House Churches...Your Opinions

I don't understand how you can come to such a conclusion based on WHERE people gather. </font>[/QUOTE]Are people not seeing the word "denigrate?"

 

You may find some in the house churches that look down on institutional churches, but you will also find those in the institutional churches who look down on house churches.

I have been called and a backslider and told I was living in sin because I am not on the membership role of an institutional church. I have yet to find one person who can show me any Scripture that says we are supposed to become a member of a local institutional church.

I like what Jim Davis has written about Christian fellowship:

Church attendance is often substituted for fellowship. To some fellowship is like a jar full of marbles. The marbles are in the same jar but there is little togetherness. The marbles have little effect on each other as they roll around in a jar. They just bump into one another. But real fellowship is more like a jar of grapes that bleed on one another. Fellowship should allow our faith to rub off on one another. The first believers had real spiritual needs that led them into fellowship with others. As they came into this fellowship of other believers with the same needs, they naturally bled on one another.

Too often church attendance turns us into iceberg Christians where we just float around and bump into one another. One fellow visited a church and gave his description of those in attendance. He said, "I don't want to say that it was a cold church, but the ushers had on ice skates." The first fellowship meeting had little to do with church attendance and everything to do with togetherness.

 

There are some major differences between the traditional church of today and the New Testament church in the Bible. Brian Anderson has compiled a list of those differences on the Milpitas Bible Fellowship Web site. I encourage every Christian to read this list, and do a in depth Bible study using the verses included in the list. Maybe you will do as I have and re-evaluate what, or who, the "Church" is.

 

"In other words, some who are in house churches (note: I am not saying all) are very elitist as though they are better Christians because they are meeting in homes and don't worry about church buildings, etc. It's fine if that is their choice, but sometimes they make other christians sound like they are not as good or as spiritual or as NT as they are."

I think that is the same way people feel when they are mocked or their Christianity is questioned because they aren't Republicans. Nobody has to answer this...I don't want to take the post off topic. Just wanted to make a point in response to what was said.

 

Well, KJ, since you aren't a U.S. citizen I don't see how the Democrat/Republican divide applies to you.

 

JGrubbs,
Thanks for the link. Although I don't agree 100% with its content, it is a good review and comparison.
WallyGator

 

Why would that be elitism or divisive? Why would that be different than meeting in a small office building or something like that? </font>[/QUOTE]Maybe you missed the word "denigrate" in my post.

In other words, some who are in house churches (note: I am not saying all) are very elitist as though they are better Christians because they are meeting in homes and don't worry about church buildings, etc. It's fine if that is their choice, but sometimes they make other christians sound like they are not as good or as spiritual or as NT as they are. </font>[/QUOTE]Oh ok I see what you mean now.
Kinda like hearing alot of people that spout onlyism of bible translations and are condescending to everyone else...etc. etc.
Christian's seem to be good at belittling their brothers and sisters in Christ.

Rachel

 

Hi, Rachel,

Right!

Thanks for letting me know you saw my point!

 

True.

I think this is a straw man. This is his perception. Just because this may be true in some churches (and I'm not denying it), that does not mean it is like that in most churches. It is not like that in my church or other churches I've been to.

I don't know about "bleeding" onto others -- what does that mean exactly?

 

I was saved while attending a church that met and worhipped in a house converted to a church facility.

I guess that's a plus.

Still, I love my home church which has a sanctuary that can seat over 3,000. Not BECAUSE it can seat that many, just because it's place my Lord wants and needs me to be right now. And I love it. Too many reasons to list, but among them, wonderful leadership, exciting changes, lots of reclaimed saints and people getting saved, awesome music, ways for me to help, and so on.

 

True.

I think this is a straw man. This is his perception. Just because this may be true in some churches (and I'm not denying it), that does not mean it is like that in most churches. It is not like that in my church or other churches I've been to.

I don't know about "bleeding" onto others -- what does that mean exactly? </font>[/QUOTE]"The marbles have little effect on each other as they roll around in a jar. They just bump into one another. But real fellowship is more like a jar of grapes that bleed on one another."

He is talking about how the grapes "bleed on one another". While your right there are some churches that have real fellowship, I would dare say most large churches have cliques and there is no real fellowship during the one hour that people gather once or twice a week. The real fellowship takes place in the small groups or during the week outside of the organized "worship service".

Real fellowship is bearing one anothers burdens, not smiling and shaking hands during the "greeting time" in between songs and announcements.

 

Thanks for your response. Here are my comments:

I still see a lot of straw men!

1. Why is there a false dichotomy between house churches and large churches? Most churches in the U.S. have about 100 members.

2. There's an assumption that large churches are unfriendly.

3. There's an assumption that people in churches consider fellowship to be shaking hands.

 

In my opinion some people start a house church because they can't get along with people at their church, someone makes them mad, etc. If you can't get along with your brothers and sisters in Christ at church then how could you get along at home with them?

I have also usually noticed that the doctrine they teach is not as sound. They are usually the people that claim to see Jesus on their ceiling or backyard. Not trying to sound harsh but that is from my experience.

 

The International Mission Board of the SBC would strongly disagree with your statement. In fact house churches are the driving force behind the church planting movement in countries that are closed (hostile) to missionary work.

 

This goes the same the other way around. Those in churches think those in homes are not willing to follow authority or have weird doctrine. People in ALL walks off life tend to put down what they don't understand. Which is hopefully, the point of discussions such as this. So we can see that each church (home or established) should be judged on the merit of their doctrine and fruit. The place they meet should not matter.

~Lori

 

Or Mary in an underpass stain? Oh wait, many of those were catholics. They meet in really fancy buildings not in homes...

Weird doctrine is all over established churches as well. You can't judge all home churches because one is weird. If we did that all established churches would be weird. I could tell you of a few!

~Lorelei

 

I've witnessed some weird stuff at my "established" church.

House churches are nothing more than a local church meeting in someone's home. A house church, like an "establiched" church, should be in fellowship with other like-minded churches for the purpose of safeguarding sound doctrine. A lack of spiritual accountability can lead to abusive situations. A "house church" can be a wonderful, doctrinally-sound, spritually growing environment; It can also be a nightmare with cult-like tendencies.

 

I think you hit on something very improtant for churches regardless of size or location. That is, that they should be in fellowship with others. Most of the institutional churches I have been in didn't even know what the other churches in their own association were doing. The "fellowship" was only within the four walls of that church, it almost seemed like the local churches were in competition with each other during VBS and other "events" throughout the year.

Your right there are home churches that are almost cultish, but there are institutional churches that are as well. Most of the organized and networked house churches I have seen and spoken with are accountable to one another and fellowship with one another on a regular basis.

 

Maybe if we're doing such a good job, we should quit while we're ahead?