why do you like church buildings for meetings?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The word "house" could be used in a generic sense for any kind of building, even the Temple.

Here is the thing, whatever kind of building it was, it held at least 120 people not to mention the possibility those unbelieving Jews that confronted Peter. That is a very large room.

They were all sitting in that room when this happened

Act 2:2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting.

Then when those unbelievers spoke up about this event the Apostles all stood up to represent the new faith

Act 2:14 But Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them, "Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words.

It also had to be located where all those visiting Jews, there for the day of Pentecost celebration, could hear of this event

The word house means HOUSE.

Oikos - a house, a place where one dwells.

oikos
Pronunciation
oi'-kos (Key)
Part of Speech
masculine noun
Root Word (Etymology)
Of uncertain affinity
Dictionary Aids
Vine's Expository Dictionary: View Entry
TDNT Reference: 5:119,674
Outline of Biblical Usage
a house
an inhabited house, home
any building whatever
of a palace
the house of God, the tabernacle
any dwelling place
of the human body as the abode of demons that possess it
of tents, and huts, and later, of the nests, stalls, lairs, of animals
the place where one has fixed his residence, one's settled abode, domicile
the inmates of a house, all the persons forming one family, a household
the family of God, of the Christian Church, of the church of the Old and New Testaments
stock, family, descendants of one

I suppose you will seize upon the phrase 'any building whatever', however I challenge you to show me where oikos is used of anything other than a dwelling place. It is not used of a synagogue.

It is used of the Temple for that was the Old Covenant 'house of God'. According to the Lexicon is is distinguished from DOMOS, the actual BUILDING where a family lives. Thus, it means an 'inhabited house', a place where the 'oikos' (household) lived. It would not be used of a store for example (unless the store were located in someone's oikos, of course).

It is translated house, household, home, at home, home with.

They were at a house, in the upper room or 'guestchamber' (Luke 22:1).

They were a house church.

They were not incorporated under either Jewish law or Roman law (or US law for that matter).

They were not a denomination.

They were a HOUSEHOLD, the household of God, the family of God.

And they weren't doing a 'praise a thon' to raise money for a building so they could hurry up and get out of those pesky houses and into a lovely new testament TEMPLE building.

[houston]

I think you suffer from steeple envy.

[MissBrattified]

My house doesn't hold 120 people. Not comfortably, anyway. Not sitting. It definitely wouldn't hold 3000. The upper room may have been a place where someone lived (debatable), but it was fairly large--not at all like today's concept of "house church" with a very small group in a relatively small house.

I'm not anti-house-church. I like the idea in some ways, and I like intimate worship settings. However, I am anti-anti-big-church-building. I don't see anything in scripture that condemns large gatherings of believers. Ergo, I have a problem with any believer who condemns Christians for the size of their buildings or congregations. Christianity isn't a cookie-cutter religion. What works in one culture, country, community or century may not work in another. No matter, because God didn't lay out a cookie cutter method for the church to propagate the Gospel.

Furthermore, the same way that people can get stuck in the rut of traditional church, people can get stuck in the rut of opposing the status quo just for the sake of it. That isn't productive, either.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I don't see anything in scripture that condemns large gatherings of believers. Ergo, I have a problem with any believer who condemns Christians for the size of their buildings or congregations.

See? I really do not understand how so many of you consistently misunderstand what 'house church' is all about.

NOBODY is 'condemning Christians for the size of their buildings or congregations'.

My original post pointed out that 'large gatherings' are not limited only to institutional big-synagogue-style Christianity.

But somehow, this is construed to mean I am 'condemning Christians for' having large meetings? Or even large meeting-places?

The 'house church' concept is apparently over too many people's heads. It is not just about 'do church in a house not a church building'. It has nothing to do with Houston's peurile fascination with 'steeple envy'. It has nothing to do with 'condemning large gatherings'. It also has nothing to do with 'having small, intimate togetherness'.

YES it has to do with the fact that large churches, TODAY, following the MODERN APPROACH to church, tend to enable too many people to 'get lost in the crowd'.

The early church in the Bible was a LARGE church. 3000 new converts in ONE DAY? With more added DAILY?

Yet it was also a house church.

I am sure some folks are thinking 'but how is that possible? Who's house could hold all those people?' And in thinking this, they would indicate they do not see the forest for the trees. In fact, it indicates they cannot see beyond their own modern way of doing church. They imagine 'house church' to be simply what they already know of as 'church' transplanted into someone's living room.

That is not at all what apostolic, biblical house 'churching' is about.

Apostolic, biblical house church has far more to do with church government, discipline, and the nature and purpose of 'the worship service' (so called), the nature and method of evangelism, the purpose, mission and authority of the church itself, than it does with 'the building the church meets in'.

Houses are important, not because the HOUSE (doma) is important, but because the OIKOS (household) is important.

I fear many simply cannot see the distinction, and it is probably best.

Everyone has a place, and a purpose, and to everything there is a time and a season.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Was there no 'church in the wilderness'?

What is the 'church'? It is the congregation, the ekklesia, the qahal, of the Lord.

Been around at least since Sinai, and I believe it wouldn't be unscriptural to say it goes back to Abraham, at least. Possibly Noah, and possibly all the way back to the days of Seth...

But I do not know of any scripture which teaches the church came into existence on the day of Pentecost.

If anything, that was the day the church was baptised with the Holy Spirit, completing it's transition into the New Covenant.

You missed an important part...after the outpouring of the HG, not first in the whole Bible.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Esaias

See? I really do not understand how so many of you consistently misunderstand what 'house church' is all about.

NOBODY is 'condemning Christians for the size of their buildings or congregations'.

My original post pointed out that 'large gatherings' are not limited only to institutional big-synagogue-style Christianity.

But somehow, this is construed to mean I am 'condemning Christians for' having large meetings? Or even large meeting-places?

The 'house church' concept is apparently over too many people's heads. It is not just about 'do church in a house not a church building'. It has nothing to do with Houston's peurile fascination with 'steeple envy'. It has nothing to do with 'condemning large gatherings'. It also has nothing to do with 'having small, intimate togetherness'.

YES it has to do with the fact that large churches, TODAY, following the MODERN APPROACH to church, tend to enable too many people to 'get lost in the crowd'.

The early church in the Bible was a LARGE church. 3000 new converts in ONE DAY? With more added DAILY?

Yet it was also a house church.

I am sure some folks are thinking 'but how is that possible? Who's house could hold all those people?' And in thinking this, they would indicate they do not see the forest for the trees. In fact, it indicates they cannot see beyond their own modern way of doing church. They imagine 'house church' to be simply what they already know of as 'church' transplanted into someone's living room.

That is not at all what apostolic, biblical house 'churching' is about.

Apostolic, biblical house church has far more to do with church government, discipline, and the nature and purpose of 'the worship service' (so called), the nature and method of evangelism, the purpose, mission and authority of the church itself, than it does with 'the building the church meets in'.

Houses are important, not because the HOUSE (doma) is important, but because the OIKOS (household) is important.

I fear many simply cannot see the distinction, and it is probably best.

Everyone has a place, and a purpose, and to everything there is a time and a season.

The entirety of my post wasn't aimed at you. I've read through a lot of debates over house church and the "right way" to gather believers together, and that condemning tone is almost always present. I'm for propagating the Gospel, gathering to worship and fellowshipping with other believers in whatever way works best for the local church. What I don't like is when any group thinks their way is superior to another. You may not feel that superiority, but many do--on both sides of the debate. That my-way-or-the-highway attitude has pervaded religion from its very beginnings, and it's a divisive human attitude; not a Godly approach.

More is accomplished for the kingdom of God when we don't think we have the corner on the "right way to do it." Outcome matters most, IMO.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The word house means HOUSE.

A house is a house

house

[n., adj. hous; v. houz] Show IPA noun, plural hous·es [hou-ziz] Show IPA , verb, housed, hous·ing, adjective
noun 1.a building in which people live; residence for human beings.
2.a household.
3.( often initial capital letter ) a family, including ancestors and descendants: the great houses of France; the House of Hapsburg.
4.a building for any purpose: a house of worship.
5.a theater, concert hall, or auditorium: a vaudeville house.


But of course we are discussing what I said...the word translated HOUSE means...

Let me start with what I said earlier about some places being set aside as Halls for use for special occasions.

Vincents Word Studies
Act 1:13
An upper room (τὸ ὑπερῷον)
With the article, denoting some well-known place of resort. It was the name given to the room directly under the flat roof. Such rooms were often set apart as halls for meetings. In such an apartment Paul delivered his farewell address at Troas (Act_20:8), and the body of Dorcas was laid (Act_9:37). Used by Luke only.

Zodhaites Wordstudy
(I) Generally (Mat_9:6-7; Mar_5:19; Luk_1:40; Joh_7:53; Act_10:22). With the preposition en (G1722) in, en oíkō, at home (1Co_11:34; 1Co_14:35; Sept.: Gen_39:2, Gen_39:16); with the prep. katá (G2596) with the acc., possessing a distributive meaning, kat’ oíkon, from house to house, in private houses (Act_2:46; Act_5:42; Act_8:3; Act_20:20; Rom_16:5, the church at a private home). Spoken of various kinds of houses or edifices, such as the house of the king or the chief priest, a palace (Mat_11:8; Luk_22:54; Sept.: Gen_12:15; 2Ki_20:18; Dan_1:4). A house of commerce, meaning a bazaar (Joh_2:16). Specifically, house of God, meaning the tabernacle or temple where the presence of God was manifested and where God was said to dwell, e.g., the tabernacle (Mat_12:4; Mar_2:26; Luk_6:4); the temple at Jerusalem (Mat_21:13; Joh_2:16-17; Act_7:47, Act_7:49); for ho naós, with a def. art. (Luk_11:51 [cf. Mat_23:35]); the house of prayer (Mat_21:13; Mar_11:17; Luk_19:46). A room or part of a house, e.g., the dining room (Luk_14:23), the upper room as a place of prayer (Act_2:2; Act_10:30; Act_11:13). Figuratively of persons, Christians as the spiritual house or temple of God (1Pe_2:5). Of those in whom evil spirits dwell (Mat_12:44; Luk_11:24).
(II) In a wider sense, a dwelling place, habitation, abode, as a city or country (Mat_23:38; Luk_13:35).
(III) Metonymically, a household, family, those who live together in a house (Luk_10:5; Act_10:2; Act_11:14; Act_16:15; 1Co_1:16; 2Ti_1:16; Tit_1:11). Including the idea of household affairs (Act_7:10; 1Ti_3:4-5, 1Ti_3:12; Sept.: Gen_7:1; Gen_12:17). Metaphorically, oíkos tou Theoú, the household of God, i.e., the Christian Church, Christians (1Ti_3:15; Heb_3:6; Heb_10:21; 1Pe_4:17); the Jewish assembly (Heb_3:2, Heb_3:5; Sept.: Num_12:7).
(IV) Metonymically, family, lineage, posterity, descended from one head or ancestor (Luk_1:27, Luk_1:69; Luk_2:4; Sept.: Exo_6:14; 1Ki_12:16, 1Ki_12:19). A whole people or nation as descended from one ancestor such as the house or people of Israel (Mat_10:6; Mat_15:24); the house of Jacob (Luk_1:33); the house of Judah (Heb_8:8; Sept.: Exo_19:3; Lev_10:6; Jdg_1:23; 1Ki_12:23; Jer_31:31).

7.2 οἶκοςa, ου m: a building consisting of one or more rooms and normally serving as a dwelling place (οἶκοςa also includes certain public buildings, for example, a temple)—‘house, temple, sanctuary.’ (The extension of οἶκοςa to include temples may be the result of speaking of a temple as the dwelling place of the deity.) ἠκούσθη ὅτι ἐν οἴκῳ ἐστίν ‘it was reported that he was at home’ Mk 2:1; τοῦ ἀπολομένου μεταξὺ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου καὶ τοῦ οἴκου ‘who perished between the altar and the Temple’ Lk 11:51. For a discussion of certain translational problems related to οἶκοςa, see 7.3.

7.3 οἰκίαa, ας f: a building or place where one dwells—‘house, home, dwelling, residence.’ ἡ δὲ οἰκία ἐπληρώθη ἐκ τῆς ὀσμῆς τοῦ μύρου ‘the sweet smell of perfume filled the whole house’ Jn 12:3.
The size of an οἰκίαa or of an οἶκοςa (7.2) may differ greatly. For example, the house referred to in Lk 7:10 would no doubt have been relatively elaborate, and in Mt 11:8 οἶκοςa refers to the palace in which Herod lived. In a number of languages it is important to distinguish clearly between various types of dwellings depending upon their size and presumed importance. Accordingly, in rendering οἰκίαa or οἶκοςa it is necessary to use a number of different terms roughly equivalent to the English series ‘cottage,’ ‘house,’ ‘official residence,’ ‘palace,’ ‘temple,’ etc.
In a number of languages one must distinguish carefully between a house and a home. A term meaning ‘house’ would be used in referring to any dwelling as a construction, while a term meaning ‘home’ would be used in referring to the more or less permanent dwelling of a particular person. In Mk 2:1, for example, it is significant to indicate that Jesus was dwelling in the house through the roof of which the paralyzed man was let down.

Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Vol. 1: Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition.) (80). New York: United Bible Societies.

I suppose you will seize upon the phrase 'any building whatever', however I challenge you to show me where oikos is used of anything other than a dwelling place. It is not used of a synagogue.

See above. It may have been an upper chamber in the Temple...or it may have been the upper room of a wealthy person with a large guest quarters they let out to visitors for special occasions

It is used of the Temple for that was the Old Covenant 'house of God'. According to the Lexicon is is distinguished from DOMOS, the actual BUILDING where a family lives. Thus, it means an 'inhabited house', a place where the 'oikos' (household) lived. It would not be used of a store for example (unless the store were located in someone's oikos, of course).

It is translated house, household, home, at home, home with.

They were at a house, in the upper room or 'guestchamber' (Luke 22:1).

Right and as I said, this particular one held approximately 120 people. Many houses had areas they let out to guests for occasions.

They were a house church.

They were the church :-). They used whatever was available to them. In Jerusalem that often meant using someone elses hall or guest area

They were not incorporated under either Jewish law or Roman law (or US law for that matter).

That really has nothing to do with what we are discussing

They were not a denomination.

Nor that

God.

Nor that

And they weren't doing a 'praise a thon' to raise money for a building so they could hurry up and get out of those pesky houses and into a lovely new testament TEMPLE building.

and that

BTW the Greek word for "Inn" is the same word used for the guest chambers of people's homes, which was one of my points here and before

katáluma; gen. katalúmatos, neut. noun from katalúō (G2647), to unloose. A lodging place or inn. It was so-called because of the ancient travelers who on arrival loosened their own belts or girdles, sandals, and the saddles or harnesses of their animals. In the ancient Greek writings, the place of entertainment is called katáluma, where animals and burdens are loosened. See Sept.: Exo_4:24. Guests were highly regarded in biblical times (Jdg_19:9, Jdg_19:15). Katáluma was also a guest chamber (Mar_14:14; Luk_2:7; Luk_22:11), a dining room where the guests loosened their sandals before they sat down to eat. In the East it is called khan or caravanserai.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

My house doesn't hold 120 people. Not comfortably, anyway. Not sitting. It definitely wouldn't hold 3000. The upper room may have been a place where someone lived (debatable), but it was fairly large--not at all like today's concept of "house church" with a very small group in a relatively small house.

I'm not anti-house-church. I like the idea in some ways, and I like intimate worship settings. However, I am anti-anti-big-church-building. I don't see anything in scripture that condemns large gatherings of believers. Ergo, I have a problem with any believer who condemns Christians for the size of their buildings or congregations. Christianity isn't a cookie-cutter religion. What works in one culture, country, community or century may not work in another. No matter, because God didn't lay out a cookie cutter method for the church to propagate the Gospel.

Furthermore, the same way that people can get stuck in the rut of traditional church, people can get stuck in the rut of opposing the status quo just for the sake of it. That isn't productive, either.

A "house" that holds 120-3000 is a special house indeed.

Houses in Jerusalem had an upper chamber set aside or loaned (Maybe even rented) to guests for meetings, weddings, prayers, as Inns where travelers can stay etc

[renee819]

I believe that, the 120 were in the Upper Room, when the Holy Ghost came.
And this is just my common sense, and can't be proved by scripture. But I don't believe there was a building large enough to hold the crowd that gathered. Of the crowd that gathered there were 3000 saved, but there may have been 10,000 there.

Acts 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
:6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:

Like someone said, it probably ended up as a street meeting.
I believe they would have had to come down out of the Upper Room to preach to that many people.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

A "house" that holds 120-3000 is a special house indeed.

Houses in Jerusalem had an upper chamber set aside or loaned (Maybe even rented) to guests for meetings, weddings, prayers, as Inns where travelers can stay etc

Houses, as you mentioned, often had rooms set aside as 'guest quarters', especially in Jerusalem due to the thrice yearly Pilgrimages that occurred. Hospitality was a big thing back then.

But it is still a house.

As for a guest chamber that could hold 120 people... when I was a young child, for Thanksgiving dinner we would gather at my uncle's house. We would usually have about 100 people, and guess what? We would all eat in the 'big room' together. He had a nice house, but not a 'mansion' by any stretch. When he bought the house he and my other uncles remodeled it (they were all carpenters and house builders) to make a large 'big room' specifically for family gatherings.

When we today see the word 'house' we have certain images that come to mind, based on our current situations. People may be tempted to imagine a house in those days was a nice 3 bedroom, 2 bath structure with a 2-horse garage and a nice yard. Yards were practically unheard of back then, it was VERY common for houses to be built as multi-storied buildings (often with a shop or business on the ground floor and the living quarters above), and most houses had a 'guest chamber' (unless you were dirt poor, of course).

The Last Supper was held in an upper room chamber, a 'guest chamber', of somebody's house who apparently was somewhat well-to-do and who had a large enough room to accomodate quite a few people. It is likely this is the same place where Pentecost occurred, although I believe a close reading of the text indicates that the Pentecostal outpouring need not have taken place in 'the upper room', necessarily.

It was a house, though.