Are House Churches the Biblically Prescribed Model?
It is irrefutable that the early church met in homes. It is also irrefutable that apostolic epistles were written to groups of home churches designated by an area, primarily cities. The letters were written for specific purposes unique to those churches, which clearly demonstrates a fellowship and unity among them.
In Acts 20, Paul called for a meeting with the Ephesian elders. Those elders represented the home churches in Ephesus—this is evident. Churches were separated by geographies made up of home assemblies and led by a particular group of elders. Once you see this construct, massive amounts of biblical data begins to fall into place. And once again, we find that we have been fed a load of boloney on another issue by the institutionalized church: “New Testament church models are ambiguous.” Not so.
Question is, was this a transitional model or intended to be the norm? I think it was intended to be the norm for a couple of reasons. First, several of the home churches were hosted by believers with significant financial means. Even though the New Testament spans several years and the church was endowed with wealthy people to some degree, we see no other model in regard to a central meeting place. Secondly, according to my wife Susan who has studied Reformation history extensively, it was Augustine who normalized the central meeting place concept. That means the initial model was in practice for at least 300 years.
The New Testament describes the leadership, the worship, and general activities of the early church in detail. There is no ambiguity here, a prescribed model is apparent. But home church does not mean the organization thereof is loosey-goosey. Far from it. Structure and organization is described in detail. Key to a successful home church network like that of the early church is paid, fulltime leaders. It is a structure within a free atmosphere. Administration and procedure are critical. Things are to be done, “decently and in order.”
As you can see, I am only putting forth a general thesis here for the time being. But in the near future I will be writing a detailed explanation of the New Testament model. Basically, I think it is a model that combines the casual and free atmosphere of the home with sound administration.
Also, there is leadership, but no polity (government), and fellowship versus authority. Sound administration can be mutually exclusive from government and authority. Unity is the goal, not control. It’s a “household of faith” not an institution. Unity comes from following the one mind in Christ; i.e., TRUTH.
1. Leadership, not government.
2. Fellowship, not authority.
3. Unity, not control.
4. A household of faith, not an institution.
Time to think out of the box on this. Time to rethink all of our presuppositions.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
I have a question?
Sent from my iPhone
LikeLike
And that would be?
LikeLike
Amen and amen!
LikeLike
And I hope you realize the import of this belief- that being the model of a single “senior” leader is destructive. Even Remembering the Lord was a simple affair that seems to have occured in some places (Jerusalem) every day, and in others on the first day of the week. There is certainly nowhere in the New Testament where it speaks of one leader needing to administer “sacraments”, baptize, etc. If Christianity is the priesthood of all believers then no special ordination is needed other than the recognition by elders that a person is gifted in a certain area and holding to sound doctrine and the laying on of hands. I mean, if we are pursuing a biblical model then this is it. The founding of institutions to teach orthodoxy and ordain ministers of said orthodoxy is a concept NEVER found in the Bible.
We are so blind to our presuppositions and the “way it is”. How easy was it/is it for Satan to pervert the simplicity of the Church? Infect the institutions. Infected institutions produce infected ministers. Infected ministers produce infected laity.
LikeLike
Right, I think you have well stated it. Just this week my eyes have been opened to how descriptive the NT is in regard to the right model.
LikeLike
The Levitical priesthood. Did the priests need to learn their duties and how to perform them? Sure. But they were BORN into it. We are born into it as well at the New Birth. It is a right by New Birth as surely as the Levitical priesthood was a right by natural birth.
LikeLike
another thing to consider- where was Jesus the most effective and the most comfortable in? homes.
Throughout the Gospels Jesus ate, taught, slept, healed, and fellowshipped in homes.
Jesus loved to be with people and especially those He was closest to.
LikeLike
“Key to a successful home church network like that of the early church is paid, fulltime leaders.”
My unwanted two cents: Where do you see that the early church had paid fulltime leaders? Paul occasionally argues that he ought to be paid, but he was a missionary not a fulltime leader. Of course missionaries need money, for their travels. But does the guy who leads a house church need to be paid? and should it really be a fulltime job? If you pay someone to sit around and think up theology all day, you’ll get what you paid for, a complicated theological system to rival Calvinism itself in complexity.
If I think of it as a household, the leader is like the Dad. I never paid my Dad to be my Dad. So conceptually, I don’t get where this is coming from. Just food for thought. I don’t have a horse in this race.
LikeLike
By the way, if you guys are trying to come up with a new model of doing church, go visit your local non-institutional church of Christ. They are “legalists” on the subject of worship and believe if you don’t worship a particular way you’re going to hell, so I’m not advising your to join them. But their way of doing church is kind of like what you describe in ways. Every male member gets to lead a song, or a prayer. They have a speaker’s schedule and every male member who wants to and has even a shred of talent is put on it, so they do a rotation, no pastor. This model does not prevent them from teaching any error any more than the “pastor system” (that’s a phrase of theirs) prevents your mainstream Protestant churches from error. But they way they do things is interesting if you’ve never seen it and want to see a slightly less formal worship service. But among them, despite having such a lay type ministry, what generally happens is one or two men (the meanest guys in the congregation) rise to the top and become defacto popes who enforce the denominational orthodoxy.
LikeLike
don’t post this comment. this is just a heads up on a quote from calvin i found on a calvinist blog. but you might want to take a look at this comment from calvin’s commentary http://descriptivegrace.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/calvin-says-unbelievers-cannot-own-property-and-everything-they-have-should-be-considered-stolen/ and do a post on it yourself at some point.
LikeLike
don’t post this one either, purely informational for you. and see this exchange where Les Prouty says Calvin is so good with scripture, praising Calvin for saying that everything unbeleivers own is ‘stolen’ in his commentary on 1st Tim 4:3.
LikeLike
The answer to everything lies in the book of life passage in Exodus 32. Everyone was written in the book of life, and not one soul was blotted out for telling a little white lie or being jealous or angry…not one soul of the Israelites was blotted out until they worshiped the golden calf, described by Moses as “Oh, this people have sinned a great sin,” and then and only then, after a GREAT SIN, were they blotted out. This is the answer to everything. Because it following this rabbit trail will make you rethink ALL of your presuppositions. If nobody is blotted out of the book of life unless they commit a really big sin, then…..all of our presuppositions beyond belief in the God of the Old Testament are whack.
LikeLike
James,
Though, as you know, I disagree with you on most issues, and I also receive 40 different kinds of heck from readers for posting your views, you bring many discussions to the table that Christians are ignorant of by ecclesiastical design. This is yet another one: the book of life. This subject is a vast untapped doctrinal/theological issue. I hope your comment will challenge my readers to study in order to show themselves approved. I am not in to protecting, I am in to equipping people to stand on their own two cranial hemispheres.
LikeLike