Christian Message Boards: Here's a question about the first church?

This is topic Here's a question about the first church? in forum Bible Topics & Study at Christian Message Boards.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://thechristianbbs.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004750

Posted by HE LIVES (Member # 4931) on :

What do you think the worship time of the first church consisted of? Would it look like todays church, would we even recognise it as a church, or would it be so different from what we're doing that we would call it a cult?

Here's another thing that makes me scratch my head. In the book of Acts it says that the first church had all things in common, but today we see eye to eye on very little.

Churches split more today than bananas, and we have a ton of denominational bible colleges to teach our denominational versions of the word of God. Doesn't that sound like this?

2Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

What are your thoughts on these matters?

This Topic is for discussion, and not for argument.

Your brother in Christ,
Chuck

Posted by Aaron (Member # 3761) on :

quote:
Originally posted by HE LIVES:
What do you think the worship time of the first church consisted of?

Without going further you (unintentionally I'm sure) bring to light a difference I believe is foundational.

I don't believe they set aside a "time of worship" like the contemporary church. I think it happened as the Spirit moved them. I can see saints meeting with one another throughout the week, sharing what the Lord has showed them, praising His name along the way to market, stopping and praying together (somewhere off the road for the sake of privacy). And worship spontaneously bubbling up out of them; perhaps in song, perhaps in prayer, perhaps in the way they treat their children or wives.

No, no "worship time" for them, I'm afraid. More like "a life of worship".

Aaron

Posted by HE LIVES (Member # 4931) on :

Thank you for sharing.

quote:
No, no "worship time" for them, I'm afraid. More like "a life of worship".

That's a great reply!

Your brother in Christ,
Chuck

Posted by Caretaker (Member # 36) on :

God bless you;

It would seem that the home fellowships share more of a commonality with the early Church, then the massive congregational buildings and organizations. One would also see this unity of faith within the persecuted Church. We may one day soon have to return to this walk of faith.

Acts 2:

42: And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
43: And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.
44: And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
45: And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
46: And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
47: Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

No mortgages.
No building funds.
No arguments over which color carpet for the sanctuary, or who sits in which pew.
No live bands, no productions, no choirs, no christian super-stars with private jets and entourages.

Purity. Simplicity. Faith and substance.

Posted by Eduardo Grequi (Member # 3984) on :

I do know that no place of worship was allowed if it were not approved by the convening authority. The church as we speak is similar to the house churches of China. Early America most people met in the community center which were the same of the church in the column. The colonial America thrived around the Church. The Church during the week was the school as well. This is the same as in Isreal Synagoug's were places of worship and education. Homeschooling itself has been around for a long time. Things are reinvented during people life times.

Why people used homes for churches were because it was suppose to be a time family/friends fellowship for the boutiful God providence.

Posted by HE LIVES (Member # 4931) on :

quote:
No mortgages.
No building funds.
No arguments over which color carpet for the sanctuary, or who sits in which pew.
No live bands, no productions, no choirs, no christian super-stars with private jets and entourages.

How beautiful does that sound?

The flock could actually invest in people instead of bricks.

Drew,

Thanks for sharing.

Your brother in Christ,
chuck

Posted by Bandit (Member # 3643) on :

quote:
Originally posted by HE LIVES:
What do you think the worship time of the first church consisted of? Would it look like todays church, would we even recognise it as a church, or would it be so different from what we're doing that we would call it a cult?

Here's another thing that makes me scratch my head. In the book of Acts it says that the first church had all things in common, but today we see eye to eye on very little.

Churches split more today than bananas, and we have a ton of denominational bible colleges to teach our denominational versions of the word of God. Doesn't that sound like this?

2Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

What are your thoughts on these matters?

This Topic is for discussion, and not for argument.

Your brother in Christ,
Chuck

I am not sure, but I would bet that the early church was probably different from the average church of today. I do wonder if churches today have made more of the "worship" service than they should. It appears to me that today it is more designed to whip up the emotions. I believe worship is an attitude that does not necessarily involve singing and dancing (or jumping and sreaming). I even dare to think it is possible to worship in complete silence!

As far as the "bible college" thing goes, the church I go to has one, but I would never attend. It is not about discussing the scriptures to see what they say, but it is all about them telling you what to believe (no real discussion involved), with you simply regurgitating back whatever they have told you. Excuse me, but I'm not going to turn my brain off so some guy who thinks he is wiser than I can fill it with whatever he has decided to be true. (How stupid do these guys think I am? Or rather, how stupid are they?)

Welcome to the club of independent thinkers! Probably one of the most unwelcome things in the modern church is a critical thinker. Anyone who is willing probe the scriptures and honestly examine alternatives is most unwelcome. Anyone who differs from the religious establishment is considered a threat. Which explains why they killed Jesus and the prophets. Today's church for the most part is no different. If you won't bow down and accept what those in leadership tell you, then you are either silenced or cast out! (I have been silenced, with the threat of being cast out somewhat understood.) But I thank God that being cast out of the "church" does not mean being cast out of His kingdom.

Bandit

Posted by David (Member # 1) on :

I found to below to be very interesting:

What are the strengths of the House Church?

1. Jesus chose the home to minister almost exclusively during His tenure on this earth. He only taught in the synagogues and temples when He wanted to confront the unconverted. He taught and fellowshipped with His faithful followers exclusively in the homes.

2. The Apostles planted the Church in the homes and never moved to larger facilities.

3. The home is where Jehovah applied the Law in Israel through the father of the home in the Passover, feasts, and teaching of the Law of God.

4. The home is where Jesus spent 30 years growing up before starting His ministry.

5. The home needs no hierarchy added since the father is head of the home and a pastor de facto. This is clearly seen in the Pauline ministry, and Paul NEVER denigrated the father as head of the House Church-- he used that man and named the local church by his name.

6. The home needs no incorporation or registration with Caesar-- Indeed, the home is the opposite of the incorporated temple down town, almost totally transparent to Caesar's greedy eye for control. Witness who Caesar attacks to prove a point of power.

7. The home is a great place to meet in times of persecution.

8. The home is already insured and does not invite liability.

9. The home is much easier to guard against sodomites, witches, and invasion by devils since it is private property and the home owner has the right to refuse entrance to anyone he chooses. The great hall of the people is a public building, even if non-incorporated, and the courts can force wicked men on them.

10. The home is used 7 days a week, so there is no need to heat the great hall of the people for 80% of the time when no one is there. Some climates where winters fall into the sub zero temperatures cause thousands of dollars of God's treasury to be sent up the chimney in heating empty space.

11. The home is a lot more inviting to sinners we are trying to win. Large halls of the people intimidate sinners and are symbols of religion. Evangelism is a lot easier in the House Church.

12. The home does not look like a "church," so it is a lot easier to teach that the Church is the people.

13. Satan does not like homes nearly as much as big temples downtown. This is obvious in history, for ALL of the superstition of the ages in Christendom is found in great halls of the people. Mark it down. You cannot prove otherwise.

14. Homes are more comfortable than great halls of the people. People hang around after meetings and enjoy one another more instead of running for the parking lot. Church dinners are more friendly since the group is smaller.

15. Home Churches don't have to keep schedules and watch the abominable clock like great halls of the people. The very nature of a great mass of people demands tight time keeping and precise choreographing of events. The home delivers the saints of the clock for a day each week.

16. The home needs no PA system, does not invite big band driven worship, obliterates the "worship leader" frenzy, and in general takes the Lord's Church back to the simplicity of a family, which is where the New Testament Church started.

17. You can keep the family together in a House Church instead of sending every family member scurrying off in 5 different directions to never see each other again until 12:30. A House Church is a REAL "church family." It offers "something for every member of the family" that is, the House Church offers to KEEP the family-- a family.

18. Youth in a House Church cannot play the fool by hiding in cars in the parking lot necking or riding in church busses to events where they run loose all over some distant town. Kids in House Churches learn to relate to adults and respect older folks, for they are with them all the time. This makes for a much more mature young person as they mature.

It must be said that many of the above qualities are also present in a local church which is under 25 people, but the lust for numerical growth in a non-home based church will one day wipe out all of the above.

Posted by Eden (Member # 5728) on :

Another reason why the early church had all things in common is because they were almost certainly excommunicated from the Jewish community of worship, and they lost their jobs and many became destitute, while others who had property were also excommunicated and they sold what they had and shared with their destitute brothers and sisters.

Now that Christianity is more settled in and the elements of Christianity do not need to be repeated as much, in countries where Christians are in the majority there is enough for everybody and no one is losing their jobs because they're Christians (at least, not yet).

Eden