Reason for Church Services

[n david]

Question: What, and for whom is our gathering together for church services?

[Rudy]

This willl be interesting. I'll start with this one. 1. Address the needs of the body.

[Esaias]

To worship God, first of all. By gathering in his name and with his Spirit we join the Heavenly Worship now in progress. We offer sacrifices and offerings to God (our praises and our prayers) and we bless his holy name.

In addition to this, meeting together is for the building up of his Temple (his people) including ministry from one to another, so that God speaks to us, by speaking through us, for instruction, comfort, admonition, etc.

It's for him and we benefit. In short, we have fellowship with God.

If you're at the point where you are wondering "what's the point of it all?" then you are obviously dissatisfied. Therefore God is wanting you go deeper into his Word and become more Biblical in your worship. Seek God's direction and he will provide.

Remember, the church participates in the Heavenly worship, so the more in line we are with that heavenly service the more Biblical our worship will be, and the more the church's proper functions will be fulfilled.

[J.A. Perez]

Question: What, and for whom is our gathering together for church services?


Luke 4:18 (KJV)

18 “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He hath anointed Me to preach the Gospel to the poor. He hath sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

(what)
A place set aside specifically for His worship.

(who and purpose)
Its all about Jesus, anointing a man to preach thus healing then enabling God's people to minister to others.

Just Like in the beginning, God spoke and there was life. Today God uses unworthy vessels of clay made in His image to speak Life by His Spirit.

Missionary Ngota Aston "Preaching, God's Choice"

a nobody,
J.A. Perez

[shazeep]

it's hard to deny that we have come a long way from the early church model, wherein these people were a community as well as a congregation.

[mfblume]

We assemble together to exhort one another and feed the saints to work for the Lord in whatever capacity their lives are in. To equip them to come to unity of the faith and not be children tossed about. To see each member supply their part.

[KeptByTheWord]

Question: What, and for whom is our gathering together for church services?

Hebrews 10:19-25
19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
21 And having an high priest over the house of God;
22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)
24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

Paraphrasing the emphasis of this passage - believers are to draw near together with a true heart of faith, holding fast the profession of our faith, considering one another, provoking one another unto love and good works, meeting together and exhorting one another as often as possible.

Simply to answer your question - With faith in our hearts, we meet to worship Jesus, to fellowship with one another, and exhort one another as often as possible.

[KeptByTheWord]

We assemble together to exhort one another and feed the saints to work for the Lord in whatever capacity their lives are in. To equip them to come to unity of the faith and not be children tossed about. To see each member supply their part.

Awesome!

[KeptByTheWord]

To worship God, first of all. By gathering in his name and with his Spirit we join the Heavenly Worship now in progress. We offer sacrifices and offerings to God (our praises and our prayers) and we bless his holy name.

In addition to this, meeting together is for the building up of his Temple (his people) including ministry from one to another, so that God speaks to us, by speaking through us, for instruction, comfort, admonition, etc.

It's for him and we benefit. In short, we have fellowship with God.

If you're at the point where you are wondering "what's the point of it all?" then you are obviously dissatisfied. Therefore God is wanting you go deeper into his Word and become more Biblical in your worship. Seek God's direction and he will provide.

Remember, the church participates in the Heavenly worship, so the more in line we are with that heavenly service the more Biblical our worship will be, and the more the church's proper functions will be fulfilled.

Wonderful!

[thephnxman]

Yes, we present ourselves before the Lord in worship and praise.
But the Ministry must also fulfill their calling: give themselves
over "...continually to prayer and the ministry of the
word." (Eph. 4:12)

[Esaias]

Yes, we present ourselves before the Lord in worship and praise.
But the Ministry must also fulfill their calling: give themselves
over "...continually to prayer and the ministry of the
word." (Eph. 4:12)

Not sure anybody left that out???

[shazeep]

...out of what? the 5-10 hours a week most church doors are unlocked these days?

[Esaias]

...out of what? the 5-10 hours a week most church doors are unlocked these days?

Touche!

I notice the biblical pattern seems to be one where apostles, elders, what have you were busy DAILY teaching the word. I imagine a teaching elder making a circuit among the people, instructing and exemplifying Christian doctrine and practice, according to their needs.

Kind of like "discipleship" or something...

Not sure how that would be put into practice in today's culture tho.

[KeptByTheWord]

We were talking about this today with some friends. It seems that homes in the early church were known as a gathering place for believers, and seemed to be open to traveling ministers, and believers alike. I wonder how this could work in today's culture as well.

[Esaias]

We were talking about this today with some friends. It seems that homes in the early church were known as a gathering place for believers, and seemed to be open to traveling ministers, and believers alike. I wonder how this could work in today's culture as well.

Americans tend to view their home as the one place they get to "get away from it all". Thus hospitality is not what it was in biblical times.

However, I suppose if evangelism included a call to discipleship, so that new converts were EXPECTING to be taught at their level, it wouldn't be too hard to schedule say a weekly meeting with the new convert for discipleship purposes, to teach by both precept and example the basics of the faith (especially practical matters like prayer and personal consecration to God).

New converts should probably spend as much time as practical with elders or at least those older in the faith. Jesus hung with his disciples all the time pretty much and they learned by his lifestyle and example as well as his more formal teaching. Thus when they join the regular meeting each week or whenever they will be in a better position to "give rather than receive" ministry, if that makes sense.

But I really think the pre-conversion and immediate post-conversion teaching is of paramount importance. The type of evangelism a person experiences often stamps permanently their future walk.

[J.A. Perez]

We were talking about this today with some friends. It seems that homes in the early church were known as a gathering place for believers, and seemed to be open to traveling ministers, and believers alike. I wonder how this could work in today's culture as well.

Interesting thought,
Unfortunately it would be unethical. I would of loved to have had men like G.T. Haywood, A. Glass, J.E. Rhode J. Duke, D. Grey, A.L. Lyle, V. Shoemake, C.P. Kilgore, O. Vouga, O. Hughes, Verbal Bean, C. Shew, M. Golder, B. Yandris, R.C. Cavanes, C. Ballestero, L. Reynolds, H. Shearer, M. Baughman, S.L. Wise, F. Muncey, I.H. Terry, I. Baxter Sr., V.A. Guidroz, M. Burr, J. Davis, H. Davis, M.D. Treece, J. Meade, R. Evans, A.O. Holmes, L.E. Westberg, C.J. Haney, T.W. Barnes, V. Morton, J.T. Bass, F. Ewart, R.E. Johnson, J. Alvear Sr., E.L. Holly, T. Alexander, E.L. Freeman, B. Garrett, C.H. Webb, M. Hicks, O.F. Fauss, and A.D. Urshan to feel like they could have just showed up at the 'ol Perez house for some Beans, Cornbread and piano singing time around the fireplace. (Boy wouldn't that be a line-up to hear at conference!)

Ethics, for better or for worse, till death due us part.

Instead I'll just read their books listen to them preach and wait till I get to heaven to ask all the questions I've got, after the first million years of talking to Jesus I might get around to it.

Wont that be a time,
J.A. Perez

[Praxeas]

What about unbelievers?

1Co 14:22 Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers.
1Co 14:23 If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?

[n david]

We were talking about this today with some friends. It seems that homes in the early church were known as a gathering place for believers, and seemed to be open to traveling ministers, and believers alike. I wonder how this could work in today's culture as well.
Sadly, it wouldn't work, as there are too many schisms in the body. Too many interested in only building up their personal kingdom on earth. There are churches of the same organization which don't fellowship with others, much less those who believe the same on salvation, but differ on the added, man-made standards.

[n david]

Interesting thought,
Unfortunately it would be unethical. I would of loved to have had men like G.T. Haywood, A. Glass, J.E. Rhode J. Duke, D. Grey, A.L. Lyle, V. Shoemake, C.P. Kilgore, O. Vouga, O. Hughes, Verbal Bean, C. Shew, M. Golder, B. Yandris, R.C. Cavanes, C. Ballestero, L. Reynolds, H. Shearer, M. Baughman, S.L. Wise, F. Muncey, I.H. Terry, I. Baxter Sr., V.A. Guidroz, M. Burr, J. Davis, H. Davis, M.D. Treece, J. Meade, R. Evans, A.O. Holmes, L.E. Westberg, C.J. Haney, T.W. Barnes, V. Morton, J.T. Bass, F. Ewart, R.E. Johnson, J. Alvear Sr., E.L. Holly, T. Alexander, E.L. Freeman, B. Garrett, C.H. Webb, M. Hicks, O.F. Fauss, and A.D. Urshan to feel like they could have just showed up at the 'ol Perez house for some Beans, Cornbread and piano singing time around the fireplace. (Boy wouldn't that be a line-up to hear at conference!)

Ethics, for better or for worse, till death due us part.

Instead I'll just read their books listen to them preach and wait till I get to heaven to ask all the questions I've got, after the first million years of talking to Jesus I might get around to it.

Wont that be a time,
J.A. Perez
I think it's incredible, and sad, that GT Haywood would have been run out of your church and condemned for his facial hair. Clyde Haney would've been barred from your church's pulpit because his wife wore jewelry. In fact, most of the founders of modern day Pentecost would be considered sinful outcasts, or "Charismatic" by you because of facial hair or jewelry.

[n david]

The replies here are very interesting.

Growing up in the UPC church my father pastored, Sunday services were always considered evangelistic, while the mid-week service was for deeper study of God's Word for believers. Folks were always getting baptized and receiving the Holy Ghost.

Recently I heard a message in which the Pastor stated that church was for believers only. He stated the pearl of great price was the church, and Jesus purchased the field only for the church. He also quoted John 3:16 and stated the reason was God so loved the church. 1 Corinthians 1:21 was also used as evidence that it's for believers only.

This is why that church doesn't preach salvation during a service, and why they don't pray for people to receive the Holy Ghost, because the church is for believers only - for their instruction, reproof, rebuke, etc. Any message of salvation, any praying for the Holy Ghost should be done day to day outside the church.

It's interesting that many responses seem to agree that services are for believers.

Personally, I believe there should be time for instructing the believers, and I do believe there should be personal evangelism every day, outside the church walls. But I don't believe services should be a private club for members only, where salvation is not preached and nonbelievers are not given the opportunity to be saved.

The pearl of great price is Jesus, not the church. God so loved the sinful world, He came. Jesus wasn't born for the righteous, but for sinners. He didn't come out of great love for the church, but because He loves sinners. And while the foolishness of preaching saves those who believe, they may not have believed before hearing the Gospel preached.

[Esaias]

We are told to "Go", to take the gospel OUT THERE into the world. The church isn't "for" believers, it IS the believers.

Part of our problem has been the idea that our gatherings are for evangelism. Thus the church becomes devoted to "attraction" of people instead of proclamation of the gospel. And thus we turn the church into a franchise trying to sell a better Jesus than the other McChurches in town. Instead of witnessing we satisfy ourselves with "inviting people to church". We focus on flowers in the foyer and pads on the pews and dressing up the building to appeal to folks. We design our music NOT to please our holy God but to allure people and "move" people. We preach less of God's Truth and more of our pop psychology to make folks feel good about coming to OUR precious little corner of the religious market. Why? So we can get the most people to come, and get 'em coming back, and build our great big fancy kingdom, and so we can feel good about ourselves even though we hardly ever speak to our neighbors (let alone witness to them).

I'm all for evangelistic meetings. But "build it and they will come" is a line from Hollywood, not holy Scripture. When our worship is designed to entice the lost into loving our God (and us ...) it will sooner or later get off track and perveted into marketing gimmicks.

As the TEMPLE of God our purpose is service to God. We should be more outward directed in our evangelism. Sinners see us for what we've become: Jesus salesmen peddlin our particular brand of religion... no different than anyone else.

That preacher you mentioned, he's got it all wrong though, think that's obvious.

But regardless, what did they do in scripture? Does our model match theirs? If not, why not?

[Michael The Disciple]

Interesting thought,
Unfortunately it would be unethical. I would of loved to have had men like G.T. Haywood, A. Glass, J.E. Rhode J. Duke, D. Grey, A.L. Lyle, V. Shoemake, C.P. Kilgore, O. Vouga, O. Hughes, Verbal Bean, C. Shew, M. Golder, B. Yandris, R.C. Cavanes, C. Ballestero, L. Reynolds, H. Shearer, M. Baughman, S.L. Wise, F. Muncey, I.H. Terry, I. Baxter Sr., V.A. Guidroz, M. Burr, J. Davis, H. Davis, M.D. Treece, J. Meade, R. Evans, A.O. Holmes, L.E. Westberg, C.J. Haney, T.W. Barnes, V. Morton, J.T. Bass, F. Ewart, R.E. Johnson, J. Alvear Sr., E.L. Holly, T. Alexander, E.L. Freeman, B. Garrett, C.H. Webb, M. Hicks, O.F. Fauss, and A.D. Urshan to feel like they could have just showed up at the 'ol Perez house for some Beans, Cornbread and piano singing time around the fireplace. (Boy wouldn't that be a line-up to hear at conference!)

Ethics, for better or for worse, till death due us part.

Instead I'll just read their books listen to them preach and wait till I get to heaven to ask all the questions I've got, after the first million years of talking to Jesus I might get around to it.

Wont that be a time,
J.A. Perez

I dont get it. What do you mean by it would be unethical? What would be?

[n david]

We are told to "Go", to take the gospel OUT THERE into the world. The church isn't "for" believers, it IS the believers.
Yes, the church is the body of Christ, I'm talking more about the services.

Part of our problem has been the idea that our gatherings are for evangelism. Thus the church becomes devoted to "attraction" of people instead of proclamation of the gospel. And thus we turn the church into a franchise trying to sell a better Jesus than the other McChurches in town. Instead of witnessing we satisfy ourselves with "inviting people to church". We focus on flowers in the foyer and pads on the pews and dressing up the building to appeal to folks. We design our music NOT to please our holy God but to allure people and "move" people. We preach less of God's Truth and more of our pop psychology to make folks feel good about coming to OUR precious little corner of the religious market. Why? So we can get the most people to come, and get 'em coming back, and build our great big fancy kingdom, and so we can feel good about ourselves even though we hardly ever speak to our neighbors (let alone witness to them).

I'm all for evangelistic meetings. But "build it and they will come" is a line from Hollywood, not holy Scripture. When our worship is designed to entice the lost into loving our God (and us ...) it will sooner or later get off track and perveted into marketing gimmicks.
I agree we shouldn't get caught up in trying to out-church other churches. Again, thinking back on growing up, there was just the Gospel preached and opportunity for sinners to receive salvation. No gimmicks or programs. This was well before video projectors and special stage lighting.

As the TEMPLE of God our purpose is service to God. We should be more outward directed in our evangelism. Sinners see us for what we've become: Jesus salesmen peddlin our particular brand of religion... no different than anyone else.

That preacher you mentioned, he's got it all wrong though, think that's obvious.

But regardless, what did they do in scripture? Does our model match theirs? If not, why not?
It is important to be reaching out daily in personal evangelism. But our services should also allow for the visitors and sinners who come to a service looking for salvation specifically because it's a church.

[Esaias]

Yes, the church is the body of Christ, I'm talking more about the services.


I agree we shouldn't get caught up in trying to out-church other churches. Again, thinking back on growing up, there was just the Gospel preached and opportunity for sinners to receive salvation. No gimmicks or programs. This was well before video projectors and special stage lighting.


It is important to be reaching out daily in personal evangelism. But our services should also allow for the visitors and sinners who come to a service looking for salvation specifically because it's a church.

For an institutional church setting, yes services need to make an effort to reach visitors, absolutely.

I don't think it really matters much these days tho. We are infected as a movement with a sales-marketing-find the latest gimmick-outdo the competition mindset. Probably because we don't have enough Holy Ghost in our meetings to begin with so we gotta "make up the difference"...

You know, all this dissatisfaction has got to lead somewhere... revival, hopefully...

[KeptByTheWord]

I didn't mention the unbeliever in my earlier post, but it wasn't intentional. I certainly believe that a gathering of believers should most often include unbelievers who are hungry and searching for truth. Like the verse Prax quoted - there has to be a place for unbelievers to come to be persuaded of the glorious gospel of the Lord.

[KeptByTheWord]

I dont get it. What do you mean by it would be unethical? What would be?

I wondered the same thing when I read this post. Perhaps Bro. J. you can better explain why it would be unethical for any of the men you mentioned to gather in your home for a meeting? :hmmm

[J.A. Perez]

I wondered the same thing when I read this post. Perhaps Bro. J. you can better explain why it would be unethical for any of the men you mentioned to gather in your home for a meeting? :hmmm

Mike, Word,
Some people (for lack of a better word lay-saint) are not mature enough in the Lord to know that there are differences in beliefs even among Good men and women. And they will take a little thing that someone else believes or says and divide, abstain, or not fellowship, instead of excepting our minor differences for the sake of unity. For instance I take my shoes off in my in-laws house because of their cultural tradition, in my house I wear shoes, but I better not bring muddy boots in and leave tracks all over the tiles. The reasoning is I respect my in-laws convictions, and I expect them to do the same at my house. However neither of us will allow the extreme of muddy boots in the house. The same is for the traditions of the various elders we all clan around. A newer saint might benefit by the influence of an elder like Haywood or Bean but they might not understand the whys and why not's of their own local assembly they belong, and not be able to Draw the lines in Perfect(Pleasant) Places. I've even seen this in some seasoned saints as well. Not that I'm mature but God has dealt with me on these things. The example above can be used in the place of Pre- or Post Trib rapture like my great, great uncle M. Baughman taught, and many Good men loved to have him in their pulpits. But they both would never except Preterism. These are the things why, not because it might not be good its because of the lack of stability and understanding in us.
Thus ethics is a protection we use to prevent confusion and provide safety.

Hope that was acceptable,
J.A. Perez

[J.A. Perez]

Mike, Word,
Some people (for lack of a better word lay-saint) are not mature enough in the Lord to know that there are differences in beliefs even among Good men and women. And they will take a little thing that someone else believes or says and divide, abstain, or not fellowship, instead of excepting our minor differences for the sake of unity. For instance I take my shoes off in my in-laws house because of their cultural tradition, in my house I wear shoes, but I better not bring muddy boots in and leave tracks all over the tiles. The reasoning is I respect my in-laws convictions, and I expect them to do the same at my house. However neither of us will allow the extreme of muddy boots in the house. The same is for the traditions of the various elders we all clan around. A newer saint might benefit by the influence of an elder like Haywood or Bean but they might not understand the whys and why not's of their own local assembly they belong, and not be able to Draw the lines in Perfect(Pleasant) Places. I've even seen this in some seasoned saints as well. Not that I'm mature but God has dealt with me on these things. The example above can be used in the place of Pre- or Post Trib rapture like my great, great uncle M. Baughman taught, and many Good men loved to have him in their pulpits. But they both would never except Preterism. These are the things why, not because it might not be good its because of the lack of stability and understanding in us.
Thus ethics is a protection we use to prevent confusion and provide safety.

Hope that was acceptable,
J.A. Perez

P.S.
This is the reason this forum is so dangerous. Though many in here are honest and are just trying to help. Our varried opinions can cause confusion in an assembly. By a person who hears a teaching differently may cause that unstable or unlearned person to attend a service and start to look at their pastor wrong or start question structure in the arrangement in government, or the particular stand that man is making about " a bean Patch." To us it may be a poiness bean patch but for you it may have big problems with people in your church that you don't know about. That your pastor has had to deal with you about or about others. Landmarks aren't always boarders for us as limits they are so set to mark the line the coyotes can't cross.
With questions about ethics preachers on this furum know there limits. But that's how the devil works to see discord amongst brethren. Because we don't know who each other really are, just a picture with a word or name.
And let me tell you I can tell if my kids been hanging around the wrong kids, it shows up sometimes in their additude or speech. "Evil communication corrupts good manners."

[Praxeas]

What about unbelievers?

1Co 14:22 Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers.
1Co 14:23 If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?
No comment? If these were house churches...how did unbelievers know about these meetings and walk in?

[n david]

No comment? If these were house churches...how did unbelievers know about these meetings and walk in?
Perhaps they were invited.

[shazeep]

post 21 was a gem, E
I don't think it really matters much these days tho. We are infected as a movement with a sales-marketing-find the latest gimmick-outdo the competition mindset. Probably because we don't have enough Holy Ghost in our meetings to begin with so we gotta "make up the difference"...
it is hard to deny that the Spirit is moving from the church, and one must personally consider if they are being called to follow it. The history of belief in One God is a history of Diaspora; congregations of believers blasted apart--basically forced out to put their new-found beliefs into action.

Imagine heading out into the sunset without a purse or spare shirt. This is not some mythical story, meant to convey a moral principle. This is the Spirit in action. As unimaginable as it might seem for most people reading this--and sorry, because this is going to mess a few people up--the very best thing you could do for your soul would be to follow them.

The "fact" that it is completely ridiculous, given your current lifestyle and commitments, is...simply not reality; it is what is keeping you from reality. Commit to shedding commitments and going within a month, or a year. It doesn't matter who you are. The Spirit will guide you. You will not die, although you are going to wish you were dead a lot--just ask Jonah et al. Just slog on with as much grace as you can muster, and find the joy of the Lord along the way. It is enough.

[Esaias]

No comment? If these were house churches...how did unbelievers know about these meetings and walk in?

I doubt these are unbelievers who just walk in off the street with no connection whatsoever. Most likely someone who had been invited to come by a member, or family member. Although, if a meeting was getting down with the Holy Ghost I can see the neighbors or even passers-by stopping in and asking "What meaneth this?"

Besides, in THAT day, the church was busy "out there" causing an uproar and turning the whole world upside down. So word gets around fast just like with Jesus and people show up demanding to know what's going on.

But with all that, the Bible never describes a church meeting as geared toward winning the lost or focusingon "seekers". Evangelism was outreach oriented, usually public. Once converted, or at the very least clearly identified as "convert material" ie highly interested and open to the gospel, they might come and see what it's all about.

[Praxeas]

Perhaps they were invited.
If that is true then church meetings are not just for believers

[Esaias]

If I invite the neighbors over for dinner does that mean family dinners are not just for family?

[thephnxman]

I doubt these are unbelievers who just walk in off the street with no connection whatsoever. Most likely someone who had been invited to come by a member, or family member. Although, if a meeting was getting down with the Holy Ghost I can see the neighbors or even passers-by stopping in and asking "What meaneth this?"
Besides, in THAT day, the church was busy "out there" causing an uproar and turning the whole world upside down. So word gets around fast just like with Jesus and people show up demanding to know what's going on.
But with all that, the Bible never describes a church meeting as geared toward winning the lost or focusingon "seekers". Evangelism was outreach oriented, usually public. Once converted, or at the very least clearly identified as "convert material" ie highly interested and open to the gospel, they might come and see what it's all about.

My experience has been that if I have been a "true" witness, people will ask me where I fellowship (go to church). I never invite people to "church": I invite them to know the Lord Jesus.

[KeptByTheWord]

Mike, Word,
Some people (for lack of a better word lay-saint) are not mature enough in the Lord to know that there are differences in beliefs even among Good men and women. And they will take a little thing that someone else believes or says and divide, abstain, or not fellowship, instead of excepting our minor differences for the sake of unity. For instance I take my shoes off in my in-laws house because of their cultural tradition, in my house I wear shoes, but I better not bring muddy boots in and leave tracks all over the tiles. The reasoning is I respect my in-laws convictions, and I expect them to do the same at my house. However neither of us will allow the extreme of muddy boots in the house. The same is for the traditions of the various elders we all clan around. A newer saint might benefit by the influence of an elder like Haywood or Bean but they might not understand the whys and why not's of their own local assembly they belong, and not be able to Draw the lines in Perfect(Pleasant) Places. I've even seen this in some seasoned saints as well. Not that I'm mature but God has dealt with me on these things. The example above can be used in the place of Pre- or Post Trib rapture like my great, great uncle M. Baughman taught, and many Good men loved to have him in their pulpits. But they both would never except Preterism. These are the things why, not because it might not be good its because of the lack of stability and understanding in us.
Thus ethics is a protection we use to prevent confusion and provide safety.

Hope that was acceptable,
J.A. Perez

P.S.
This is the reason this forum is so dangerous. Though many in here are honest and are just trying to help. Our varried opinions can cause confusion in an assembly. By a person who hears a teaching differently may cause that unstable or unlearned person to attend a service and start to look at their pastor wrong or start question structure in the arrangement in government, or the particular stand that man is making about " a bean Patch." To us it may be a poiness bean patch but for you it may have big problems with people in your church that you don't know about. That your pastor has had to deal with you about or about others. Landmarks aren't always boarders for us as limits they are so set to mark the line the coyotes can't cross.
With questions about ethics preachers on this furum know there limits. But that's how the devil works to see discord amongst brethren. Because we don't know who each other really are, just a picture with a word or name.
And let me tell you I can tell if my kids been hanging around the wrong kids, it shows up sometimes in their additude or speech. "Evil communication corrupts good manners."

Again, your expression of this thought about ethics belies the fact that you truly believe the pastor can set up laws and boundaries per his own ideas, and that those in his church are expected to comply.

But if you would stop and consider the fact that leadership in the church is to lead by example as servants unto the Lord, and couple this with the teaching of Jesus (Mark 10:42-45) that the disciples were not to be as Lord's over the people, then you realize this is a false teaching, and understanding.

You don't have to micromanage God's people to have them be saved. You teach them principles from the Word of God, and teach them to be led of the Spirit in application. If the spirit cannot teach people how to live a godly, holy life, how do you expect a man's laws to be able to do something the spirit cannot?

[KeptByTheWord]

My experience has been that if I have been a "true" witness, people will ask me where I fellowship (go to church). I never invite people to "church": I invite them to know the Lord Jesus.

And it is in this kind of personal way that you can lead people to the Lord, putting their focus on him, and encouraging them in the way of the gospel, and when they have been persuaded that they want to follow Jesus, it would be then you could introduce them to the body of believers.

[shazeep]

amen
Again, your expression of this thought about ethics belies the fact that you truly believe the pastor can set up laws and boundaries per his own ideas, and that those in his church are expected to comply.

But if you would stop and consider the fact that leadership in the church is to lead by example as servants unto the Lord, and couple this with the teaching of Jesus (Mark 10:42-45) that the disciples were not to be as Lord's over the people, then you realize this is a false teaching, and understanding.

You don't have to micromanage God's people to have them be saved. You teach them principles from the Word of God, and teach them to be led of the Spirit in application. If the spirit cannot teach people how to live a godly, holy life, how do you expect a man's laws to be able to do something the spirit cannot?and amen! :D

[Aquila]

Question: What, and for whom is our gathering together for church services?

I believe it is...

Ephesians 4:11-12
And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

[n david]

I believe it is...

Ephesians 4:11-12
And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Wouldn't the "for the work of the ministry" include reaching out to nonbelievers?

[Esaias]

That is the purpose of the apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastors/teachers. Their purpose is only partly fulfilled during the corporate gathering of the Body.

The apostles etc are given to the church for the perfecting of the saints for the work of service so the body of Christ can be built. Apostles etc are to perfect the saints. Who are then able to serve. This service is geared toward the building of the body of Christ (the church).

Thus the saints are to be perfected (matured?) so they can serve in a way that will build the Lord's church.

[J.A. Perez]

Again, your expression of this thought about ethics belies the fact that you truly believe the pastor can set up laws and boundaries per his own ideas, and that those in his church are expected to comply.

But if you would stop and consider the fact that leadership in the church is to lead by example as servants unto the Lord, and couple this with the teaching of Jesus (Mark 10:42-45) that the disciples were not to be as Lord's over the people, then you realize this is a false teaching, and understanding.

You don't have to micromanage God's people to have them be saved. You teach them principles from the Word of God, and teach them to be led of the Spirit in application. If the spirit cannot teach people how to live a godly, holy life, how do you expect a man's laws to be able to do something the spirit cannot?

Ma'am,
Just like in every company there is a chain of command. The church of God is no different.

My children do not have the wisdom or the experience to make good life choices even though my teenagers will tell you different. So it is in the church there are different levels of wisdom and experience. I can only suppose that there are no rules in your house in regard to your children and no limits?

I believe that there are micro managers in the churches of God and I am not advocating that. But I also believe that Good sincere men are capable of making mistakes and maybe even bad judgment. That does not excuse the fact that they are just trying to convey a safety attitude and culture that most people don't naturally have, especially when it comes to a group of any size. We all come from varied cultures and ethnicities.

I’m sure that even the house churches have rules for things they won’t accept, Depending on their level of tolerance. If a guy came in with mud on his boots, who wouldn’t say something at the door?

Micro managing is not ever right, but your definition could be skewed because you are a woman. And women naturally are the weaker vessel and have had problems with authority since the garden. Try to compose yourself when typing it can be misunderstood.


Sincerely,
J.A. Perez

[n david]

Just like in every company there is a chain of command. The church of God is no different.
You mean this chain of command:

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."

I don't see the part where it's written the head of every man is some other man.

[J.A. Perez]

You mean this chain of command:

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."

I don't see the part where it's written the head of every man is some other man.

No, but your close.
If you take hat verse in its context it would read:

1Corinthians 11:1-3
11 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Nice try,
J.A. Perez

[n david]

No, but your close.
If you take hat verse in its context it would read:

1Corinthians 11:1-3
11 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Nice try,
J.A. Perez
No, sorry. Paul didn't set himself up as the one-man authority over the church in Corinth. That's not what he's saying.

Some treat the Pastor like a Catholic Priest, as though he has some connection to God no one else can have.

Not so.

[J.A. Perez]

No, sorry. Paul didn't set himself up as the one-man authority over the church in Corinth. That's not what he's saying.

Some treat the Pastor like a Catholic Priest, as though he has some connection to God no one else can have.

Not so.

Sir,

I didnt say much, I just said your close.

It was just scriptire I didnt even highlight anything?

HAHA! but thats just like u.

Go ahead and argue with the word all you want, I never said to treat a man like a priest? The word teaches the principle to follow the elder/pastor/shephard like they follow Christ. People dont even do that, many pastors hold a very modest stand in life in general, but people in the congregation see it, but think they can get by with much less. Then the Pastor gets up to help and address certain dangers and people call him a legalist.

You are awesome,
J.A. Perez

[thephnxman]

You mean this chain of command:
"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."
I don't see the part where it's written the head of every man is some other man.

Christ is the head of EVERY (plural) man; the man (singular) is the head of the woman (singular).

The only person over whom a man has authority is his own wife...this includes the Ministry. The
only man to whom the woman needs to submit, is to her own husband. If she submits
to another, she is playing the role of a harlot; and if a man would exercise authority over a
woman or another man's wife, he is committing adultery.

We have not touched upon the authority of the scriptures.

[J.A. Perez]

Christ is the head of EVERY (plural) man; the man (singular) is the head of the woman (singular).

The only person over whom a man has authority is his own wife...this includes the Ministry. The
only man to whom the woman needs to submit, is to her own husband. If she submits
to another, she is playing the role of a harlot; and if a man would exercise authority over a
woman or another man's wife, he is committing adultery.

We have not touched upon the authority of the scriptures.

Well, as long as the man is in right standing with God and His Word then he is to follow the minisrty as they follow Christ. Do they Not?

If you say no then is Paul in violation of the Word by saying “follow me as I follow Christ”?

1. What if the woman is a widow?

2. What if her husband left her and she is not divorced?

3. What if she is divorced and her husband is remarried?

4. What if her husband in not in church and it’s because he is clearly in rebellion?

I do believe as long as I as a husband am in good standing with God, then I am my wife’s head, but in these scenarios I believe the scripture stands with the authority of the ministry as well.

Do you not?

Where do you see in the bible your version of this line or principle taught?

Sincerely curious,
J.A. Perez

[J.A. Perez]

Christ is the head of EVERY (plural) man; the man (singular) is the head of the woman (singular).

The only person over whom a man has authority is his own wife...this includes the Ministry. The
only man to whom the woman needs to submit, is to her own husband. If she submits
to another, she is playing the role of a harlot; and if a man would exercise authority over a
woman or another man's wife, he is committing adultery.

We have not touched upon the authority of the scriptures.

Sir, I seriously question your understanding?

If this reasoning is correct then if a man takes authority over another man does that make him guilty of homo sexuality?

Is there no authority given to a spiritual father over those that he has begotten through the gospel through Christ Jesus?

1Corinthians 4;15
For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

Sincerely,
J.A. Perez

[Scott Pitta]

What is the purpose of the church ? Edification of the body of believers, evangelism of the lost and the exultation of our Lord.

For practical purposes, our Sunday morning service is for all the members to worship in a corporate way. This is the pastors chance to feed the body en masse.

Our other services are distinctly different and serve specific purposes. Our senior citizens meet in the daytime, not at night. They sing old songs. Their pastor is a senior.

The youth and their youth pastor are your typical energetic bunch of loud music and activities that reflect the spiritual and social needs of the teens.

Our most attended services are when a meal is served. The poor enjoy eating at our church. Prayer meetings do not have a social element to them.

Church services meet the unique needs of the distinct group that compose the population of our congregation.

[n david]

Sir,

I didnt say much, I just said your close.

It was just scriptire I didnt even highlight anything?

HAHA! but thats just like u.
"That's just like u?" Please, tell me more about me, since you claim to know so much about me. :dogpat

Go ahead and argue with the word all you want, I never said to treat a man like a priest? The word teaches the principle to follow the elder/pastor/shephard like they follow Christ. People dont even do that, many pastors hold a very modest stand in life in general, but people in the congregation see it, but think they can get by with much less. Then the Pastor gets up to help and address certain dangers and people call him a legalist.

You are awesome,
I am awesome, thank you. No need to argue with the word, it says what it says. The head of every man is Christ. The reason Paul said to follow him as he follows Christ is because the church in Corinth argued over who to follow. "I follow Apollos." "I follow Paul." Thus Paul said, not as a way of claiming some kind of authority over them, but to clear up the matter, Paul said follow me as I follow Christ. Then he further clarified that the head of every man was Christ.

The reason I mentioned what I did about people treating Pastors as Catholic Priests is because of posts you and other cons post stating people must have a Pastor, and other posts which imply that the Pastor has more spiritual knowledge than any ordinary saint can have, and by claiming the Pastor has spiritual authority over people. You may not like the analogy, but it's the truth. Perhaps not you, though by your post it appears so, but many cons have made the Pastor into a Catholic Priest.

[n david]

Christ is the head of EVERY (plural) man; the man (singular) is the head of the woman (singular).

The only person over whom a man has authority is his own wife...this includes the Ministry. The only man to whom the woman needs to submit, is to her own husband. If she submits to another, she is playing the role of a harlot; and if a man would exercise authority over a woman or another man's wife, he is committing adultery.

We have not touched upon the authority of the scriptures.
:thumbsup

Well, as long as the man is in right standing with God and His Word then he is to follow the minisrty as they follow Christ. Do they Not?

If you say no then is Paul in violation of the Word by saying “follow me as I follow Christ”?
Again, there was a reason Paul said "follow me as I follow Christ." He wasn't claiming authority over them, he was trying to settle a dispute in the church in Corinth by people split between following Apollos and Paul.

[n david]

If this reasoning is correct then if a man takes authority over another man does that make him guilty of homo sexuality?
:toofunny

Is there no authority given to a spiritual father over those that he has begotten through the gospel through Christ Jesus?

1Corinthians 4;15
For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
Paul preached the Gospel and people were saved, thus "I have begotten you." That's it. Have you witnessed to anyone who then repented, was baptized and received the Holy Ghost? And if so, does that give you some kind of authority over them?

:nah

There have been people I have ministered to who have been filled with the Holy Ghost, ie I begat them through the Gospel, but I have (nor would I dare claim) authority over them.

[J.A. Perez]

:toofunny


Paul preached the Gospel and people were saved, thus "I have begotten you." That's it. Have you witnessed to anyone who then repented, was baptized and received the Holy Ghost? And if so, does that give you some kind of authority over them?

There have been people I have ministered to who have been filled with the Holy Ghost, ie I begat them through the Gospel, but I have (nor would I dare claim) authority over them.


I don’t have time to fully respond, but I will say natural or Godly authority is developed not in a priestly way, but due to the consecration of a man or woman. Not that God could not speak through a donkey, but maturity, experience and devotion to God will supersede the authority of a newly born saint. Not to mention the Anointing that God places on men to minister the word. Therefore when a man of God, annointed by God, preaches the word of God, or speaks thus sayeth the Lord; submission is demanded because authority speaks. Call it how you want but this is the need of a pastor and pastor is synonymous with Elder and shepherd.

Berl Stevenson" I don’t have time to qualify everything, you qualify it."

Lol,
J.A. Perez

[Praxeas]

If I invite the neighbors over for dinner does that mean family dinners are not just for family?
If you do it regularly YES that is what it means. It means that somewhere along the way you decided Dinner time should be a time to include others besides your family

And if not regularly it means It means that somewhere along the way you decided Dinner time COULD be a time to include others besides your family

In fact consider that some gifts during a church service are designed in part to affect unbelievers

[KeptByTheWord]

Ma'am,
Just like in every company there is a chain of command. The church of God is no different.

My children do not have the wisdom or the experience to make good life choices even though my teenagers will tell you different. So it is in the church there are different levels of wisdom and experience. I can only suppose that there are no rules in your house in regard to your children and no limits?

I believe that there are micro managers in the churches of God and I am not advocating that. But I also believe that Good sincere men are capable of making mistakes and maybe even bad judgment. That does not excuse the fact that they are just trying to convey a safety attitude and culture that most people don't naturally have, especially when it comes to a group of any size. We all come from varied cultures and ethnicities.

I’m sure that even the house churches have rules for things they won’t accept, Depending on their level of tolerance. If a guy came in with mud on his boots, who wouldn’t say something at the door?

Micro managing is not ever right, but your definition could be skewed because you are a woman. And women naturally are the weaker vessel and have had problems with authority since the garden. Try to compose yourself when typing it can be misunderstood.


Sincerely,
J.A. Perez

Your sarcasm is not necessary in this discussion. Dismissing me because I am a woman? This shows right there what kind of heart you have that we are dealing with here.

But to address what you said - the headship as taught by Paul is God-Christ-man-woman. It is written nowhere that a woman is to be subject to anyone other than her husband, and Christ. Prove it with scripture if you think otherwise!

So, the way it is clearly understood by Paul's teaching is that if anyone in the 5-fold ministry or leadership of the church had an issue with a woman or child of another man's family, he would take that issue to the man, the head of the home, and allow the man to deal with it in the way he saw best fit. It is not his place to rule over another man's wife or hold authority over her in any way.

There is no need to micromanage the kingdom of the Lord. The ministry and leadership are meant to encourage, strengthen and lead the body of Christ, not rule over them.

[J.A. Perez]

Your sarcasm is not necessary in this discussion. Dismissing me because I am a woman? This shows right there what kind of heart you have that we are dealing with here.

But to address what you said - the headship as taught by Paul is God-Christ-man-woman. It is written nowhere that a woman is to be subject to anyone other than her husband, and Christ. Prove it with scripture if you think otherwise!

So, the way it is clearly understood by Paul's teaching is that if anyone in the 5-fold ministry or leadership of the church had an issue with a woman or child of another man's family, he would take that issue to the man, the head of the home, and allow the man to deal with it in the way he saw best fit. It is not his place to rule over another man's wife or hold authority over her in any way.

There is no need to micromanage the kingdom of the Lord. The ministry and leadership are meant to encourage, strengthen and lead the body of Christ, not rule over them. (I agree)

Below is a perfect example of what I have been trying to say.

Acts 5:1-11 (KJV)

1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,

2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet. (notice he brought this money to Peter not God) But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?

4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.

6 And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.

7 And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in.

8 And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much? And she said, Yea, for so much. (notice she spoke to Peter not to the Holy Ghost.)9 Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out.

10 Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.

11 And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.

It is very clear, the God anointed man of God has authority when he speaks for God, whether speaking to a married Man or Woman. A priest never had this authority but a prophet did or in this case the Apostle Peter. Clearly a perfect example of the authority of the 5- fold ministry in the church or out. Notice it was not, and is not, a biblical command for us to sell all we have and give it to the ministry, but the standard had been set and God Backed his man.

No disrespect intended,
J.A. Perez

[shag]

Nothin like being killed by your pastor...

[J.A. Perez]

These are the verses leading up to the story of Ananias and Sapphira which set the standard.

Acts 4:32-37 (KJV)

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.

36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus,

37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles' feet.

[shag]

What's your point?
Is it the great power the apostles had in verse 33, that the pastors nowadays possess as well to kill disobedient saints?
Was it the fact that likely there are zero pastors nowadays that distribute everything BACK amongst the saints, but many instead build a fancier temple, I mean house of God, I mean just a building made with hands?


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hF_b5kEZyLw

[KeptByTheWord]

Below is a perfect example of what I have been trying to say.

Acts 5:1-11 (KJV)

1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,

2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet. (notice he brought this money to Peter not God) But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?

4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.

6 And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.

7 And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in.

8 And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much? And she said, Yea, for so much. (notice she spoke to Peter not to the Holy Ghost.)9 Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out.

10 Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.

11 And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.

It is very clear, the God anointed man of God has authority when he speaks for God, whether speaking to a married Man or Woman. A priest never had this authority but a prophet did or in this case the Apostle Peter. Clearly a perfect example of the authority of the 5- fold ministry in the church or out. Notice it was not, and is not, a biblical command for us to sell all we have and give it to the ministry, but the standard had been set and God Backed his man.

No disrespect intended,
J.A. Perez

Several points to mention...

1. Notice it was not, and is not, a biblical command for us to sell all we have and give it to the ministry, but the standard had been set and God Backed his man. This was interpreted by you as "giving to the ministry". Really? So the disciples took all the funds that came in and went on vacation with it? Seriously. The funds that came in were being used to distribute to the needs of the congregation - not just the ministry, although I am sure the ministry was taken care of. The part you missed - and it is a big part - is that the funds went to the needs of the believers and church, and were distributed as a necessity to the body of believers, which would include the ministry.

2. Peter dealt with this situation severely because it was to set a precedent among the churches that committing the sin of lying to achieve status in the church would never be accepted by God. This was what brought fear into the hearts of those observing. God will never accept our sacrifices for him if they are done under any illusion to benefit our flesh nature and pride. This spirit was dealt with so severely by the Lord in the very beginning to teach the church just how seriously God hates giving under the illusion of sacrifice, yet tinged with rebellion and deceit. A huge word of caution for all of us. Just because we sacrifice, and give unto the Lord, if it is to receive status, or to attain a place of leadership, authority, or position within the body - it is not accepted by God if it is tainted with deception in any way.

3. The word of authority that Peter spoke was directly from the Lord. Peter didn't "kill" Ananias and Sapphira, the Lord did. It was the authority of the Lord that spoke and revealed their hidden deceitful deeds.

[Aquila]

Wouldn't the "for the work of the ministry" include reaching out to nonbelievers?

Yes. But notice something. The ESV reads...

Ephesians 4:11-12 (ESV)
11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ,


In the early years of Christianity elders weren't trying to establish followers to gain "members" of their given church gathering. They were essentially training the saints to go forth and establish gatherings in their own homes and communities. The gathering of the saints was to teach and train every believer for the ministry; finding their gifts and showing them how to use them. Teaching doctrine and teaching them how to teach it. They didn't "pen" the saints in houses or church buildings as "members" and establish a "salary" through the inflow of off tithes and offerings. Those who stayed with the elder assisted with caring for the poor, widows, and orphans. However, the main portion of the body was equipped and sent out to establish new Christian communities. And the church spread like wildfire...

[Aquila]

What if a pastor set down a standard stating that all members must wear a tinfoil hat? The pastor explains that the standard was designed to do several things:

1.) Establish who is obedient to the pulpit and who isn't.
2.) To set a very distinct standard of separation from the world (as the world doesn't wear tinfoil hats).
3.) To test the saints, as the saints will no doubt receive mockings and perhaps slander and persecution for their obedience.

Would the laity be bound to follow said standard? Or do the laity have a "personal relationship" with God that would allow them to search the Scriptures on their own and hear from the Spirit regarding the issue? Would the laity have the freedom to walk in the Spirit and correct the elder tenderly as a wayward spiritual father or mentor?

Sadly, in most churches today... the body is oppressed by the authority of the pastorate.

[shazeep]

yes, methinks the meaning of 'church services' has been altered in the intervening years...
The funds that came in were being used to distribute to the needs of the congregation - not just the ministry

[shazeep]

what might be hard for a pastor to get over now is that they were all commies back then, and they lived church, they didn't go to church.

[Praxeas]

So anyways...my theory that the church service is in part geared towards visitors too?

[KeptByTheWord]

So anyways...my theory that the church service is in part geared towards visitors too?

We must be led of the spirit in all things. There is not a one size fits all formula that works in every single situation - except for allowing the spirit to move and have its way.

[KeptByTheWord]

what might be hard for a pastor to get over now is that they were all commies back then, and they lived church, they didn't go to church.

You're right. Jesus Christ was who they lived for, every moment of the day. It wasn't an attitude that they put on when they went to church on Sunday, it was an attitude and a way of life that they lived every day.

We don't have to "go" to church. We are the church. When we gather with fellow believers, as a body of believers, we encourage each other, which is building up the church.

Church is a lifestyle, a way of living - and not a building.

[Lafon]

:thumbsupYou're right. Jesus Christ was who they lived for, every moment of the day. It wasn't an attitude that they put on when they went to church on Sunday, it was an attitude and a way of life that they lived every day.

We don't have to "go" to church. We are the church. When we gather with fellow believers, as a body of believers, we encourage each other, which is building up the church.

Church is a lifestyle, a way of living - and not a building.

:thumbsup :highfive

[Lafon]

Here's the manner Paul the apostle advised the saints of the 1st Century Church at Corinth regarding the agenda for "Church Services":

"How is it then, brethren? When ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying." (see I Corinthians 14:26-40)

Oh! BTW, do NOT overlook Paul's explicit instructions recorded in verse #37 -

"If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord."

Sort of puts quite a bit of "added emphasis" to Paul's words, don't you think?

[thephnxman]

Here's the manner Paul the apostle advised the saints of the 1st Century Church at Corinth regarding the agenda for "Church Services":
"How is it then, brethren? When ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying." (see I Corinthians 14:26-40)
Oh! BTW, do NOT overlook Paul's explicit instructions recorded in verse #37 -
"If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord."
Sort of puts quite a bit of "added emphasis" to Paul's words, don't you think?

Good.