The Alleged Superiority of the Institutional (c)hurch Model

[Resha Caner]

3) They assumed that the exercise of authority within the institutional model is itself superior.

Your OP has the feel of a polemic and doesn't align to my experiences of the institutional church to which I belong. Further, my experience has been that seeker and home church people make a lot of errant assumptions about what those in institutional churches believe.

If you're actually interested in a discussion about institutional churches, the assumptions being made on both sides of that discussion could kill this before we even get started. So, I would ask, per item #3: What do you think is the place of authority within Christianity?

 

[DamianWarS]

While listening to AFR (American Family Radio) yesterday, the program at the time had some dudes talking about the alleged superiority of the institutional model compared to meeting in homes, out in a park, coffee shop, a forest, et al. I numbered my the points for ease of reference.

Some points they made were the following:

1) They assumed that the orchestrated form of what they call "corporate worship" is itself superior.

2) They assumed that historic and the modern sermon (teaching, rhetoric) is superior to merely meeting and sharing with others, in that to do so any grouping needs to be overseen by one who is "ordained" by some man-made institution of higher learning.

3) They assumed that the exercise of authority within the institutional model is itself superior.

4) They assumed that the "praise" within the institutional model is superior.

5) They assumed, in conclusion, that the alleged "overall fellowship" within the institutional model offers superior diversity and overall quality.

So, what are your thoughts on these points? Can everyone here step outside the confining boxes of their biased thinking and apply a critical analysis of the claims?

Now, unless you have actually lived out both models, your input may be viewed as suspect if such bias becomes evident. What I'm looking for is an experiential analysis of the claims from different perspectives. Having been hurt within either of the two models isn't an address of the actual points provided. That is the "bias" I'd like to avoid in order to see if folks can actually step back and address ONLY the merits of the claims.

If you are so pro-institutional in your thinking that you've never even given thought to other expressions, types, models, forms, content, or anything else that deviates away from the iron-fisted choke-hold of some ecclesiastical model you've grown up with, then your input will be, as indicated, suspect and of no real value to answering the questions asked.

Group-think is mostly an exercise of blind indifference to the full expanse of human experience that is far too vast to be so simplistically defined down to such a low level of constrained intellect. If other models offend you, then perhaps it would be better that you simply lurk about rather than offering anything as input. I'm not looking for debate that eventually degrades to a level of ad hominem, but rather level-headed discussion about the merits of the claims and counter-claims.

Jr

the problem with the questions is why can't they be pointed right back to the questioner or "the dudes". All they expose is a bias to whatever flavour of church is liked best. don't the dudes also not believe what they call corporate worship is superior, their version of teaching is superior, their model of authority is superior, etc... if they don't then why the heck are we listening to them? The questions in themselves are only there to force you to re-evaluate the status quo against what the bible says but they themselves don't expose anything remarkable as every insider thinks they are the best.

 

[RDKirk]

The problem with modern home churching is that it rarely if ever follows scripture with regards to how God wishes to be worshiped. While they look to the past for evidence that home churching is allowed, they take out of context why God's people met in homes back in the days of Paul. They met in homes because it often wasn't safe to meet in public spaces. There were also at times lack of public spaces at the time that could be used for worship. Most of us live in the US or other western nations, it isn't unsafe for us to worship God in public. There really isn't a reason to have church at home, absent extenuating circumstances. We should be out in public, with our doors open to the community.

Paul rented a speaking hall in Ephesus, which indicates that he went for large venues if he could get them.

But what is being missed--and as we see even in this thread, not just missed but deliberately avoided--is the fact that each one of us is supposed to be an actively functioning member of a Body, working directly with other members of the Body of Christ to support one another and to fulfill the mission of the Body of Christ.

If one is not a member of the Body, he's like an amputated finger or toe.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

This does leave one important and growing trend, the institution of "I don't need any institution" otherwise known as the institution of self:

1) I don't need anyone else to worship

2) The Holy Spirit is the only teacher I need. Therefore other people couldn't possibly have a greater understanding than me.

3) I'm my own authority. All other authority is bad and mean and selfish so I'm going to do it myself.

4) Praise God I don't need anyone else!

5) The best company I can keep is myself. People are messy, therefore I avoid fellowshiping with them in any meaningful Christian way.

Isn’t the Holy Spirit the only teacher you need?

 

[RDKirk]

Isn’t the Holy Spirit the only teacher you need?

Apparently not:

Every day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they did not stop teaching...-- Acts 1

And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues. -- 1 Corinthians 12

 

[Oldmantook]

Then I guess he and thousands of other Christians at this time who were performing this practice were also "disobedient". People take having the collected Bible for granted these days. I highly doubt Constantine had a copy of the diadache laying around. The Church hadn't even established trinitarian theology firmly yet, much less at what time a person should be baptized. Infantile? Before death? Right before conversion? The NT doesn't specify merely that the person IS baptized.

Also the apostles creed was written in Milan around the same time, yet not by an ecumenical council.

St. Nicholas of Myra (The St. Nicholas) had a favorable opinion of Constantine as well as many other Saints at the time. He did deal with the Arian controversy, and his Mother had many miracles in her life as well.

You are of course free to believe what you will however i find your claims to be speculative. The gospels and epistles were extant and to claim that doctrine/theology was not yet fully developed and formalized is to detract from the basic, simple gospel message and implies that the early church from a foundational aspect didn't really know what to believe and how to behave from the standpoint of orthodoxy and orthopraxy.

Scripture makes it clear that the true outward evidence of one's inward faith is by the fruits of one's life. In 326 AD, Constantine had his eldest son Crispus, seized and put to death by “cold poison”. The same year he had his second wife Fausta killed by leaving her to die in an over-heated bath. Do these murders appear to be good fruit and the mark of a genuine believer to you? Not to me.

 

[Resha Caner]

Isn’t the Holy Spirit the only teacher you need?

The Holy Spirit only? Not the Father? Not the Son?

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

The Holy Spirit only? Not the Father? Not the Son?

My apologies I should have said the trinity. But Jesus did say he would send the spirit to guide us into all truth so I just said Holy Spirit.

 

[Oldmantook]

There is no reason to doubt that his conversion was genuine.



Yes, but delaying baptism wasn't unusual at the time.

A genuine believer does not kill his own family as Constantine did to his oldest son Crispus and his second wife Fausta. Delaying baptism amounts to disobeying the command to be baptized. For both of these reasons, cast doubts on Constantine's supposed conversion.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

Apparently not:

Every day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they did not stop teaching...-- Acts 1

And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues. -- 1 Corinthians 12

I have a hard time trusting human beings in our modern day but it does seem they were lying quite a bit from each other during biblical times.

 

[Resha Caner]

My apologies I should have said the trinity. But Jesus did say he would send the spirit to guide us into all truth so I just said Holy Spirit.

I asked because I inferred from your reply you don't think the Church is necessary. When The Spirit was given as a guide, it was not given so we could ignore everything else.

 

[SwordmanJr]

If you want a simple answer it’s this. If there is no means to support full time ministry financially. Then there will be failure.Full time ministry is designed primarily to give those called of God the time to be filled with the Holy Spirit and his power. On the other side of that coin. If that full time ministry assume “leadership” roles that control an institution. There will be systematic failure. Men are not capable of the kind of leadership necessary for ALL of God’s will to be done. Only Jesus has that capability.

I appreciate your writing a response. Specifically, I was asking about the claimed superiority of the one over the other by the speakers in that AFR broadcast. Support of what most deem as the "full time ministry" within the four walls of their (c)hurch organization, that does indeed require the people of that organization to support them if the professional staff work no other means for their own support.

Another fact I've noticed when observing the distinctions between the (C)hurch and (c)hurches is that the (C)hurch lives and breaths independent of money and materials to thrive and grow, where (c)hurches collapse into a heap without money. Unbelievers cannot enter the (C)hurch, but they can warm some of the seating within (c)hurches. That is why I take issue with the idea that the (C)hurch fails God in any way. It is (c)hurches that fail because they are headed up by men, and some by women, rather than Christ. The (C)hurch, on the other hand, has ONLY Christ Jesus as her Head. That gives hope to all who look to the Lord alone as their Mediator and God. As members of that (C)hurch, we are ALL priests unto the Most High God. What a rush!

Jr

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

I asked because I inferred from your reply you don't think the Church is necessary. When The Spirit was given as a guide, it was not given so we could ignore everything else.

So when Jesus said the spirit will guide you into all truth did he forget to mention we also MUST be willing to listen to other human beings as well? Not sure but I’m fairly confident all means the same in English, Hebrew and Greek. Now I understand one might say I missing context but anytime someone says that I know right away what they are saying is I’m failing to add in my own opinion on the matter.

 

[topher694]

Isn’t the Holy Spirit the only teacher you need?

Bravo! You sound just like them!

So, let's get em saved and send them on their way... you've got the Holy Spirit now, figure it out for yourself don't bother me with questions and stuff.

 

[Redwingfan9]

Paul rented a speaking hall in Ephesus, which indicates that he went for large venues if he could get them.

But what is being missed--and as we see even in this thread, not just missed but deliberately avoided--is the fact that each one of us is supposed to be an actively functioning member of a Body, working directly with other members of the Body of Christ to support one another and to fulfill the mission of the Body of Christ.

If one is not a member of the Body, he's like an amputated finger or toe.

Paul clearly shifts around between synagogues, homes and public speaking areas. It all depends on what was available and the relative safety involved. Clearly Paul wasn't afraid to speak publicly, he was beaten up on a number of occasions.

I do agree it's the duty of believers to be part of the body of Christ and that is the church. There are obvious circumstances where that isn't possible. In North Korea, for example, it isn't safe to worship in public. However, most of us are in the US or somewhere else in the west. We don't have that problem. All of us should be part of the church, working to further his Kingdom within it. I fear too many American Christians have gotten far too individually minded when it comes to faith and the church. It's all about us as individuals as opposed to Christ and the church. I dare say many modern hymns and praise songs bare this out.

 

[SwordmanJr]

Early on in my Christianity I left an established denomination to join a house church of a few people. It felt so cutting edge and so spiritually right. I felt like I was on the front lines of the whole Christian experience. Of course it eventually fell apart and I was on my own for a couple years until I got back into a regular church. Looking back now, what then seemed like spiritual awareness was more like conceited weirdness. There was nothing special about us at all. I think in lands where Christians meet in cellars and face strong opposition, the grace exists for such necessities. But here, where churches are in plain sight all over, I don't think house churches are that necessary. Although I admit finding a church that fits you can be a challenge, it still is a good idea to keep looking. To do it over again, I would not. I'd rather be in an established church. I still remain an independent person and I will never officially join anything, but my worship is within a structured denomination and I am comfortable there.

Perhaps the institutional model should prepare for its eventual demise once groupings in government like the Hag Squad get their way by doing away with religious freedoms in America, institutional (c)hurches will eventually pay taxes like all other businesses, and public expression of faith (by true Christians) will be outlawed. The underground model will once again become a necessity if we are to see current sentiments and events as indicators.

Jr

 

[RDKirk]

I have a hard time trusting human beings in our modern day but it does seem they were lying quite a bit from each other during biblical times.

How do you know it's the Holy Spirit speaking to you and not your own head?

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

Bravo! You sound just like them!

So, let's get em saved and send them on their way... you've got the Holy Spirit now, figure it out for yourself don't bother me with questions and stuff.

Lol.... of course you can ask questions. I ask all the time but I will leave it at that. You reply didn’t come across to me as very friendly so thanks anyway.

 

[Resha Caner]

So when Jesus said the spirit will guide you into all truth did he forget to mention we also MUST be willing to listen to other human beings as well? Not sure but I’m fairly confident all means the same in English, Hebrew and Greek. Now I understand one might say I missing context but anytime someone says that I know right away what they are saying is I’m failing to add in my own opinion on the matter.

Are looking to follow Jesus' example, or are you looking for loopholes?

 

[RDKirk]

So when Jesus said the spirit will guide you into all truth did he forget to mention we also MUST be willing to listen to other human beings as well? Not sure but I’m fairly confident all means the same in English, Hebrew and Greek. Now I understand one might say I missing context but anytime someone says that I know right away what they are saying is I’m failing to add in my own opinion on the matter.

The "you" of Jesus' statement was plural. That doesn't show through in the English because there is no formal English pluralized you (we ought to formalize "y'all").

Because Americans are born members of the cult of individualism, we tend to read a singular "you" whenever possible, but Jesus was clearly speaking to a group at this time.