Do we really need all this? The church in the first two centuries of Christianity took the world by storm house to house with little to no organization. Here's a commentary article that I found very thought provoking.
THE HOUSE CHURCH
AND PARACHURCH
ORGANIZATIONS
Since the first use of the word church (Gk. ekklesia) in Acts is found here (2:47), we pause to consider the centrality of the church in the thinking of the early Christians.
The church in the Book of Acts and in the rest of the NT was what is often called a house church. The early Christians met in houses rather than in special ecclesiastical buildings. It has been said that religion was loosed from specially sacred places and centered in that universal place of living, the home. Unger says that homes continued to serve as places of Christian assembly for two centuries.
It might be easy for us to think that the use of private homes was forced by economic necessity rather than being the result of spiritual considerations. We have become so accustomed to church buildings and chapels that we think they are God’s ideal.
However, there I strong reason to believe that the first century believers might have been wiser than we are.
First, it is inconsistent with the Christian faith and its emphasis on love to spend thousands of dollars on luxurious buildings when there is such appalling needed throughout the world. In that connection, E. Stanley Jones wrote:
I looked on the Bambino, the child Christ in the Cathedral at Rome, laden with expensive jewels, and then walked out and looked upon the countenances of hungry children and wondered whether Christ, in view of this hunger, was enjoying His jewels, and the thought persisted that if He was, then I could no longer enjoy the thought of Christ. That bejeweled Bambino and the hunger children are a symbol of what we have done in putting around Christ the expensive livery of stately cathedral sand churches while leaving untouched the fundamental wrongs in human society whereby Christ is left hungry in the unemployed and the disposed.
Not only is it inhumane; it is also uneconomical to spend money on expensive buildings that are used for no more than three, four, or five hours during the week. How have we ever allowed ourselves to drift into this unthinking dream world where we are willing to spend so much in order to get so little usage in return?
Our modern building programs have been one of the biggest hindrances to the expansion of the church. Heavy payments on principle and interest cause church leaders to resist any efforts to hive off and form new churches. Any loss of members would jeopardize the income needed to pay for the building and its upkeep. An unborn generation is addled with debt, and any hope of church reproduction is stifled.
It is often argued that we must have impressive buildings in order to attract the unchurched to our services. Aside from being a carnal way of thinking, this completely overlooks the NT pattern. The meetings of the early church were largely for believers. The Christians assembled for the apostles’ teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread, and prayer (Acts 2:42). The did not do their evangelizing by inviting people to meetings on Sunday but by witnessing to those with whom they came in contact throughout the week. When people did get converted, they were then brought into the fellowship and warmth of the house church to be fed and encouraged.
It is sometimes difficult to get people to attend services in dignified church buildings. There is a strong reaction against formalism. Also there is a fear of being solicited for funds. “All the church wants is your money,” is a common complaint. Yet many of these same people are willing to attend a conversational Bible class in a home. There they do not have to be style-conscious, and they enjoy the informal, unprofessional atmosphere.
Actually the house church is ideal for every culture and every country. And probably of we could look over the entire world, we would see more churches meeting in homes than in any other way.
In contrast to today’s imposing cathedrals, churches, and chapels – as well as a whole host of highly organized denominations, the apostles in the Book of Acts made no attempt to form an organization of any kind for carrying on the work of the Lord. The local church was God’s unit on earth for propagating the faith and the disciples were content to work within that context.
In recent years there has been an organizational explosion in Christendom of such proportions as to make one dizzy. Every time a believer gets a new idea for advancing the cause of Christ, he forms a new mission board, corporations, or institution!
One result is that capable teachers and preachers have been called away from their primary ministries in order to become administrators. If all mission board administrators were serving on the mission field, it would greatly reduce the need for personnel there.
Another result of the proliferation of organizations is that vast sums of money are needed for overhead, and thus diverted from direct gospel outreach. The greater part of every dollar given to many Christian organizations is devoted to the expense of maintaining the organization rather than the primary purpose for which it was founded.
Organizations often hinder the fulfillment of the Great Commission. Jesus told His disciples to teach all the things He had commanded. Many who work for Christian organizations find they are not permitted to teach all the truth of God. They must no teach certain controversial matters for fear they will alienate the constituency to whom they look for financial support.
The multiplication of Christian institutions has too often resulted in factions, jealousy, and rivalry that have done great harm to the testimony of Christ.
Consider the overlapping multiplicity of Christian organizations at work, at home, and abroad. Each competes for limited personnel and for shrinking financial resources. And consider how many of these organizations really owe their origin to purely human rivalry, though public statements usually refer to God’s will (Daily Notes of the Scripture Union).
And it is often true that organizations have a way of perpetuating themselves long after they have outlived their usefulness. The wheels grind on heavily even though the vision of the founders has been lost, and the glory of the once dynamic movement has departed. It was spiritual wisdom, not primitive naiveté, that saved the early Christians from setting up human organizations to carry on the work of the Lord. G. H. Lang writes:
An acute writer, contrasting the apostolic work with the more usual modern missionary methods, has said that “we found missions, the apostles founded churches.” The distinction is sound and pregnant. The apostles founded churches, and the founded nothing else, because for the ends in view nothing else was required or could have been so suitable. In each place where they labored they formed the converts into a local assembly, with elders – always elders, never an elder (Acts 14:23; 15:6, 23; 20:17; Phil. 1:1) – to guide, to rule, to shepherd, men qualified by the Lord and recognized by the saints (I Cor. 16:15; I Thess. 5:12, 13; I Tim. 5:17-19); and with deacons, appointed by the assembly (Acts 6:1-6; Phil 1:1) – in this contrasted with the elders – to attend to the few but very important temporal affairs, and in particular to the distribution of the funds of the assembly….All they (the apostles) did in the way of organizing was to form the disciples gathered into other such assemblies. No other organization than the local assembly appears in the New Testament, nor do we find even the germ of anything further.
To the early Christians and their apostolic leadership, the congregation was the divinely ordained unit on earth through which God chose to work, and they only such unit to which He promised perpetuity was the church.
Are you taking the world by storm in the house church movement?
I agree with church debt. With threatened economy, more families have needs and donations fall. If the church has a fat mortgage, it comes first and missions come last.
I read about the fancy cathedral in California was insolvent. I have never heard of evictions for non payment of mortgages from brush arbours.
well, this probably isnt relevant, but, a good part of the OT, was spend rebuilding and repairing the temple in Jerusalem, which was extravagant in expenses lavished on it.
so, i can't think that God would really object to have nice houses of worship.
on the other hand, why not go back to open air tent meetings where people can see a service in process and drop in w/o feeling pressured.
__________________
Are you worried about what 2026 will bring?
I think it will bring flowers. why?
because i'm planting flowers 🌹
Another thought, the Apostles turned the world upside down quickly and fervently with their doctrine, as it was being preached to people who had never heard of Jesus before. We now live in a world where everyone has heard about Jesus. So can we really say the blueprint for the Apostles used should be ours? Most of our churches are recycling people from other churches, at least in this country. To follow in the Apostles pattern, wouldn't you need to go to places where people are predominately ignorant to the gospel?
__________________
Are you worried about what 2026 will bring?
I think it will bring flowers. why?
because i'm planting flowers 🌹
well, this probably isnt relevant, but, a good part of the OT, was spend rebuilding and repairing the temple in Jerusalem, which was extravagant in expenses lavished on it.
And we saw how that ended.
Quote:
so, i can't think that God would really object to have nice houses of worship.
Form must follow function. Look at what Paul tells us with regards to how our meetings should be:
I Corinthians 14:29-33
29 Let two or three people prophesy, and let the others evaluate what is said. 30 But if someone is prophesying and another person receives a revelation from the Lord, the one who is speaking must stop. 31 In this way, all who prophesy will have a turn to speak, one after the other, so that everyone will learn and be encouraged. 32 Remember that people who prophesy are in control of their spirit and can take turns. 33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace, as in all the meetings of God’s holy people.
Notice, two or three are to speak the Word of God (prophesy). Others present are to evaluate what’s being said. But if someone is teaching the Word of God and another person sitting there listening receives a revelation from the Lord, the one who is speaking must stop. This way everyone with the gift to speak God’s Word will have a turn to speak, one after the other. This is so that everyone will learn and being encouraged. Remember that everyone who speaks are in control of their own spirits and can take turns. Because God isn’t a God of disorder but of peace, as in all the meetings of God’s holy church.
Do enormous buildings wherein you sit like a spectator allow everyone a chance to discuss and share revelations concerning the Word of God? No. You see…form should follow function. Now, larger gatherings aren’t always bad. But to neglect these smaller gatherings as Paul ordered them is to neglect something that’s actually stated in Scripture.
Quote:
on the other hand, why not go back to open air tent meetings where people can see a service in process and drop in w/o feeling pressured.
It’s about fulfilling NT mandates in our churches. Not just listening to a sermon. Here’s a link to help you understand what is called the Simple Church model:
My church does this. We have one service on Sundays at our campus. Throughout the week we have meetings at our house churches. It's precious and powerful!
Linear Mode
