What is Wrong with going to Church?

[Norah63]

So if the building is a home or a community church building, the focus is on participation from all attending? That sounds like life in the spirit to me.
No one needs money for sharing the love of Christ that is in each part of His body.
Offerings for the water bill in a home. Or electric and taxes an heat if the luxury of a building is used.
How to coax people to speak up when they have been taught silence for so many years. Do only the men pray or speak? Women cook the food and stay silent?
( the ones i have been to were of this type) So thanks for sharing in this thread.

 

[Episaw]

A church in the home can be no different to church in a dedicated building. Just the location changed but not the ethos.

A good leader of home church will make sure everyone is involved. A lot of the time no one preaches. All contribute with their revelations or ask questions which get answered, and which they rarely do in "church."

I have been to home church in other people's homes and have never contributed to the utilities. I have had home church in my home and never expect anyone to contribute to utilities. It is part of the serving one another.

And no the women are not consigned to a back room role. As a leader and a man, I have often washed the dishes.

Two of the great things about church in the home that church in the building doesn't offer is flexibility and the priesthood of ALL believers.

Flexibility means flowing with the Holy Spirit in which way he wants to take the meeting and the Holy Spirit is free to use anyone he wants to as there is no hierarchy or people who have superior gifts that set them above others.

Gifting is more organisational rather than ministerial which leaves everyone to operate in the gifts they have been given.

 

[Johnnz]

We meet, have coffee and snacks and talk, about al sorts of things. We become quite connected with each other. Usually we will proceed into some prayer, teaching with freedom to interrupt of discussions afterwards that can continue into a meal together. Sometimes the coffee time just extends as some so that some issue can be discussed and that can form the morning's 'lesson'. Topics can include workplace issues, people we have met and have concerns for, family life - all life related. When such an issue does come up we share experiences, biblical insights, give support and so on. Thus flexibility and relevance to daily living.

John
NZ

 

[BeforeThereWas]

This thread and sabbath an baptize are the most posted threads. That tells us a lot about home groups and cell meetings.
We need to get some unity in these three areas.
Our individule body's are the church that Christ spoke about, as opposed to groups?
How can we come into agreement except by the leading of the Holy Spirit?

Institutionalized church organizations have for centuries ignored the necessity for unity. They talk about it often, but never act upon it.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Do home groups or cell groups pay anyone to have them. Or lead them.
If so how could they be any diffrent than a small church congregation of any stripe?
Does anyone know?

I've never seen a home fellowship pay anyone to meet in homes. That's a rather outlandish concept from my 25 years of experience in home fellowships.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Most will involve unpaid people, especialy when the group is not that big. It's not size that is the principal difference between a house church and a small church congregation. My 21st Feb post set out some significant factors of difference. Egalatarian, participative, relationship focused, low overheads, and demonstrating a style of genuine community are what I see as real differences.

John
NZ

Egalitarianism works for a hippie commune, but not a home fellowship rooted in the scriptures.

Another major difference between home fellowships and institutionalized religion in a so-called "church" building is that I never could master the art of fellowshipping with the backs of other people's heads.

There are many other major differences, but I'll just stick to what's asked or discussed by others.

BTW

 

[Johnnz]

Egalitarianism works for a hippie commune, but not a home fellowship rooted in the scriptures.BTW

Please amplify a bit more.

Thanks

John
NZ

 

[Linda Panera]

It would be so great if egalitarianism would work in home groups but unless everyone is super mature there will need to be a leader. I think that the question is then, is the leader someone that you want to follow.

I've been reading Detoxing From Church (McAlpine) and am seeing how "the system" gets into your system and if you were a bit disfunctional (proud, controlling, cynical) in a big, regular church you will cart this stuff into your home church because it isn't only in the big church it is also in you.

I am tending to quote a lot from the book because it is getting under my skin. Some of the things that he talks about I have personally experienced. Maybe one day I can face going back to church but not is the same form that it was before. I think house church is the way for me.

 

[Johnnz]

It would be so great if egalitarianism would work in home groups but unless everyone is super mature there will need to be a leader. I think that the question is then, is the leader someone that you want to follow.

We are all equal as far as status, value as a person and fellow members of God's family. Onto that people receive gifts and abilities from the indwelling Christ, but any such gifting does not entail hierarchy, just function. A good leader must have a servant heart (look at the foot washing incident in the Gospel and what Jesus taught from that example). There is nothing about 'authority over' as a function of position or title seen in the NT. When Paul addressed issues within a young church in 1 Corinthians he wrote to the entire church for all of them to be involved in setting things right. Today such matters would go directly to the pastor or maybe the elders.

John
NZ

 

[Norah63]

Egalitarainism, went over my head, whats that?
Yes,Beforetherewas could you give us a thumbnail of how you see home groups?
How have the ones you have been a part of worked?
And Linda I understand when you say everyone would have to be mature.
Yet isnt that the very purpose of a home (small) group?
Learning to speak out and offer theirselves in fellowship. It is quite a change.
Some people never want to participate, just watch others. This needs help to change.
The bulk of the church has been silent too long.
We must begin to cry repentance to this generation.

 

[Episaw]

It would be so great if egalitarianism would work in home groups but unless everyone is super mature there will need to be a leader. I think that the question is then, is the leader someone that you want to follow.

This question comes up because we do not follow New Testament principles of Church government.

First, there was only ONE church per town as in the church in Corinth, the Church at Philippi, the church in Thessalonica etc.

Second, the government of the church was the responsibility of Elders who were members of the fellowship and attested and tried by the fellowship before they were made Elders, so all they were doing was appointing a person who had already established their credentials.

Third, as I understand it, each home fellowship, as that is where the church met was served by an Elder. Not led by but served by. Often it would be held in his home.

Fourth, Elders were ALWAYS male and older members of the fellowship.

Fifth, decisions were made by the Apostles, Elders and members, not by a Board or paid leadership and most decisions were to do with people, not things.

Sixth, you will not find one single case in the New Testament of a pastor being brought in from another fellowship and being appointed to lead it and for him to be paid a salary.

Because we have jettisoned biblical leadership and organisation for secular business leadership, we are out on a limb without anything to support us.

 

[cubanito]

In regards to full time paid preachers Paul says this:

9 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? 2 If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you; for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.

3 My defense to those who examine me is this: 4 [a]Do we not have a right to eat and drink? 5 Do we not have a right to take along a [c]believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? 6 Or do only [d]Barnabas and I not have a right to refrain from working? 7 Who at any time serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat the fruit of it? Or who tends a flock and does not [e]use the milk of the flock?

8 I am not speaking these things according to [f]human judgment, am I? Or does not the Law also say these things? 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing.” God is not concerned about oxen, is He? 10 Or is He speaking altogether for our sake? Yes, for our sake it was written, because the plowman ought to plow in hope, and the thresher to thresh in hope of sharing the crops. 11 If we sowed spiritual things in you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? 12 If others share the right over you, do we not more? Nevertheless, we did not use this right, but we endure all things so that we will cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ. 13 Do you not know that those who perform sacred services eat the food of the temple, and those who attend regularly to the altar have their share [g]from the altar? 14 So also the Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel.

JR, just a sheep earning his money in the world, but grateful that a few can devote full time to the Gospel

 

[Johnnz]

But never demanded as an obligation or fixed amount.

John
NZ

 

[Episaw]

But never demanded as an obligation or fixed amount.

In addition Johnnz, this passage has nothing to do with a pastor who has been brought in from another church and paid a salary as pastors were not the church leaders in the New Testament Church, the Elders were and they were never brought in from outside the church.

Using this passage to justifying a salaried pastor from another church is nothing more that making the Word fit our non biblical theology.

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Please amplify a bit more.

Thanks

John
NZ

Do you know what egalitarianism is?

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

We are all equal as far as status, value as a person and fellow members of God's family.

Yes, but there are distinctions in function, as established by the word of God.

Onto that people receive gifts and abilities from the indwelling Christ, but any such gifting does not entail hierarchy, just function. A good leader must have a servant heart (look at the foot washing incident in the Gospel and what Jesus taught from that example). There is nothing about 'authority over' as a function of position or title seen in the NT.

Biblical teaching authority is not a matter of lording over anyone AS an authority figure, as is practiced in such cults as "Church of Christ."

When Paul addressed issues within a young church in 1 Corinthians he wrote to the entire church for all of them to be involved in setting things right.

Wrong! If you delve into the Greek, when Paul addressed the "brethren," in his epistles, the Greek word translated "brethren" is GENDER SPECIFIC (masculine), not neuter or feminine.

Relying strictly on the weaknesses of English translations most generally leads to gross error.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Egalitarainism, went over my head, whats that?
Yes,Beforetherewas could you give us a thumbnail of how you see home groups?

Egalitarianism is group consensus, including the women, young girls and boys.....regardless of maturity level.

In scripture, the bastions against false teaching was found in the elder men, and in no others. It was the "brothers" who decided that Paul had to be removed from the city, and thus let down the outer wall in a basket.

Yes, I realize we have all been touched deeply by the feministic nonsense of our post modern culture, but that intolerance of historic truths, truths not under the control of the subjective ism of modern society, stand as unmovable lighthouse beacons to those who seek the stability of the solid Rock, not the shifting sands of our feministic culture that has infiltrated into most circles of religious thought.

How have the ones you have been a part of worked?

Oh my. Hmm. Well, perhaps the best way to put this is to say there's no firm, biblical model worthy of scripture apart from the centrality of Christ Jesus in all things and in all lives involved.

Most people have no clue what TRUE fellowship is. Most think they have such when sitting in strange rows, looking at the backs of other people's heads while being no more than a mere member of the audience.

In our home fellowships, the women and children are cared for and watched over by the men. We see to it that they are safe and provided for, and they are free to share their testimonies and love for the Lord openly, but they are not the defensive bastions against heresy when it comes into our groups by way of wicked people seeking to come in and create disunity and convey false teachings. We men have had to run people off because of their evil influences that clearly were anti-scriptural.

I could write books on this subject, but suffice it to say that I've been doing this for more than 20 years now, and I will not go back to the institutionalized model.

BTW

 

[Episaw]

Yes, I realize we have all been touched deeply by the feministic nonsense of our post modern culture, but that intolerance of historic truths, truths not under the control of the subjective ism of modern society, stand as unmovable lighthouse beacons to those who seek the stability of the solid Rock, not the shifting sands of our feministic culture that has infiltrated into most circles of religious thought.

Very well put BeforeThereWas especially the "truths not under the control of the subjective ism of modern society."

I have been looking at this subject for about 10 years and in most cases, people seem to be scurrying around scripture to support feminist doctrine in the church, as though women had just been discovered.

Prior to all this women played an integral role in the church but I don't remember them agitating to be the top dog, or equal top dog with men and spouting all sorts of weird and wonderful texts that proved from scripture they should be equal top dog.

And I note that until feminist embarked upon their crusade for equality, the church didn't. makes you think doesn't it.

 

[Norah63]

Women in the pulpit, that is when I voted with my feet and left the building.
We may be expected to cook, clean and teach the kids, but to do the preaching too is
just the limit. Where are the men? Let them open up and pour out their hearts before the Lord.
The time has always been ripe, and today even more so. Preach nothing but repentance to this generation.

 

[Johnnz]

Women in the pulpit, that is when I voted with my feet and left the building.
We may be expected to cook, clean and teach the kids, but to do the preaching too is
just the limit. Where are the men? Let them open up and pour out their hearts before the Lord.
The time has always been ripe, and today even more so. Preach nothing but repentance to this generation.

I'm not sure you have read your NT closely enough.


John
NZ