Reason you can not deny

[ttg]

Also, you should know that 99.99% of house churches are started by respected and educated and experienced pastors. Or better said ex pastors they do not call themselves that more.

Do some homework, before making too many assumptions.

Most polls have an error rate of + or - 4 percent and that is why I don't believe your statistic.

Did you know 47.8% of all statistics are made up on the spot?

 

[Sothenes]

Did you know 47.8% of all statistics are made up on the spot?

The order in which you ask the questions can determine the answers people give which mean that people aren't intentionally truthful.

It is sort of like the guy surveying you at the mall. He asks you if you eat any cereals where the main ingredient is sugar. You want to appear as if you don't eat junk and then the guy surveying you asks you what cereal you eat. Most cereals have sugar listed in one of the first three ingredients which means that the most popular cereals have sugar which are bad for your teeth. Unless you eat a bland cereal like shredded wheat, you are getting sugar. I can't eat shredded wheat because it is tasteless. Anyway, if you wish to appear proper during a survey, you will probably end up telling inaccuracies.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Also, you should know that 99.99% of house churches are started by respected and educated and experienced pastors

Same can be said about Pastors, or whatever you want to call them, of churches. Both home churches and church buildings have the potential for problems. Ignoring such a reality is rather convenient and a poor way to argue for something. The fact remains, as before in another similar topic, no biblical proof exists that proves church buildings are sinful.

To me, the point is not that church buildings are "sinful", but that the pattern of the church meeting changed somewhere along the way and we need to ask "why"? Why did it become necessary that a congregation that grew beyond a dozen or so (that could meet in one house) need purchase a building with the intention of eventually cramming hundreds of members into a single meeting? Why not simply start another house meeting, and then another and another, so that hundreds of members could meet in dozens of homes? Such a home church scenario could still have a leadership and also function as a single minded entity.

The obvious benefits of this pattern are...

1) Each member of each home meeting could actually participate in the meeting, rather than just warm a pew in a vast auditorium.

2) The majority of offerings from the congregation could (gasp! :o) actually go to the needy among or outside of the congregation instead of huge property payments on facilities that are not necessary.

Here's what happened...

Somewhere along the way, worldly-minded and self-serving individuals gained control of the church, formed organizations which they called the "church" (which were not really the church) and began to solicit offerings from the sheep to build their empire.

In short, the church was "hoodwinked", and still is. All ye who remain a part of this situation are part of the problem, not the solution.

 

[Sothenes]

The majority of offerings from the congregation could (gasp! :o) actually go to the needy among or outside of the congregation instead of huge property payments on facilities that are not necessary.

Here's what happened...

Somewhere along the way, worldly-minded and self-serving individuals gained control of the church, formed organizations which they called the "church" (which were not really the church) and began to solicit offerings from the sheep to build their empire.

In short, the church was "hoodwinked", and still is. All ye who remain a part of this situation are part of the problem, not the solution.

Jesus did feed the five thousand so having an audience that large is not outside the realm of God's example.

Helping the "needy" is not always a good idea because I have helped people who have in turned decided that since I helped them get by that they didn't need to work as hard because I made them able to get by.

Helping the needy is not always a good idea because Paul says,"if any would not work, neither should he eat." (II Thess. 3:10) When I was younger, I remember the names of Hospitals and a lot of them had Christian sounding names because the Church built a lot of them out of the Great Depression and most of them are taken over today because of costs so the names have changed.

Organizations are necessary to go world wide. I go to a MegaChurch and they sent a tractor trailer down to New Orleans after Katrina hit. Your little house church would not be able to afford to rent a tractor trailer for very long let alone fill it. Samaritan's Purse, the Salvation Army are all Christian organizations that are able to go into other countries and work on a large scale effort that little groups cannot and will not match. The Gideons are more countries distributing the Word of God than any small Christian group. Wycliffe Translators are spending years trying to translate the Word of God into other languages and it is not as simple as you think. It is a large scale operation that no small group can accomplish because small groups would have accomplished it already if they could.

Somehow you think it is wrong for someone to have to pay for the lights. If I had a church and it grew from a $100 electric bill to a $1,000 electric bill than that is the cost of having church. If I go from a $100 water bill to a $10,000 water bill than that is the cost of meeting the needs of those whom worship God with you. Why is that more disgusting then if you broke that $10,000 dollar water bill down per house church then you still would have had the same amount of people using the same amount of water and each church would equal a part of that $10,000 water bill because the people still have to use the facilities whether it is in a house or a building.

One of the things I thank God for is the fact that my megachurch can pay for a licensed counsellor and offer him to me for free. That is not something that a house church can afford to do. The house church cannot afford to have a licensed counsellor on call. You think it is something disgusting for the church to be paying for all those services but the reality is that people are donating their time for less than what they would get in the real world and the church is getting a service at a great bargain.

You assume that the person warming the pew is doing nothing and that it is wrong for them to be doing that. That is your standard but that isn't Jesus' standard. Sometimes by being a busy Christian you are neglecting the same God you claim to serve and that is evident in the Biblical story of Mary and Martha. It is also unfair to expect those who have the smallest means to do all the work and such is found in the story of the Widow who gave two mites and though what she accomplished wasn't much, she gave more than those who did more but the Widow gave more of a percentage for the Widow who gave two mites gave all that she had. I would to see everyone here put themselves at risk before they accuse those whom actually put themselves at risk be accused of doing nothing.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Jesus did feed the five thousand so having an audience that large is not outside the realm of God's example

So have your meeting on a hillside. Point is, he didn't raise funds to purchase a building to have it.

Helping the "needy" is not always a good idea because I have helped people who have in turned decided that since I helped them get by that they didn't need to work as hard because I made them able to get by.

Helping the needy is not always a good idea because Paul says,"if any would not work, neither should he eat." (II Thess. 3:10) When I was younger, I remember the names of Hospitals and a lot of them had Christian sounding names because the Church built a lot of them out of the Great Depression and most of them are taken over today because of costs so the names have changed

I was not advocating indiscriminate giving, rather, giving to those who are truly in need (and through no fault of their own) which is the biblical example, and not to a man-made organization which has no basis in the NT.

Organizations are necessary to go world wide. I go to a MegaChurch and they sent a tractor trailer down to New Orleans after Katrina hit. Your little house church would not be able to afford to rent a tractor trailer for very long let alone fill it. Samaritan's Purse, the Salvation Army are all Christian organizations that are able to go into other countries and work on a large scale effort that little groups cannot and will not match. The Gideons are more countries distributing the Word of God than any small Christian group. Wycliffe Translators are spending years trying to translate the Word of God into other languages and it is not as simple as you think. It is a large scale operation that no small group can accomplish because small groups would have accomplished it already if they could

One little house church would not be able to afford it but MANY would, just the same way your "mega-church" did. In fact, such a house church group could probably afford to send SEVERAL tractors from an equally sized congregation since they would not be spending anything on a church building and related facilities.

Somehow you think it is wrong for someone to have to pay for the lights. If I had a church and it grew from a $100 electric bill to a $1,000 electric bill than that is the cost of having church. If I go from a $100 water bill to a $10,000 water bill than that is the cost of meeting the needs of those whom worship God with you. Why is that more disgusting then if you broke that $10,000 dollar water bill down per house church then you still would have had the same amount of people using the same amount of water and each church would equal a part of that $10,000 water bill because the people still have to use the facilities whether it is in a house or a building

But if it is in the home, the owners are ALREADY paying the utilities for that particular house. Would it cost you anymore to live if you had a dozen people over for meetings? Maybe the toilet would flush a few more times? Maybe you'd burn out one more light bulb a month? :roll: C'mon, think this through - it's not hard.

One of the things I thank God for is the fact that my megachurch can pay for a licensed counsellor and offer him to me for free. That is not something that a house church can afford to do. The house church cannot afford to have a licensed counsellor on call. You think it is something disgusting for the church to be paying for all those services but the reality is that people are donating their time for less than what they would get in the real world and the church is getting a service at a great bargain

Well, if you really need a "licensed counsellor", then I refer you back to my previous point. The home church can afford anything your church can and MORE, because it has less expenses.

You assume that the person warming the pew is doing nothing and that it is wrong for them to be doing that. That is your standard but that isn't Jesus' standard. Sometimes by being a busy Christian you are neglecting the same God you claim to serve and that is evident in the Biblical story of Mary and Martha. It is also unfair to expect those who have the smallest means to do all the work and such is found in the story of the Widow who gave two mites and though what she accomplished wasn't much, she gave more than those who did more but the Widow gave more of a percentage for the Widow who gave two mites gave all that she had. I would to see everyone here put themselves at risk before they accuse those whom actually put themselves at risk be accused of doing nothing.

"When ye come together, EVERY ONE OF YOU hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation..." (1Cor.14:26)

This is the pattern for the biblical Christian meeting. It is impossible for everyone to participate according to this pattern in a "mega-church" meeting (unless you plan to have a 15 hour church service) Therefore, your mega-church is unscriptural in form.

Next objection :roll:....

 

[Sothenes]

Jesus did feed the five thousand so having an audience that large is not outside the realm of God's example

So have your meeting on a hillside. Point is, he didn't raise funds to purchase a building to have it.

I don't know of any wilderness churches where people go out in freezing or sub zero weather.

 

[Sothenes]

Well, if you really need a "licensed counsellor", then I refer you back to my previous point. The home church can afford anything your church can and MORE, because it has less expenses.

That isn't true because I read a survey by Christianity Today back in the early 1990's which said that the average pastor they surveyed made less than $12,000 a year which was below the poverty level.

The second thing is that I called around and the only Church offering Counselling in my area was the mega-church. There was one other large church and the pastor said he only did marriage counselling. If what you said was true then the house churches would be leading the way but they are not.

 

[Klee shay]

These "my church versus your church" discussions are doing nothing to edify the body of Christ.

 

[gingercat]

These "my church versus your church" discussions are doing nothing to edify the body of Christ.

We don't see much of fruit of Christianity from main stream organized churches. They obviousely have big problems and should be focused instead of hiding or ignore them for His name's sake!

 

[Sothenes]

These "my church versus your church" discussions are doing nothing to edify the body of Christ.

We don't see much of fruit of Christianity from main stream organized churches. They obviousely have big problems and should be focused instead of hiding or ignore them for His name's sake!

How many churches have you visited to be able to say that?

 

[gingercat]

These "my church versus your church" discussions are doing nothing to edify the body of Christ.

We don't see much fruit of Christianity from main stream organized churches. They obviousely have big problems and should be focused instead of hiding or ignore them for His name's sake!

How many churches have you visited to be able to say that?

It is well known. Billy Graham often states it. I am sorry I don't have the exact report. Do you mean you don't recognize it? If not you should examine you own walk with the Lord. You may not have high standard as you should as His follower.

 

[Sothenes]

These "my church versus your church" discussions are doing nothing to edify the body of Christ.

We don't see much fruit of Christianity from main stream organized churches. They obviousely have big problems and should be focused instead of hiding or ignore them for His name's sake!

How many churches have you visited to be able to say that?

It is well known. Billy Graham often states it. I am sorry I don't have the exact report. Do you mean you don't recognize it? If not you should examine you own walk with the Lord. You may not have high standard as you should as His follower.

What I'm saying is that I'm sure that few of you have spent your life going to churches in different states so you wouldn't be qualified to speak about churches in different states. I don't believe there are no responsible people anywhere and I haven't heard you say that. By saying that there is no fruit, I'm confused because what I hear is that in your eyes the Church basically doesn't exist. The truth is that I have traveled to at least one Church in the Bible belt and the attitudes there are entirely different because breaking the Ten Commandments there is not tolerated. I think you are painting with a broad brush because there are different Church administrations in different areas of the country.

"But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to [the image of] Baal."-Romans 11:4

God has his people where He wants them and they are being responsible whether or not you can see them. I've seen life where I haven't been looking from different Mainline denominations. Another thing is that when you talk about my standards not being high enough, you have to remember that different people see different needs and that is why their standards will not automatically be your standards.

 

[Henry]

God has his people where He wants them and they are being responsible whether or not you can see them.

What? I am always shocked at this kind of excuse...yes I said excuse that is all it is.

You are saying things like "different people have different needs" as if that answers denomionalism.

Sadly the bible does not support this kind of thinking. THe people where told to scatter they did not God scattered them. This happened in the OT and the NT. It is just not right to say God has people where he wants them as if they have no reason to consider perhaps they are not where God wants them.

And them when you start serving the "needs" of the people, the church becomes man centered not God centered. God has not said, hey do church how ever you "feel" good about it.

Church is not pragmatic.

What about the Bible? Do you care at all what the bible says, or just what ever makes you feel good?

 

[gingercat]

Another thing is that when you talk about my standards not being high enough, you have to remember that different people see different needs and that is why their standards will not automatically be your standards.

I have two teenagers; 16 and 18 years olds. You cannot expect maturity as adults but I can see their sincerity and it is not so hard to see.

It is the same as all adults. No matter how long or short they have been Christians, if they are sincere, you can tell. It is not so difficult to differenciate from wholehearted ones and not so serious ones. If we cannot tell, we have serious spiritual problems.

Teen agers who are raised by wholehearted Christians will not get into serious problems like many secular ones.

 

[Sothenes]

God has his people where He wants them and they are being responsible whether or not you can see them.

What? I am always shocked at this kind of excuse...yes I said excuse that is all it is.

You are saying things like "different people have different needs" as if that answers denomionalism.

Sadly the bible does not support this kind of thinking. THe people where told to scatter they did not God scattered them. This happened in the OT and the NT. It is just not right to say God has people where he wants them as if they have no reason to consider perhaps they are not where God wants them.

And them when you start serving the "needs" of the people, the church becomes man centered not God centered. God has not said, hey do church how ever you "feel" good about it.

Church is not pragmatic.

What about the Bible? Do you care at all what the bible says, or just what ever makes you feel good?

Luk 9:49 And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us.


Luk 9:50 And Jesus said unto him, Forbid [him] not: for he that is not against us is for us.

If Christians wish to go in a different direction than you wish them to go, Jesus says you have no right to forbid them.

Mat 25:42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

Many Mainline Churches have feeding programs. I don't know any Christian who wouldn't give someone a cup of water.

Mat 25:43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

You're saying that there aren't any main line churches that have clothing programs. There are.

Mat 25:44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

You're saying there isn't a prison ministry. There are.

Mat 25:45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to me.

These are man centered needs and Jesus said that if you do it unto the least of these, you have done it unto Him.

Luk 6:3 And Jesus answering them said, Have ye not read so much as this, what David did, when himself was an hungred, and they which were with him;

Luk 6:4 How he went into the house of God, and did take and eat the shewbread, and gave also to them that were with him; which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone?

Human need always proceeds the law of God.

Again, I don't know what any of you are talking about. You are disrespecting Main Line churches without any specific charges which is stereotyping and saying that the dirty people are over there.

 

[Henry]

You are deffending the status quo, who said the "mainline" churches don't try to do things, they certainly do. They just waist more then they give...

Think about it, if there was no building to pay for and no pastor salary to pay, how much more can used to help people.

Like it or not very little of mainline church spending goes to helping people, most of it goes to the buildings and the staff.

Besides, what really matters is what the bible teaches and no mainline church practices church life as we learn about in the bible.

YOu are defending the system when you should be challenging it according the word of God.

 

[Sothenes]

You are deffending the status quo, who said the "mainline" churches don't try to do things, they certainly do. They just waist more then they give...

Think about it, if there was no building to pay for and no pastor salary to pay, how much more can used to help people.

Like it or not very little of mainline church spending goes to helping people, most of it goes to the buildings and the staff.

Besides, what really matters is what the bible teaches and no mainline church practices church life as we learn about in the bible.

YOu are defending the system when you should be challenging it according the word of God.

I was talking to a Black pastor in the black community and he says that Main Line churches give more to missions than other churches and especially more than Churches in urban areas so he would disagree with you. The Black Pastor I'm referring to does not get paid a salary and his church does not reimburse him for the textbooks he has to buy or the courses he is taking. I go to a large church in a predominately white area and they spend more on missionaries than your average church so I don't have a problem with what they doing in terms of missions.

I have actual budgets in my filing cabinets for a mainline church and a lot of their buildings were paid for years ago. Some of these main line churches were made out of stone which has a longer life than some of your house churches which makes their cost more efficient than your little prefabricated house which will break down. If you are going to have a full time pastor then you should pay him because the Bible says not to muzzle the ox which treads out the corn and a workman is worthy of his hire.

You want me to defend your practices by the Bible but I noticed that you aren't willing to give any Bible verses for what you are suggesting. If you want to defend your position, you can but I am not responsible to defend your position.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

So have your meeting on a hillside. Point is, he didn't raise funds to purchase a building to have it.

I don't know of any wilderness churches where people go out in freezing or sub zero weather.

So meet in your home in the winter :roll:

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Well, if you really need a "licensed counsellor", then I refer you back to my previous point. The home church can afford anything your church can and MORE, because it has less expenses.

That isn't true because I read a survey by Christianity Today back in the early 1990's which said that the average pastor they surveyed made less than $12,000 a year which was below the poverty level

Your response doesn't make sense. Please reread my statement.

[quote:38886]The second thing is that I called around and the only Church offering Counselling in my area was the mega-church. There was one other large church and the pastor said he only did marriage counselling. If what you said was true then the house churches would be leading the way but they are not.

[/quote:38886]

Firstly, I have to question whether the availability of professional marriage counsellors in a church constitutes it "leading the way"? Secondly, you won't see many house churches anyway unless and until Christians begin to realize what the church is supposed to be.

 

[Henry]

Sothenes

Mormon bishops and home teachers also do not get paid. And they are actually much closer to the scriptures at that point, however you miss the point. It is not IF they get a pay check or not, the question is does the Bibles teaching support this practice.

I can also say that Mormons give much more money (sadly) then any Christian group to each other and to help people in general. Plus they missionaries pay for their own way.

So then if we are to be pragmatic as you seem to imply the Mormons must be OK too? Yet we know that there is not salvation in Mormon teaching. WHY because the bible teaches us otherwise.

As for Biblical backing for what I have said, I have been posting dozens of text through out this forum. Tell me what it is exactly you want me to back and I will give the text to you.

If you are going to have a full time pastor then you should pay him because the Bible says not to muzzle the ox which treads out the corn and a workman is worthy of his hire.

Problems...One the bible knows nothing of the kind of Pastor you are talking about, there is NO TIME NO PLACE AND NO teaching in the bible of a one man show. You are trying to use a biblical precept to deffend an unbiblical job.

And the context of the verse you are refering to is not talking about paid clergy (by the way not such thing as Clergy in the NTchurch). You should take some time to read that text in the context in which it was written, it is talking apostles more so then a pastor. Never the less it does not matter, becuase as I have said there is not such thing as the church pastor in the bible anyways.

Yes, I am saying that man who calls himself PASTOR is wrong, he may be a good man, and he may be serving God as best as he knows how. But his job is man made and not biblical.