Agora Messageboard now functions as a quorum. Please click
to join as a member. We want to hear from you... A query that needs an answer,
a word to uplift the people, a statement of concern that needs prayer, a cry
for help...
God bless you...
Previous Messageboard have been archived.
What problem? 
Which church? (True Light)
Whichever church you "go to" (RTC)
So you are going to a man-setup church, independant church? eom (Emmanuel)
Where did you get that from? (RTC)
Thats where your problem lies ahead (Emmanuel)
|
I have no rights to say much about "House Church". ++Well, perhaps when you have read my past exchanges or do your own reading, and even visit a house church meeting, you may have something to say. Why the change in modern times? Why can't we stay where we are when God is pleased? Why must we be extra-intelligient to re-construct "church ideas" thru' our own perception of Scriptures? ++What makes you think it is a matter of our own perception? FYI, the expression of the church that meets in the home is not a modern phenomena. Believers down through history has always met in the simplicity of their homes, though they do not “advertise” their presence. That’s why I asked you to read “The Pilgrim Church”. It is not about being extra-intelligent, it is about having a biblical basis for our faith and practice. Maybe you ought to entertain the idea that it is the “extra-intelligent” who through their own ways took the church out of the intimacy of the living room to the cold structures of the modern day cathedrals and steepled-buildings, institutionalising the church, replacing family-household relationships with positional-hierarchical structures. But then again, I doubt if you would even want to consider that, since as you are obviously happy with the current status. Nobody cares who is going or not to a church(buiding), but on "Church" as Fellowship of believers. ++Really? Haven’t you heard or seen the look upon many when they hear that you or someone else are not “going to church”? Truth is, the first thing many Christians learn is to “go to church”. Just like most Jehovah witnesses who met up in houses..we shalt have no say. But today you are talking on Man-made church. The apostles layed down buildings for Church to be in. ++You must be kidding. Show me from Scriptures a building that the apostles dedicated to God for a church building. I would be most delighted to know of it. God asks for his temple to the Jews. If Jews were to celebrate Sabbath at "Homes", then I will have nothing much to debate here about. ++You have just confirmed my earlier assessment that you are ignorant of the distinction between the old covenant and the new covenant! The poison of the Devil is deadly, let not his plans for causing disunity in Christ behold us. ++It is always easy to charge others for disunity simply because they do not agree with you or go along with the established way of doing things. I can show from Scriptures why we choose to meet the way we do, and if you want to call that lack of unity or of the devil, it’s up to you. I only hope you can give as much Scriptural support for the way you do church today. Have you ever sought positive response from civil authority in gatherings at home, no matter what purposes? Especially here in Singapore? Do you have a certificate authorized by civil authorities on Religious matter? Will they approve? ++Ah, the typical “we are legally covered but you are not” type of put-down argument. The assumption in your question is that government recognised or endorsed churches are “legitimate” churches, or at least this much is implied. (Little is considered whether there is any biblical support for such an assumption) I have often encountered this from fellow believers and even from critical nonbelievers. They often do not fault our theology from the Bible but attempt to fault it from the legal point of view, thinking that if they cannot convince us to return to the prevailing practice, perhaps the threat of breaching the law can cause us to have second thoughts and abandon the whole idea. I’ve got a proposition for you, find out what the Singapore law says on illegal assembly and then see whether you concern is valid. Let things that are fine, be where they are. Don't try to confuse things up as to make a congregation "as close to the churches(fellowships)" as close to what you think they may be in the Book of acts. ++Are you sure things are “fine”? Why do you say I am confusing things? Is the concept of house churches something I’ve made up or is that what the early church expression was? I leave that to you for your own study. Cell groups are healthy, but about men of being "over-zealous" and seeks to open their "own congregations", this isn't very heathly. ++Why? Do you have any biblical reasons? Why is having a house church considered over-zealous and unhealthy and “doing their own thing” whereas having an institutional church setup is none of the above? How do you make that distinction and on what basis? Forgive me if I am blunt or discouraging, I am just stating from the bottom of my heart. Man seems to think that he is inspired at all times, but actually, he himself is over sensitive and may be misled by the wrong spirit. ++That’s certainly possible. But rather than sitting in an ivory tower and think that you are immune from this, perhaps you may like to pose this question to your own RCC heritage and consider if you have been a victim of your own statement? Or do you not even entertain this thought? |
to:
Messages
Outline:
The problem....... by Emmanuel, 2001, Dec 10
Is that all? by RTC, 2001, Dec 11
Wrong, wrong, wrong! by Emmanuel, 2001, Dec 13
What, what, what? by RTC, 2001, Dec 13
to:
Back to Antioch's Home Page