More on Housechurches(less on House-a-God's) - Page 5

whoami · #41 10-25-2010, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notofworks

With the exception of the nurse, I've seen all this in plenty of "White" church cultures......and I can't stand it in any color.

Me neither.

whoami · #42 10-25-2010, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aquila

What saddens me is that he's labeled an entire "biblical" method of gathering, not realizing that the majority of Christians meeting throughout the world aren't meeting in large professional buildings. Throughout China, South America, various places in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East, Christians are meeting in homes and living a more communal lifestyle. AtlantaBishop obviously is one who thinks that the American style of modern church is the rule. Frankly, it's the exception.

I know, I don't get it. Pretty sure the "upper room" mentioned in Acts was in a house, not a tabernacle. Were the 12 disciples a cult? I think they followed a man's teaching, didn't pay him, and gathered in houses. LOL!!!

mfblume · #43 10-25-2010, 09:19 AM

Anyone ever read THE OPEN CHURCH by Rutz?

Gene Edwards contributed to the book and for the first time in history it was written down how the church building concept came into being and how things got to where they are today.

Fascinating book.

Aquila · #44 10-25-2010, 09:24 AM

The reality is that the church doesn't have walls. We're a body, a kingdom. Sure, we can meet in a large tabernacle or in homes. Frankly, it doesn't matter. Wheresoever two are more are gathered in his name, there he can be found.

So many are praying for "revival" in America. What they're really praying for is an "expansion of membership" in their traditional congregations, widfall profits from Heaven. lol

Most are believing that the Spirit of God will move in America and turn hearts towards Jesus. Think about it... if this happened... the traditional church wouldn't be able to hold the masses. House churching would immediately become the norm. Perhaps... we're seeing the beginning of a massive sea change.

mfblume · #45 10-25-2010, 09:31 AM

Constantine turned the pagan temples over to the Christians. The former pagan temple priests, who put on a religious show for an hour as the people watched without participating, became the pattern for the "church priests" when the Church never did that beforehand.

This led to the Roman Catholic Church.

The Lutheran Reformation made great bounds with justification by faith, but he took the then-emptied Catholic Churches and filled them as fast as he could with Lutheran ministers, translated his own Bible version and filled Europe with literature. He did nothing hardly different from the Catholic priesthood except allow ministers to marry. So a flurry of ex-Catholic priests started marrying ex-nuns and became most of the ministers in Lutheran churches. Not much of a change occurred in how "CHURCH" was run to get it back before Constantine stepped in.

Calvin pretty well did the same thing around the same time, and "church meetings" never basically changed from the 11am - 12am routine every week with none of the saints participating in real body ministry.

Mr. Smith · #46 10-25-2010, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aquila

The reality is that the church doesn't have walls. We're a body, a kingdom. Sure, we can meet in a large tabernacle or in homes. Frankly, it doesn't matter. Wheresoever two are more are gathered in his name, there he can be found.

So many are praying for "revival" in America. What they're really praying for is an "expansion of membership" in their traditional congregations, widfall profits from Heaven. lol

Most are believing that the Spirit of God will move in America and turn hearts towards Jesus. Think about it... if this happened... the traditional church wouldn't be able to hold the masses. House churching would immediately become the norm. Perhaps... we're seeing the beginning of a massive sea change.

True, some are. But I think your across-the-board indictment of "The Church" is unfair. Although it's not my thing, I don't have a problem with home churches. But to me, I see a bit of a superiority complex on both sides, here. AB has it for sure! But the veiled "my-way-is-better" comes through on the other side as well.

Aquila · #47 10-25-2010, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfblume

Constantine turned the pagan temples over to the Christians. The former pagan temple priests, who put on a religious show for an hour as the people watched without participating, became the pattern for the "church priests" when the Church never did that beforehand.

This led to the Roman Catholic Church.

The Lutheran Reformation made great bounds with justification by faith, but he took the then-emptied Catholic Churches and filled them as fast as he could with Lutheran ministers, translated his own Bible version and filled Europe with literature. He did nothing hardly different from the Catholic priesthood except allow ministers to marry. So a flurry of ex-Catholic priests started marrying ex-nuns and became most of the ministers in Lutheran churches. Not much of a change occurred in how "CHURCH" was run to get it back before Constantine stepped in.

Calvin pretty well did the same thing around the same time, and "church meetings" never basically changed from the 11am - 12am routine every week with none of the saints participating in real body ministry.

Amen, Rev. Blume.

Here's an example of how deep the institutional church is still entrenched in the patterns and traditions of Rome: Think of the Lord's Supper. Have we moved back to a commemorative feast of fellowship as was Apostolic Pattern... or do we still have the homily, wafer, and sip of wine (or grape juice)?

The way we do Communion today is clearly still a Catholic innovation.

mfblume · #48 10-25-2010, 09:41 AM

As the video mentioned, a philosophy of the physical inspiring the church members evolved where monstrously high ceiling edifices were built to force a person to become silent and stand in awe by looking UP. This sort of physical-sense-emphasis replaced much spirituality. Really, it was a carnal motivation and attempt to become spiritually minded, but does not work.

It was an attempt at translating spirituality into the physical. It was started with Plato, not the Lord. Plato taught that light, space and color could be used to veer man towards the spiritual "unknowable" things of God. The early believers saw no need of stained glass and steeples to point us to a God who was just out of reach. They thought of God as knowing Him face to face. The catholics adopted Plato's STAGES OF ASCENT into Christianity.

whoami · #49 10-25-2010, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

True, some are. But I think your across-the-board indictment of "The Church" is unfair. Although it's not my thing, I don't have a problem with home churches. But to me, I see a bit of a superiority complex on both sides, here. AB has it for sure! But the veiled "my-way-is-better" comes through on the other side as well.

True.

It's hard not to let one's preference show. I don't like church buildings, I grew up in churches where the congregation was constantly strained for money to pay for and maintain our huge beautiful building. But - I do try not to be rude about my preference.

mfblume · #50 10-25-2010, 09:54 AM

One man said one of the worst things to happen in church history was caused by a one-man disaster team named Dionysius the Aeropagite. He is now known as Pseudo-Dionysius, a monk, since he was proved to be a sham and NOT what he claimed to be, a personal friend of Paul the Apostle. He lived in 500 and wrote letters as though they were in Paul's day!

His writings were rife with Neo-Platonic thought of how the physical can influence a person to reach further to the unreachable God. People thought his works were "gospel" since he was personally converted by Paul and wrote at that day. This made them think Paul was a Platonic philosopher!

Not until about one thousand years later did people realize Dionysius was a fraud, but his effect stuck! His thoughts are so embedded in general Christian thought today that they will likely never leave the majority of denominations.

Then Abbott Suger of France came along in the 800's and pushed Dionysius' fraudulent beliefs in the church world and built the world's first Gothic cathedral and Christian Architecture was born. The buildings pushed the sense of how little man is with these monstrous edifices, emphasizing the Platonic focus of LIGHT and space and color, and the bigness of God. Suger proved this was all the will of God by quoting Dionysius who said he was Paul's friend, when the real writer was the monk in 500.

Then Thomas Aquinas came into the scene in the 1200's and blended Platonic thought with Aristotle's philosophies and Neo-Platonism, and came up with his brand of NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. This is Catholic doctrine to this day, as well as most Protestant doctrine.

And it all came from a fraudulent writing claimed to have been from Paul's day, from a student of Paul, when a monk made it all up in the 500's from Plato's concepts!

Hence, most of CHURCH GATHERINGS today are from that sort of thing.

I do not think one has to abandon a church building, but the open church concept where the saints are allowed to minister in some capacity is vitally needed. The five-fold ministry was to help the saints do the work of the ministry! We were not meant to see saints watch a show for an hour.