Enjoy... But remember
"Don't give in to winning the argument
and losing one of your eternal crowns..."
|
We are discussing the theory that you have that churches must be small (which you thought the NT housechurches were) in order to meet in a family setting in homes, not whether they have one large building to meet in or not. I already said the early Church need not necessarily meet in tiny assemblies all over one city. The house in Acts 1 already can take 120 people and that's just indoors. When the Day of Pentecost arrived, the church spill into the streets. They met then in public places (the Temple grounds b4 the persecution by Saul):-
"So, in the weeks that followed the first Christian Pentecost, the believers met regularly in the TEMPLE PRECINTS FOR PUBLIC WORSHIP AND PUBLIC WITNESS, while they took their fellowship meals (THIS IS YOUR CONFUSION : you mistook the main activity is round the Lord's Supper and all other parts of the church service revolve around a dinner table) in one another's homes and 'broke bread' in accordance with their Master's precedent. The part of the temple precints where they seem to have gathered habitually was Solomnon's Colonade, running along the Eastern side of the outer court. Their community was probably organized along the lines of the voluntary type of organisation called a haburah, a central feature of which was the common meal. The common meal could not conveniently be eaten in the temple precints, so they ate 'by the households' (as the Greek phrase may be translated)" from the Book Of Acts by FF Bruce. When persecution arose, they then met in large private homes. "The wealthy house of NT times in Palestine was similar to the Roman house everywhere. There was an outer court with its surounding rooms, and behind it a second court with its adjacent rooms." from The New Bible Dictionary. Acts had given us 2 houses with gates and one 3 storeys high. So how small must the housechurches of Judea or the surrounding Mediterranean regions be??? Yet these housechurches do not function as independent churches of each other but as the groupings of the local church in the city. But they are one church not many churches. That's why Paul's epistles are always to the ONE LOCAL church of the city.
|
to:
Messages
Outline:
And yet I see by RTC, 2001, May 04
Can blind man be trusted?, 2001, May 04
Ditto, 2001, May 04
Why not? by RTC, 2001, May 08
Now you're admitting there's teaching by the Apostle Paul in public places,, 2001, May 08
Don't have to admit what I never deny in the first place by RTC, 2001, May 09
Admit you don't even know what you're talking about., 2001, May 09
You will have to do the admission, not me by RTC, 2001, May 09
Jumbled up theory of the church of today,, 2001, May 09
Yep, it's a big jumbo! by RTC, 2001, May 10
Huh! Those verses doesn't prove a thing of your housechurch theory! , 2001, May 10
If by RTC, 2001, May 10
Confuse theme with activities by RTC, 2001, May 08
Deny whatever they did also in public mass meetings all you want! Kon beh liau lah!, 2001, May 08
Not denial, but proper understanding by RTC, 2001, May 08
to: