What is an effective way of handling doctrinal differences within a house church? Im sure there will be some, we all are fallible and bound to understand differently.
I don't think there is a singular answer to this (regardless of the 'type' of church) - many principles and much patience and maturity will be required to keep the balance and peace.
There is an oft quoted maxim (one of the thread's posters is in fact using this in his signature) - it goes like this:
"in essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity." (or similar)
It's a thoughtful and wise saying in many respects IMO but it does actually still leave us with one massive problem... Who decides what is "essential" or "non-essential" ?
I certainly don't have all the answers but I would just like to draw attention to what might be the more relevant factors - that is, what affects our PRACTICES and what is more to do with THEORETICAL BELIEFS (for want of a better description) ?
For Example:
One member might believe strongly in Calvinism (I won't bother to summarize, most will understand these issues) and another member may be firmly Arminian. In most cases (but there are extremes) there is no reason why the two brothers can't accept the others 'intellectual' position and still worship God side-by-side.
Another Example:
One member might believe strongly that the rebirth of Israel in 1948 was a fulfillment of prophecy and that Christians should take an interest in, and pray for that nation. Another, equally well-studied brother may believe sincerely that those prophecies relate to a former restoration of that nation and that there is no special significance in the presence of that nation today. But if both men agree that God loves ALL people, and that He wants to save ALL men then the second can still easily say "Amen" when the first prays for the salvation of the Jews. And the first, if he is gracious, can accept that the second brother is sincere in his understanding and not an anti-Semite just because he doesn't place special significance on that particular group.
An Example Causing Difficulty:
The above issues, if held graciously in check should not bar two men who love God and His Word from fellowshipping together, but... Let's take a more PRACTICAL difference... What if one man believes that the 'house church' should follow a set liturgy (you know, three hymns, a collection and a monologue sermon) and the other believes that when the church gathers everyone should participate and the flow should be mostly free and spontaneous. Now we have a genuine problem. And to my mind, where the first two examples (of very different views) can with patience exist alongside one another this latter issue is actually the more serious one in reality - because it affects WHAT WE DO not just WHAT WE BELIEVE. If through prayer and examination of the Scriptures no accord can be reached then quite frankly it will be impossible to function as part of a 'living church' together.
In Summary...
Some people would place huge emphasis on the first two issues but they really shouldn't stop us from enjoying everyday fellowship with one another. The third issue may not sound like a biggie to many people but in REALITY it is where our differences must be resolved or we simply will not be able to 'do church' together on a regular basis.
My Final Thought...
Issues that affect PRACTICE need to be derived from the NT instead of 'tradition'