Unchurched?

[ElijahSK]

Maybe I'm just getting the wrong impression. If so, forgive me; I'll be most happy to be mistaken on this.

What does this forum mean by unchurched? Is that to say people that do go to church? If it is to mean someone who does not fellowship with believers why is it coupled with the house church forum?
0

 

[New_Wineskin]

Maybe I'm just getting the wrong impression. If so, forgive me; I'll be most happy to be mistaken on this.

What does this forum mean by unchurched?

It pretty muh means those that are not affilliated with a particular group .

Is that to say people that do go to church?

They are the church . But , it could mean that they don't even attend any group's meetings .

If it is to mean someone who does not fellowship with believers why is it coupled with the house church forum?
0

It does not mean that they do not fellowship with believers .

It is grouped with house churches because there are many in denominations and non-denominations that consider house churches to not be true churches in the sense that their groups are . At least , that is my understanding .

 

[ElijahSK]

New_Wineskin,

Thank you for your response. Basicly what I thought it to mean.

Fellowship I define as a meeting of the church. The Lord's Supper, a couple bring a teaching, some bring songs, some tongues and interpretations, and yet still some prophecies. All things to edify the brethren.

While I understand there are many denominations and non-demon churches that don't recognize home churches, I personally (you can call me crazy) find it offense to list it together in a forum with unchurched.

I don't mean to aim this at you or anyone else, this is just my opinion. House churches are about following apostlic tradition as we are commanded to do. As a firm believer in the early church (New Testament church/house church), I myself consider anyone who goes to a building and calls it church to be unchurched. Because they have exchanged all biblical precedents to form a new "church".

I don't know. I just find it ironic that the people who wish to follow the example of the early church are labeled as "unchurched" today. Especially since unchurched most literally means not of the church. And except for those in today's "church" church means the body of Christ. So basicly saying to me if you home church your not in the body of Christ. I know thatisn't what's meant but it is hard not to be offended at first glance every time I see it.

 

[Count]

New_Wineskin,

Thank you for your response. Basicly what I thought it to mean.

Fellowship I define as a meeting of the church. The Lord's Supper, a couple bring a teaching, some bring songs, some tongues and interpretations, and yet still some prophecies. All things to edify the brethren.

While I understand there are many denominations and non-demon churches that don't recognize home churches, I personally (you can call me crazy) find it offense to list it together in a forum with unchurched.

I don't mean to aim this at you or anyone else, this is just my opinion. House churches are about following apostlic tradition as we are commanded to do. As a firm believer in the early church (New Testament church/house church), I myself consider anyone who goes to a building and calls it church to be unchurched. Because they have exchanged all biblical precedents to form a new "church".

I don't know. I just find it ironic that the people who wish to follow the example of the early church are labeled as "unchurched" today. Especially since unchurched most literally means not of the church. And except for those in today's "church" church means the body of Christ. So basicly saying to me if you home church your not in the body of Christ. I know thatisn't what's meant but it is hard not to be offended at first glance every time I see it.

It is an hounour for me to be offended since my Lord was first offended. In church history, groups of believers have been named from their enemies.

That's why I don't mine when others consider me unchurched. It is an honour for me. With my Lord I have always been inseparable, and that is what matters.

 

[ElijahSK]

Well, can't argue with that. Rejoice and again I say rejoice... always.

Didn't think it would occur here, but I've ever ready to adopt way of thinking.

Good post.0

 

[FLANDIDLYANDERS]

Funny, I've always considerd house church to be the obvious church, and the institutional variety to be religious bollox. Of course I'm not quite that stuck-up any more... I reckon all churches suck in one way or another, we all lose sight of Jeebus after all and rely on him to drag us back!

 

[TheAJKMan]

I think we need to remember that there is a place for both the "institution" and the homechurch type of churches. So long as God is preached and worshipped there, there shouldn't be a problem. Also, looking at the roots of the early church, they were mostly jews who would meet every sabbath in a synagouge. Institution at it's best SO to speak at least. Just my 5cents.

TheAJKMan

 

[New_Wineskin]

New_Wineskin,

Thank you for your response. Basicly what I thought it to mean.

No problem .

Fellowship I define as a meeting of the church. The Lord's Supper, a couple bring a teaching, some bring songs, some tongues and interpretations, and yet still some prophecies. All things to edify the brethren.

I look at those things as a scheduled and ( many times ) ritualistic meeting . Fellowship may occur in such but not necessarly . In fact , that idea of fellowship is why I don't like institutional settings - settings that I see in home churches as well . I look at fellowship as something that happens when believers are together whether planned or not and simply enjoy each other's company with none of the above needed .

While I understand there are many denominations and non-demon churches that don't recognize home churches, I personally (you can call me crazy) find it offense to list it together in a forum with unchurched.

Why would it be offensive ? Ok . I saw it later on .

I don't mean to aim this at you or anyone else, this is just my opinion. House churches are about following apostlic tradition as we are commanded to do.

I wasn't commanded to do so . You may have been . But , I know that I wasn't . I recognize that it is your opinion . It is incorrect if you were including me in that "we" .

As a firm believer in the early church (New Testament church/house church), I myself consider anyone who goes to a building and calls it church to be unchurched. Because they have exchanged all biblical precedents to form a new "church".

This is so similar to all of the denominational and nondenominational people with respect to the things that set them apart from the other groups . They say that the others have exchanged the "biblical" idea that is central to their group with something else . I mean - it is *exactly* the same thing . Now , I would prefer meeting people in their homes rather than a building built for a religious purpose . However , I don't like it because it is more "biblical" . I simpl;y prefer it . With respect to the Scriptures , there is none that present a command to meet only in each other's homes . The setting doesn't make something holy .

I don't know. I just find it ironic that the people who wish to follow the example of the early church are labeled as "unchurched" today. Especially since unchurched most literally means not of the church. And except for those in today's "church" church means the body of Christ. So basicly saying to me if you home church your not in the body of Christ. I know thatisn't what's meant but it is hard not to be offended at first glance every time I see it.

Oh , I see . I don't think that they look at it as not being a believer . Though , I do think that they look at those who are unaffiliated as backslidden or disobedient . With respect to house churches , they are suspicious because they are small and supposedly not accountable ( as if their groups are accountable to others ) .

 

[ElijahSK]

Flandidlyanders,
A church losing sight of Jesus is like a man forgetting how to walk. Whenever there is an argument saying we all, there is a counter saying but God. We have all sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God. But Christ didn't and died so we could obtain it. We all lose sight of Jesus, but Jesus is now our reason for living. He is the underlying theme in all of our conversation. He has made us righteous, holy, pure, sanctified, redeemed, and glroified. He has freed us from sin so that we need not lose sight of Him again.

TheAJKMan,
Very true. I'd like to see your references on the early church. The early church I see in the Bible met daily.

New_Wineskin,
You certainly have an interesting stance. Why I say we instead of I is to include all those who believe the Bible. Paul commands a couple times that we follow the traditions that the apostles handed down to the churches. Still other times he praised those that did. All of this by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. So whereas I may prefer pepperoni over ham on a pizza. I'm convinced that when God tells us to do something it is the best course of action.

Thanks again you guys for your time and your responses.

 

[GK]

From one moderator's perspective, housechurch and unchurch are really two different things. If you're part of a housechurch, you aren't unchurched you just do church differently than most people in these forums. Unchurched would refer to those people who are not currently part of any regular group (housechurch or larger gathering), whether temporary or long-term.

 

[Rick Otto]

The Uncola is the official drink of the Unchurch.
Now eat yer beans.

 

[Count]

I look at those things as a scheduled and ( many times ) ritualistic meeting . Fellowship may occur in such but not necessarly . In fact , that idea of fellowship is why I don't like institutional settings - settings that I see in home churches as well . I look at fellowship as something that happens when believers are together whether planned or not and simply enjoy each other's company with none of the above needed .

Amen, Amen, Amen!

 

[New_Wineskin]

New_Wineskin,
You certainly have an interesting stance. Why I say we instead of I is to include all those who believe the Bible. Paul commands a couple times that we follow the traditions that the apostles handed down to the churches. Still other times he praised those that did. All of this by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. So whereas I may prefer pepperoni over ham on a pizza. I'm convinced that when God tells us to do something it is the best course of action.

Well , that is a typical stance of christians . I disagree and consider that way of thinking to contradict one of Paul's major themes . Besides that contradiction comes the contradiction of the New Covenant itself as it is a personal thing while this concept brings it back to one person telling everyone else what the Lord wants and doesn't want . If that concept was kept and kept to one's self , I would have no problem . But , it almost always has people saying to others that the Lord "says" this or that to *everyone* . This contradicts the New Covenant .

 

[christandisrael]

Maybe I'm just getting the wrong impression. If so, forgive me; I'll be most happy to be mistaken on this.

What does this forum mean by unchurched? Is that to say people that do go to church? If it is to mean someone who does not fellowship with believers why is it coupled with the house church forum?
0

Basically, it means anyone who does not belong to an institutionalized church.