Curious to me that, according to this podcast, one is supposed to create a “biblical house church” that is patterned after folks who didn’t have an example of one nor a “new testament” to tell them how! They simply got together, prayed, taught the apostle’s doctrine, received the Lord’s table, (communion) and had fellowship which probably included a meal together. This podcast implies that if you don’t organize it down to the finest detail it can’t be done. Do what the first followers of “The Way” did and just go do it! The details will fall together as the Word is taught. We’ve been meeting house to house for twenty years now and threw the unbiblical and unnecessary junk out the window from the beginning….starting with the building, bank interest, maintenance, utilities, paid staff, insurance premiums, etc. Religious legalism gives me a headache………
I think the scriptures paint a picture of plurality of elders in a town/community not every house.... I kind of see it as many homes gatherings in a town with "elders" being part of 2 or 3 of those homes.
@@craiglees5631 The scriptures are written to individual churches. The church or Ephesus and the church of Corinth for example were churches that Paul wrote to. He didn't write to the many churches in Ephesus, Corinth, etc. How do these elders know who is in their flock if they are church hopping? I don't see Biblical evidence for home churches in this sense.
@@feedtheabby yes... I agree, because there is only one church per city. this can never be in todays church examples... but picture many home fellowships. elders are couples who are elders for the city. you may fellowship in a certain home. an eldership couple may or may not be part of your weekly gatherings, but you know them and they may come to the same hone you fellowsip in one week if there is need or just to teach something. every now and then all the fellowships may come together for a big function in a community hall... but each home fellowship meets weekly in their own home, and wach believer daily finds and gathers with other believers.
@@craiglees5631 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9 set a number of characteristics that men must possess in order to be pastors/elders. A couple (husband and wife) in no way is a biblical representation of what eldership is. We start getting into a much deeper issue here with how a local church is viewed. The word “church” in the New Testament is a translation of the word ekklesia, which means “called out ones” or “assembly”. Nowhere is the church referred to as a building or place but to a people. The issue I see with saying that house churches are the most biblical way to do church is that it isn’t biblical. It’s extra biblical. Sure the early churches often gathered in homes but nowhere does it command or forbid gathering in homes or in other buildings. The church is the people not the building. Having such a strong focus on the location a church gathers instead of how a church gathers is unhealthy and can bind the conscience of people when this isn’t a sin issue.
@@feedtheabby re: elder...agree re: church being the people... agree re: churches meeting in homes not being biblical... disagree... the NT letters often mention "church in so and so home" home church model os best pattern I can see to fit biblical narrative. best example I can see to fit Jesus as leader instead of man, best example for multiplication.... etc etc... either way, stand by your convictions, keep your eyes on Jesus.
"Order of worship"? I'd like to kindly invite you to even Evaluate where you got that from. Church gatherings are to edify one another. The Bible never equates to worship. We are together together to edify one another. The Bible knows nothing of gathering together to worship. I know this sounds bizarre, but after studying this for over a month, and learning from people who have studied this for 30 and 40 years, it's very eye-opening. Wishing you all the best. I'm learning many things as I watch these videos. So thank you.
That would just be church in the house and only difference would be on a smaller scale... The concept here would be doing away with the "worship service", and be open to being led by Jesus.... This makes sense then in the boundaries that Paul wrote about for the gatherings
The early church (the community of believers) met in homes! The church as a building is the creation of Emperor Constantine of Rome. He built the first "church" after he "converted" from paganism to Christianity and made it a state religion. That was the birth of Roman Catholicism. If you are satisfied with where you are, you don't need to bother with this message. It's for those who crave another level of relationship with Jesus Christ.
In this video, Dale said a "biblical" church is one that, like the traditional church, has unity via a strong statement of faith. I strongly disagree. BIBLICAL UNITY isn't obtained by coerced doctrinal sameness and only letting those you agree with speak, but by love among doctrinal diversity; doctrinal diversity to the extent that any TRUE BORN AGAIN BELIEVER can hold (eg. not salvation by works, or Jesus isn't the Son of God, etc.). We are all different and can never be (nor would want to be) identical. People who THINK will always be different from each other; people who blindly conform will LOOK very much the same. Dale's right that house churches solve the problem of UNCONNECTEDNESS that exists within traditional churches. But the other main problem of the traditional church is DICTATORSHIP. The word "speak" is mentioned about 22 times in 1 Cor. 14, and many additional terms like "pray," "prophesy," etc., refer to speaking. A healthy body needs all the members to be functioning, and Paul wasn't talking about the freedom to help set up and put away chairs. Paul was talking about real, substantive, spiritual (even risky) ministry, edifying others through what you're allowed to SAY. To be a BIBLICAL house church you have to do what the Bible says in 1 Cor. 14 and allow people the freedom to speak on whatever topic they choose. Dale said their house churches are under the authority of their house church network. This is also unbiblical. I believe Dale is wrong in being Calvinist; you may believe he's right in this. But God draws his circle around all who are truly in Messiah, truly his children, born of and indwelt by his Spirit. Dale's traditional reformed theology approach is why we have denominations. The Calvinists gather only among themselves, the charismatics likewise, even the blacks and whites. We've got to allow diversity of doctrine in order for the whole body to function versus having all the feet gathering separately from the hands, for example. It's true there should be ordained elders in each city ("ordain elders in every city," Titus 1:5). And it's true that a weakness of house churches in general is a shortage of good doctrinal teaching, and that good doctrinal teaching is as important, or more important, than church body ministry; but this could be solved by teachers, given to the church by God ("he gave some ... teachers," Eph. 4:11), rotating through the different house churches in that city ("I ... taught you publicly and from house to house,"Acts 20:20). But dictatorship is why the saints don't mature (ntrf.org/decision-making-strategy-video). That's what I think; what do you think? facebook.com/share/ZY6DU7e1NTekmdBR/
How many people can you fit in a house? The real limiting thing of a house church is how do you have a large attendance so that you can have elders and deacons?
For example on a low estimate. Plurality of elders we will say 2 Deacon 1 Their wives 3 Children at .5 of adult ratio. And half of attendance not elder or Deacon. That is 18 people minimum in a single house. With low numbers of children and bare Bones leadership and half are in leadership. How many can you fit in a house to make this a real model.
I think the assumption is that every home needs a human leader/elder... If Jesus is the leader of each home gathering, many of these homes in a community and then 2 or more "elder" couples in the community who may visit from time to time, if and only where necessary
@@feedtheabby okay, for me, reading scriptue, I see meetings in homes, church is not a building, only one church in a city, plurality of elders, church is not an institution, church is organic, etc... so multi-home fellowships as one city church seems to be the only model I can see that works
@@craiglees5631 I don’t see how this is a biblical gathering. A community isn’t a church. This sounds like a multi-site church model to me and there is no clear example of this in the New Testament.
Far far too many holdovers from the institutional church. Pretty much taken the failings of the institutional church, and made them smaller and bring them into homes....
Yikes! The traditional model of “church” is a large contributor to the “leavened bread” Jesus told us to be aware of. My Brother, please reconsider your doctrine for much error is revealed. Those who long to “worship in Spirit and truth” wonder if you understand the word, 7:35 worship means prostrate or bow to the Spirit and truth. Not a man. God. And He can be accessed by any “adopted” child of the Father. He gave us the Holy Spirit to teach us and lead us into a right relationship with Him.
Curious to me that, according to this podcast, one is supposed to create a “biblical house church” that is patterned after folks who didn’t have an example of one nor a “new testament” to tell them how! They simply got together, prayed, taught the apostle’s doctrine, received the Lord’s table, (communion) and had fellowship which probably included a meal together. This podcast implies that if you don’t organize it down to the finest detail it can’t be done. Do what the first followers of “The Way” did and just go do it! The details will fall together as the Word is taught. We’ve been meeting house to house for twenty years now and threw the unbiblical and unnecessary junk out the window from the beginning….starting with the building, bank interest, maintenance, utilities, paid staff, insurance premiums, etc. Religious legalism gives me a headache………
Do your home churches follow the biblical pattern of a plurality of elders in the new testament (Acts 14:23; Phil. 1:1; Jas. 5:14)?
I think the scriptures paint a picture of plurality of elders in a town/community not every house.... I kind of see it as many homes gatherings in a town with "elders" being part of 2 or 3 of those homes.
@@craiglees5631 The scriptures are written to individual churches. The church or Ephesus and the church of Corinth for example were churches that Paul wrote to. He didn't write to the many churches in Ephesus, Corinth, etc. How do these elders know who is in their flock if they are church hopping?
I don't see Biblical evidence for home churches in this sense.
@@feedtheabby yes... I agree, because there is only one church per city. this can never be in todays church examples...
but picture many home fellowships. elders are couples who are elders for the city. you may fellowship in a certain home. an eldership couple may or may not be part of your weekly gatherings, but you know them and they may come to the same hone you fellowsip in one week if there is need or just to teach something.
every now and then all the fellowships may come together for a big function in a community hall... but each home fellowship meets weekly in their own home, and wach believer daily finds and gathers with other believers.
@@craiglees5631 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9 set a number of characteristics that men must possess in order to be pastors/elders. A couple (husband and wife) in no way is a biblical representation of what eldership is.
We start getting into a much deeper issue here with how a local church is viewed. The word “church” in the New Testament is a translation of the word ekklesia, which means “called out ones” or “assembly”. Nowhere is the church referred to as a building or place but to a people.
The issue I see with saying that house churches are the most biblical way to do church is that it isn’t biblical. It’s extra biblical. Sure the early churches often gathered in homes but nowhere does it command or forbid gathering in homes or in other buildings. The church is the people not the building. Having such a strong focus on the location a church gathers instead of how a church gathers is unhealthy and can bind the conscience of people when this isn’t a sin issue.
@@feedtheabby re: elder...agree
re: church being the people... agree
re: churches meeting in homes not being biblical... disagree... the NT letters often mention "church in so and so home"
home church model os best pattern I can see to fit biblical narrative. best example I can see to fit Jesus as leader instead of man, best example for multiplication.... etc etc...
either way, stand by your convictions, keep your eyes on Jesus.
It would be nice if you prepare a demo video on how house church is conducted.
"Order of worship"? I'd like to kindly invite you to even Evaluate where you got that from. Church gatherings are to edify one another. The Bible never equates to worship. We are together together to edify one another. The Bible knows nothing of gathering together to worship. I know this sounds bizarre, but after studying this for over a month, and learning from people who have studied this for 30 and 40 years, it's very eye-opening.
Wishing you all the best. I'm learning many things as I watch these videos. So thank you.
I sense that your commentors on this video are unfortunately missing the main point. Thank you for this info.
Thank you !!
Can I learn more about it?
Are you saying that moving a church service inside of a house is the answer?
I guess it depends on the question.
That would just be church in the house and only difference would be on a smaller scale... The concept here would be doing away with the "worship service", and be open to being led by Jesus.... This makes sense then in the boundaries that Paul wrote about for the gatherings
The early church (the community of believers) met in homes! The church as a building is the creation of Emperor Constantine of Rome. He built the first "church" after he "converted" from paganism to Christianity and made it a state religion. That was the birth of Roman Catholicism. If you are satisfied with where you are, you don't need to bother with this message. It's for those who crave another level of relationship with Jesus Christ.
Interesting….
In this video, Dale said a "biblical" church is one that, like the traditional church, has unity via a strong statement of faith. I strongly disagree. BIBLICAL UNITY isn't obtained by coerced doctrinal sameness and only letting those you agree with speak, but by love among doctrinal diversity; doctrinal diversity to the extent that any TRUE BORN AGAIN BELIEVER can hold (eg. not salvation by works, or Jesus isn't the Son of God, etc.). We are all different and can never be (nor would want to be) identical. People who THINK will always be different from each other; people who blindly conform will LOOK very much the same.
Dale's right that house churches solve the problem of UNCONNECTEDNESS that exists within traditional churches. But the other main problem of the traditional church is DICTATORSHIP. The word "speak" is mentioned about 22 times in 1 Cor. 14, and many additional terms like "pray," "prophesy," etc., refer to speaking. A healthy body needs all the members to be functioning, and Paul wasn't talking about the freedom to help set up and put away chairs. Paul was talking about real, substantive, spiritual (even risky) ministry, edifying others through what you're allowed to SAY. To be a BIBLICAL house church you have to do what the Bible says in 1 Cor. 14 and allow people the freedom to speak on whatever topic they choose.
Dale said their house churches are under the authority of their house church network. This is also unbiblical. I believe Dale is wrong in being Calvinist; you may believe he's right in this. But God draws his circle around all who are truly in Messiah, truly his children, born of and indwelt by his Spirit. Dale's traditional reformed theology approach is why we have denominations. The Calvinists gather only among themselves, the charismatics likewise, even the blacks and whites. We've got to allow diversity of doctrine in order for the whole body to function versus having all the feet gathering separately from the hands, for example.
It's true there should be ordained elders in each city ("ordain elders in every city," Titus 1:5). And it's true that a weakness of house churches in general is a shortage of good doctrinal teaching, and that good doctrinal teaching is as important, or more important, than church body ministry; but this could be solved by teachers, given to the church by God ("he gave some ... teachers," Eph. 4:11), rotating through the different house churches in that city ("I ... taught you publicly and from house to house,"Acts 20:20). But dictatorship is why the saints don't mature (ntrf.org/decision-making-strategy-video). That's what I think; what do you think?
facebook.com/share/ZY6DU7e1NTekmdBR/
How many people can you fit in a house? The real limiting thing of a house church is how do you have a large attendance so that you can have elders and deacons?
For example on a low estimate.
Plurality of elders we will say 2
Deacon 1
Their wives 3
Children at .5 of adult ratio.
And half of attendance not elder or Deacon.
That is 18 people minimum in a single house. With low numbers of children and bare Bones leadership and half are in leadership.
How many can you fit in a house to make this a real model.
I think the assumption is that every home needs a human leader/elder... If Jesus is the leader of each home gathering, many of these homes in a community and then 2 or more "elder" couples in the community who may visit from time to time, if and only where necessary
@@craiglees5631 So multi-site home churches? This doesn't make sense to me.
@@feedtheabby okay, for me, reading scriptue, I see meetings in homes, church is not a building, only one church in a city, plurality of elders, church is not an institution, church is organic, etc... so multi-home fellowships as one city church seems to be the only model I can see that works
@@craiglees5631 I don’t see how this is a biblical gathering. A community isn’t a church. This sounds like a multi-site church model to me and there is no clear example of this in the New Testament.
Answering "what is a biblical church?", without quoting a single bible verse.
Yeah, right
Far far too many holdovers from the institutional church. Pretty much taken the failings of the institutional church, and made them smaller and bring them into homes....
Yikes! The traditional model of “church” is a large contributor to the “leavened bread” Jesus told us to be aware of. My Brother, please reconsider your doctrine for much error is revealed. Those who long to “worship in Spirit and truth” wonder if you understand the word, 7:35 worship means prostrate or bow to the Spirit and truth. Not a man. God. And He can be accessed by any “adopted” child of the Father. He gave us the Holy Spirit to teach us and lead us into a right relationship with Him.
A Bible study is a REAL church.