Archive for the ecclesiology category.
And that is what this movement is full of: High-sounding talk. You see it in Barna’s book “Revolution”. You hear it everywhere you go in the ‘Out-of-church’ movement. Vast claims are being made for those who will simply “come out” - and actually “BE the church without having to GO to church”, etc. One would think that “coming out” was the solution to all that ails us. But as I have seen for 20 years now, nothing could be further from the truth.
The facts are plain and simple: If your thinking and behaviour are basically “anti-Body” and “anti-Leader”, then don’t expect to get anywhere. And don’t expect the Body of Christ to get anywhere either. We are not designed to be an “amorphous blob”. We are designed to be a unified army with leaders and direction and teamwork - taking the kingdom of darkness using “combined force”. United together we are very powerful - for God designed us to be a ‘Body’. Split apart into “individualists”, we are weak and ineffective…
In closing, I need to say this: Because I can no longer condone the ‘Out-of-church’ Revolution that I have endorsed for many years, I needed to take my e-book “The OUT-OF-CHURCH Christians” off the main page of our website - http://www.revivalschool.com. This has now been done.
Link: http://65.108.220.179/leavingbehind.html
So says Andrew Strom at the above mentioned and popular website. Some of his points are indeed valid - others not very. Scripture, in fact, does warn us of the modern manifestation of what are known as “church leaders.” Not all, of course.
In Seattle, the young men are, generally, pathetic. They are unlikely to go to church, get married, have children, or do much of anything else that smacks of being responsible. But they are known to be highly skilled at smoking pot, masturbating, playing video games, playing air guitar, free-loading, and having sex with their significant others. However, the emerging-church massage-parlor antics of labyrinth-walking by candlelight will do little more than increase the pool of extras for television’s Will and Grace. If there is any hope for a kingdom culture to be built in Seattle, getting the young men to undergo a complete cranial-rectal extraction is priority number one.
Mark Driscoll, Radical Reformission, p. 184
And:
The problem in the church today is just a bunch of nice, soft, tender, chickafied church boys. 60% of Christians are chicks and the 40% that are dudes are still sort of…chicks. It’s just sad.
We’re looking around going, How come we’re not innovative? Cause all the innovative dudes are home watching football or they’re out making money or climbing a mountain or shooting a gun or working on their truck. They look at the church like that’s a nice thing for women and children. So the question is if you want to be innovative: How do you get young men? All this nonsense on how to grow the church. One issue: young men. That’s it. That’s the whole thing. They’re going to get married, make money, make babies, build companies, buy real estate. They’re going to make the culture of the future. If you get the young men you win the war, you get everything. You get the families, the women, the children, the money, the business, you get everything. If you don’t get the young men you get nothing.
Mark Driscoll, speaking at the 2006 National Desiring God Conference
In the New Testament there is not a longer list of grammatical elements than those prescribed to older ones or elders of the church. There are two such long lists (1 Tim 3, Titus 1) and a host of other exhortations. It has to be a serious matter. The apostles “ordained elders” as they went from town to town. Those in view were ordained or appointed to a task - loving oversight of the younger ones - not to an office in the modern sense.
The term “elder” is a comparative one pertaining to age. Thus, the aimless younger men mentioned above are actually older ones in relation to their juniors. Regardless of their age, all Christian men should be preparing themselves for a life of service to the chief Shepherd and to his flock. This is their calling. Unfortunately, most don’t know it because they haven’t been taught it. As a result, this most natural of human relationships has become highly professionalized.
During the night Paul had a vision of a man of Macedonia standing and begging him, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.” After Paul had seen the vision, we got ready at once to leave for Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to preach the gospel to them. From Troas we put out to sea and sailed straight for Samothrace, and the next day on to Neapolis. From there we traveled to Philippi, a Roman colony and the leading city of that district of Macedonia. And we stayed there several days. On the Sabbath we went outside the city gate to the river, where we expected to find a place of prayer. We sat down and began to speak to the women who had gathered there. One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message. When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home. “If you consider me a believer in the Lord,” she said, “come and stay at my house.” And she persuaded us. Acts 16:9-15.
Notice that Paul associated “helping” in Macedonia with “preaching” in Macedonia. Nothing here, nor anywhere else, about planting churches or starting something. It was rather the gospel seed which was to be planted. Nothing here about cleaning up the social ills of the city or beginning a never-ending conversation.
Notice that Lydia’s conversion is attributed to God, not to the latest methods. Are we overly dependent upon methods, books, and techniques or are we knocking at heaven’s door?
Where, oh where were the men? No doubt some in our day would have scolded these women: How dare you assemble without men and without elders and deacons?
What do you see or not see in this account?
Nationwide research has yielded more polling numbers for the house church movement and the numbers are, as they say, “all over the page.”
The latest from the Barna Group, as reported by ABC News, is that there are at least 5 million American adults involved in house churches. But less than a year ago, that number was put at 20 million (weekly participants) or 43 million (monthly participants). During an alleged period of “exponential growth” why have the numbers… plummeted?
In January of ‘07 it was heralded in the Barna Update: “The rapid growth in house church activity is evident in the fact that half of the people (54%) currently engaged in an independent home fellowship have been participating for less than three months.” If so, based upon the most recent head-count of 5 million, there would have been way less than 2.5 million participants during the time frame when tens of millions were being reported. That is, unless millions have dropped dead.
Most recently, George Barna revealed that house churchers are much “more satisfied than those in conventional churches.” That’s a strange thing in that Barna previously announced that “70 million adults had experimented with house churches.” 70 million tried house churching but only 5 million are now with it on a regular basis? That’s about one in fourteen, is it not? Exactly what kind of satisfaction are we talking about?
Furthermore, why is the failure rate of house churches so high if house churching is so satisfying? According to my observation, their life span is more likely to be measured in months rather than years. According to a book entitled “The House Church Movement” (Seedsowers Publishing, page 65): “House churches collapse and disappear faster than they are born.”
Another head-scratching statistic from the Barna Group to ponder and to factor in: 80% of house churchers “maintain some connection to a conventional church, having one foot in both camps.” Again, I do have to wonder: If 4 out of 5 house churchers still remain connected with the traditional churches they were relatively unsatisfied with, just how satisfied are they or how unsatisfied were they?
(We know that the phrase “maintain some connection to” actually means to “attend” because In June of 2006, it was published at barna.org: “… one-fifth (of all USA church attenders) ATTEND both a house church and a conventional church” And in December of 2006, the same subset was referred to: “Involvement in a house church is rapidly growing, although the transition is occurring with some trepidation: four out of every five (80%) house church participants MAINTAIN SOME CONNECTION TO a conventional church as well.”)
But wait, the continual theme of Barna’s “Revolution” was that the revolutionaries had left the traditional churches in mass exodus. Their departure was necessary because their intense passion for God rendered them incapable of co-existing with ordinary, less authentic Christians.
It may objected that house churches are practically invisible and that the precise or the approximate numbers cannot be determined. Well, why then does Barna ascribe a tiny margin of “sampling error” and a high “confidence level” to his analysis?
I would be interested in seeing polling data from another source which might corroborate the incredible Barna numbers. This revolution, if it is the real deal, represents an extensive re-draw of the Christian map as never before witnessed on planet earth - it’s existence and magnitude could not possibly be overlooked.
Personally, I have found house churching to be, for the most part, satisfying and highly recommend that every Christian consider the possibility. You, for example.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2781114&page=1
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50802
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=241
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=252
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=255
Living Room Liturgy by Steve Grove, Jan. 9, 2007
Every Monday night, Meredith Scott and eight of her friends get together at one of their homes in St. Paul, Minn. They cook a meal, share what’s going on in their lives and pray together.
But Scott and her friends don’t call this a Bible study or a support group — they call it a church. They are part of the growing number of Americans who are shifting from traditional churches toward more informal, intimate settings, dubbed house churches.
….
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2781114&page=1
Here’s a scenario which might appear strange to us but not to those who lived in the earliest days of the church:
A guy my age, as a father, grandfather, and yes, as a great-grandfather might have several dozen of his own kin coming over for a regular meal and a meeting in Jesus name. That’s not to mention all the in-laws of each married child from the other side of their families. Several dozen would certainly qualify as real church according to anyone with whom I’m acquainted including my own relatives which disapprove of house church.
Young teens married then and lost no time in bearing children. There was no birth control being practiced as a rule and the lights went out early.
Yes, it would have been quite possible to host a “family church” in which the teeming crowd overwhelmed the house. We can’t assume that all the family members would have become Christians, nevertheless the numbers could have been surprisingly high.
In round figures, Carolynn and I might have married and had the first of our 6 children at age 15, who each had 6 kids by the time we were 40-something… you get the idea and can have fun with the math. That’s a big bunch, no? It must also be mentioned that the average age of a male in the Roman empire was only 40-something at death. So I’ve been told. Wars, disease, and persecutions took their toll.
I don’t get the idea that “family church” was the norm then but I believe it is perfectly acceptable and not to be apologized for. I do believe that we should invite others, too, whenever possible. Each person brings something. Why would we not welcome them into our fellowship or hesitate to join theirs? If we are practicing hospitality we surely would. That said, I do believe that the meetings were to be intentional and regular but that wouldn’t exclude spontaneous ones. What is ‘regular’ may vary, I freely acknowledge. That’s a topic for another day. I just wanted us to consider the domestic situation of some of the large Christian families in the ancient world. The Bible, btw, mentions several household baptisms. There are also major implications here for the Lord’s Supper and eldership, too.
I’m occasionally informed that house churching is easy - so easy and simple that anybody could do it. Certainly, if God is in it, it can and it will happen. Surely, churching of about any kind - even house churching - has frequently been made more complicated than originally intended.
House churching would need or at least want, it seems to me, some sort of a stable household. This would disqualify many, if not most, in the US where the divorce rate for the saved is about the same as the lost. Of course, folks remarry and start again but there are a lot of unstable households even where one or both parties are believers. Where such marriages are intact, there is often great disharmony which would make the gatherings a strain on everyone. Who would want to be in the cross-fire?
Both spouses should be in general agreement about doctrinal things, ‘twould seem. Then, there might ought to be a basic agreement on the format of the meetings. Then, there should be a willingness to love everyone else involved at all times. Then, there should be a willingness to be open and intimate in one’s home setting which is a little like being on an examination table.
Anybody left? Anyone can declare themselves to be a church but how about all those one-another commands which require dying to self?
Again, almighty God can cause these would-be barriers to instantly evaporate but is house churching really easy? Has it been for you? For me, I’d have to say yes and no. More no than yes, I suppose, as I reflect today. Rewarding? I’m sure about that. But if it is so easy, why are there not more of us? Why is the fold up rate of house churches so high? What’s the hold up if it’s so simple and easy?
Who would have guessed that, by some accounts, there are now more house churchers than Southern Baptists, the largest protestant denomination in the USA? House Churchers, therefore, are all around us, likely in every public place, even at every major intersection. If the “one in five adults” figure is accurate and you’re sitting in a restaurant, there are statistically several others present who could join with you for an impromptu church meeting.
These numbers mean that traditional churches have lost members by the millions, tithes and offerings by the billions. If “one in five adults” are participating in house churches, tens of millions of children would also be involved.
These new churches, we are informed, are not “cell churches” attached to a traditional church but real house church participants.
Is this the latter day glory or what? I am very optimistic in my prophetic views of the end times but I must confess that such figures exceed anything I could have ever expected. Oh me of little faith… The amazing findings of George Barna can be tracked in the articles below.
And somewhere, there must be a sizable group of “house church planters” who have been more fantastically successful than anything previously documented in the whole history of the church including the book of Acts. Might these please step forward and identify themselves? God will receive all the glory, of course, we just want to know who you are.
It should be noted that serious disparity does exist in the polling. The Time magazine article first mentioned it. Take, for example, the data reported in the Friday Fax, published by researcher and author Wolfgang Simson. About a year ago (May 13. 2005) it was documented that USA house churches “had probably doubled in the past 18 months, from 2,500 to 5,000.”
Hmmmm… Let’s take that “43 million” number of house churchERS and then double again the number of house churchES to 10,000 to represent another doubling for the year 2006 - this time in only a year, actually much less. That translates, I believe, into about 4,300 adults per house church!
What do YOU think about the implications of the alleged “70 million who regularly attend or have experimented with a house church?” What do you see in your corner of the world to confirm such an unprecedented shift in social behavior?
Me, I’ve gone door to door for 20 something years as a UPS delivery driver in more than a dozen counties in Tennessee and Virginia. I’ve gotten close to a lot of families along the way. Total number of known house churchers encountered? Zero.
Furthermore, I’ve read literally thousands of email messages, public and private, over the past decade from those within or interested in the house church community. Folks alooking for a local house church have outnumbered those who actually found one by a ratio of hundreds to one.
Where are all the house/micro/simple/home/nano/organic/family/nameless church bloggers, btw? If our numbers are greater than the Baptists (and all other denoms) why isn’t it reflected in the blog traffic and the tags? I see hundreds of reformed bloggers, for example, but hardly a few dozen house church bloggers who post regularly if even that many.
Question: Other than the Barna Group what other pollsters have examined this matter and what did they discover?
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdateNarrow&BarnaUpdateID=241
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=221
http://www.abpnews.com/1198.article
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50802
http://www.albertmohler.com/commentary_read.php?cdate=2006-02-13
How difficult it is to comprehend the reality of the one true church. Peter, the apostle, missed it even after having a special vision about it.
Some, having been burned in the traditional churches, write the whole thing off and reject everyone in it. I believe that may be a mistake. Btw, you can get severely burned in a house church, too. Sin does not differentiate.
Well, let’s say we’re at 40k feet and the pilot announces in a quivering voice that the jet engines have just malfunctioned. Could we not take the hand of another believer and pray for the safety of the plane and for those who haven’t yet made peace with God? Would the mode of baptism, church structure, the Sabbath, or one’s view of the great tribulation make much difference then? I doubt it.
The plane is planet earth. It’ll crash and burn but the new heavens and earth await those who follow the Lamb. Until then we might follow the admonition of Paul to be gentle with each other.
Jesus’ prayer in another “Lord’s Prayer”: John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be ONE, as we are.
John 17:21-22 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be ONE in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be ONE, even as we are ONE.
My “tentmaking” way of living out my passion is by “Coaching” people on how to start and/or lead a Simple/House Church. I also coach people regarding their personal issues, and helping them move towards their dreams and goals.
If you’re new to the process of “Coaching,” it is a powerful process that helps you get clear about what God is up to in your life. It is a process of discovery achieved through dialogue and by wrestling with clarifying questions.
I have 20 years of experience helping to disciple (mentor, coach, teach, train, counsel) men and women into wholeness and life (with a capital “L”). I am a Professional Coach as well as a Church Planter, focusing on simple expressions of church.
I charge $150 a month for three (30 minute) sessions conducted over the phone. If you’d like to give coaching a no obligation “test drive” with me, email me and we’ll schedule a free session, to see if it’s a good fit for you, and for me. If you’re ready to get started, email me using the link at the top of the page.
The info above is from a house church site which can be located via google.com if one so desires. I am considering this person’s methods today, which I believe are unscriptural and antiscriptural - thus counterproductive. I am not considering his motives which I doubt not are noble and intended to advance the kingdom of Jesus.
First, being a true biblical tentmaker would exclude charging for ministry. If this person is a real Professional Coach and I don’t doubt that he is, would he really need to be collecting money from small churches to the tune of $100 per hour? And why capitalize these titles? Why withhold needful information to a brother until you are paid for it, making it an article of commerce? What happened to “Freely received, freely given?” What happened to “We don’t seek yours, but you.” Matthew 10:8 and 2 Corinthians 12:14: Behold, the third time I am ready to come to you; and I will not be burdensome to you: for I seek not yours, but you: for the children (you Corinthians) ought not to lay up for the parents (we apostles), but the parents for the children.
If this is about “simple church” does one really need to be coached three times a month???
The apostle Paul confessed that “he had the care of all the churches upon him” yet he never solicited fees, offerings, tithes, or gifts for himself or his ministry. He was not selling anything, either, thank God. Nor did he offer freebies up front in order to market something else later. That’s what drug pushers do.
If anyone could have exempted themself from the workforce, would it not have been Paul? As a traveling, itinerant evangelist/apostle/missionary he was entitled to support but that is a far different situation from the settled “local pastors/elders” who were enjoined to work just like he did. See Acts 20 below for this little known text. Most students of the Word know the “more blessed to give” part but the context of the local leaders being exhorted to follow the apostle’s example of tentmaking seldom registers.
Of course Paul did occasionally recieve aid but that isn’t the same as “services for fees.” So, are we really wiser than he? I doubt it. Has not the commercialization of the church adversely affected it? I believe, I know that it has and that the gospel should not be an article of commerce anymore.
By the way, when I was an unregenerate person one thing that greatly influenced me toward the gospel was the fact that the Jesus and his apostles were not money grubbers nor were they covetous, Judas excepted. I also was familiar with a true man of God who always volunteered his services in the churches as a guest speaker. His habit was to quietly put the checks given to him by the churches back into the collection plate with a gift of his own. God used these things to slowly melt my stiff heart. When I observed up close this volunteer elder, I knew the gospel was real.
I have not coveted anyone’s silver or gold or clothing. You yourselves know that these hands of mine have supplied my own needs and the needs of my companions. In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work WE MUST help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’ Acts 20:33-35.
——————
2 Thessalonians 3:6-13: Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us. For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; Neither did we eat any man’s bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread. But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing.
“Be not weary in well doing.” Now that’s another pithy saying which is often taken out of it’s original context which is OK because it can stand alone. Still, the context is that of an apostle who paid his own way.
I hear today a lot of fantasizing about wanting to be “apostolic” but little or nothing said about this aspect of it.
If I interpret these words rightly, Paul is saying that unless one is following his counsel, example, and tradition concerning a lifestyle which includes being gainfully employed then he is guilty of “disorderly” conduct and should be “withdrawn from” that he might be ashamed and repent.
Truly, the first will be last and the last first when it’s all over on planet earth. But it’s sad to see those in the house church community adopting the fund-raising practices of the world. Why? Because we have total freedom to do what is right. Sorry, but I cannot see a true apostle promising that for “an offering in any amount” he would send the first portion of his next book. Nor would he have collected names for a “free” newsletter, calendar, or magazine intended to milk donations out of the recipients. Nor would he have charged for “coaching sessions.” Rather he:
… dwelt two whole years in HIS OWN HIRED house, and received ALL that came in unto him. Acts 28:30
By the way, several years ago the leading “Christian counselor” admitted that that industry would be better left to volunteers.
Why would a man redirect his life’s work at its zenith?
Two years ago, in an interview with Christianity Today, Larry Crabb, a Christian psychologist and best-selling author, announced, “In the end, all counseling—intentionally or not—deals with issues of sanctification. The primary context for healing, then, should be the Christian community, not the antiseptic world of a private-practice therapist.”
Put simply, Crabb has had a conversion experience, and his new thinking has direct implications for pastoral work.
Crabb coined the term ‘eldering’ to describe what he believes ought to go on in the local church between older, wiser members and younger, struggling men and women. He believes this interaction can often be more redemptive and healing than traditional psychotherapy.
http://www.ctlibrary.com/le/1997/spring/7l2037.html
