|
|
Post by And Such Were Some Of You on Mar 14, 2008 6:02:02 GMT -5
It has already been stated that it is not a movement, we also know that church were not only held in houses...please the flow of the thread is going to be the POSITIVE about House Church and how one can benefit from it.
Be blessed!
|
|
|
|
Post by Beck on Mar 14, 2008 6:07:41 GMT -5
I found this website and thought it was very interesting. www.hccentral.com here is something that was on the website: HCC is non-denominational and an effort is made to accommodate Christians of many backgrounds. The house church movement is an attempt to get away from the institutional church, seeking instead to return to the small gatherings of peoples that constituted all of the churches of the New Testament era. The emphasis at this site is not to criticize the institutional church, but rather to lift up its alternative. Many house churches start among people who first meet in an institutional setting, and regular attendance at a good institutional church is encouraged as a source of Christian teaching. But can one really worship at an institutional church? The fellowship pictured in Mt. 18:20 (the source of the house church doctrine of church) is "two or three gathered together." Even "church growth" expert Lyle Schaller says that the "glue" that is necessary to unite worshippers cannot be achieved as a church grows beyond a limit of about 40 people. Other experts point out that an assembly larger than a mere dozen people creates an environment in which some of the people often back away from full participation. And there is the concern so well articulated by that the institutional church tends toward viewing its members as an "audience" and the worship experience as a "show." It is better, he said, to view God as the audience and all the people equally accountable for the "performance" of worshipping in Spirit and in Truth. Why the House Church? Here are just a few of the reasons: Historical. The house church is the biblical church. All of the churches in the New Testament era were small assemblies that met in homes. While setting up institutional forms of "church" may or may not provide a way to honor God, the movement toward the institution and the human authority that tends to accompany hierarchical institutional structure are not theologically neutral. Growth. The most explosive growth of Christianity in our own time has taken place in the likes of the People's Republic of China where its only expression has been the illegal, underground house church (more recently the PRC has installed a government-licensed "Three Self" church in an effort to control a movement that decades of political repression has failed to contain). Historian Del Birkey's studies have led him to conclude that the house church is our best hope for the renewal in our times. Resisting the Culture. Our culture desperately wants to change our doctrines so that it might Christianity to conform to its notion of "civil religion" and "political correctness." The house church has always been for this reason, just as Jesus said that his disciples should be in the Sermon on the Mount. That sermon outlines how the powerless disciple can be salt and light in a dark world (Mt. 5:13-14), how to withstand evildoers (Mt. 5:39) by showing God's love to the world through suffering at the hands of persecution from bullies (Mt. 5:39), foreclosing landlords (Mt. 5:40), and occupying Roman authorities (Mt. 5:41). It speaks of giving and lending to the most hopeless credit risks (Mt. 5:42). It speaks of a praying community ("Our Father, who art in heaven ..." Mt. 6:9) that fasts (Mt. 6:16), gives of itself (Mt. 6: 21), and depends completely on God (Mt. 25ff). It speaks of the non-judgment of individuals (Mt. 7:1), just as it speaks of the need to judge those who would be authorities in spiritual matters (Mt. 7:15ff). Mission. There are several opportunities in our communities that are especially suited for the house church. An invitation offered to a work-place acquaintance to a home is much less threatening than one to a church, just as one example. Another is the unique value of the house church as a ministry to "the damaged" and the possibility of learning the joy of giving by elevating that practice to a personal level. Of course there are objections to the independent house church that the reader will need to consider carefully: Authority. House church advocates reject any human authority other than the very real and present rule of Christ, who was inaugurated the king of his church at the first Pentecost (Acts 2). The house church assembles to know the will of its king through the Holy Spirit and to be obedient to that will. Many in the professional clergy, however, understand their role as a "priestly" one in which they are to be intermediaries between the Lord and His flock, being thus trusted through the process with a certain degree of authority. While they seek the benefits of the vibrant Christianity that manifests itself in small groups, and work hard to make small groups a part of the ministry of their churches, many harbor a concern that the groups might become a threat to their own relevance and livelihood. Heresy. Others argue that house churches, due to their lack of seminary trained clergy, might follow the examples of Jonestown and Waco. In this they have a point, as the New Testament is full of epistles that attempt to correct a legion of heresies in various churches--and all of the New Testament churches were, in fact, house churches. It is hoped that these pages can help house churches avoid this pitfall, taking over the seminary's role to the extent possible in a mere web site. It is the hope of House Church Central that this site can help nurture the growth of the movement and also mitigate the concerns of house church nay-sayers. I do not agree with the assumption that ALL churches in the NT were house churches... I agree that there were some.. probably a great many... but ALL  ??!!!!!!!!!!!! I dont know about that... Pretty much all of the churches in the NT were in houses...Romans wasnt written to a church at all..but to "the saints"at rome..Cor, Gal, Phil,Etc ..were all houses. |
|
|
|
Post by zelica on Mar 14, 2008 8:15:32 GMT -5
It has already been stated that it is not a movement, we also know that church were not only held in houses...please the flow of the thread is going to be the POSITIVE about House Church and how one can benefit from it. Be blessed! Yes maam I want this thread to be positive, I was just sharing a little info that I have found on this topic....just wanted to be apart of the thread thats all ;D |
|
|
|
Post by stillfocused on Mar 14, 2008 11:37:19 GMT -5
Much of what I came to love about the gospel...didn't come from Sunday only sermons. I found out that I was accepted for who I was. Yet, this is something I continually face in institutional church setting..the focus is not on growing into maturity..yet, the main focus remains "she got issues and she doesn't even know it". I came to learn accountability not to my brothers and sisters..yet, to myself. The gifts of the Holy Spirit operated more freely and even though you had ministers, worship leaders, deacons, and etc present..no one pulled rank and said " you can't prophesy" because you haven't been released to. There was more freedom and expectancy that charged the room that the Holy Spirit would move and with no worries to move on to whatever was planned.
|
|
|
|
Post by nina2 on Mar 15, 2008 16:15:34 GMT -5
In light of what StillFocused just mentioned, I would like to share my own experience. I hope that it is relevant because it might give another "dimension" - even though not really a new one - to how meaninful and vital a church house might be.
I was saved when I began to attend services in a Pentecostal Church. Friends had witnessed to me and I started attending with them. Nothing special there, except that it was in France, and in 1982...
The majority of Christians in France are Catholics so, Pentecostal was - and probably is still - considered as some kind of heresy or cult, definitely not main stream...
Our church was not huge, of course, very family oriented, and most people already knew each other from the jump. If not, they got to know each other rather fast.
The friend who had witnessed to me and ultimately was so instrumental in me being saved and born again, was an elder of the church.
After seeking the Lord, he was lead to start what seems to be described here, a house church and to approach the pastor about it.
Eventually, he started, with the approval and blessing of the pastor and the meetings were taking place in his house. The pastor came every time he was available. When he did, he would actually "sit back" and let my friend lead the meeting as usual.
In the main church's services, there was never one service where the gifts of the Holy Spirit were not not manifested. As a matter of fact, in the beginning of each service, there was a time dedicated to just that, praying, praising, worshipping and tarrying until the Holy Spirit gave directions.
We did not separate teens, children, adults, everybody was present. Some of our teens had the gift of prophecy and prophecied during service.
The "pattern" for the meetings at my friend's house were that, first, he would go from the sermon preached at the church on Sunday (we were meeting on Mondays) and we would go further into the study of the scriptures relating to that. That allowed those of us who did have questions about it to actually ask, receive godly advice, whatever was needed, they had an answer.
Since we met in the evening, we had a meal together. The adults were helping my friend's wife. If we could get there a little earlier, we helped her, some others brought something. There was always more than enough! Regardless of what some might say, there is something about sitting at the same table, sharing food that gives a greater sense of togetherness, sharing, belonging, in that setting especially...
After that, there was prayer. The prayer requests were made, and we were all committed to praying for each other, all the time. But, in that setting, we prayed right there and then, and it was so powerful. We laid hands on each other, and as SF said, the Lord was right there in the midst of us. When he spoke, there was such reverence, intense listening and receiving.
Sometimes the presence of the Lord was so heavy, we just could not move, not talk, but we just knew that the glory of God was lingering...
One of the ladies attending had a wonderful voice, she was a soprano. At times, she would just start singing in the spirit, and she really had the voice of an angel, and all of us would just fall on our face, just worshipping as she sang, and it did not matter how long it lasted, because we did not want it to stop anyway...
There was healing, there was prophecy, there was freedom in the Spirit and there was strength growing among us, our children. Everybody received from the Lord.
There was no protocole, but over there, we held on to the Lord and to each other, in a spiritual way, because that was THE place for us. We did not have a church like that on every street corner. So, it did not matter where, when we were together, it was about God, sharing, helping, praying.
It's not saying that it is not happening in bigger churches. What that setting provides is a greater intimacy with God, and the fact that you cannot not know that you belong, that you are in the body, and no matter how small the meeting, that's who and what we are.
I believe that the real "benefit" of a house church is that it brings back the focus on what/who matters: God, and us in his service. It comes straight from the heart of the believer who is actively and consistently, relentlessly, seeking God's presence.
|
|
|
|
Post by keita on Mar 15, 2008 16:53:17 GMT -5
As a "house churcher" for the past 6 years, I just wanted to say.... AWESOME!to that post of testimony......... and for yet another link in the connection to a sister of my heart and in His Spirit.  |
|
|
|
Post by stillfocused on Mar 15, 2008 17:37:52 GMT -5
Nina2...you just brought back some awesome memories !! All that you posted was the very reason I loved those meetings held once a week. May God !! Seeking the presence of God !! Man !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I know it's just not me; but, I believe that house churches will soon out number our local churches. Just an idea !! don't how it would work !! but, here goes anyone interested in do in a "house church" online ?!!
|
|
|
|
Post by ybrown on Mar 18, 2008 10:18:28 GMT -5
House Church is absolutely the essence of church. Personally, it is so hard for me to find truth, God and anything real in organized religion anymore. Pure religion, undefiled, which Christ is building and Heads, looks nothing like organized religion which is created and headed by man. I believe people who are so steeped into the religious practices of men will be offended by HC.
I say HC is a step back into the right direction.
|
|
|
|
Post by stillfocused on Mar 18, 2008 12:45:59 GMT -5
Offended isn't the word " O-ffended" is more like. I am personally longing for so much more..even though I love my church family. It's the formalities and the other madness that's really getting to me..
|
|
|
|
Post by ybrown on Mar 18, 2008 13:13:00 GMT -5
Offended isn't the word " O-ffended" is more like. I am personally longing for so much more..even though I love my church family. It's the formalities and the other madness that's really getting to me.. Maybe it's "Off"-ended. I think we've replaced Christ and the Father with all sorts of craziness. I've always known something just... wasn't....right...and I couldn't put my finger on it until recently. Stillfocused, you have your hammer hovering above the nail with your sentiments and you are about to TOTALLY obliterate that nail!!! Get naked with God tonight and every night. Sister you have almost unlocked the door to what COMPLETE freedom in Christ is all about!! |
|
|
|
Post by keita on Mar 18, 2008 13:44:02 GMT -5
LOL @ the wordplay, but not the matter... because it and this discussion actually reminds me of this: And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.[/color] (Mark 14:27)It's that "ALL" that really gets me. Stillfocused, you have your hammer hovering above the nail with your sentiments and you are about to TOTALLY obliterate that nail!!!
Get naked with God tonight and every night. Sister you have almost unlocked the door to what COMPLETE freedom in Christ is all about!! |
|
|
|
Post by ybrown on Mar 18, 2008 14:09:16 GMT -5
Keita, God is amazing!
He will always use what's leather bound to be a witness to what He's put in us.
|
|
|
|
Post by stillfocused on Mar 18, 2008 14:27:56 GMT -5
Keita..it's funny you posted that scripture...I posted the same thing in the post about TWIII.
|
|
|
|
Post by ybrown on Mar 19, 2008 10:25:54 GMT -5
One of the mainstays of the traditional church setting is the sermon. People won’t even feel like they’ve been to church unless someone has stood in front of them and preached for an hour.
In actuality, the sermon is a Greek idea and not really a biblical one.
The sermon was borne out of what used to be called Greek rhetoric and it became popular when a lot of the big named speakers and orators of the day converted to Christianity.
This new type of polished, eloquent and sophisticated way of speaking the scriptures starting cropping up in Christian assemblies, and after a while speaking the Word became more about dynamic and entertaining speaking rather than scriptural or Christian content.
The content came to be less scripture and more Greek philosophy and the men were judged more on their oratorical skill rather than the spirit of the content or their Christ-likeness.
After the clergy/laity separation came about, only those who were officially trained and ordained in this type of oratory delivery were allowed to address the people. At that point the saints were officially silenced during service and the idea that only the “qualified” and “chosen” men of God were fit to speak, prevailed. Speaking in church became more about one man’s showmanship rather than the sharing of God’s word.
It seems to me Paul was aware of this and addressed it in 1 Corinth. 1 and again in Chapter 2:1-5 when he said that he did not come speaking and preaching to impress but only to let the Spirit prevail, preaching Christ and Him crucified.
In Acts 20:7, Paul is said to have preached to believers in Troas. The word translated “preached” is dialegomai which is Greek means to dialogue or to carry on a conversation. Even look at 1 Corinthians 14:29-32 and 1 Thessalonians 5:20-21 which also suggest dialogue happening rather than one-way speech delivery.
I’m sure that monologues were used at times but it was not the prevailing apostolic pattern of dialoguing and interaction in which most Christian assemblies just natural engaged.
That’s why I see HC as a positive step because they allow everyone the opportunity to share in learning, discovering and making alive, the richness of the scriptures.
|
|
|
|
Post by And Such Were Some Of You on Mar 19, 2008 11:16:18 GMT -5
One of the mainstays of the traditional church setting is the sermon. People won’t even feel like they’ve been to church unless someone has stood in front of them and preached for an hour. In actuality, the sermon is a Greek idea and not really a biblical one. The sermon was borne out of what used to be called Greek rhetoric and it became popular when a lot of the big named speakers and orators of the day converted to Christianity. This new type of polished, eloquent and sophisticated way of speaking the scriptures starting cropping up in Christian assemblies, and after a while speaking the Word became more about dynamic and entertaining speaking rather than scriptural or Christian content. The content came to be less scripture and more Greek philosophy and the men were judged more on their oratorical skill rather than the spirit of the content or their Christ-likeness. After the clergy/laity separation came about, only those who were officially trained and ordained in this type of oratory delivery were allowed to address the people. At that point the saints were officially silenced during service and the idea that only the “qualified” and “chosen” men of God were fit to speak, prevailed. Speaking in church became more about one man’s showmanship rather than the sharing of God’s word. It seems to me Paul was aware of this and addressed it in 1 Corinth. 1 and again in Chapter 2:1-5 when he said that he did not come speaking and preaching to impress but only to let the Spirit prevail, preaching Christ and Him crucified. In Acts 20:7, Paul is said to have preached to believers in Troas. The word translated “preached” is dialegomai which is Greek means to dialogue or to carry on a conversation. Even look at 1 Corinthians 14:29-32 and 1 Thessalonians 5:20-21 which also suggest dialogue happening rather than one-way speech delivery. I’m sure that monologues were used at times but it was not the prevailing apostolic pattern of dialoguing and interaction in which most Christian assemblies just natural engaged. That’s why I see HC as a positive step because they allow everyone the opportunity to share in learning, discovering and making alive, the richness of the scriptures. Interesting! Thanks for the info. |
|
??!!!!!!!!!!!!
