"the Church which meets in their house"

LoveofTruth · Jun 29, 2015

Hello all and and grace and peace to all,

I would like Christians to consider something here even if it is a difficult truth to come to terms with. One of the hinderances to understanding and recognizing the true church, is to call man made structures, “church buildings”. This tradition has come from way back where men were drawn away from the apostolic order of meeting in homes unto to the large pagan type temples. This may have happened around 325 A.D. with the building projects of Constantine and others. This did not begin in the New Testament church as we see in scripture. The problem with a large temple type structure where the architecture faces the front and one man called the pastor is over all, is that it does not allow the body to edify one another under Chjrist headship and to follow the commands of Christ in this area, 1 Cor 14;26-38, Ephesians 4:15,16 Romans 12, 1 Cor 12, 1 Pter 4:10,11.

Here are some clear verses showing the apostolic patter they followed as led by the Spirit

“and breaking bread from house to house,” ( Acts 2;46)

“ As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison. “ (Acts 8:3) Paul knew where to find them.

“ And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house”(Acts 20:20)

“Likewise greet the church that is in their house.” (Romans 16:5)

“...Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house” (1 Corinthians 16:19)

“Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house. “ (Colossians 4:15)

“And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house” (Philemon 1:2)

“If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed” (2 John 10 )

“And they went out of the prison, and entered into the house of Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them, and departed. “ (Acts 16:40)

“And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying” (Acts 12:12)

“But the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people” (Acts 17:5)

It is clear that the Spirit led them to do this as a pattern and this is the way Paul and others ordered gatherings as they were following God’s order in the Spirit. We know this because Paul was confident that he was following Christ as a wise masterbuilder and he was led by the Spirit in what he did as were the other apostles who followed Christ in this as well. This leading Paul had included whatever things the believers learned from him, and what he did in word or deed, (Philippians 4:9). This would include setting church order in homes around Christ. If Paul did not plant churches this way, where do we think they got the idea to meet as they did? The question is not do we have to do things the way they did ? The question is why would you want to do anything else?

Objections:

1. Some will object and say, there are no commands in scripture to meet in homes so we can do whatever we want.

Answer. There and not direct commands for many things we do in our gatherings, but we see patterns and scripture for such things. Paul also told believers that he did and taught the same things in every church. Paul even rebuked the Corinthians for thinking they could have their own order contrary to Gods order.
But as far as commands to meet in homes, consider when Jesus sent the apostles out two by two he told them whatever house they come to that is worthy and where their peace remains there to stay there. This would have taught them how to plant churches in the future and use the house as a base. We see the apostles in the New testament doing this exact thing. Paul met Lydia and a home meeting was established there etc. We see also from the many scriptures i posted that this was how the Holy Spirit directed Paul and others to have meetings and where to do them. The home allows for mutual edification which is commanded in 1 Cor 14 by God. If the large structure hinders mutual edification then the form of many assemblies does not allow the church to function freely under Christ headship.

Also Jesus did command the disciples to meet in a house in the upper room and wait for the promised Spirit. This was a command by Jesus and directing them where to meet.

2. Some will object and say, "they met in the temple and house to house" so we can meet in our large temple structures still.

Answer: this is not a right understanding. They did no have church meetings in the temple, they went to Solomons porch for evangelism, and we can use any place for this. But the temple mindset was still lingering in the Jewish believers for a while, they even were going into it and sacrificing in Acts 21. This was all done away and in 70 Ad it was finished. Consider also that there was no temple in Rome or Corinth or Ephesis etc. Believers are now the temple of the Holy Ghost we are one spiritual house build up with living stones, the church is the body of Christ not a man made building. Also the early church met in a family type home and had a meal together. This meal is not easy to achieve in a religious form with hundereds of people.

RDKirk · Jun 29, 2015

However, the original congregation at Jerusalem did meet at the temple for teaching, although at private homes for the more internal matters of sharing their stewardships to meet each others' needs.

Paul taught at synagogues where ever he could, and rented a lecture hall at Philippi. Therefore, scriptural evidence is that they did meet in larger structures when possible, remembering that at the time such was often not possible. There is nothing to be derived as a command or even a model either way.

However, I will agree that we must always consider the "church" as being "those called out from the world," not ever as any particular building. That's why I will more often refer to the church as the Body of Christ.

LoveofTruth · Jun 29, 2015

RDKirk said:
However, the original congregation at Jerusalem did meet at the temple for teaching, although at private homes for the more internal matters of sharing their stewardships to meet each others' needs.

Paul taught at synagogues where ever he could, and rented a lecture hall at Philippi. Therefore, scriptural evidence is that they did meet in larger structures when possible, remembering that at the time such was often not possible. There is nothing to be derived as a command or even a model either way.

However, I will agree that we must always consider the "church" as being "those called out from the world," not ever as any particular building. That's why I will more often refer to the church as the Body of Christ.

Hello and glad to talk with you,

in Solomons porch they were evangelising and sharing the faith. This was not a church meeting in the homes for mutual edification and waiting on the Lord and having a meal together and fellowship.

The patterns we see clearly are that they met in homes. We read many verses that say this as I posted. I think we can both agree that when Paul planted a church and he used homes as the base for this he did not follow his own mind to do so. He said himself that God made him a wise master builder. He told others that he did and taught the same things in every church. Paul also said that there is a way believers OUGHT to behave themselves in the house of God which is the church. He also sent others to set in order things that are lacking in certain churches. he did all this under the command of God and as he followed Jesus. We would most likely agree that Paul was led by the Spirit in how and where to have churches meet and what they were to do.

The command part comes indirectly through the commands to the Corinthians and others where God commands believers to use their gifts as they wait on Him for revelation and edification. This mutual edification is how Christ builds his church (Eph. 4:15,16) to edify is to build up as a house builder. So if Christ is building his church in us as we wait on home and edify one another under his headship, then anything that hinders that is not in his command and we should avoid it and withdraw from it.

The Roman Emeperor Constantine built his idea of the Christian church and directed people away from the waiting on the Lord for body ministry . He set up 7 religious buildings that came to be known as churches (unbiblically) in Rome and one in Constantanople, and 1 in Bethlehem, and Isreal as I understand. These religious refurbished pagan temples became the state churches move to make christianity a acceptable religion. But in doing this the priest system was set up and all the body facing forward where they were to listen to the man elevated and exalted above them on a altar with steps leading up to it. The priest or ministers became paid and a religious order was set up. But this was not the order of God in scripture and is quenched the spirit in the body and created a silent body ministry, where only the paid professionals could speak. We still suffer from this tradition of man that makes the word of God of no effect today.

Peter said in 1 Peter 4:10,11 as every man hath received the gift even so minister the same one to another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God, if any man speak, let him speak as of the oracles of God, if any man minister let him do it...

notice that all can and should minister the gift Gathering called the Pastor. We read of a plurality of elders and all the body edifying eachother as they are led in homes with a full meal together and fellowship. .

so if we see the apostles doing the same pattern for meeting and there are commands of how we should wait on the Lord and all can use their gifts and this is Gods order and the modern religious form with one man at the front where none can edify freely is the norm. Then we can see the wisdom of the Spirit in the way they met and where they met and what they did when they met. Anything that hinders this may cause Jesus to stand outside knocking wanting to come into them and sup with them, or to commune with them, This inward supper is the Lords participation with them. if they do not allow this then he said he would spew them out of his mouth. I see this letter to Laodicea as relevant even today.

RDKirk · Jun 29, 2015

LoveofTruth said:
Hello and glad to talk with you,

in Solomons porch they were evangelising and sharing the faith. This was not a church meeting in the homes for mutual edification and waiting on the Lord and having a meal together and fellowship.

You quoted me already saying that.

The patterns we see clearly are that they met in homes. We read many verses that say this as I posted. I think we can both agree that when Paul planted a church and he used homes as the base for this he did not follow his own mind to do so. He said himself that God made him a wise master builder. He told others that he did and taught the same things in every church. Paul also said that there is a way believers OUGHT to behave themselves in the house of God which is the church. He also sent others to set in order things that are lacking in certain churches. he did all this under the command of God and as he followed Jesus. We would most likely agree that Paul was led by the Spirit in how and where to have churches meet and what they were to do.

The problem with attempting to use that as a model is that Paul usually had no choice--there was simply no other place to meet (and when he did have a choice, such as at Ephesus, he rented a lecture hall). He makes no actual statement about what kind of place to meet, and since he usually had no clear choice we can't take this as a model. We may as well say that all international travel of Christians must be by boat because Jesus and Paul took boats.

The command part comes indirectly through the commands to the Corinthians and others where God commands believers to use their gifts as they wait on Him for revelation and edification. This mutual edification is how Christ builds his church (Eph. 4:15,16) to edify is to build up as a house builder. So if Christ is building his church in us as we wait on home and edify one another under his headship, then anything that hinders that is not in his command and we should avoid it and withdraw from it.

That's a pretty strained exegesis to say it commands or even suggests that the Body of Christ must meet in homes.

The Roman Emeperor Constantine built his idea of the Christian church and directed people away from the waiting on the Lord for body ministry . He set up 7 religious buildings that came to be known as churches (unbiblically) in Rome and one in Constantanople, and 1 in Bethlehem, and Isreal as I understand. These religious refurbished pagan temples became the state churches move to make christianity a acceptable religion. But in doing this the priest system was set up and all the body facing forward where they were to listen to the man elevated and exalted above them on a altar with steps leading up to it. The priest or ministers became paid and a religious order was set up. But this was not the order of God in scripture and is quenched the spirit in the body and created a silent body ministry, where only the paid professionals could speak. We still suffer from this tradition of man that makes the word of God of no effect today.

None of that is directly related to the type of building they met. A priesthood can be set up even by a congregation that meets in a private home. In fact, that tends to happen pretty frequently--they just don't call it a "priesthood."

LoveofTruth · Jun 30, 2015

hello again RDkirk

you said

"The problem with attempting to use that as a model is that Paul usually had no choice--there was simply no other place to meet"

The early church met from house to house right from the beginning and for about 300 years after mostly. In all that time they could have made large structures to meet in. But we read nothing of this in history until Constantine wrongly positioned himself as a kind of head of the church." We also read things like this

"...and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, 47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." Acts 2:46,47

here we see that they did not go into homes because of persecution, they had favour with all the people at this time. The Lord led them to met in homes for about 300 years after as most church historians would agree. Meeting in homes for church meetings and having a meal and fellowship is the normal pattern we see in scripture. They could have built larger structures as the Jew built their synagogues. But they were led into homes. Paul planted churches in every place this same way he said,

"
“Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1)

Notice here that Paul did not even direct men to follow him directly, but only as he followed Christ. He then went on in the chapter to praise them for keeping the ordinances (or traditions, patterns) as he handed them down to them (1 Corinthians 11:2).

“Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.” ( 2 Thessalonians 2:15)

“Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you” (1 Corinthians 11:2)

Notice Paul said, they remembered him on “all things” . These “all things” would have included the order from God in church meetings, which would have included where to meet as well. And paul said.

“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” (1 Corinthians 14:33)

this would mean that one church should not do things their own way different from other churches. That would include meeting in homes around Christ. yes in times of trouble they would meet wherever they can to gather, even in a prison. But the normative order was as Paul set in every church. There was a set order as scripture speaks of in many places and how they OUGHT to behave themselves. Paul even tells believers to withdraw from every brother that does not walk orderly.

What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?” (1 Corinthians 14:36)

Paul sent others to set this same order in all the churches everywhere. This shows that we also today can follow this order, for Paul handed down what God showed him for all churches, there is no need to make up new things or a new order. This is similar to scripture and the gospel that have been once delivered to the saints.

17. “For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.” (1 Corinthians 4:17)

Again we see that this order Paul had as he followed Christ was what he taught “everywhere” in “every church”. Yes, what he said here related many teachings in the christian walk and not just church gatherings, but it also related to church gatherings as well and these were the same in every church as we read already. Pauls “ways which be in Christ”, are the order of God.

Paul also speaks of Christ in him as a witness all he said and did he said .

“Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you.” (Philippians 4:9)

This would also include the way he was led to set in order church gatherings, all of which he spoke to churches many times. Paul was so certain of Christ in him and his leading, that he could say that all he handed down to them, and the order he set and his whole life and works were to be an example to the believers. So we might ask how did Paul plant churches, well we see that many other believers met in homes around Christ and were Christ was the head working in the measure of every part, and all were free to minister and use their gifts from God and edify one another. The would have a met together and Let the Word of Christ dwell in them in their teaching and admonishing one another in Psalms and hymns as well. All these things were what Paul handed down and taught for the church order in Christ.
What Paul handed down to them were called traditions also. There are man made traditions that hinder and make the word of God of no effect, but there are also apostolic traditions given by Gods leading as Paul referred to and he commended the believers for keeping these ordinances and traditions (1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15) and told others to withdraw from those who wouldn’t keep them (2 Thessalonians 3:6). But to do the things Paul handed down from God brings the promise of Gods peace among us and Gods presence with us as we read in Philippians 4:9, Colossians 3:15 and other places).

You also said,

"(and when he did have a choice, such as at Ephesus, he rented a lecture hall)."

This lecture hall of Tyrenus was not a church meeting waiting on the Lord with beleivers but rather a opportunity to evangelize and share things of God . We see this in Acts 19

"And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God" Acts 19:8

here Paul used the opportunity to share Christ, In the synagogues they were not waiting upon Jesus to fill them with revelation and edify eachother in Christ. This was evangelism and bringing them out from the old was to the New . We also read in Acts 19

"disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus." Acts 19:9

This again was not a church meeting but a disputing and evangelism. This was not "the church which meets in their house "

When Paul would have won some to Christ there he would have sought out their home to meet in if they were worth and used that as a meeting place.
Jesus commanded the apostle to do likewise as we read here,

"And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house. 6 And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it: if not, it shall turn to you again. 7 And in the same house remain,..." (Luke 10"5-7)

Here we see that Jesus commanded the apostles how to begin home meetings. Paul would have followed Christ in this also. We see an example of this order here,

"14 And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.
15 And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there...And they went out of the prison, and entered into the house of Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them, and departed." Acts 16:14-15,40)

Here we see the pattern the Lord led him in and how a home meeting was started.We can see the example of meeting in home in Corinth with Aquila and Priscilla, here "Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house” (1 Corinthians 16:19)" and when they went to Rome we see them following the same order "“Likewise greet the church that is in their house.” (Romans 16:5). There was definitely a order to this and a pattern they followed. They did not just do this because they had nowhere else to meet. They followed the Spirit and Paul was a wise master builder. the wisdom of meeting in homes is a long discussion. But briefly we are the family of God and brothers and sister a home is a natural family type environment. We must be allowed to use our gifts and the home where we can face eachother and share is ideal. We should also have a meal together and fellowship, the home is ideal for this. The large structures unbiblically called "churches", do not allow the church to function as they should and so must be rejected . At best they can be used to house the poor and evangelism, at worst they fight against the body ministry under Chris headship and Christ stands outside knocking.

When I speak of meeting in homes which we see as a clear example and pattern all through the NT in many books not just in Jerusalem, but in Rome Corinth, Colossia etc. I am referring to the gathering in one place for ministry and edification and waiting on God with a meal together and fellowship. If a believer or evangelist wants to rent a large hall to win sols that is acceptable and there is no issue with that. Or if they want to meet in any place to discuss issues have a discussion. What I am talking about is the church which meets in their house and the spirit leading them to do so. I think we will agree that Paul was led by God in doing this as were other apostles.

You also said,

He makes no actual statement about what kind of place to meet,"

Paul said things like this

"“Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you.” (Philippians 4:9)" This would include the pattern of where to meet and how. God doesnt leave this up to mans traditions and ideas. Jesus commanded them from the start how to do this. And he commanded they meet in the house in the upper room for the Spirit to come also.
Paul salso directed others to do this as well “For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.” (1 Corinthians 4:17)

You also said,

"and since he usually had no clear choice we can't take this as a model."
Paul was directed by God in what he did particularly when he planted churches, He said himself that God made him an able minister. He told others that certain things must be set in order in the churches, this order was not his own order.Or just something he made up. Paul said,
"
“If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. 38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant” (1 Corinthians 14:36,38)

" and "“For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:” (Titus 1:5)

and "“For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ.” (Colossians 2:5)

This “order” among the Colossian church here was a spiritual order and Paul was able to behold it in spirit. This is Gods order, and it was said to be“in Christ” . This order was not mans order and it is often not understood by man outside the Spirit.

You said,

"We may as well say that all international travel of Christians must be by boat because Jesus and Paul took boats"

No I am not talking about cultures and things like this. I am not saying we should all wear long robes and sit on the floor etc. I am talking about church practice not cultures of the day.

You said,

"That's a pretty strained exegesis to say it commands or even suggests that the Body of Christ must meet in homes."

no i believe it is sound. If God commanded the church to do certain things and mans order and religious forms hinder that, then we should not meet in large buildings and call them "churches" and they quench the spirit in the very form. They do not allow the church to function as God commanded. In architecture there is a saying "form follows function". Whatever the function of the place is the form will follow it. So if the function is a lecture or school environment, we see all the seats facing forward to the man at the front. But if the function is mutual edification under Christ headship we see all facing eachother in a smaller environment as a house.

You said, (referring to the history of Constantine and other aspects,

"None of that is directly related to the type of building they met. A priesthood can be set up even by a congregation that meets in a private home. In fact, that tends to happen pretty frequently--they just don't call it a "priesthood."

Yes the Priest over all and the altars and temples refurbished as churches did greatly affect the body life and ministry under Christ headship. It quenched it for the most part. And yes, even in a home meeting we can see one man dominating over others and taking the preeminence as Diotrephese in 3rd John 9 and 10 did. But because of the few that do this , this doesn't mean we discard the order of gathering and freedoms because of this.
Also the bible speaks of all believers being a priesthood and every joint supplying. We are a spiritual priesthood , all of the believers. There should to be a clergy laity division. there is no such thing as a clergy laity divide in scripture. the word for clergy comes from kleros meaning a lot or inheritance, and believers are the inheritance of God and the word laity means the people, we are also the people of God. This false clergy laity division is unbiblical and hinders the body ministry . read 1 Cor 12 again about one part cannot say to another part I have no need of you. And Jesus warned about false gentile authority over others who have dominion over them. This should not be so in the church. But in Constantines time the pagan authority did creep into the church and the great ones were over others and had their castle like thrones set up called churches.

TheMissingRib · Aug 8, 2015

LoveofTruth said:
Hello all and and grace and peace to all,

I would like Christians to consider something here even if it is a difficult truth to come to terms with. One of the hinderances to understanding and recognizing the true church, is to call man made structures, “church buildings”. This tradition has come from way back where men were drawn away from the apostolic order of meeting in homes unto to the large pagan type temples. This may have happened around 325 A.D. with the building projects of Constantine and others. This did not begin in the New Testament church as we see in scripture. The problem with a large temple type structure where the architecture faces the front and one man called the pastor is over all, is that it does not allow the body to edify one another under Christ headship and to follow the commands of Christ in this area, 1 Cor 14;26-38, Ephesians 4:15,16 Romans 12, 1 Cor 12, 1 Pter 4:10,11.

Here are some clear verses showing the apostolic patter they followed as led by the Spirit

“and breaking bread from house to house,” ( Acts 2;46)

“ As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison. “ (Acts 8:3) Paul knew where to find them.

“ And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house”(Acts 20:20)

“Likewise greet the church that is in their house.” (Romans 16:5)

“...Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house” (1 Corinthians 16:19)

“Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house. “ (Colossians 4:15)

“And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house” (Philemon 1:2)

“If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed” (2 John 10 )

“And they went out of the prison, and entered into the house of Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them, and departed. “ (Acts 16:40)

“And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying” (Acts 12:12)

“But the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people” (Acts 17:5)

It is clear that the Spirit led them to do this as a pattern and this is the way Paul and others ordered gatherings as they were following God’s order in the Spirit. We know this because Paul was confident that he was following Christ as a wise master builder and he was led by the Spirit in what he did as were the other apostles who followed Christ in this as well. This leading Paul had included whatever things the believers learned from him, and what he did in word or deed, (Philippians 4:9). This would include setting church order in homes around Christ. If Paul did not plant churches this way, where do we think they got the idea to meet as they did? The question is not do we have to do things the way they did ? The question is why would you want to do anything else?

Objections:

1. Some will object and say, there are no commands in scripture to meet in homes so we can do whatever we want.

Answer. There and not direct commands for many things we do in our gatherings, but we see patterns and scripture for such things. Paul also told believers that he did and taught the same things in every church. Paul even rebuked the Corinthians for thinking they could have their own order contrary to Gods order.
But as far as commands to meet in homes, consider when Jesus sent the apostles out two by two he told them whatever house they come to that is worthy and where their peace remains there to stay there. This would have taught them how to plant churches in the future and use the house as a base. We see the apostles in the New testament doing this exact thing. Paul met Lydia and a home meeting was established there etc. We see also from the many scriptures i posted that this was how the Holy Spirit directed Paul and others to have meetings and where to do them. The home allows for mutual edification which is commanded in 1 Cor 14 by God. If the large structure hinders mutual edification then the form of many assemblies does not allow the church to function freely under Christ headship.

Also Jesus did command the disciples to meet in a house in the upper room and wait for the promised Spirit. This was a command by Jesus and directing them where to meet.

2. Some will object and say, "they met in the temple and house to house" so we can meet in our large temple structures still.

Answer: this is not a right understanding. They did no have church meetings in the temple, they went to Solomons porch for evangelism, and we can use any place for this. But the temple mindset was still lingering in the Jewish believers for a while, they even were going into it and sacrificing in Acts 21. This was all done away and in 70 Ad it was finished. Consider also that there was no temple in Rome or Corinth or Ephesis etc. Believers are now the temple of the Holy Ghost we are one spiritual house build up with living stones, the church is the body of Christ not a man made building. Also the early church met in a family type home and had a meal together. This meal is not easy to achieve in a religious form with hundreds of people.

"ditto" to the above

1Co 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghostwhich is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
1Co 6:20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

1Co 9:13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?
1Co 9:14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.

and...

Eph 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
Eph 2:21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
Eph 2:22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Berean777 · Aug 8, 2015

RDKirk said:
However, the original congregation at Jerusalem did meet at the temple for teaching, although at private homes for the more internal matters of sharing their stewardships to meet each others' needs.

Paul taught at synagogues where ever he could, and rented a lecture hall at Philippi. Therefore, scriptural evidence is that they did meet in larger structures when possible, remembering that at the time such was often not possible. There is nothing to be derived as a command or even a model either way.

However, I will agree that we must always consider the "church" as being "those called out from the world," not ever as any particular building. That's why I will more often refer to the church as the Body of Christ.

They did so covertly to reach Jews who have yet to be cunverted to Christ. We see on several occasions in the acts of the apostles that the apostles were found, tried and beaten before the crowd and sometimes jailed. They even tried to follow Jewish traditions to appear on the surface that they are still observers of the law so that their accusers could not stop them from reaching Jews that they could convert to Christ. Remembering that each Jewish man converted in the temple would lead to 50 others being converted to Christ from his family members.
This was not a church service that they were going to but a covert operation to reach their compatriots through a Trojan horse approach bearing the gift of Christ. Yes early on they would give unauthorised sermons in the temple and no sooner that they did this they were expelled and beaten and men were employed to search for them in th temple if they dared come back again.

Cappadocious · Aug 9, 2015

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop

Berean777 · Aug 9, 2015

Berean777 · Aug 9, 2015

LoveofTruth said:
Hello all and and grace and peace to all,

I would like Christians to consider something here even if it is a difficult truth to come to terms with. One of the hinderances to understanding and recognizing the true church, is to call man made structures, “church buildings”. This tradition has come from way back where men were drawn away from the apostolic order of meeting in homes unto to the large pagan type temples. This may have happened around 325 A.D. with the building projects of Constantine and others. This did not begin in the New Testament church as we see in scripture. The problem with a large temple type structure where the architecture faces the front and one man called the pastor is over all, is that it does not allow the body to edify one another under Chjrist headship and to follow the commands of Christ in this area, 1 Cor 14;26-38, Ephesians 4:15,16 Romans 12, 1 Cor 12, 1 Pter 4:10,11.

Here are some clear verses showing the apostolic patter they followed as led by the Spirit

“and breaking bread from house to house,” ( Acts 2;46)

“ As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison. “ (Acts 8:3) Paul knew where to find them.

“ And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house”(Acts 20:20)

“Likewise greet the church that is in their house.” (Romans 16:5)

“...Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house” (1 Corinthians 16:19)

“Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house. “ (Colossians 4:15)

“And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house” (Philemon 1:2)

“If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed” (2 John 10 )

“And they went out of the prison, and entered into the house of Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them, and departed. “ (Acts 16:40)

“And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying” (Acts 12:12)

“But the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people” (Acts 17:5)

It is clear that the Spirit led them to do this as a pattern and this is the way Paul and others ordered gatherings as they were following God’s order in the Spirit. We know this because Paul was confident that he was following Christ as a wise masterbuilder and he was led by the Spirit in what he did as were the other apostles who followed Christ in this as well. This leading Paul had included whatever things the believers learned from him, and what he did in word or deed, (Philippians 4:9). This would include setting church order in homes around Christ. If Paul did not plant churches this way, where do we think they got the idea to meet as they did? The question is not do we have to do things the way they did ? The question is why would you want to do anything else?

Objections:

1. Some will object and say, there are no commands in scripture to meet in homes so we can do whatever we want.

Answer. There and not direct commands for many things we do in our gatherings, but we see patterns and scripture for such things. Paul also told believers that he did and taught the same things in every church. Paul even rebuked the Corinthians for thinking they could have their own order contrary to Gods order.
But as far as commands to meet in homes, consider when Jesus sent the apostles out two by two he told them whatever house they come to that is worthy and where their peace remains there to stay there. This would have taught them how to plant churches in the future and use the house as a base. We see the apostles in the New testament doing this exact thing. Paul met Lydia and a home meeting was established there etc. We see also from the many scriptures i posted that this was how the Holy Spirit directed Paul and others to have meetings and where to do them. The home allows for mutual edification which is commanded in 1 Cor 14 by God. If the large structure hinders mutual edification then the form of many assemblies does not allow the church to function freely under Christ headship.

Also Jesus did command the disciples to meet in a house in the upper room and wait for the promised Spirit. This was a command by Jesus and directing them where to meet.

2. Some will object and say, "they met in the temple and house to house" so we can meet in our large temple structures still.

Answer: this is not a right understanding. They did no have church meetings in the temple, they went to Solomons porch for evangelism, and we can use any place for this. But the temple mindset was still lingering in the Jewish believers for a while, they even were going into it and sacrificing in Acts 21. This was all done away and in 70 Ad it was finished. Consider also that there was no temple in Rome or Corinth or Ephesis etc. Believers are now the temple of the Holy Ghost we are one spiritual house build up with living stones, the church is the body of Christ not a man made building. Also the early church met in a family type home and had a meal together. This meal is not easy to achieve in a religious form with hundereds of people.

Our church must be our house for a family unit where the fullness of God dwells is the church and when we go to houses of prayer in larger buildings, we are taking the church with us. We are the church, all to the glory of Christ.

Berean777 · Aug 9, 2015

LoveofTruth · Aug 9, 2015

Berean777 said:
Our church must be our house for a family unit where the fullness of God dwells is the church and when we go to houses of prayer in larger buildings, we are taking the church with us. We are the church, all to the glory of Christ.

I know that the common understanding to day is to meet in large temple like structures, that men call the church , or the temple or sanctuary, etc.. But what many have not considered is where these large temple type structures came from in the first place.

I guess we could go way back to when Gods people wanted a king to rule over them like all the other pagan nations, and they wanted Saul. But God said they stopped wanting HIm to rule over them. Then they wanted to build God a house, But God said what house will ye build me. Stephen said that the most hgh dwelleth not in temples made with hands. But as christians we know that believers are the temple of God and he dwells in us. We together are the body of Christ the church. And we do read many verses where the "church" meets in their home. This went on for about 300 years or so, until Constantne came along and refurbished pagan temples and the temple mindset was introduced to the believers. Soon the one man ministry was set over all and the body quenched. The church became a religious building and organization rather than a living oragnization in Christ .

It is true that where two or more are gathered Christ is in the midst. So if we think that way even if ten believers meet in a hall or forest, or prison, they can gather and have ministry etc. But. God is also practicle and infinitely wise. he led believers into homes for many reasons, . But one some of these reasons are that the church a is family and there must be mutual edification and interaction under Christ headship and having a meal and fellowship together. These very things are not possible in all settings, such as a prison or as we see today in most large religious buildings unbiblically called Churches.

If the body is not free to edify eachother when they come together under Christ headship and have a meal together and fellowship etc. Then the structure and form that men get boxed into hinders Christ and quenches the spirit and body edification. But we must have such edification (1 Cor 14:26-38, 1 Peter 4:10,11, Romans 12, 1 Cor 12 etc ). This is one of the main problems with the large one man show ministry that meets in a large building with all the believers facing forward looking at the back of eachothers heads, and where no one is free to minister under Christ headship as they are led. This fights against the very function and purpose of the church as they gather.

Yes some good things happen in such places despite the error and hinderances, such as scripture is still read and some get saved, they pray and have some teaching. But If Christ is not allowed in to the gathering to sup (or participate in communion) with every one of the believers, then he may be standing outside knocking while inside they think all is well and they are rich and increased.

The very form and building structures of so called churches, fights against body ministry and Christ body edifying itself . I see the Devils masterpiece in this since way back around the time of Constantine, and how the devil sought to silenced Christ ministering in the body as they gather. One man is easier to control and if the devil gets the man in the pulpit he can bind up the entire assembly, as he has often done. Just look at the popes and one man priest over all and the false one man ministers through the centuries. Or consider the danger of one man rule over all with cults like Jim Jones and others.

"..but in the multitude of counsellors thereissafety."(Proverbs 11;14 KJV)

it is not enough that where a few believers gather there is the church . It matters where two or more are gathered there is Christ IN THE MIDST. If he is in the midst and we radically trust in Him and rule believe that he will work in us unto every good work and that he really does give us gifts and revelation and ministry by His grace. Then we need to live in this and come out from among all the confusion that hinders the body life and ministry.

and come back home

“Likewise greet the church that is in their house.” (Romans 16:5)

at best some of these large temple type gatherings are like evangelism, and for soul winning. At worst they are headed by man and under false teaching and deception of the devil and bound up or they may be like laodicea where Christ is outside knocking wanting to come into them and sup with them.

Berean777 · Aug 9, 2015

LoveofTruth said:
I know that the common understanding to day is to meet in large temple like structures, that men call the church , or the temple or sanctuary, etc.. But what many have not considered is where these large temple type structures came from in the first place.

I guess we could go way back to when Gods people wanted a king to rule over them like all the other pagan nations, and they wanted Saul. But God said they stopped wanting HIm to rule over them. Then they wanted to build God a house, But God said what house will ye build me. Stephen said that the most hgh dwelleth not in temples made with hands. But as christians we know that believers are the temple of God and he dwells in us. We together are the body of Christ the church. And we do read many verses where the "church" meets in their home. This went on for about 300 years or so, until Constantne came along and refurbished pagan temples and the temple mindset was introduced to the believers. Soon the one man ministry was set over all and the body quenched. The church became a religious building and organization rather than a living oragnization in Christ .

It is true that where two or more are gathered Christ is in the midst. So if we think that way even if ten believers meet in a hall or forest, or prison, they can gather and have ministry etc. But. God is also practicle and infinitely wise. he led believers into homes for many reasons, . But one some of these reasons are that the church a is family and there must be mutual edification and interaction under Christ headship and having a meal and fellowship together. These very things are not possible in all settings, such as a prison or as we see today in most large religious buildings unbiblically called Churches.

If the body is not free to edify eachother when they come together under Christ headship and have a meal together and fellowship etc. Then the structure and form that men get boxed into hinders Christ and quenches the spirit and body edification. But we must have such edification (1 Cor 14:26-38, 1 Peter 4:10,11, Romans 12, 1 Cor 12 etc ). This is one of the main problems with the large one man show ministry that meets in a large building with all the believers facing forward looking at the back of eachothers heads, and where no one is free to minister under Christ headship as they are led. This fights against the very function and purpose of the church as they gather.

Yes some good things happen in such places despite the error and hinderances, such as scripture is still read and some get saved, they pray and have some teaching. But If Christ is not allowed in to the gathering to sup (or participate in communion) with every one of the believers, then he may be standing outside knocking while inside they think all is well and they are rich and increased.

The very form and building structures of so called churches, fights against body ministry and Christ body edifying itself . I see the Devils masterpiece in this since way back around the time of Constantine, and how the devil sought to silenced Christ ministering in the body as they gather. One man is easier to control and if the devil gets the man in the pulpit he can bind up the entire assembly, as he has often done. Just look at the popes and one man priest over all and the false one man ministers through the centuries. Or consider the danger of one man rule over all with cults like Jim Jones and others.

"..but in the multitude of counsellors thereissafety."(Proverbs 11;14 KJV)

it is not enough that where a few believers gather there is the church . It matters where two or more are gathered there is Christ IN THE MIDST. If he is in the midst and we radically trust in Him and rule believe that he will work in us unto every good work and that he really does give us gifts and revelation and ministry by His grace. Then we need to live in this and come out from among all the confusion that hinders the body life and ministry.

and come back home

“Likewise greet the church that is in their house.” (Romans 16:5)

at best some of these large temple type gatherings are like evangelism, and for soul winning. At worst they are headed by man and under false teaching and deception of the devil and bound up or they may be like laodicea where Christ is outside knocking wanting to come into them and sup with them.

I ought to fill some gaps in your thinking. The majority of Christianity in the middle east was not run by Constantine and were not pagan temples converted to Christian churches. The churches in the middle east were cave like dwellings, some of which were made from rock and mud. This provided a hidden sanctuary for the Christian monks, where the village met to worship Christ. In these small community/village gatherings Christ is the head of worship and through liturgy worship, they SUPED with Christ through fasting and prayer in meditation. These mountain churches of which some were thousands of feet in elevation were the gathering places. The gathering of villagers comforted one another in troublesome times and this experience was edifying through liturgy, fasting, prayer, community charity, miracles and praises to the Lord and the manifestation of the Lord's love through these gatherings.

I have to disagree in your stereo tying of these larger buildings outside of the homes as being not edifying and silencing the voice of Christ. You must agree that in these circumstances you are wrong to generalise all of Christianity as Constantine converted churches. Also the churches in the middle east are the oldest church structures that Peter's epistle blesses as the elected church in Babylon. These churches in Babylon Iraq are one of the oldest churches that are not even listed as churches, except the founder of the church Saint Thomas in 34AD knew exactly how they worshipped Christ through liturgy, fasting, prayer, community charity and many other things in servitude to Christ.

You totally dropped the ball on this one friend. I encourage you to do your deligent research before stereo typing all of Christianity.

In Europe it may have been home based, but in the middle east it was community buildings called churches in whom Christ worked his miracles through the congregation who gathered in his name.

To say that these were not edifying experiences to the body of Christ and only evangelical outreach is playing on ignorance at best and at worse leaning towards absurdity.

I abjure you that you reconsider what you have said; Please do not classify all Christian buildings outside of the homes of the believers as objects of Constantine's pagan temple conversions. This is in gross error on your part.

LoveofTruth · Aug 9, 2015

Berean777 said:
I ought to fill some gaps in your thinking.

Sorry my friend but you are in great error and fighting against the true church as I will show you by the grace of God,

And no, I did not drop the ball. I was tracing the major shift in the churches of Roma and surrounding areas that were affected. Yes there were some places that did not want to Join with Rome, and that were isolated. But I speak of the major shift in Christendom around that time and before.

Berean777 said:
but in the middle east it was community buildings called churches

This is one of your main errors. Never in the whole New Testament is a man made building called the church. This shows your lack of understanding here of what the true church is. The church is not a building of man, it is the living body of Christ where Jesus Christ is the head and it is made up a spiritual house of living stones.

"22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
23 Which is his body,..."( Ephesians 1:22,23)

"...Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house," (1 Peter 2:5)

The word church (ekklésia) in the New Testament never refers to a building. It fundamentally means assembly, gathering, meeting or congregation

And all I speak is grounded in the holy scriptures. It doesn't matter if a few other groups met in different areas and not in homes. Either way they were wrong. We see clearly that the early church met in homes around Christ from many scriptures. This is the apostolic pattern, and we see this even in scripture some 66 years after Christ. The earliest recorded history of a church gathering house, was
Dura-Europos around 233-250 Ad and it is the earliest identified Christian house church.[1] It is located in Dura-Europos in Syria. It was basically a house with a wall knocked out for a larger space.

Do your historical study more before you say I don't do research. And study the apostolic patterns and God's order in scriptures first and what the true church is and the meaning of the word "church" itself.

Berean777 said:
The majority of Christianity in the middle east was not run by Constantine and were not pagan temples converted to Christian churches. The churches in the middle east were cave like dwellings, some of which were made from rock and mud.

I never said all churches on the earth at the time Constantine legalized Christianity ( so called0 were under his power and influence. But eventually the sway of Rome and the order they set up spread everywhere. I am not saying that the foundations of religious buildings unbiblically called churches only started with Constantine, and the idea of priest over all and one man ministry etc. these roots started way back in the so called church fathers, and we could say even further back with the making of a temple for God in the Old testament. But no doubt some of the so called Church fathers had sway in the middle east and the writings and influence must have spread to many places. But if it went against the clear scriptural truth and order we can safely reject anything that does not line up with the Holy scriptures.

Berean777 said:
This provided a hidden sanctuary for the Christian monks, where the village met to worship Christ. In these small community/village gatherings Christ is the head of worship and through liturgy worship, they SUPED with Christ through fasting and prayer in meditation. These mountain churches of which some were thousands of feet in elevation were the gathering places.

Show me the historical proof that they were not just meeting in homes. And if they did build places to meet or as you said, they met in "cave like dwellings". Werent these homes?. Either way the apostolic patter in to meet in home no doubt, following the Spirit of God who led them to do so. To go away from this and to not allow the body to edify eachother hinders this mutual edification under Christ headship.

In these so called "community buildings called churches" as you put it, what was the order and how did they meet?. Was there one man over all a priest or pastor?, and show me proof from History of your findings and credible sources.

Berean777 said:
The gathering of villagers comforted one another in troublesome times and this experience was edifying through liturgy, fasting, prayer, community charity, miracles and praises to the Lord and the manifestation of the Lord's love through these gatherings.

You say troublesome times", what years were you referring to and show proof from history for me. And the scriptures speak of no such thing as a "litergy" or form as many have today. read 1 Cor 14:26-38, 1 Peter 4;10,11, Romans 12 etc etc etc.

Berean777 said:
I have to disagree in your stereo tying of these larger buildings outside of the homes as being not edifying and silencing the voice of Christ.

Well I do so with scriptures and sound words. if the function of a place and the from of the structure os for a lecture format, where one man is exalted on a altar above others and does all the speaking. Then the function of that gathering will be a silent body where all face forward and look at the back of eachothers heads and look to the man at the front. The very structure and form of the place is set up for such a one man show. But since the new testament church is to have Christ as the head who effectually works in every part ( Ephesians 4:15,16) and since this is how they edify ( or build up one another as a house builder) . Then this is how Christ builds His church from within the believers. To hinder this freedom of edification with eachother where every one has a gift and ministry from God and all are free to use these gifts , is to quench the spirit and hinder the body of Christ. In most gatherings and Im sure in your also, there is one man over all exalted called a priest, reverend, pastor or many other titles. The body is not free to minister to one another as they wait on the Lord and let the Word of Christ dwell in them richly. This silences Christ effectually wirking in the body. It s very obvious.

Tell me about your gathering, the name and structure and the order of your meetings?

Berean777 said:
You must agree that in these circumstances you are wrong to generalize all of Christianity as Constantine converted churches.

I speak of after Constantine organized things, and for centuries to follow. Even the middle eastern churches have been influenced by Rome and other aspects. I speak also of most of the world either catholic or protestant churches that follow such forms. As you define your gatherings and I put it up against Christ church and the order from scripture and the apostolic order, we will see if I overgeneralized. The roots of what Constantine organized stem from way back and fro m pagan roots also. Just as the temple in Jerusalem, and the king ruling over all stems back to pagan roots also. But God allowed them to have a temple and a king as types, but he did say when they wanted a king they stopped wanting Him to "rule" over them and when they wanted a temple, like the pagan nations, God said what house will ye build me, and that the most high dwelleth not in temples made by man.

Berean777 said:
Also the churches in the middle east are the oldest church structures that Peter's epistle blesses as the elected church in Babylon.

Again you speak as one who should be ashamed not rightly dividing the word of truth. you call man made buildings "churches". study to show thyself approved unto God. The church is not a man made building. It is the body of Christ. There is no such thing as church structures either. This error is so engrained in the minds of men over the centuries it is a tradition that makes the word of God of no effect and very difficult to correct, even with scripture.

And No Peter is not referring to a man made building. The early church met in homes and many scriptures can be shown for this. Read my first post again and check the verses.

Berean777 said:
These churches in Babylon Iraq are one of the oldest churches that are not even listed as churches,

Again are you referring to man made buildings as "churches" and then you say they are not even listed as "churches"??? what does that mean? and show me proof from history about your claims. I want to see man made buildings called "churches" in history. And even if they are there they are wrong to do so.

Berean777 said:
except the founder of the church Saint Thomas in 34AD knew exactly how they worshipped Christ through liturgy, fasting, prayer, community charity and many other things in servitude to Christ.

Show history and proof. And in scripture we see no such thing as "liturgy" the way many have today. . And the order of God is clear in scripture. if any went away from this then they dropped the ball.

Liturgy (Greek: λειτουργία) is the customary public worship done by a specific religious group, according to its particular beliefs, customs and traditions."

The traditions of man can make the word of God of no effect. There were apostolic traditions as Paul handed down and also the commands of God in 1 Cor 14 of the order of worship as they waited on the Lord for all things.

Berean777 said:
You totally dropped the ball on this one friend. I encourage you to do your deligent research before stereo typing all of Christianity.

I didn't drop the ball at all. You still haven't got the ball and are not even in the court.

Berean777 said:
In Europe it may have been home based, but in the middle east it was community buildings called churches in whom Christ worked his miracles through the congregation who gathered in his name.

No church buildings in all the New testament. And show me your proof historically.

Berean777 said:
To say that these were not edifying experiences to the body of Christ and only evangelical outreach is playing on ignorance at best and at worse leaning towards absurdity.

I cannot speak for every meeting in every place, all through the early times up till today. But all I need do is look at your gathering today and examine it with Gods order and we will see if Christ is free to edify each part of the body EVERY time they come together and if they are allowed to minister at ANY time as God leads, and the order of where and what you do.

Berean777 said:
I abjure you that you reconsider what you have said; Please do not classify all Christian buildings outside of the homes of the believers as objects of Constantine's pagan temple conversions. This is in gross error on your part.

I dont have to say they are all objects of Constantine's order. the ones before Constantines order took off, may have been influenced by other man made traditions and erronious wrttings etc. But I believe if we were to examine your gatherings and the middle eastern churches, as they are called, we would find some links and ties to Roman Catholicism and the order overlapping. Either way, I will note that gatherings before Constantine, as you say had things called church buildings and that the first historical evidence anywhere of a meeting of worship was in 233-250 Ad as i showed, and that you say that is wrong. Show me your proof, many historians have agreed that Dura-Europos around 233-250 Ad and it is the earliest identified Christian house church.[1] It is located in Dura-Europos in Syria. And you seem to disagree with this.

Show me your proof that there is an earlier Christian structure found that was not a home and was a "church building" as you call it, and i want to see the words "church building" or a Building called a church" before Constantine. You seem to disagree with history here and I want to see your proof. And when I speak of Constantines influence, I speak of the events that mostly shaped the religious world of Christians as we see it today. The middle eastern churches did not do this as I am aware of.

All the internet and those who watch all over are waiting.

Berean777 · Aug 9, 2015

I will address your post at length, but first the historically agreed accounts of Christianity is as follows:

Christianity was brought to iraq in the 1st century AD by Thomas the Apostle and Mar Addai (Thaddeus of Edessa) and his pupils Aggai and Mari. Thomas and Thaddeus belonged to the twelve Apostles.[6] Iraq's Eastern Aramaic-speaking Assyrian communities are believed to be among the oldest in the world.

The Assyrian people adopted Christianity in the 1st century AD[5] and north Iraq became the centre of Eastern Rite Christianity and Syriac literature from the 1st century AD until the Middle Ages.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Iraq

I have to ask you, where was your model and definition of the true church outside of this early church. What I am saying is, if you use versus from the Bible it is your onus to prove that Christianity existed outside of this main group. This group started in 34AD.

My questions to you is:

Where is your evidence on those 'other' Christian denominations outside of this mainstream Middle East group that you say met in their homes?

When was Paul's conversion:

The Conversion of Paul the Apostle, was, according to the New Testament, an event in the life of Paul the Apostle that led him to cease persecuting early Christians and to become a follower of Jesus. It is normally dated by researchers to AD 33–36.[1][2][3] The phrases Pauline conversion, Damascene conversionand Damascus Christophany, and road to Damascusallude to this event.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_of_Paul_the_Apostle

When Paul was converted his ministry didn't start straight away (Acts 9). It would take Paul increments of 5 years up to 15 years before he could realise the Home grown churches in Europe. In this case the first home grown churches in Europe started to spring up around 40 to 50 AD which is a good 7 to 17 years after the church at Babylon was established.

What were those in the middle east doing?

Well you have to ask them, right? Yes/No

Their reply to you is that buildings aside from their homes were erected as a protection in mountain areas where they could be out of harms way from their enemies. These places were safe havens or safe houses called the churches whenever the congregations met in them.

The proof is in their testimonies. You won't find them in Google friend. You say that the church hinders people from edifying one another, yet you are asking me that the testimony of these people owing to their culture cannot be accepted because there is no proof. Haven't you just done a complete circle in your reasoning, how is it that you say when they meet in their homes they accept edification, yet when the body of Christ right here is speaking to you, you will not listen to them unless they give you some proof of their cultural history grounded in their liturgy.

We can't pick and choose. Churches are where ever the congregation meets and edification is happening, maybe not to your definition, but Christ is there amongst them.

I would like to ask you one question only?

People gathering in buildings other than their homes in Christ's name and in communion with his Spirit are every part of his body where two or three are gathered in worship and not according to the picture you gave of a person standing at the front transmitting whilst the others absorb, but rather all do meditate in prayer and through much fasting.

Are you saying that these places where these people meet are not the church. Notice I said where they meet. These places where they meet are called churches right? Yes/No

If you said no, then are you saying that the Holy Ghost is not present at that place where they meet? Yes/No

Notice these are direct questions, I don't need a scripture reply for this, you should be able to answer them directly without any reference to scripture. Simple yes/no questions.

I hope that you see that fallacy in your thinking that you have placed an umbrella of restriction upon your definition of church by making it a home grown movement whilst ignoring the community based churches established in Christ's name. Now you may disagree with the definition of a church as not a building, but if have not said it is a building but rather a meeting place, a house of prayer call it where the body of Christ meets in worship.

Who are we to say that these places of worship are not attended to by the Holy Ghost when the body of Christ meets in communion, we are not in God's position to define a church that gathers, as how you have defined it in the quote below:

"I want to see man made buildings called "churchs" in history. Even if they are there they are wrong to do so."

And this is your faulty premise arising from your definition of what communion is:

"If Christ is free to edify each part of the body EVERY time they come together and if they are allowed to minister at ANY time as God leads, and the order of where and what to do."

Now comes your circular reasoning:

"disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus." Acts 19:9

This again was not a church meeting but a disputing and evangelism. This was not "the church which meets in their house".

In facts the circular reasoning goes further, even the home gatherings wee by your definition an pen evangelism as there were many disputes that Paul had to attend to. One in particular was.

1 Corinthians 11:34
Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. And when I come I will give further directions.

As to your faulty conclusion the home edification movement resulted in bickering and rioting at times where you ironically are saying that "if they are allowed to minister at ANY time as God leads, and the order of where and what to do. Many were not allowed to come because they were frown upon as the poor who came to eat a meal, Hmmmmmmmmm...........

And more you ask...........ok

1 Corinthians 1:12-17
12What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephasb ”; still another, “I follow Christ.”

13Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. 16(Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) 17For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

What made things worse for Paul is that these Corinthians were the intelligent ones who threw the spanner into he works by reverting to the groupie mentality even in their homes and choosing their members and acting out purely towards who they favoured to be of their group.

1 Timothy 5:17:21
17The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. 18For Scripture says, “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,”a and “The worker deserves his wages.”b 19Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. 20But those elders who are sinning you are to reprove before everyone, so that the others may take warning. 21I charge you, in the sight of God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, to keep these instructions without partiality, and to do nothing out of favoritism.

Timothy's letter dates towards the end of Paul's ministry when he was imprisoned, the hom grown movement was running riot amongst its member far distant from the Middle eastern church who was orderly and collective. These groups in Europe became a law onto themselves and they even attacked their elders. This is the home grown movement that you are flogging I see and its fruits.

Let me edify you brother in love, the church is not an evangelist gathering and these home grown movements in Europe turned into these movements where Paul in "disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus." Acts 19:9" had to call th aside in neutral territory to stop their continuous bickerings and lombastic attitudes towards other members of the body.

In my conclusion the church gathering is not an evangelistic meeting, where everyone speaks to edify one another from a spoken opinion, but rather it is grounded in worship and worship requires order, silence and meditation in prayer to the God that they all stand facing towards the altar throughout the liturgy proceeding.

Your circular reasoning of home grown movements not being evangelistic is laughable because that was their main objective to increase members through these meetings and your premise that church gatherings are evangelistic is anything but, because communion gathering has nothing to do with evangelising rather is all to do with worship and all face towards the King who is Christ including the priest whose back is turned against the congregation whilst facing God.

LoveofTruth · Aug 9, 2015

Berean777 said:
I will address your post at length, but first the historically agreed accounts of Christianity is as follows:

Wow, so many things you say to be corrected and so many errors, it takes a long time to work through them all. SAnd I notice you didn't give any history for the questions I asked. You just tried to avoid the questions.

Berean777 said:
I have to ask you, where was your model and definition of the true church outside of this early church. What I am saying is, if you use versus from the Bible it is your onus to prove that Christianity existed outside of this main group. This group started in 34AD.

What?

All I need is the Holy scriptures and the truth handed down by the apostolic workers about Gods order and where they met how they met what they did and how God worked in each one to give gifts and ministries. Read over my first post for just a small sampling of the church which meets in their homes. This is the apostolic order as led by the Holy Spirit.

And I can show clearly that they met in homes long after 34 Ad and that Jesus led them to plant churches this way, Here is just some of the proof,

"9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake...."( Titus 1:9-11 )

The first thing to note is that historically this letter was dated about 66 AD. That would mean that they were doing these things at least 66 years after Christ.

Here we see that the overseer/elders were not to lord over others but to hold the faithful word and to exhort and convince the gainsayer. they were to wait on the Lord and His word to exhort and convince, they did not Lord over or be one man over all. In these gatherings they were all allowed to speak as we see even the ones in error were speaking. And this whole scene took PLACE IN HOMES, as we read "who subvert whole houses". As we can see this was what their meetings were like, all were allowed to share and speak in homes, and the overseers were mature brothers who could exhort and convince the error with the word of God and sound doctrine. And this was all about 66 years after Christ.

Paul was a wise master builder and God taught Him how to plant churches, and he did the same in every church everywhere. God is not the author of confusion. To have meetings in homes where they could all minister and fellowship and have a meal together and pray etc was Gods order from the start and always has been. For men to go away from that and create large buildings unbiblically called "churches" and to set up one man exalted over all and quench the spirit in the body ministry is not right and hinders the church and Christ headship.

so first section from Titus shows that they had home meetings at least 66 years after Christ. The same could be shown for many other verses about the church which meets in their house in Rome Corinth etc etc. If we look at the dates when these were written we will see that they were much later than 34 Ad and close to 60 Ad or so some of them.

Also, Jesus when he sent the apostles out two by two told them to find the house of peace and stay there. He was showing them how to do the work of church planting. Also when he told the disciples to meet in the upper room of a house on pentacost, again he was showing them where to meet. We also see that they met from house to house in Acts 2 having favour with all the people. So they were not driven into homes under persecution at that time. The persecution happened later and Paul knew where to find them all, in homes.

Berean777 said:
Where is your evidence on those 'other' Christian denominations outside of this mainstream Middle East group that you say met in their homes?

what "denominations, the word denomination means to make a name and that is carnal to make denominations . Paul rebuked dividing under men in 1 Cor 1. Also , All I need is the scriptural witness. there is much in history of the early church meeting in homes until around 325 or later.

Berean777 said:
When Paul was converted his ministry didn't start straight away (Acts 9). It would take Paul increments of 5 years up to 15 years before he could realize the Home grown churches in Europe. In this case the first home grown churches in Europe started to spring up around 40 to 50 AD which is a good 7 to 17 years after the church at Babylon was established.

I find it funny that now you call the church gatherings in Europe "home grown" churches. I already have been saying that they met in homes. You are the one who said they made buildings and called them churches? Which I have yet to see any proof for your wrong words. And the first church that met in homes happned right at pentecost and after they met from house to house all through the New Testament, not in 40-50 AD (or 34 Ad as you said before) have you forgotten these verses so quick. Notice that these were all through the different letters to different churches.

“and breaking bread from house to house,” ( Acts 2;46)

“ As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison. “ (Acts 8:3) Paul knew where to find them.

“ And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house”(Acts 20:20)

“Likewise greet the church that is in their house.” (Romans 16:5)

“...Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house” (1 Corinthians 16:19)

“Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house. “ (Colossians 4:15)

“And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house” (Philemon 1:2)

“If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed” (2 John 10 )

“And they went out of the prison, and entered into the house of Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them, and departed. “ (Acts 16:40)

“And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying” (Acts 12:12)

“But the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people” (Acts 17:5)

Berean777 said:
What were those in the middle east doing?

Well you have to ask them, right? Yes/No

I'm still waiting for your evidence, you don't seem to know. Show me where the middle east church ( people) met in a building of man specifically made for them to meet in and where they called it a "church", anywhere before Constantine.

Berean777 said:
Their reply to you is that buildings aside from their homes were erected as a protection in mountain areas where they could be out of harms way from their enemies. These places were safe havens or safe houses called the churches whenever the congregations met in them.

Again you keep promoting your lie that man made buildings are "churches". This is totally ridiculous and even a baby Christian should be able to correct you, in fact go as any minister who you listen to if a man made building is a "church" and see what they say. And no when the church is in a place (man made building or house) the place is not called a church because the believers are in it, in fact the wording is like this, to be correct,

'“Likewise greet the church that is in their house.” (Romans 16:5)

“...Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house” (1 Corinthians 16:19)

“Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house. “ (Colossians 4:15)

“And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house” (Philemon 1:2)

Berean777 said:
The proof is in their testimonies. You won't find them in Google friend.

still waiting for ANY proof historically from you. So far you look like your just making things up based upon your tradition and wrong understanding.

Berean777 said:
You say that the church hinders people from edifying one another,

No another straw man argument II never said the "church" hinders people. The church is the people of God. There you go again stuck in your wrong thinking that a man made building is a church ". if it wasn't so serious an issue it would be comical .What hinders the church is the traditions of man that make the word of God of no effect and the man made traditions that make the word of God of no effect and the one man ministry that the whole structure is et up to promote. The very function of the church , as mutual edification is hindered by the man made structure and form and the whole order.

Berean777 said:
yet you are asking me that the testimony of these people owing to their culture cannot be accepted because there is no proof. Haven't you just done a complete circle in your reasoning, how is it that you say when they meet in their homes they accept edification, yet when the body of Christ right here is speaking to you, you will not listen to them unless they give you some proof of their cultural history grounded in their liturgy.

No I don't do that, I am still waiting for any history to back up your words about man made buildings called the church in the middle east around the time you say 34 AD or up to the time of Constantine. You are just trying to avoid the question because you are very wrong and spoke too soon I think, and you are just trusting that your tradition must have called them churches that early because they wrongly do today. That's what I think.

We can't pick and choose. Churches are where ever the congregation meets and edification is happening, maybe not to your definition, but Christ is there amongst them.

Berean777 said:
People gathering in buildings other than their homes in Christ's name and in communion with his Spirit are every part of his body where two or three are gathered in worship and not according to the picture you gave of a person standing at the front transmitting whilst the others absorb, but rather all do meditate in prayer and through much fasting.

Are you saying that these places where these people meet are not the church. Notice I said where they meet. These places where they meet are called churches right? Yes/No

No and No again, i have been saying no all along. The PLACES they meet are not the "church" NO. does this scripture mean anything to you?

And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house” (Philemon 1:2)

The "church ( being the body of Christ and members in particular) meets in their "HOUSE" (in Greek a dwelling)

It doesnt say the church which meets in the church???

Berean777 said:
If you said no, then are you saying that the Holy Ghost is not present at that place where they meet? Yes/No

NO, not at all. The Holy Ghost is in every part of the "church" ( the body of Christ), and the church is a "spiritual house", made up of living stones.

Berean777 said:
Notice these are direct questions, I don't need a scripture reply for this, you should be able to answer them directly without any reference to scripture. Simple yes/no questions.

They are uniformed questions, and you need to study to show thyself approved, rightly dividing the word and understanding what the church is.

Berean777 said:
I hope that you see that fallacy in your thinking

No I dont see any fallacy AT ALL in my thinking according to scripture and sound words. But I see great folly in your thinking.

Berean777 said:
that you have placed an umbrella of restriction upon your definition of church by making it a home grown movement whilst ignoring the community based churches established in Christ's name.

No I have given the biblical definition that the church is the body of Christ and that they church ( the body of Christ) met in homes. I even gave you the definition of the word "church", but you must have missed that. It is not a religious building.

Berean777 said:
Now you may disagree with the definition of a church as not a building, but if have not said it is a building but rather a meeting place, a house of prayer call it where the body of Christ meets in worship.

???
marvel at how simple these things are really and yet some still try and go around and round trying to make their meeting place or temple or man made buildings the church. It is a lie to call a man made building a church, it is wrong and unbiblical. It displaces the true church and the function of the true church. This is basic teaching and milk.

Berean777 said:
And this is your faulty premise arising from your definition of what communion is:

What??? I simply asked,

"I want to see man made buildings called "churches" in history. Even if they are there they are wrong to do so."
and what you said about my definition of communion has nothing to do with this. I am not talking aboit communion here but show me your historical evidence where the middle east believers in the earliest days up to Constantine called man made buildings "churches", and show me that they did not meet in their homes?

Berean777 said:
As to your faulty conclusion the home edification movement resulted in bickering and rioting at times where you ironically are saying that "if they are allowed to minister at ANY time as God leads, and the order of where and what to do. Many were not allowed to come because they were frown upon as the poor who came to eat a meal, Hmmmmmmmmm...........

What, Paul said ( even though he had to correct some disorder) that they m,ust allow all things to be done unto edifying and that included any having a psalms a doctrine, a tongue a revelation etc. Paul said what he wrote to them was the "commandment of the Lord", if they ignored it they were ignorant. The order Paul showed to the Corinthians in 1 Cor 14 was Gods set order for the church to allow God to move freely among them. For you to try and attack this and imply that this is not Gods order you are in danger according to Paul 1 Cor 14:37,38

Berean777 said:
Timothy's letter dates towards the end of Paul's ministry when he was imprisoned, the hom grown movement was running riot amongst its member far distant from the Middle eastern church who was orderly and collective. These groups in Europe became a law onto themselves and they even attacked their elders. This is the home grown movement that you are flogging I see and its fruits.

What?? again you attack Paul and Timothy as if they did not know what to do and were just causing confusion. You are in great error for even the implication. Timothy was an apostle worker and he and Paul were mighty in the Lord. Timothy and Titus were to set in order things lacking. They handed down the order given to Paul from God also. Paul taught the same things in every church everywhere. Paul expected all churches to be the same way in meeting.

Berean777 said:
Let me edify you brother in love,

The only way a believer can edify another is if Christ the head is working effectually n them. But what you have been saying so far is not according to scripture . I wait for the anointing to teach me all things, I have no need for any man to teach me (1 John 2:27). If a believer is in the anointing and they speak in faith and the spirit i hear the witness and according to scripture.

Berean777 said:
the church is not an evangelist gathering and these home grown movements in Europe turned into these movements where Paul in "disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus." Acts 19:9" had to call th aside in neutral territory to stop their continuous bickerings and lombastic attitudes towards other members of the body.

In my conclusion the church gathering is not an evangelistic meeting, where everyone speaks to edify one another from a spoken opinion,

Again I never said the church is an evangelistic meeting. And I never said they should ever speak their own "opinion". Again you try to create a straw man argument and it is no good. The church is the body of Christ where he is the head working effectually in every part to edify one another in love and where all can use their gifts as he leads (1 Cor 14:26-38 1 Peter 4:10,11, Romans 12, 1 Cor 12 etc etc)

Berean777 said:
but rather it is grounded in worship and worship requires order, silence and meditation in prayer to the God that they all stand facing towards the altar throughout the liturgy proceeding.

All your own understanding. There is only Gods order not mans that we are to walk in. And there is no "altar" in the new testament homes. Only a spiritual altar. No masses sacrifices , one man priest over all, no pews church buildings, song leaders, one man pastor ministry, no tithing, no collections in the gatherings, no paid minister, no programs, no time schedules, no showtime religion, no inscent sticks, wax candle burning, fancy robes for men to wear, no clergy laity division etc etc etc etc.

Berean777 said:
Your circular reasoning of home grown movements not being evangelistic is laughable because that was their main objective to increase members through these meetings and your premise that church gatherings are evangelistic is anything but, because communion gathering has nothing to do with evangelising rather is all to do with worship and all face towards the King who is Christ including the priest whose back is turned against the congregation whilst facing God.

Your whole argument would be "laughable" if it wasnt so serious. You really have no idea what you are talking about, none. Here is your rebuke from scripture. As you try to say the church meetings are not "evangelical". (by the way i did not say they were "evangelical although evangelist can speak also if they have such a gift)

"11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;...15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love." (Ephesians 4:11,15,16)

"10 As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen." ( 1 Peter 4:10,11)

Notice that if all believers dont use the gifts God gives they are not good "stewards".

"11 Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do." ( 1 Thessalonians 5:11)

Notice the one anothering. And edifying , one another.

"5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;7 Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching;8 Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation:"(Romans 12:5-8)

"26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? 37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant."( 1 Cor 14:26-38)

These are the commandments of the Lord. and this open ministry under Christ headship is what many do not do today.

and where did they have church meetings?

“...Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house” (1 Corinthians 16:19)

Berean777 · Aug 10, 2015

Like I said before I will address your lost in its entirety, but first you are making your own definitions of church, communion and the purpose of the communion. You have obviously read scripture without discerning much anthropology which is the mark of ignorance, without no malice intended in what I say. As I stated before the onus is on you to provide evidence of chronology of such home grounded church as the only true church and not one that has an apostolic head figure or elder. You cannot provide any chronology because there is non and all your hypothesis of scriptural interpretation is centred on the IDEAL. You have an IDEAL an ideology that you want to fit 2000 years of Christianity into through your definitions and your own purpose driven church. Notice I said your own purpose driven church that has no ties to anthropology, no history and no chronology. You stance is once that you have modelled through your interpretation of scriptures to be the be all and any thing that falls outside of your definitions and standards, you will reject even if evidence is provided that encompass 2000 years of church history.

I leave you with this chronology of church elders of the church of the East. You may not accept it because it flies in the face of your definitions, but who cares what you or I think, right? Everything must be objective and not subjected by human standards or opinions.

Here is your evidence.

List of Catholicoi of Seleucia-Ctesiphon and Patriarchs of the East until 1552
Legendary era

Shimun Keepa (Saint Peter) (33–64)[7]

Thoma Shlikha, (Saint Thomas) [8]

Tulmay (St. Bartholomew the Apostle) [8]

Mar Addai, (St. Thaddeus) of the Seventy disciples (c.66–c.87)

Aggai of the Seventy disciples (c.81)

Mari of the Seventy disciples (c.87–c.120)

1 Aggai (Mar Aggai) (120–152 AD) disciple of Mar Addai and spiritual director of Mar Mari

2 Saint Mari (Mar Mari) (152–185 AD)— During his days the bishopric was formally established at Seleucia-Ctesiphon

Seleucia-Ctesiphon era
See also: Al-Mada'in

3 Abris (Abres or Ahrasius) (121–137 / 185–201 AD)

4 Abraham (Abraham I of Kashker) (159–171 / 201–213 AD)

5 Yaʿqob I (Mar Yacob I) (c. 172-190 / 213–231 AD)

6 Ebid M’shikha (191–203)[8]

7 Ahadabui (Ahha d'Aboui) (204–220 / 231–246) - First bishop of the East to get statikon as Catholicos. Ordained in 231 AD in Jerusalem Council.

8 Shahaloopa of Kashker (Shahlufa) (220–224 / 246–266 AD)

vacant (224–c. 280)

Metropolitan of Seleucia-Ctesiphon elevated as titular Catholicos
Around 280, visiting bishops consecrated Papa bar Aggai as Bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon, thereby establishing the succession.[9] With him, heads of the church took the title Catholicos.

9 Papa bar Aggai (Mar Papa bar Gaggai (c. 280–317 / 267–336 AD)

vacant (317–329)

10 Shemʿon bar Sabbaʿe (Simeon Barsabae) (329–341 / 337–350 AD)

11 Shahdost (Shalidoste) (341–343 / 350–352 AD)

12 Barbaʿshmin (Barbashmin) (343–346 / 352–360 AD)

vacant (c. 346–c. 363)

13 Tomarsa (Toumarsa) (363–371 / 360–368 AD)

vacant (c. 371–c. 377)

14 Qayyoma (Qaioma) (370–375 / 377–399 AD)

15 Isaac (375–386 / 399–410 AD)

Catholicos of the East with jurisdiction over Eastern provinces
Isaac was recognised as 'Grand Metropolitan' and Primate of the Church of the East at the Synod of Seleucia-Ctesiphon in 410. The acts of this Synod were later edited by the Patriarch Joseph (552–567) to grant him the title of Catholicos as well. This title for Patriarch Isaac in fact only came into use towards the end of the fifth century.

16 Ahha (Ahhi) (386–393 / 410–414 AD)

17 Yahballaha I (Yab-Alaha I) (393–398 / 415–420 AD)

18 Maʿna (Maana) (398–400 AD / 420)

19 Farbokht (Frabokht) (401–420 AD / 421)

20 Dadishoʿ (Dadishu I) 421–456 AD)

With Dadisho, the significant disagreement on the dates of the Catholicoi in the sources start to converge. In 424, under Mar Dadisho I, the Church of the East declared itself independent of all other churches; thereafter, its Catholicoi began to use the additional title of Patriarch.[9] During his reign, Nestorianism was subsequently denounced at the Council of Ephesus in 431.

21 Babowai (Babwahi) (457–484 AD)

22 Barsauma (484–485) opposed by

Acacius (Aqaq-Acace) (485–496/8 AD)

23 Babai (497–503)

24 Shila (503–523)

25 Elishaʿ (524–537)

Narsai intrusus (524–537)

26 Paul (539)

27 Aba I (540–552)

In 544 the Synod of Mar Aba I adopted the ordinances of the Council of Chalcedon.[10]

28 Joseph (552–556/567 AD)

29 Ezekiel (567–581)

30 Ishoʿyahb I (582–595)

31 Sabrishoʿ I (596–604)

32 Gregory (605–609)

vacant (609–628)

Babai the Great (coadjutor) 609–628; together with Aba (coadjutor) 609–628

From 628, the Maphrian also began to use the title Catholicos. See the List of Maphrians for details.

33 Ishoʿyahb II (628–645)

34 Maremmeh (646–649)

35 Ishoʿyahb III (649–659)

36 Giwargis I (661–680)

37 Yohannan I (680–683)

vacant (683–685)

38 Hnanishoʿ I (686–698)

Yohannan the Leper intrusus (691–693)

vacant (698–714)

39 Sliba-zkha (714–728)

vacant (728–731)

40 Pethion (731–740)

41 Aba II (741–751)

42 Surin (753)

43 Yaʿqob II (753–773)

44 Hnanishoʿ II (773–780)

In 775, the seat transferred from Seleucia-Ctesiphon to Baghdad, the recently established capital of the ʿAbbasid caliphs.[11]

45 Timothy I (780–823)

46 Ishoʿ Bar Nun (823–828)

47 Giwargis II (828–831)

48 Sabrishoʿ II (831–835)

49 Abraham II (837–850)

vacant (850–853)

50 Theodosius (853–858)

vacant (858–860)

51 Sargis (860–872)

vacant (872–877)

52 Israel of Kashkar intrusus (877)

53 Enosh (877–884)

54 Yohannan II bar Narsai (884–891)

55 Yohannan III (893–899)

56 Yohannan IV Bar Abgar (900–905)

57 Abraham III (906–937)

58 Emmanuel I (937–960)

59 Israel (961)

60 ʿAbdishoʿ I (963–986)

61 Mari (987–999)

62 Yohannan V (1000–1011)

63 Yohannan VI bar Nazuk (1012–1016)

vacant (1016–1020)

64 Ishoʿyahb IV bar Ezekiel (1020–1025)

vacant (1025–1028)

65 Eliya I (1028–1049)

66 Yohannan VII bar Targal (1049–1057)

vacant (1057–1064)

67 Sabrishoʿ III (1064–1072)

68 ʿAbdishoʿ II ibn al-ʿArid (1074–1090)

69 Makkikha I (1092–1110)

70 Eliya II Bar Moqli (1111–1132)

71 Bar Sawma (1134–1136)

vacant (1136–1139)

72 ʿAbdishoʿ III Bar Moqli (1139–1148)

73 Ishoʿyahb V (1149–1176)

74 Eliya III (1176–1190)

75 Yahballaha II (1190–1222)

76 Sabrishoʿ IV Bar Qayyoma (1222–1224)

77 Sabrishoʿ V ibn al-Masihi (1226–1256)

78 Makkikha II (1257–1265)

79 Denha I (1265–1281)

80 Yahballaha III (1281–1317) – The Patriarchal Seat transferred to Maragha

81 Timothy II (1318–c. 1332)

vacant (c. 1332–c. 1336)

82 Denha II (1336/7–1381/2)

83 Shemʿon II (c. 1365–c. 1392) (dates uncertain)

83b Shemʿon III (c. 1403–c. 1407) (existence uncertain)

84 Eliya IV (c. 1437)

85 Shemʿon IV Basidi (1437–1493, ob.1497)

86 Shemʿon V (1497–1501)

87 Eliya V (1502–1503)

88 Shemʿon VI (1504–1538)

89 Shemʿon VII Ishoʿyahb (1539–1558)

List of Patriarchs of the Church of the East from 1552 to 1681
Main article: Schism of 1552
By the Schism of 1552 divided the Church of the East was divided into two factions, of which one (the Church of Assyria and Mosul) entered into communion with the Catholic Church and the other remained independent.

Eliya Line, with residence in Alqosh:

90 Eliya VII (1558–1591)[12]

91 Eliya VIII (1591–1617)[12] – In 1610, Eliya VIII entered communion with the Catholic Church. His successor Eliya IX quickly repudiated the union.

92 Eliya IX Shemʿon (1617–1660)[12]

93 Eliya X Yohannan Marogin (1660–1700)[12]

Shemʿon Line, with residence in Amid, Siirt, Urmia, Salmas. This line until 1600 was in communion with the Catholic Church:

90 Shemʿon Sulaqa (1553–1555)

91 Abdisho IV Maron (1555–1570)

92 Shemʿon VIII Yahballaha (1570–1580)[12]

93 Shemʿon IX Dinkha (1580–1600)[12]

In 1600 the Shemʿon Line restored the hereditary succession, moved to Qochanisand broke the communion with the Catholic Church

94 Shemʿon X Eliyah (1600–1638)[12]

95 Shemʿon XI Eshuyow (1638–1656)[12]

96 Shemʿon XII Yoalaha (1656–1662)[12]

97 Shemʿon XIII Dinkha (1662–1700)[12]

List of Patriarchs of the Assyrian Church of the East from 1681 to 1820
In 1681 a separate Patriarchate in communion with the Catholic Church was erected in Amid, splitting from the Eliya Line. In 1692 Shemʿon XIII Dinkha (based in Qochanis) of the Shimun line, broke formally communion with Rome.

Eliya Line, with residence in Alqosh:

93 Eliya X Yohannan Marogin (1660–1700)[12]

94 Eliya XI Marogin (1700–1722)[12]

95 Eliya XII Denha (1722–1778)[12]

at the death of Eliya XII the Eliya Line split between:

96 Eliya XIII Ishoʿyahb (1778–1804)[12]

96 Yohannan VIII Hormizd (1778–1830)

Shemʿon Line, with residence in Qochanis:

97 Shemʿon XIII Dinkha (1662–1700)[12]

98 Shemʿon XIV Shlemon (1700–1740)[12]

99 Shemʿon XV Mikhaʿil Mukhtas (1740–1780)[12]

100 Shemʿon XVI Yohannan (1780–1820)[12]

101 Shemʿon XVII Abraham (1820–1861)[12]

Josephite Line, with residence in Amid, in full Communion with the Catholic Church:

94 Joseph I (1681–1696)

95 Joseph II Sliba Maruf (1696–1713)

96 Joseph III Timothy Maroge (1713–1757)

97 Joseph IV Lazare Hindi (1757–1780)

98 Joseph V Augustine Hindi (1780–1827)

With the reign of Patriarch Yohannan Hormizd, the Eliya Line in Alqosh entered in Communion with Rome, merging with the Catholic "Josephite" Amid line and thus forming the modern Chaldean Church. In 1830, Yohannan Hormizd was recognised by the Vatican as patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans and moved the see in Mosul. This event marked the birth of the modern Chaldean Catholic Church. For the following Chaldean Patriarchs see the below.

The Shemʿon Line remained the only line not in communion with the Catholic Church, and from the 19th-century it was known as Assyrian Church of the East.

List of Patriarchs of the Assyrian Church of the East since 1820
Continuation of the Shemʿon Line

101 Shemʿon XVII Abraham (1820–1861)[12] Residence continued in Qochanis

102 Shemʿon XVIII Rubil (1861–1903)[12]

103 Shemʿon XIX Benjamin (1903–1918) Residence in Qochanis ended in 1915, with Patriarch residing starting from 1915 between Urmia and Salmas, Persia until his assassination in 1918

104 Shemʿon XX Paul (1918–1920) Patriarch moved the patriarchate to Mosul, Iraq

Locum Tenens

Yosip Khnanisho (coadjutor) (1918–1920)

Abimalek Timotheus (coadjutor) (1920)

105 Shemʿon XXI Eshai (1920–1975) – forced into exile in 1933 and thus the patriarchate was temporarily located in Cyprusbefore relocating to Chicago, Illinois in 1940, and finally relocating to San Francisco, California in. He resigned in 1973, although unofficially still remained patriarch. He was assassinated in San Jose, California. His death led to the end of the Shemʿon line

Non-hereditary patriarchy

106 Dinkha IV (1976–2015) first canonically elected Patriarch since 1600. Relocated the patriarchate to Chicago, Illinois in 1980 after temporarily living in Tehran, Iran. Abolished hereditary succession upon his election

107 – To be determined by the Holy Synod of the Assyrian Church of the East. A preliminary Synod meeting in Erbil on June 2, 2015 did not result in election of a new patriarch. The election was postponed to September 2015 and to be held again in Erbil.

List of Patriarchs of the Chaldean Catholic Church since 1830
Non-hereditary line established with end of Eliya Line

96 Yohannan VIII Hormizd (1830–1838) — moved the See to Mosul

97 Nicholas I Zaya (1839–1846)

98 Joseph VI Audo (1847–1878)

99 Eliya Abulyonan (1878–1894)

100 Audishu V Khayyath (1894–1899) (Georges Ebed-Iesu)

101 Yousef VI Emmanuel II Thomas (1900–1946)

102 Yousef VII Ghanima (1946–1958) — moved the See to Baghdad

103 Paul II Cheikho (1958–1989)

104 Raphael I Bidawid (1989–2003)

Locum Tenens Shlemon Warduni (2003)

105 Emmanuel III Delly (2003–2012)

Locum Tenens Jacques Ishaq (2012–2013)

106 Louis Raphaël I Sako (since 2013)

List of Patriarchs of the Ancient Church of the East
Main article: Ancient Church of the East
In 1964, during the reign of Shemʿon XXI Eshai (also known as Mar Eshai Shimun XXIII), a schism occurred in the Church of the East causing the establishment of a separate Ancient Church of the East with its center in Baghdad. This schism occurred because of the changing of the church calendar from the traditional Julian calendar to the Gregorian one, along with hereditary succession and tribal rivalry. In 1968 communities in Iraq, Syria and India elected a rival Patriarch centered in Baghdad, the then suspended Metropolitan of India Mar Thoma Darmo. He consecrated prelates who in turn consecrated him Patriarch. Shimun XXIII Eshai continued as the official head of the Church of the East with his see in San Francisco. Currently the Patriarchate is located in Baghdad, Iraq.

Vacant (1964–1968) – first period of the schism

106 Thoma Darmo (1968–1969)

Locum Tenens: Mar Addai Giwargis (1969–1972)

107 Mar Addai II (1972–present)

Here is the link:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Patriarchs_of_the_Church_of_the_East

Your efforts to try and burry church history that encompasses 2000 years is a vain effort. Tell me where is the history of those home grown churches in Europe. Please give us your anthropology and chronology.

You will find non. Do you know why?

Because you have invented your own religion that wants to distance itself from what Christ has worked through. Show me the work of your home grown church, please show us its chronology from 1st century until now?

I thought so!

Berean777 · Aug 10, 2015

All you need is not all found in holy scriptures. Your admission is pointing to a faceless religion that has no anthropology, no chronology and no history.

Where are the blood of the martyrs of the church you speak off, that is grounded in home bound religion?

Christians throughout centuries gathered in buildings called churches with elders of the congregation. There are many accounts of how the congregation during persecution huddled in these church buildings and prayed whilst they were burnt down by the enemy.

Again where is your home grown religion, where is the chronology and trail of blood that was purchased through countless martyrs for Jesus Christ.

You know the western talk is cheap,they pretend to be much bigger than they really are and when tough gets going to be ready to spill their blood they are the first to try and talk their way out of it by their slippery tongue.

You have lost touch with anthropology my friend. Christianity is tied to anthropology and we see the living word of Christ throughout the 2000 years and we need not refer to scripture to identify the members of the body of Christ who have been martyred for his sake for believing in him.

Looking at scripture as the be all whilst ignoring the works of the living word throughout the last 2000 years is bordering on bible worship which is a form of idolatry.

LoveofTruth · Aug 10, 2015

Berean777 said:
Like I said before I will address your lost in its entirety

still waiting eagerly so far you have given nothing and tried to avoid the simple scriptural order of God as handed down by the apostolic order. The early church had problems right from the start when fal and doctrines of the Nicolaitines, and the false aposltes etc.

Berean777 said:
but first you are making your own definitions of church,

No I don't. I showed you the actual definition of the word "ekklessia" "ἐκκλησία, ας, ἡ" an assembly, ca called out gathring of people.
You can just make up your own ideas but you will be wrong to do so. You create another church than the church Christ is building. Jesus Christ builds His church from within us, not of brick and mortar as man does.

and I showed you these clear verses,

"22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all."(Ephesians 1;22,23)

This is as clear a rebuke to you as is needed. Paul, speaking by the Holy Spirit) said the church is the body of Christ. All believers are part of that body and Christ is the head of that body as we read,

"15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love."(Ephesians 4:15,16)

Believers are a spiritulal house made of living stnes

"1 Peter 2:5
Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ."

I know it seems like you dont want to be bothered with the FACTS and clear scriptures. You would rather follow mens traditions from the past and from the error s that crept in early in the church. It is sad when some do not acknowledge the Holt scriptures and try to accuse those who believe the word as bibliolaters etc. Paul rebuked such men in 1 Cor 14:37,38

"37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant."(1 Cor 14:37,38)

Berean777 said:
communion and the purpose of the communion.

You do not understand the word communion or what it really is. This communion is our participation with Christ inwardly. He said he would come into believers and sup with them.

κοινωνία, ας, ἡ - "contributory help, participation, (b) sharing in, communion, (c) spiritual fellowship, a fellowship in the spirit."( Strongs concordance)

Berean777 said:
You have obviously read scripture without discerning much anthropology which is the mark of ignorance, without no malice intended in what I say.

Wrong. The study of human cultures and their development is not needed to see the clear scriptural order of God and what the spirit of God clearly showed for the church to follow. We see the apostolic patterns and traditions handed down to the saints all over the New testament. And we follow the believers from Christ death until many years after some 66 years after and they were still meeting in homes and all were allowed to share and no one man over all, they had a plurality of elders in every gathering.

The so called anthropology of the church history and times of cultures that you try to bring is not relevant to the talk. I can show clearly that the first recorder church buildings in history were not in the middle east as you try to show. I still wait for you to show me proof that the middle east believers built buildings for worship called churches. I am not talking about men hiding from persecution from the times, and meeting in caves or forest or cemetaries etc. I am talking about a public building called a church. Also the first and earliest historical evidence of a building used for Christians was simply a HOME with a wall knocked out for a larger meeting. Here is some of the evidence. Although I do not agree with any man who calls a man made building a "church" and to do so is a lie or misinformation in ignorance. But I will post this list to show that i do not see any middle east buildings called churches in the list before 229 AD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_church_buildings

Berean777 said:
As I stated before the onus is on you to provide evidence of chronology of such home grounded church as the only true church and not one that has an apostolic head figure or elder.

There is no other head but Christ in the church. An apostle or elder is not the head of the church.

Also i can easily show by scripture the early church for many years right up to around 70 Ad or close met in homes as scripture shows clearly. This is the earliest order from God sealed in Holy scripture for all to see and follow and Paul set in order things that were lacking in the gatherings and how they ought to behave themsleves in the church when meeting in homes. This is clearly seen in scripture and the many verses i showed you about the church meeting in their homes.

Whatever came after that in history, such as the so called church fathers and some of the traditions of man and rituals and errors etc, that is to be judged by the scriptural witness and not by mans traditions and cultural history. We do not go back to just after the scriptures were finished and when the apostles had died and then define what men did after the order of God had been shown and scripturally stated, and then say this is the way we should be. If a man takes a histrical cultural witness from lets say, 375 Ad and he says see, they were meeting in large buildings then so that was way back then and we should today. This is false. If the early church from the time of Christ up to them for the most part met in homes and that is the scriptural witness for many years. The scriptural witness rebukes the other historical and cultural witness. Your reasoning is not sound.

Berean777 said:
You cannot provide any chronology because there is non and all your hypothesis of scriptural interpretation is centred on the IDEAL. You have an IDEAL an ideology that you want to fit 2000 years of Christianity into through your definitions and your own purpose driven church.

Berean777 said:

If God says ( through Paul) that what he wrote through Paul was His commands to the church. Then we have Gods ideal and His order, not mans. This ideal is the biblical church. And Paul taught the same things to every church and everywhere he went as scripture clearly shows. Jesus says , be perfect, Peter says :be perfect, Paul said he wanted to present every man perfect in Christ. To be perfect is the ideal, and we should not stop short of that. The ideal i speak of is the very clear scriptural witness from the word of God working in the apostles who set in order things in the church and who spoke and lived the word of God as examples for us. All scripture is profitable for doctrine, correction, instruction in righteousness etc.

Berean777 said:

Notice I said your own purpose driven church that has no ties to anthropology, no history and no chronology.

Click to expand...

Yes it does have ties to history and most importantly, it has ties to Holy scripture , which you seem to disregard in favour of your religious man made traditions. Like the pharisees who made the word of God of no effect by their traditions. The church is clearly defined in the New testament. You just seem to ignore the scriptures and meaning of the word "church".Yes the word church is ekklessia in Greek and the word church comes from a ancient wod so both words connect.

I attached a link of some evidence that they met in homes in the early church. The history is a long study to weigh through all the details. But really all I need is the scriptural witness and proof that they dd met in homes for at least the first 68 years or so as we see in the scriptures.

https://www.ntrf.org/articles/article_detail.php?PRKey=50
And so I wait for you to contradict all these men who searched and have shown that the early church met in homes exclusively for about the first 300 years. Show me our proof where the middle eastern church met in a building called a church before 300 Ad. The thing is even if they did, they would have been wrong to call a man made building a church.But I wait for the evidence eagerly.

Berean777 said:

You stance is once that you have modelled through your interpretation of scriptures to be the be all and any thing that falls outside of your definitions and standards, you will reject even if evidence is provided that encompass 2000 years of church history.

Click to expand...

I will reject anything that hinders the effectual working of Christ as the head of His church and anything that fights against the clear commandments of the Lord for the church order ( 1 Cor 14:26-38, 1 Peter 4;10,110 If any religious form quenches the spirit sets up a one man ministry over others exalted and preeminant, and if any gatherig calls a man mad e building and organization of man "the church: i will reject it according to scripture and the apostolic order as seen in scripture. It doesn't matter if men went astray from Gods command 300 years after or ten years after or one minute after they read the commands of God, they would still be wrong. And it doesn't matter even if hand join with hand would still be wrong. The pharisees had their traditons that they had for a long time and yet they made the word of Gd of no effect by them and were rightly rebuked. But I can hear them saying the same type of arguments that you give based on their history and numbers and that they have been doing their way for such a long time etc.

Berean777 said:

I leave you with this chronology of church elders of the church of the East. You may not accept it because it flies in the face of your definitions, but who cares what you or I think, right? Everything must be objective and not subjected by human standards or opinions.

Here is your evidence.

Here is the link:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Patriarchs_of_the_Church_of_the_East

.

Click to expand...

I do not reject it because it flies in the face of "my definition". But because the biblical order and church is seen in the scriptures. I do not reject the believers who came through the centuries and who may have been bound up under religious systems . But the thing is that the so called Chronology that you gave does not answer my question. i asked to show me a man made building called a church building from the early church to just before Constantine. And you have not done this. What you show me here is very similar to the catholics who claim apostolic sucession wrongly and try to go back and attach all the elders and bishops to them and try to prove the authenticity and evidence that they should have a man over all called the pope. But scripture rebuke them as well. There historical so called proof means nothing and I do not place church fathers as they are called above scripture. if they made errors and some of them did I judge what they said by scripture in the spirit. Just as I judge all things from history and culture and what men did by the scriptural witness and the spirit.

Berean777 said:

Your efforts to try and burry church history that encompasses 2000 years is a vain effort. Tell me where is the history of those home grown churches in Europe. Please give us your anthropology and chronology.

You will find non. Do you know why?

Click to expand...

I showed you a link that reveals some of the history. But I have shown you the clearest evidence from the many quotes I showed you of men meeting in homes from scripture. Check the dates when those books were written and you will see that some of them are much later close to 68 Ad. Titus was around 66 Ad and they were still meeting in homes. I could show you evidence from every quote in each place where home meetings were as the best evidence of the early church following the Spirit which led them in homes. Paul who planted churches and set in order things in the church did so as he was led by the Spirit. So I give the best and most accurate HISTORY and that is from the scriptures.

Berean777 said:

Because you have invented your own religion that wants to distance itself from what Christ has worked through.

Click to expand...

No this is a lie, I do not invent my own religion. I show you clear scriptures and patterns and commands of God and you just ignore it for your own church order, which is not according to the scriptures. Tell me what place you meet in and what is it called , and what is the order there, and we will see very quickly if it is in Gods order or if you fight against the commands of God.

What has influenced the world much more than the middle eastern churches is the Roman catholic church which stems from Rome and Constantine. The history is very well documented. The protestants for the most part have inherited much from the catholic order that came from man=s traditions in regards to so called religious temples and places of worhsip. The early Christians have said in records that they have no temple of order like the pagans. They simply met in homes The world has been affected greatly by the Constantine times and after and through thr protestant churches. Show me your proof that the potestant churches followed middle eastern church structures to make their buildings unbiblically called churches..

Click to expand...

LoveofTruth · Aug 10, 2015

Berean777 said:
All you need is not all found in holy scriptures. Your admission is pointing to a faceless religion that has no anthropology, no chronology and no history.

Wrong, I see in the history recorded n the scriptures a clear picture of the early church meetings and in homes and where they had a meal together and fellow shipped and continued in the apostles doctrine etc. There is evidence that the early church met in homes up to around 300 ADS. I can search for more of that. But the main argument is from the commands and order seen in scripture and the apostolic order they set out. If men went away from this early that is the problem. But you seem to make it a good things. and try to justify your error by the years of made traditions in history as if that proves they were right. i could just as easily show you the traditions and history of pagan temples that lasted for a long time and were seen all through history, does that make them right?

When you go away from Holy scripture you fall into gross error, as has been evident. You go so far that you actually think a man made building is the church, and on numerous post you have said the church is a religious building. This is so basic I marvel at how you can miss it. Its like if i were to meet a person praying to a stature of what they think is Jesus. i say to them, this is only a stature dont pray to that, and it is not even what Jesus looks like. Then they get all offended and their superstition comes out and they say , Oh dont talk like that i am praying to Jesus. I say no the statue is not Jesus. its that absurd. I say the church is the body of Christ and you say the religious buildings of man are the church,. And you try to escape the error by saying if the believers meet in the building, then it is a church. This is the same error.

You try to ignore scripture because perhaps you realize your whole religious form and gatherings are bnot according to scripture. Do you go to history and tradition and mans order to justfiy you. This is wrong to do so.

Berean777 said:
Where are the blood of the martyrs of the church you speak off, that is grounded in home bound religion?

It is clear from scripture the early church met in homes and they suffered and were persecuted for doing so read in Acts when Paul gathers the christians together and he went to every HOME to find them. This is the history and evidence of the persecution of believers who met in homes.

Berean777 said:
Christians throughout centuries gathered in buildings called churches with elders of the congregation. There are many accounts of how the congregation during persecution huddled in these church buildings and prayed whilst they were burnt down by the enemy.

I have no doubt that man true believers gathered in man made religious Babylonian type temple structures unbiblically called "churches". But there you ggo again still in gross ignorance, 9sorry to have to rebuke you so strong, but you are so wrong). You still keep trying to justify calling a man made building a church it is absurd!!! You have been shown clear scripture that rebukes you and all you say is things like, "All you need is not all found in holy scriptures". You are in great error there. The church met in their homes. Not the church met in the church.

Berean777 said:
Again where is your home grown religion, where is the chronology and trail of blood that was purchased through countless martyrs for Jesus Christ.

It is there and many believers met in homes up to the time of Constantine, and all we really need is the scriptures which show them meeting in homes for about 70 years after Christ.

Berean777 said:
You know the western talk is cheap,they pretend to be much bigger than they really are and when tough gets going to be ready to spill their blood they are the first to try and talk their way out of it by their slippery tongue.

Not sure who r what you are referring to here. But I use scripture to prove you wrong and thats all i need, I dont trust in history written by different men and from different perspectives. yes i can look at the history as well and see many things. But the history i see shows that the church met in homes up until around 300 Ad or so. I still wait for you to show me a man made building historically proven that was before 300 AD and called a "church". In fact show me anywhere in the new testament where we see one man over all called a pastor or priest, or reverend getting a regular salary

Berean777 said:
You have lost touch with anthropology my friend. Christianity is tied to anthropology and we see the living word of Christ throughout the 2000 years and we need not refer to scripture to identify the members of the body of Christ who have been martyred for his sake for believing in him.

You have lost touch with the truth of God and the scriptures of truth. I have not lost touch with the many errors that crept into the church through history. It can be seen in the history and words of many.

Berean777 said:
Looking at scripture as the be all whilst ignoring the works of the living word throughout the last 2000 years is bordering on bible worship which is a form of idolatry.

I see the living word in me and the believers i know and all through history working in many. I do not look at the scriptures as the be all and end all. God is all and the Holy scriptures are given by God. You seem to put history as your idol. And you magnify mans traditions and history over the word of God in scripture. That is the greatest error you do. It is so clear that you do this when you try hard to justify your false reilgious order and call a man mad e building a church.This shows that you do not understand what the church is.

I also do not ignore history or Gods work in men through history. You try to create a straw man argument and this is wrong also.

Some seem to stress things like church history of their group over scripture or thingsike church fathers over scripture etc thus is not right

If we have the pattern in the scriptures from the history of the church recorded we do not need to go to many centuries later and follow a different pattern that men made that goes against the scriptures

"the Church which meets in their house"

Christ builds His church from within us

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Christ builds His church from within us

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Christ builds His church from within us

Active Member

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Well-Known Member

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Christ builds His church from within us

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Christ builds His church from within us

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Christ builds His church from within us

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Christ builds His church from within us

Christ builds His church from within us

Similar threads