Pristine Grace
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst ... 3 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 71

Thread: Anyone here in a house church?

  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    2,655
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    We do know that people most often met in house churches do to persecution...But, regardless I think what needs to be kept in mind was the reason for the house churches. They existed because of persecution. It's foolish to continue to divide the church up into little segments when it is not being persecuted.
    out of curiosity, why do you think (how do we) know this? i'm curious what evidence there is for this claim. you seem very certain about this as an established fact as to the only accepted reason why they met in homes and i don't know of any NT text that actually makes this explicit connection.

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    Perhaps the number of elders in the individual house was determined by the number of people who worshipped there. There doesn't seem to be any formula given for the number of elders that should be in any given house however.
    that would make sense but you're right, there is no such formula.

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    There does seem to be some type of progression ocurring. A somewhat modified Presbyterian government seems to be the most Biblical to me. Although, since we don't have all the details there are various things I don't necessariliy buy into that is associated with such a government.
    i agree that from the gospels up through acts that we do see a progression. that is undeniable. but the question becomes what is normative and at what time do we emulate what they did. is 1 co 12-14 too early to be normative? how about 1 tim? where do we go in order to receive certain instruction for what governs our meetings? is church history or something other than Scripture the standard?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    I really don't want to go back to the 1st century. A desire to do so, is denial of all the ways in which God has guided His church through the ages and the wonderful developments in doctrine. I'm quite happy I'm literate and don't have to depend on the guy up in front who is the only one who can read who is only holding a small portion of Scripture. I'm quite happy that the dispute over canonical books is over with for the most part and that I don't have to formulate the doctrine of the hypostatic union. We certainly must weed out the error as it works our way into our doctrines along the way, but we musn't overlook the profound truth that has developed since the time of the apostles and to think that everything will be better if we live in isolation from the rest of the Christian community and worship in houses with a small group of people is absurd.
    but it seems that you're equating the development and honing of doctrines with church practice and order. if you don't want to emulate the church of Scripture then what shall we emulate? should we rather emulate the church of history and the post-apostolic church? do we want to adopt their extra-Scriptural additions? if this is the approach then why not be catholic or eastern orthodox?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    Stylistic variation? I really don't know. It does seem to have lost any kind of rigid meaning by this point however. Perhaps there was some type of conversation or question and answer going on, but I would hate to build a doctrine on such a shaky thing.
    i do want to seriously ask why does it seem less shaky to adopt practices that are not found anywhere in Scripture such as orators behind pulpits giving homilies, ecclesiastical garb and trappings, greek and roman accoutrements, a one man show, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    There seems to be a trajectory which occurs in Scripture. I am certainly aware that the idea of 'trajectories' can be abused and used to support whatever teaching is appealing to the one making the chart, but I do think it is legitimate if done properly.
    what do you mean by trajectory?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    The passage is speaking about those doing mission work, but I don't think that means that Christ does not speak through the preacher in the church. It would seem more likely to assume that Christ does speak through the preacher whenever he preaches since the passage doesn't say "only on the mission field."
    this is a black-or-white fallacy. just because one asserts that KHRUSSW primarily (always?) occurs to evangelistic/missionary contexts does not mean that one believes that Christ does not speak though the preacher (do you mean elder?) in the church. i honestly don't know how/why you make that connection or that logical conclusion. certainly Christ can even speak through donkeys but this does not prove that donkeys should be orators in church pulpits. the main question of the article is, is it Scriptural to have our gatherings centered around one individual who gives oration from a pulpit? the answer and thesis of the article is that it is not.

    i go to a church that follows this tradition (though we're slowly working to change things here...Lord willing) and realize that Christ still speaks to us through sermons and through the word. i'm not necessarily a strict prescriptionist. i don't think something is automatically wrong because we don't find it explicitly in Scripture (e.g., musical instruments in worship, church buildings, etc.) and i don't think we need to slavishly emulate everything we find in Scripture or in it's background (e.g., wearing sandals, robes, having no electricity, head coverings, holy kiss, etc.). but i do think that we need to be willing to ask ourselves the hard questions and be willing to own up to the truth even if it is uncomfortable and even if we go to or lead a church that is following extra-Scriptural traditions that may be wrong. we need to willingly embrace semper reformanda and be willing to do something about it. as i heard the other day in a message from a.n. martin, we often listen to people or read books expecting them to be our champion or our chump (of our cause) and if they fail us then we find a way to discredit them or their argument so that we don't have to be challenged or change anything. i personally want to protect myself from this and not act as if i have it all figured out and as if i never have anything to change/correct. humility is the key to all of this.

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    I'm not making the assumption at all. There certainly are both teaching and ruling elders. The article seemed to deny that we ought to show honor to pastors. My only reason for bringing this verse up was to show that the Bible says we ought to.
    perhaps you could point out where in the article he denied that we ought to show honor to pastors? and what does this have to do with the correctness of our "services" being one-man and sermon oriented?
    When I get a little money, I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes.
    --Erasmus

    A room without books is a body without soul.
    --Cicero

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    out of curiosity, why do you think (how do we) know this? i'm curious what evidence there is for this claim. you seem very certain about this as an established fact as to the only accepted reason why they met in homes and i don't know of any NT text that actually makes this explicit connection.
    Please read previous post, I agreed with Tomas's legitimate objection to my statement.

    but it seems that you're equating the development and honing of doctrines with church practice and order. if you don't want to emulate the church of Scripture then what shall we emulate? should we rather emulate the church of history and the post-apostolic church? do we want to adopt their extra-Scriptural additions? if this is the approach then why not be catholic or eastern orthodox?
    The EO and RC flatly deny the teachings of Scriptures. False practice stems from false doctrine, they closely tied.

    i do want to seriously ask why does it seem less shaky to adopt practices that are not found anywhere in Scripture such as orators behind pulpits giving homilies, ecclesiastical garb and trappings, greek and roman accoutrements, a one man show, etc.
    There is no ecclesiastical garb at my church. As for the rest, I don't see anywhere where the article proves that sermons did not occur prior to this time period. Paul very likely learned oration the same way these other men did. He certainly shows knowledge of the writings of Homer and others in his speeches. The Christian church was born in Greek culture and it does not seem unlikely that some of the same methods of teaching were used.

    I think that the temple would have been used because it was a public place and a good place to proclaim the gospel. an equivalent place today would be the food court at the mall or maybe a park. Acts chapter three gives a picture of what these meetings were probably like. sort of a crusade or a seeker service.
    But it simply doesn't say what they were doing there, to read a modern evangelism crusade or seeker service into it seems a bit of an anachronism.

    Other than tradition and what is taught in cessassionist seminaries today, and not meaning to change the subject of this thread, would you please give me a biblical evidence that the prophecies and "revelation" (I don't think that word is in the alluded text), uttered in 1 Cor. 12 through 14, practiced by the Corinthian church were additions--added-- to the canon and were placed in the final canon? Can you give me an example from the Scriptures? Tell me which one of the prophecies Paul mentions in 1 Cor 12 through 14 are today part of what we know as the canon. I am really curious to know.
    They certainly weren't placed in the final canon but were accepted as canon by those during that time period. If we are to continue the practice we must do the same and treat those who make false prophecies as false prophets rather than as true Christians.

    Let me just ask again, to anyone reading this: Where you find in the Biblical context that "when that which is perfect comes" refers to the Canon. B.C.V. please (Book, chapter and verse) and not the "perfect" that Paul mentions in other texts? When "that which is perfect comes" I will no longer see as looking in a glass darkly (a polished brass used as mirror) but I see as I am seen and know as I am known. Neither of these two miracles happened to me as of yet.
    I don't see either of these passages speaking specifically about the closing of the canon and think that such claims are foolish. However, throughout the New Testament epistles, there seems to be less and less emphasis on the miraculous gifts as time goes on and seem to die away in the church with the death of the last apostle. Certain heretical groups then come in and claim to have these gifts and during the reformation the RCC points to its own supposed miracles to prove itself as the true church. Then the modern pentecostal comes about and uses supposed miracles to lay claim to its own false teaching and send people after an earthly kingdom.

    Sola Gratia,
    WildBoar
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  3. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    They certainly weren't placed in the final canon but were accepted as canon by those during that time period. If we are to continue the practice we must do the same and treat those who make false prophecies as false prophets rather than as true Christians.
    If we are to assume this, (which I might agree with) let's assume that they were merely "localized canons" since we don't see this in any of the other congregations. They did not transfer this kind of "localized canons" to make it into an universal canon; at least I don't see any evidence of these "prophecies, revelations and utterances" being made into a "universal canon" since we don't even know the contents of them today. So, I don't think the practice of the "sprituals" would or could be construed into a universal canon and will end up as mere local guidance, which have to be judged in light of the Scriptures before being put into practice, if we are to follow the apostolic command. That's simply why I think your concern, though valid, a bit exaggerated.

    I don't see either of these passages speaking specifically about the closing of the canon and think that such claims are foolish. However, throughout the New Testament epistles, there seems to be less and less emphasis on the miraculous gifts as time goes on and seem to die away in the church with the death of the last apostle. Certain heretical groups then come in and claim to have these gifts and during the reformation the RCC points to its own supposed miracles to prove itself as the true church. Then the modern pentecostal comes about and uses supposed miracles to lay claim to its own false teaching and send people after an earthly kingdom
    Thank you for your blunt honesty. "Foolish" is just about the best qualifying term I've seen so far about "these claims". As to the "emphasis" I agree with you totally. However, I may not "emphasize" anymore, every day, every moment, about being a male, but that does not make my manhood disappear. My contention is with the preaching that all all manifestations are either gibberish or demonic, even when the miracle is an authentical duplication of what happened in the N.T. days.

    I have witnessed this kind of miracles and have heard them to be called "demonic" by the reformed and others. It is as if the "devil" heals and "God" makes people sick always and in an unqualifying way, which is another "foolishness". My response to this is "one of the two happened: either the devil is now good and God backslid"... I believe that God makes people sick for His own purpose and the devil attempts to deceive in a miraculous healing, but that does not make the miracle power of God null and void. God can and will place sickness in a person sometimes exactly for His glory in performing a miracle. It happened in the ministry of Jesus and I have seen it duplicated here and now with, as in case of a healing, medical proof.

    Then the modern pentecostal comes about and uses supposed miracles to lay claim to its own false teaching and send people after an earthly kingdom.
    The Pentecostal never read in the Bible that in 1 Thessalonians 1:7 Paul calls the addressed congregation an example even when none of the miracles practiced by the pentecostals are never mentioned in Paul's praising of them nor are cited by Paul in the two epistles he wrote to them. So, to be an exemplary congregation, worthy of a following, the miracles and outward gifts of uterance or otherwise, do not have to be necessarily present.

    Again, thank you for your candor!

    Milt - a non cessassionist
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    2,655
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    Regardless, they are not neglecting the assembling of themselves together as a large group as the modern house-church movement wishes to do, but rather in addition meeting in small groups throughout the week. I love to meet with my Christian brothers and sisters throughout the week and sing psalms, but that doesn't mean that I cease to meet with like-minded believers in a larger group.
    this is a good point. i wholeheartedly agree with you on this point. i am convinced that there is probably no basis for a one-man-show type service but i don't know that large meetings are "wrong". i think the real point is that we meet regularly and that certain things happen in our meetings a la acts 2:42ff (e.g., instruction/discipleship/mentoring, prayer, fellowship, communion, etc.). but i don't know that each and every one of these things must happen every time we meet.

    Quote Originally Posted by tomas1
    Maybe the Greek scholars could help me out on this one does “they held all thing in common” necessarily have to mean strict communism or could it possibly be a reference to the attitude of what mine is yours that is often seen among close friends?
    see below

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    Also, if you are oing to be consistent you must sell all your possessions.
    it doesn't say that though. this seems like a bit of a jab which is based on an incorrect reading. it says:

    Acts 2:44 And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common; 45 and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need.

    it does not say that every single one of the believers sold all of their possessions. that is not in the text. the most natural reading is that those who had stuff to sell and wanted to sell, did so, and shared with those who had need (not that everyone sold everything they had and that no one had anything of their own). it wasn't communism (as some assert) but was exactly what hebrews 13:16 commands:

    Heb 13:16 And do not neglect doing good and sharing, for with such sacrifices God is pleased.

    tertullian (c. 200) said:

    "One in mind and soul, we do not hesitate to share our earthly goods with one another. All things are common among us but our wives," Apology, 39
    When I get a little money, I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes.
    --Erasmus

    A room without books is a body without soul.
    --Cicero

  5. #45
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Hawaiian Islands
    Posts
    3,672
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    73
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    119
    Thanked in
    65 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    The house church movement is wrong, not because it is nonconformist, but because it is even more sectarian than the historic denominations. No true reformation will ever come as a result of sectarianism, which is the essence of heresy (schism).

    I often identify with the true people of God in public worship; both in large and small assemblies. But I would point out that this is only to identify with the ekklesia, not the institution or the bishop who rules the institution. If we truly love the truth of the gospel, we should not be tied to ANY religious institution. Once we identify with one, our Bible is tightly closed shut so that a bulldozer won't open it--just as if we were officers in the Papacy itself. Once we identify with a sect, our search for truth is limited to 'searching the scriptures' to prove that the doctrines of that sect are true; not to searching the scriptures for Jesus Christ.
    I got four things to live by: don't say nothin' that will hurt anybody; don't give advice--no one will take it anyway; don't complain; don't explain. Walter Scott

  6. #46
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    Quote Originally Posted by BillTwisse
    The house church movement is wrong, not because it is nonconformist, but because it is even more sectarian than the historic denominations. No true reformation will ever come as a result of sectarianism, which is the essence of heresy (schism).
    Yep, amen and amen. I've found that most of the house church movement is also free willism and charismaticism to the core. Further, those that emphasize God's sovereignty in salvation are so gung ho about the "movement" that they're willing to compromise the gospel for the sake of the movement. This has been my observation. For a short time, I thought the only true churches were house churches... Boy was I wrong. The only true churches are GOSPEL churches.
    This is my signature.

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Akron
    Posts
    139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    Brandon,

    Would you share how you came to this conclusion? I would be interested in to hear the how's and whys.

    Dave

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    115
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    Quote Originally Posted by tomas1
    The simple biblical method of church organization resembles an organic life cycle and looks something like this
    1. A “messenger” is sent from a mother church to establish a daughter church. This person represents and reports to the sending congregation. (Acts 13:2-4)
    2. He finds those who have been prepared by God in advance to receive the gospel and a church is born (1Cor 3:6-9)
    3. After a period of time Elders are selected and the messenger moves on. (Titus 1:5)
    4. The growth process begins. (Eph 2:21-22)
    5. All decisions are made by consensus of the whole church with the input and guidance of the Elders. (Acts 15:22)
    6. The elders exercise less and less authority as the congration matures (Eph 4:13-15)
    7. The church appoints servants to make financial decisions. So that there is no conflict of interest these individuals must not be Elders and must not be selected by them but by the congregation (Acts 6:3)
    8. When questions of proper doctrine or practice or conflicts come up that the congregation would like input on they consult the mother church or their sister churches. (Acts 15:2-3)
    9. At some point individuals from within the church are recognized as called of God to be messengers. These are sent out and the process repeats itself. (Acts 18:27-28)

    You can see variations of this cycle any time that the gospel is growing not just with the early church. This is the way that Calvin spread the gospel in the early days of the reformation it’s how the early Baptist churches were organized and it is the method of the Chinese house churches today.
    The cycle is interrupted when the Elders become lords instead of servants. They decide to increase their power by drawing people to themselves. They refuse to acknowledge or in some cases to even to allow a maturing process in the congregation. Messengers cease to be sent instead the flock is encouraged to bring all new converts to the already existing congregation and the natural cycle stops cold. The advance of the kingdom must wait for a reformation to shake things up and start the cycle again.
    This stunting of growth can happen no matter where the congration meets but is much more likely in a large gathering with a large number of immature believers that can be manipulated by charismatic men.
    Very good presentation, Tomas1.

    Also wonder if there are Reformed or Calvinistic house churches in China?

  9. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    115
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Gill
    Yep, amen and amen. I've found that most of the house church movement is also free willism and charismaticism to the core. Further, those that emphasize God's sovereignty in salvation are so gung ho about the "movement" that they're willing to compromise the gospel for the sake of the movement. This has been my observation. For a short time, I thought the only true churches were house churches... Boy was I wrong. The only true churches are GOSPEL churches.
    Brandan,

    When you speak of 'charismaticism', are you referring to those who speak in tongues, or movements that revolve around charismatic leaders?

    Also, do you find that all of those who emphasize God's sovereignty in salvation chuck that doctrine aside in house churches?

  10. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    Those who I know in the house-church movement are actually of a somewhat distorted reformed persuasion, but then I'm in Grand Rapids.
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  11. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    115
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    In what sense are they distorted?

  12. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    The people who I have spoken with from said churches often concentrate on the TULIP doctrines at the expense of all else. Christology is often lost and some are preterists and dependent upon books by R. C. Sproul for much of their theology. Others are just rabidly anti-confessional and fall into various other errors. At its core a Reformed house church is a bit of an oxymoron just as an independent Presbyterian church is.
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  13. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    115
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    The people who I have spoken with from said churches often concentrate on the TULIP doctrines at the expense of all else. Christology is often lost and some are preterists and dependent upon books by R. C. Sproul for much of their theology. Others are just rabidly anti-confessional and fall into various other errors. At its core a Reformed house church is a bit of an oxymoron just as an independent Presbyterian church is.
    The doctrines of grace (as I like to call them) are important but just focusing on those all the time is like, well, an unbalanced diet. I'm certainly no preterist myself, and I do have a couple of issues with Sproul. I have one of his books--the Holiness of God--and admit that it was one of the things that the Lord used in my life in regards to the doctrines of grace, but Sproul is not on my list of favorite authors, though.

  14. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    115
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    WB,

    What is the governing structure of these house churches?

  15. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    The doctrines of grace (as I like to call them) are important but just focusing on those all the time is like, well, an unbalanced diet. I'm certainly no preterist myself, and I do have a couple of issues with Sproul. I have one of his books--the Holiness of God--and admit that it was one of the things that the Lord used in my life in regards to the doctrines of grace, but Sproul is not on my list of favorite authors, though.
    I'm certainly not saying people shouldn't read Sproul. For a time I read everything I could by him. We just shouldn't become too dependent upon a single author to interpret Scripture for us.

    What is the governing structure of these house churches?
    I haven't spoken extensively about this with the people I have met. I met most of them through the bookstore I work at and always have to be conscious of my duty as a Christian to proclaim the truth but also my duty as an employee to not run people out of the store. From what I gather, however, there doesn't seem to be any governing structure. Their biggest boast is that they claim to "worship just like the New Testament church without any hierarchy." As far as I can tell, it seems to function more like a Bible Study group in which they read the Bible and sing some hymns and each person contributes as they wish.

    There is also the Harold Camping influence to greater and lesser degrees where it is believed by some that the church age has ended and elders and deacons must be done away with.

    Sola Gratia,
    WildBoar
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  16. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    First of all let me say that the comments here have been excellent. I think this subject really needs to be discussed with the kind of cool heads that so far have prevailed here.
    I think we are entering a unique period in the history of the church. When we will get to see the fruits of the different church organizational methods side by side as never before.

    1 Cor 11:19For there also must be factions among you, that those who are approved may be revealed among you.

    It’s just too early to tell how this will all play out the so-called “House Church Movement” is too young. I hope we can at least agree that small groups are also the ecclesia and a building is not what is required to make a church.

    It seems to me that the trend ever since the 1400’s is that every time the church is reformed it is at the expense of the hierarchy that is extant at the time. First Calvin and Luther shattered the monolithic RCC. Then the Puritans broke the power of State Church. Is the denominational one-man show the next to go?

    Bill twisse:
    No true reformation will ever come as a result of sectarianism, which is the essence of heresy (schism).
    I agree. If Simple Churches think of themselves as some how different or separate from their brothers in large gatherings their “movement” is doomed
    By the way I’ve never spoke to a member of this movement. It hasn’t made it to the sticks yet.

  17. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    Jason:
    Also wonder if there are Reformed or Calvinistic house churches in China?

    Representatives of the major Chinese House Church networks came together in 1996 to draft a confession of faith that they could all agree on. It’s not the 1644 Baptist confession but it’s far better than anything you could get from any 40 million professed Christians in the USA. For example:
    On Salvation
    Anyone who repents, confessing his or her sins, and believes in Jesus as the Son of God, that He was crucified on the cross for our sins, and that He rose again on the third day for the remission of our sins and for receiving the Holy Spirit, shall be saved through being born again. For by grace are we saved through faith: we are justified by faith: we receive the Holy Spirit and we become the sons of God through faith

    We believe that God will preserve his children in Christ to the end, and we also believe that believers should firmly believe in the truth to the end. We believe that receiving the Holy Spirit is the assurance (evidence) of being saved, and the Spirit of God bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God. We are apposed to all who take specific phenomenon or personal experience as the objective criterion for being saved.

    We are opposed to the belief that one can sin because He is under grace [contra “once saved, always saved and hence one may sin freely]. We are opposed to the idea of multiple salvations [contra one can be lost if one fails to persist in faith, and hence must go through repentance and faith again]. We are also opposed to the belief that we can be saved by keeping the law.

    Remember all the major house church movements in China not just a single denomination agreed to this confession. That is a unity that we could never achieve in the USA. The pastor-popes would not stand for it.

  18. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    He rose again on the third day for the remission of our sins and for receiving the Holy Spirit, shall be saved through being born again.
    We shall be saved through being born again? Do they look at being born again as something in the future for the believer or is this just an issue of translation?

    Remember all the major house church movements in China not just a single denomination agreed to this confession. That is a unity that we could never achieve in the USA. The pastor-popes would not stand for it.
    The RCC would love it if we would all just agree with their confession. Unity based on such broad terms is not true unity.

    Sola Gratia,
    WildBoar
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  19. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    I think I already found an answer to my question according to a website I found it said: "In Chinese, congsheng dejiu, means "born again and saved." Salvation is defined in terms of being born again."

    There is a compromise reached in the full statement over the issues of God's Sovereignty and human responsibility. The site I looked at however said "top leaders of a few major house church groups have come get together in a certain village in North China in November, 1998, to pray together, to search the Scriptures, and to draft the confession of faith as shown below." So it does not appear to be all.
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  20. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Anyone here in a house church?

    Quote from "Jesus in Beijing" by David Aikman

    "The issue was what can we agree as the basis of the Christian faith? The document then released, signed by representives of four networks

    It instantly recieved widspread recognition in China amoung the various house church movements, and even amoung some of the Three Self pastors dissatisfied with official theology of that organization"

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst ... 3 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Super Bowl Explained
    By Mickey in forum General Discussion Archive
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-09-06, 10:21 PM
  2. Isaiah 26:10 on common grace/favor
    By wildboar in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-26-05, 12:20 AM
  3. Method of Eternal Salvation
    By Prmtv Bptst in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-23-04, 10:32 PM
  4. How do you witness to Jehovah's Witness'
    By Faithnhope in forum Old Miscellaneous Archive
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-18-03, 09:23 AM
  5. Christian Leaders Behaving Badly
    By countrymouse in forum Old Miscellaneous Archive
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-12-02, 10:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •