Featured Two Sunday services required?

I agree with Mikey that the article does a poor job in support of it's position. I'd add that it is historically inaccurate (e.g. "In the first four centuries after the Reformation, most churches met for worship twice on the Lord’s Day and both services were considered important"), at least for a lot of Baptists in the Southern U. S. over a good bit of time. Most rural churches in our area didn't begin to even meet every Sunday until after World War II (some a good bit later than that). I can't speak for the author's denomination.

 

You may have them but will they come?
Sure, evening services have died from lack of attendance. Nothing to new to see there.

The article tries to guilt people into believing that those that attend are better Christians. Be a better “Reformed” believer, it doesn’t work for me... sounds very Catholic in fact.

Rob

 

I think it would be hard to prove from the Bible that two services are 'required.'
But what a blessing to join with your Christian brothers and sisters twice on the Lord's day to praise the Saviour and hear His word!

 

Is it required? No. Is it beneficial? Absolutely.

 

Three services would be even better.

Rob

 

When our back to back Sunday morning services grew to capacity, we inaugurated a Saturday Evening service (same sermon and music as Sunday morning.) It lasted more than two years, then due I believe to staff fatigue, we went instead with three Sunday morning services. Our "evening" service has been replaced with mid-week small group meetings that delve into study notes based on the Sunday sermon.

I think one key is whether the total evening attendance is greater than the sanctuary capacity.

 

Yep. I like evening service and Wed service so I can fellowship with the wheat without the Sunday morning social club tares.

 

Everything was some type "union" in SBC churches 40 years ago.

 

How about four? Do I hear four? Four to the man in the cape. Five? Five? Five? Will anybody bid five? Five going once...going twice...

 

My pastor preaches entirely-different sermons Sunday AM & PM, and in Wednesday "prayer meetings". While many of our members attend "every time the doors are open", many of us cannot.

And, the pastor sometimes alters the starting times from 9 AM & 7 PM to allow for certain events such as the Super Bowl, to allow people to not miss a minute of church nor a minute of a special event.

 

Several churches in the UK, including the Met Tab (Spurgeon's) have an 'evangelistic' service on the Sunday evening with the sermon directed particularly at unbelievers, as opposed to the morning meeting which is more teaching-centred.

 

I am familiar with that model.

 

Ahhhhh! Triggered! Sorry. This is one of my biggest pet peeves.

 

It's not just a pet peeve. I believe it is wrong. You are saying to the world that a football game is higher priority than the preaching of the Word of God in its normal time. It is bowing down to the culture.

Yes, the argument will be "but we still had service" but the reality is that you alter religious practice, faith practice, to bow down to a football game because it is more important.

 

Uh, huh...how about church discipline even for absence from the midweek services, check out this pronouncement from the famous 1689 London Baptist Assembly:

"The Questions Proposed from the Several Churches, Debated, and Resolved
....
Q. Whether when the church have agreed upon the keeping of one day, weekly, or monthly, besides the first day of the week to worship God, and perform the necessary services of the church, they may not charge such persons with evil that neglect such meetings, and lay them under reproof, unless such members can shew good cause for such their absence?
A. Concluded in the affirmative, Heb. x. 25."