House churches vs Traditional
 

Which is better and why?

Is either more scriptural or spiritual?

Can they co-exist or are they by nature exclusionary?

Re: House churches vs Traditional
 

I think a system of "house" churches that regularly meet together as a whole would be awesome

Re: House churches vs Traditional
 

Can you define system?

And at what point would such a system begin to resemble a traditional church that also has small group ministry?

Re: House churches vs Traditional
 

I like the idea of a mix between the two. If, for example, all the apostolics in any given city were to meet in homes for their "regular" services, then meet once a month for a city wide gathering to enjoy some corporate worship then I think we'd have much more unity.

Re: House churches vs Traditional
 

I do not think one is better than the other in every area of the country. Some very large churches are against cell groups, but some very large churches have gotten large numbers because of them. I think that they can co-exist. I feel that in the pastor of the church should know the area enough to know if it will work. The UPC church I go to had them for a while and they fizzled out. The pastor said that the church 'WILL' do them in order to grow. But it might not work everywhere. In the Bible belt you might not have to do them cause some people are not against visiting a church where on the West Coast they might be (examples only). I have heard the the Manguns will not do them. Not too sure but going on second hand info. It all boils to is it profitable for your church. Sometime putting the wrong people in charge of a home group is bad cause they might try to lead the people away from that local church. I believe they can work, but I have not ever seen it personally work.

Re: House churches vs Traditional
 

Bingo, but you know that would not fly in every area.

Re: House churches vs Traditional
 

I prefer mega churches. I like all the options, functions, and programs without the intimacy of having to be too close with people.

Re: House churches vs Traditional
 

Could you imagine pulling something like that off in a really big city, like Los Angeles? Holy macanoli!!! Everyone would know about the apostolic church then! They'd be renting out football stadiums for church services on a regular basis!! It's blowin my mind just thinking about it. It's a shame something like what I've described has about the same chance that a snowball has in............well, ya know.

Re: House churches vs Traditional
 

I already defined it...a serious of house churches that regularly meet together as a whole...Not sure what you were asking for...

Basically it would be similar to a small group ministry

Re: House churches vs Traditional
 

I would respectfully disagree that it's not viable.

It would take a special pastor. In my opinion many traditional Oneness churches do not grow because the pastor feels he needs to be in control of everything and is afraid to delegate.

From a purely evangelistic POV it makes sense. Smaller groups would make more individuals involved, and develop their own personal gifts.

Occasional large gatherings in my opinion are also necessary, there is an special atmosphere when hundreds or thousands gather. Large gatherings could also make sure the "network" for lack of a better word stayed on the same page as far as vision and doctrine.

The problem is, and always will be balance. How much control to be centralized and how much in the hands of the house leaders.