House Church Movement Growing

Hi JulianSims...

Thanks for the article! Krispy won my esteem for the House Church movement quite a long time ago! Perhaps the next great move of God will not begin in established Church cathedrals -- but inside the homes of believers?

:-)

I wonder, if we spent as much time and effort following the example of the early church on:

Acts 2:41-47
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. [42] And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. [43] And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. [44] And all that believed were together, and had all things common; [45] And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. [46] And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, [47] Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

Acts 4:31-35
And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness. [32] And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. [33] And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. [34] Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, [35] And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.

Lets see, Jesus was crucified, as was Peter, all the disciples but John, who was only boiled in oil, were martyred. Then we have Stephen who was stoned, Paul beheaded and the untold number of early Christians who were martyred in every way you can think of and many ways we wish not to, and all as sheep led to the slaughter.

I wonder, why do we not emphasize following these examples, why only emphasize meeting in our homes?

Maybe if we did, we would discover what being a Christian really is, hey and we might even become a martyr.;-)

In His Love
pastorfrin

While to a degree I can understand why some people would leave larger congregations in favor for smaller, close-knit fellowships based in one's home, the downside I see is that unless these home-churches are connected by way of some network, the independence it creates can easily lead to self-imposed segregation and/or cult-like behaivior i.e., who are the authorities within the group? Who are they accountable to apart from themselves? :-(

{totally edited to include verses and be more thorough}

Here are my beliefs regarding the network of authority within house churches. To the best of my knowledge this is the system of inter-church government practiced since Paul's time.

[b]The Network of Reverential Authority amongst Home Churches[/b]
by Michael Spotts:.

An apostle or team of apostles, sometimes called "missionaries" or "church planters", are separated by the Spirit and typically ordained by elders. [1 Corinthians 12:28; Ephesians 4:11-12] These travel about evangelizing and teaching fundamentals. [Acts 13:2-4 ; Acts 15:35-37] Those who receive the message and profess faith in Christ, and demonstrate apparent first fruits of the Spirit are considered to be added to the church. [Acts 2:40-47]

Prior to, or instead of, the establishment of a dedicated meeting place, this new church body may gather in an individual's home, or meet from house to house, in keeping with hospitality. [Romans 16:3-5; Acts 2:46-47]

Apostles may themselves establish elders from amongst the new church body [Acts 14:23], or may appoint another elder to do so, such as when Paul directed Titus to set elders over the Cretans. [Titus 1:5]

The apostle has special authority over those bodies which he "births", yet this authority comes by way of due reverence, not heavy-handed control. [1 Corinthians 4:14-16] This is seen in the relationship Paul had toward the Corinthians, regarding whom he declared, "you have not many fathers."

As new church bodies develop and begin sending out other apostles, the network of reverential authority grows relative to the maturity and faithfulness of elders, and guided by the supreme authority of the word. In the case of disputes, elders of a church may resort to the counsel and authority of those apostles and sending churches that preceded them. [Acts 15:2-27]

Example:

The elders of Home Church A send out Apostle A. He plants Home Church B, perhaps even in the same city as Home Church A.

When Home Church B is ready, apostle A - perhaps with the elders of Home Church A - ordain elders in Home Church B. Apostle A is then free to go or stay as the Lord leads.

If a dispute, confusion, or trial arises in Home Church B, they may turn to Apostle A and the elders of Home Church A for guidance, discipline, and help.

When Home Church B is ready, the elders may send forth Apostle B to continue the cycle.

Hope that helps.

I can see where there are many concerns. But how many are bassed on the paranoia of pastors of corporate churches? Their income and dynasty is at stake. There is only room for one king in most of these settings, and his name is Pastor Doe.
My kidneys are part of my body. They will never be my knee joint. They have a completely different location and function. Yet both are truly part of the same body.
So who will lead these home churches? Why the Holy Spirit of course. He is well able to do exceedingly abundantly above all we ask or think. You do trust Him to do so, don't you.
I have written articles on the blite of Apostle, Prophet, Evangelist ministries in the local church. I think that with this wonderful surge of home churches, we will see many more of these emerge with respect and honor...but not as kings to rule over the home churches. They will be resources of health and vitality that the Holy Spirit will use. We must remember that Jesus explicitly told his disciples NOT to "lord it over them as the gentiles do". No monarchy please. Well, we all know that did not last very long.
Yet, there are so many who shiver at the thought of something living that they do not control. My brain controls my kidneys and knees, and does so real well. What my knees are doing is none of my kidney's business.
It's the same with Christ's church. It is His church. He alone is the Head, and He does a real good job of keeping "His own" close to Him.
I have not meant to sound sharp here. But every great reformation has come from studying our history and going back to our roots. Jesus did not institute an imperfect church to be perfected by man over 2000 years. It's high time we started following Him and His Holy Spirit and quit fretting over who will be in control He is in control. Get over and get on with it.
BTW, some of the most wonderful church experiences I have ever had have been in home fellowships with just ordinary people gathered with our Extraordinary Savior. Alleluia.

In Him,

"O"

i think the House Church Movement will grow even larger once the American economy really hit's the wall (we're already in the skid), and the use of the more massive edifices we've become used to are no longer cost affordable ...

i know from my own experience of larger churches currently closing down prayer nights because it's costing to much in utilities to keep the doors open as they once did when they were smaller ... For one thing tithes and offerings are dwindling ...

i often wonder if Osteen will be able to sustain The Compaq Center once the U.S. economy hits crisis, and "the people" whom he said "he depends on" at his opening speech of the place no longer have the capital they once had ... i thought that was a very telling statement when he said that, and shuddered that he didn't say he depended on our Lord for it's sustenance ...

i think we are shortly to see a whole lot of empty Mega & cathedral type churches in America simply because they'll not be able to be afforded by thier congregation, and many will be foreclosed on because of having such massive mortgages ... Aware pastors right now are on a real mission to get those mortgages paid off, and are digging as deep as they can into the pockets of their flock while the "getting" is still good ... :-?

Bro Krisp you wrote;
"House churching, tho, is about a lot more than buildings. In fact, thats hardly a blip on the radar screen."

--- Bro i know this, primarily from reading many of your past posts regarding your motivation in this area :-D ...

You bro, and others as yourself, have "chosen" (pro-active) to assemble in a "house", but i'm talking from the perspective of our/your brethren who'll be "forced" (re-active) into to it ... If you wanna see a "large edifice attending" saint look like a deer caught in headlights, tell them that there's coming a time that they may be worshipping in the home of another saint (Acts 2) because "the big building" will be closed ... What no comfy seats, no big screen tv's, no air conditioning, no robes, no pomp or circumstance? ...

Perhaps those who are house churched now will be used of our Lord to help those who may be forced to ... That is if the "house churched" haven't forgotten that the "institutional churched" are still their brethren ... You know how "separatist" we Christians can be one toward another for one reason or another :-? ---

A little history of Miccah and house church

I have been meeting and holding "house church" for a little under 3 years. As a house church, we meet in a very small and intimate setting that allows for us to really dive into each others lives. Accountability is direct. It is hard to not be accountable to eachother since we meet with our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ every week.

Our church consists of multiple house churches that meet in common on Sunday morning for worshiping The Lord. Not one of these is independent of one another, but interconnected. As someone stated here before about their kidney (excuse the butchering of it :) ), all different parts of the body are needed for the body to function properly, and all are equal in the Lords purpose and use.

The Lord moves mightily in both of these settings.

As in [u][b]Acts 2:46[/b][/u]

"So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house..."

We meet in the home together, and in the church as one body of the Church. This is how the Church was "held".

I have personally been invloved in this movement for sometime. [u]I would like to point out that by no means am I against traditional church as most people know it.[/u] I have been lead to do different, but as important for the Lord. Most everyone I know that has moved from a traditional church to a house church has grown expediential in Him. All share, all pray, all get prayed over, all use the giftings and ALL glorify His name.

Personally, I love it. I thank God for opening my eyes to this. One of the better things that I have realized after moving from traditional church to a house church is that it does not "stop" after leaving. The focus on Him continues day in and day out, as it should anywhere, but sometimes gets lost in traditional settings, but not all traditional settings mind you.

Another great aspect about house church is that you can intermingle between the house churches. Doors are always open for everyone. Sometimes we don't hold ours, and go to another house church. All is for His glory.

What a wonderful God we have.

Miccah

Who are they accountable to apart from themselves?

Isn't this the case within traditional denominations? They are only accountable within themselves? And isn't the accountability usually only with some distant overseer figure, who pretty much is just called in when things go very sour... and often past being fixed? And they don't traditionally hold one accountable for things such as pride. Only gross outward sins are checked.

James was head of the Jerusalem church, he over saw those that were dispersed abroad.

While a popular interpretation of who James was, there is no evidence of this in the Scriptures. The New Testament church knew of no other head than Jesus Christ. James was simply a resident apostle at the church in Jerusalem. At one point, he appears to have been the only apostle there. But this does not make him head of it. Jesus alone is the head of the church, both universal and local.

If there was someone teaching a false doctrine, who would hold you or other accountable? Thats my point, I could start a house church and teach what I want, who will who me accountable?

The entire community of believers! Jesus said if anybody sins, the believer who catches that individual in sin is to go to him in private and rebuke him. If he refuses to listen to this brother, bring two or three others. And if he won't listen to them, let it be known to the church. And if even that won't work... then let him be to the church as a tax collector and sinner!!! THAT is accountability.

If I am the acting pastor of the fellowship, then who do I go to?

In New Testament churches, there is never just one pastor in any given church. So this isn't a problem.

The Apostle Paul governed all his churches.

Not in the traditional sense as you probably think of it. Paul did oversee the churches that he had relations with. However, these churches were free to accept or reject his oversight. In fact, in 2 Corinthians Paul is in jeopardy of losing his ability to oversee the church, because some other apostles (false ones) have come into the church and have begun to turn the church against Paul. Paul "governed" the churches he had actual relationships with. He modeled Christ to them and gave his input from time to time as was needed.

I believe in having a a doctrinal statement all house fellowships should adhere to, if there is not, then I would be afraid to go to anyones house that acted like an island unto themselves.

While there is nothing wrong with having a statement of faith, who says such is a necessary thing? The first century church never developed any sort of official statement of faith. That's not to say there were not essential things that were taught and expected to be believed e.g. Jesus is Lord. But as it is, developing creedal statements of faith hasn't been a safeguard against heresy. In fact, the most "creedal" churches out there today are full of heresy. E.g. The Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholics, PCUSA, Methodist, etc.