There is a lot of talk in the Southern Baptist Convention about the nature of the church. Words like organic, institution, movement, centralization, etc.. are thrown around quite often. I have read a few books on the issue and I have to be honest: I take a stand on the ‘not as popular’ side. What is the nature of the church in Acts? Most agree that the nature of the church in Acts is more of an organic, house to house church setting. In Acts we see the phrase ‘house to house’ numerous times. Paul addressed and spoke of house churches. Paul went house to house in order to disciple and preach. It is a reoccurring theme in the book of Acts.
What about today?
The church setting today is very different. We are very centralized. When someone says the word church the first thing people think of is where their ‘church’ meets. Many people do not like the house church concept, always saying, ‘Any successful house church stops becoming a house church because they grow and get a building.’ Good logic, if only that was true. Was the New Testament church not ‘successful’? Of course they were and yet they stayed in homes. They continued to grow by reproducing. The reproduced from house to house, community to community, village to village, and nation to nation.
The question usually becomes a question of cultural setting. Was the early church only an ‘organic’ house church type because of its culture or is that the way God designed it to be? I think that is the way God designed it to be. There is still a cultural aspect, but this aspect is a matter of variations within the organic nature of the church. It should not be a question of organic vs. institutional: it should be a question of what way the organic nature of the church will express itself in that particular culture. If you look at all of the great movements of the church throughout the world it has a very decentralized look, except America. South Korea and China are obvious examples.
I do no think one can make the argument that the house church setting wouldn’t work in our culture. I think the New Testament left us an example to follow. We should look to Acts not only to learn the principle of the church, but to also follow the direction of the church!
Is it wrong to meet outside of homes? No. I will use a church called Apex Community Church of Dayton, Ohio to be my example. They are a church from anywhere to 2500-3000 people. They are made up of over 60 house churches and meet together with four services on the weekends. You are not a member of Apex if you do not attend a house church. Just showing up on the weekends is not enough. I use Apex as an example because I think that they give the best example of practicing the organic nature of the church in our culture. They are a community of house churches that all meet together on the weekends in order to worship together, be united in mission together, and to celebrate that God saved them.
Jesus gave us the great commission. What is the best way to fulfill this commission? Looking at the book of Acts the answer seems to be by the church functioning in a decentralized, organic way. I do not care what you call it. You can call it house churches, cell groups, community groups, discipleship groups, or small groups. What matters is that groups are meeting outside of the big building with the church sign to disciple believers and reach their communities. In my opinion, Scripture lays out this example for one reason: it is the best way to fulfill the great commission. Most churches have four services that are almost identical. Sunday morning worship, Sunday School, Sunday evening worship, and prayer meeting on Wednesday nights: all have one person preach, some prayer, and some singing. Where is the time for confession? Exhortation? Repentance? Where in this centralized system can we fulfill all of the ‘one anothers’ that Scripture commands?
When people meet in homes or in small groups somewhere besides the big building with the sign it creates an atmosphere that is needed. It creates an atmosphere that opens the door to believers opening their lives to confess sin, pray personally with one another, grow closer together, and really be able to exhort and encourage each other. It also creates an evangelistic atmosphere that is welcoming to lost people who are intimidated by the ‘big church setting’ but are comfortable going to a small group with a good friend of their from work. A ‘House Church’ setting is the best missional, incarnational approach to ministry: not because of preference, personality, culture, but because it is the biblical model left for us.
The book of Acts gives more than principles about the church, it gives an example for the church.
The Church first met in the synagogue, before persecution drove it into homes. Read Acts Again. in Acts 3 Peter and John were on the way to the temple to pray.
The time may come, when persecution will once again drive it into homes as it has done in other lands.
I couldn’t agree more, Matt. I fear the issue may be more insidious than we’d like to admit. I think Acts is pretty clear, along with the rest of Scripture on this. But when the Bible gets in the way of our desires, we side-step it. A network of house meetings makes demands of us that our current popular structures do not. Our current structures enable us to keep others at whatever distance we want (including the elders of the church). Preach at me from a stage, make me feel guilty, spank me so that I can feel atoned through… Read more »
Dr. Foltz, I think Acts is clear that they were meeting in the synagogues and homes early in Acts. Saul went ‘ravaging the church’ from ‘house to house.’ I think that is proof that ‘house to house’ was a concept in the very beginning of the church and not just after persecution. It was in homes that Saul went to ravage the church. They did meet in synagogues to come together in larger numbers to pray, hear the Word preached, and evangelized, but they also met often in homes. When Acts 2 says they ‘met together daily’ I do not… Read more »
Darby,
Very well said. This kind of gospel call is radical and takes a community willing to completely open their lives to the people they serve with… Most people want no part of it.
Matt Svobodas last blog post..When Do We Not Cast Our Pearls?
Brother Paul,
You make a valid point about Acts, but is your point exclusive? Do you believe the structure of the church is such that only when persecution or some external source demands it, it decentralizes? Or do you believe there is a biblical mandate that transcends circumstances. IOW, I think there are some who think the current western structure is the default position, and anything else is circumstancially motivated. Is that your point as well?
Darby Livingstons last blog post..Hospitality
Dr. Foltz has mde an astute observation concerning where the early church met. They met in homes, when they were driven out of the temple. They also met in homes in other places, because they were not fully accepted in Society at that time. Indeed, they were likely and, in many instances, did lose their lives by public witness. I know of several groups that are house church oriented. It doesn’t make them any more spiritual than having buildings make people unspiritual. It all depends on the spirit of the people involved. While I am no a Landmarker (I once… Read more »
Thank you Dr Willingham for your kind words.
Brother Darby, persecution not only drove them into homes but out of Jerusalem. Jesus had instructed them to go into all the world and teach all nations, baptizoing them, and teaching them to observe what He had commanded. They stayed at jerusalem until Acts 8.
The myrtyrdom of Stephen andthe ensuing persecution was a tool in the hands of the Holy Spirit to get them to evangelize other lands.
God can use any means He so desires.
“They met in homes, when they were driven out of the temple.” Dr. Willingham, “I think Acts is clear that they were meeting in the synagogues and homes early in Acts. Saul went ‘ravaging the church’ from ‘house to house.’ I think that is proof that ‘house to house’ was a concept in the very beginning of the church and not just after persecution.”- ME Scripture does not insinuate that they only met in homes after persecution. I would argue the exact opposite. It appears that they were meeting in homes from the beginning. Acts 2 says they met daily:… Read more »
Dear Bro. Matt: It is pretty easy to read the Bible and seemingly grasp what it is saying. Yes, they did meet in houses, and there is nothing wrong with doing so. The question is this: Was this a result of necessity or a precept from the Lord? The command is to assemble together (Hebs.10:25), positive implication of negative prohibition. Where is not stressed. In the present situation, especially as Christians are now needing to establish schools and other instruments of socialization, there is no prohibition for having meeting houses (that is the original term used by the Baptists before… Read more »
Oh for a revival in our churches, and a spiritual awakening in our land.
Oh that God would rend the heavens and visit us.
Oh for broken hearts, penitential tears, and confessions of wrongness.
Oh that The Holy spririt would purge the church of its dross.
then we would stop grasping after empty straws, and arguing over things that swallow a gnat.
May we pray, fast and weep UNTIL the Lord sends it upon us.
Thanks for a good and thoughtful discussion. As I read the post and comments, these were my thoughts. Perhaps our own culture has influenced and insulated us in ways we would not have chosen. The institution is valued, but cannot provide life. It seems to me that the emphasis in the book of Acts is not location of meeting, but the transformed lives of the disciples of Christ. We are encouraged that they did meet regularly somewhere to worship and celebrate God and this new life. My own research and anecdotal evidence informs me that people meet globally in locations… Read more »
You know what would bring about a revival?
A church ‘model’ that wasn’t over-centralized, program driven, and full blown consumerism. 😉
Matt Svobodas last blog post..In the Blogosphere
Matt, I agree with you here. It’s easy to just dismiss the idea as an irrelevant cultural artifact. Jim Elliff has written some helpful articles on house churches. I could provide links if you haven’t seen them. I personally am glad to see you and others standing on the “not as popular” side.
Barry Wallaces last blog post..Bruce Ware on the Atonement
Barry,
I would love the links. I really have read very little of what others have had to say on the topic except for Alan Hirsch’s book “The Forgotten Ways.”
One thing that strikes me is that Dr. Paul and Dr. James are both arguing no to worry about this topic, but rather worry about revival when in South Korea and China the thing I am arguing FOR brought about revival in both country’s. (Obviously, the Holy Spirit ‘brings about revival’ but He did it through exactly what I am arguing for.
Matt Svobodas last blog post..In the Blogosphere
While I think Hirsch overstates his case by not suggesting that folks would meet in large groups if they could, and under-emphasizing the role of preaching, I think he has some valid points. I also think that in some people, there is just a willful blindness to the text of Scripture concerning the structure of the church. It’s ludicrous to think that what one sees in terms of community in the NT and what one sees across the American church landscape are comparable and merely contextually driven. I think this banner will have to be carried by those who see… Read more »
Darby,
I like and agree with much of what you said. I’ll ask you one question, you said, “But we do have to be willing to lead in an alternate direction if needed.”, Do you think an alternate direction is needed?
Matt Svobodas last blog post..In the Blogosphere
That’s always the 50,000,000,000,000 dollar question isn’t it? I do think an alternate direction is needed. I don’t think we need a revolution or anything. 🙂 However, it’s not enough to say, “We’re just going to try to be faithful to Scripture.” Everyone says that and I believe everyone we have in mind honestly tries to. However, sometimes we need something to smack us upside the head so that we see differently – like Hosea marrying a whore perhaps (or Hirsch’s overstatements). We may be close to having the new direction handed to us. In China it’s communism that caused… Read more »
Matt,
Here are Jim’s articles:
Should I Say More About Meeting in Homes?
Christ Fellowship of Kansas City
Barry Wallaces last blog post..Bruce Ware on the Atonement
I have to ask the question even though I might regret it — Does it matter? Are we splitting hairs over trivial matters such as the proper place for worship? There are folks that I specifically know of who work in a factory in a country where they must hold their church meetings in secret or perish. The folks I know of aren’t the only ones out their either. Are we going to tell them they can only worship God and have “church” in a home, or in a temple/tabernacle/church or whatever we want to call it? I doubt that.… Read more »
Sallie, I am not arguing that church should only be done in a home or a specific building. I am arguing this: “Jesus gave us the great commission. What is the best way to fulfill this commission? Looking at the book of Acts the answer seems to be by the church functioning in a decentralized, organic way. I do not care what you call it. You can call it house churches, cell groups, community groups, discipleship groups, or small groups. What matters is that groups are meeting outside of the big building with the church sign to disciple believers and… Read more »
Jesus said, Jn4:21, ‘NEITHER IN THIS MOUNTAIN, NOR YET AT JERUSALEM (SHALL YOU), WORSHIP THE FATHER. and Jn.4:23,24, BUT THE HOUR COMES, AND NOW IS, WHN THE TRUE WORSHIPPERS , SHALL WORSHIP THE FATHER IN SPIRIT AND IN TRUTH: FOR THE FATHER SEEKS SUCH TO WORSHIP HIM. GOD IS A SPIRIT: AND THEY THAT WORSHIP HIM MUST WORSHIP HIM IN SPIRIT AND TRUTH. That, I believe, says it all on the subject of worship. It is like formal as opposed to informal worship. Dr. R. G. Lee told of an African American believer who attended the dedication of a railroad… Read more »
Great discussion everybody and extremely pertinent to the affairs of our day. I would like to offer my two cents worth real quick. One of my criticisms of the argument of the “not so popular” viewpoint is that I think they are standing to close to the trees to actually see the forest. What I mean is two-fold: (1) I think they are too easily dismissing the references to the preaching at Solomon’s portico and the various other larger gatherings. I also think they too easily dismiss the cultural information. This was a poor early church who had people selling… Read more »
Dr. Willingham, I think we are on two different pages. We are talking about getting to the same destination, but merely emphasizing two different aspects. I appreciated your last post and agree with every word. We are to worship in Spirit and in Truth… While we worship God in this was we are to also fulfill the Great Commission, this is part of our worship, I am only trying to determine what the most effective, biblical way to fulfill the Great Commission is and I don’t believe it is our consumeristic-program ‘me driven’ philosophy of ministry. Matt Svobodas last blog… Read more »
Todd, Thank you for the response. I am going to address your first point. I don’t feel that us ‘not so popular’ view guys dismiss the obvious larger gatherings. In my post the church example that I use is an example that has the ‘organic’ house church setting AND the large corporate gathering. I am a half-breed. I do not think the church as a body should forsake large gatherings and I do not think they should forsake meeting in smaller more intimate settings, such as a home. Let’s say they were not poor… Who’s says they would spend ridiculous… Read more »
Matt, Thanks for your response. I agree with you on the use of money issue. I am in Florida and one night I was teaching and decided to question the necessity of an aquarium replicating the parting of the Red Sea that is housed at FBC Jacksonville. Needless to say, I was almost stoned by some of the people in the group. However, people who took a beat top think about it came up to me afterwards and said, “You know, you’ve got a point.” Let me say, I am in accord with you in the view of large AND… Read more »
I’m glad Matt brought up the financial aspect, which I’d like to address first before going back to a couple of other points. What would happen if Christians in fellowship were more focused on being “the Church” rather than being “a __insert your favorite flavor___ church?” The plain fact is that the vast majority of the funds that are collected within American Christendom are used to maintain facilities and church plants which a) provide services primarily aimed at the SAVED rather than the LOST, and b) are dedicated to the task of maintaining a SEPARATE and DISTINCT identity compared to… Read more »
Dear Matt: I don’t recall ever approving the consumerism, me -centered worship of a lot of today’s church life. In fact, I am repulsed by it. The real issue, however, is to get at the intent behind what is being done. There are times when extravagance is approved of the Lord. Remember the woman and the expensive ointment which she used to anoint the feet of Jesus? I can’t say I like these ornate church buildings, etc., either, but a meeting house designed to last a while is no particular evil as it will serve multitudes and be a means… Read more »
Matt — I am enjoying the discussion here very much. I hope I didn’t see callous with my earlier post. It wasn’t intentional. I think I’m lost on the use of the word “organic”.. to me that would mean meeting in the fields and forests or by the waters edge 🙂 We looked into house churches even before we moved to North Carolina but only found one or two available and with what seemed to be the thought of any theology or doctrine will work for us (the others advertising their “house church” meeting). That didn’t work for us 🙂… Read more »
Sallie, the term “organic church” in this context is referring to a group of people who interact with one another like the different parts of an organism, rather than as members of a top-down, rigidly structured organization. One reason why the organic church concept seems so foreign to most “churched” people is because for centuries we have been indoctrinated as to how “church” is supposed to be done, i.e., with a well-defined leadership hierarchy consisting of a senior pastor, deacons, pastoral staff, etc. The problem with that is that you can’t really find that kind of structure in the New… Read more »
“The NT church WAS, in fact, more like an organism in the sense that the members weren’t spectators to the show (worship service) being put on by the professional clergy.” Although the whole Paul and Eutychus thing bears a strong resemblance to modern church. 🙂 I think we need to be careful right along the line you’ve mentioned here. This is one of the things I think Hirsch has played too fast and loose with in overstatement. I found myself frustrated at how eldership is under-emphasized and body gifting is given almost exclusive attention (in his book, not your comment).… Read more »
Dear Mr. Vance: I hardly think what I gave is the modern definition of the church. My specialty in research was the nature of the church. that definition is based upon explicit knowledge and analysis of the meaning of the term ekklesia in the Greek New Testament. Your presentation of what is a church reminds me of two groups that don’t claim to be a church, namely, the christian or church of Christ and the Plymouth Brethren, although I am not sure where the gift of tongues would quite fit into those two. In any case, both of the two… Read more »
Dr. Willingham, I personally know Jay Vance to be a strong man of God with a very devout and good christian character. He is the father of a young soldier who I spoke of in an article of mine on SBCVoices a little while ago. He is no outsider to the SBC. Jay, you said “The idea that the primary mode of worship for Christians is to come and sit in pews and spectate as professional clergy conduct a “service” would be totally foreign to the NT church.” and I am in complete agreement! I think you know my heart… Read more »
Darby, I totally agree with the need for BOTH large-group and small-group experiences in the Body life of Christians. I just don’t think much of what passes for large-group worship on a week-to-week basis in many (if not most) churches has much basis in NT teachings. As to the role of elderS (plural) in the local church, I absolutely agree this is a Biblical model. I also believe the modern professional clergy system as we know it, with a senior pastor at the top of the local church hierarchy, has little semblance to the Biblical eldership concept modeled for us… Read more »
Jay,
Then we are ready for tea and crepes. 🙂 I agree with your agreements.
Darby Livingstons last blog post..Should Men Work Outside the Home?
Barry,
Somehow I just saw the links you gave me. Thanks again!
Matt Svobodas last blog post..Bell and Luther: Same side of Reform?
I believe in congregational church government and ministry. Every member of the ekklesia is on an equal basis with every other member. No one is the superior of another. Every member of the body has a ministry which no one else can perform. Like the human body each part must function, if one is to have an effective life. It was baptist and congregational churches which provided the people with a means of training that made the Republican Democracy that we have in America work so well. Most other countries lack that acclamating agent to help their citizens get the… Read more »
Matt,
You’re welcome, brother. Let me know what you think about the articles. You’ve got my email address. I’m glad you raised the issue. It’s an important one.
For whatever it’s worth, I agree with Jay’s main point–nothing that most of our churches do on a Sunday morning even remotely resembles the dynamic participatory ministry of 1 Cor. 14. And, as Darby pointed out, a strong plural eldership is needed to provide oversight and direction for that sort of dynamic gathering.
Barry Wallaces last blog post..I’m more talented with the sword
While I believe in the eldership, I am also painfully aware that it is abused just like the diaconate and the pastoral leadership and congregational government are abused. For instance, I know a place where the Pastor/Elder was retiring. The next Sunday a Pastor/Elder from another place was in the pulpit. When a former elder andmember asked, when is the congregation going to voe on the new Elder, the one retiring said, “Ask him. He’s your new pastor.”!!!!! Gentlemen, I suggest that, while a plurality of elders is a NT norm, the real issue lies in the hearts of all… Read more »
DR, WILLINGHAM-38
Iam joining you in praying for a world wide awakening. unless we get it, it’s about over. We need a revival in our churches also.
Oh, that God’s people would fall in love with Him and each other.
Oh, that the lost were awakened to their lost condition…
Grant it, Oh God.
Dr. Paul Foltz
An awakening reaches all areas of society, including, and especially, the church. In Feb., d.v., I will speak in a church that was one of the centers of the Second Great Awakening in 1801. In that revival that church is said to have head 500 converted in one Sunday morning service or in a revival (different sources). In any case, out of that awakening within 20 years will come the Great Century of Missions. That Awakening and that Assn., Sandy Creek, and that church will produce along with other churches the great impetus to missions of Southern Baptists. The man… Read more »
I am joining the in invitation to pray for a world wide awakening. This is what we need in our churches in order to reach the goal of success for the world wide awakening program. When we pray something happens!
Oh, that God’s people would fall in love with Him and each other.
Oh, that the lost were awakened to their lost condition…
Grant it, Oh God.
Dennis Tuazon
WElcome Dennis Tuazon to the ranks of those praying for a Spiritual Awakening and A Revival. May God add to the ranks those who are committed in seeing these things brought to pass soon.
Brethren, I spoke twice in that church which once was an arm of Sandy Creek Church and which produced the minister who would set the tone to train ministers for the SBC. I refer to Basil Manly, Sr. I preached twice for that church (2/8 & 2/15). Today, they are as they have been for yrs. just a small country church with no one farming any more. The members are employed in other ways. My heart’s prayer is that God would raise up people to pray in every church for a visitation from God that would move the whole earth.… Read more »