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Previous Messageboard have been archived.
Living in the Old? 
church in Jurong West vicinity 
City Harvest (Liz R.)
Sorry, City Harvest is not Traditional Church, Lolz...eom (Emmanuel)
The true City (Ivan)
Impressive (RTC)
What great feats of men to turn the wasteland into a holy masterpiece sanctuary of God! (Ivan)
Reasons??? (RTC)
I believe every building of a new church is a testimony of the members' faith in a great God (Ivan)
I can see that, but can you see this? (RTC)
In times like these (Ivan)
|
If you are familiar with the building of God's temple in the book of Haggai, you'll not have question the creation of the new CHC. ++Like others, you have to resort to quoting the OT for support. Brother, we are now living in the NT! The Most High does not dwell in houses made by human hands. The NT bears this teaching as can be seen in the practices of the early church. Are you more interested in building your glorious home, etc than the church of God? ++I see that you have equated the Church of God with a piece of property. Sorry but I do not share the same paradigm as you do. Neither do I look upon my home as a sanctuary where believers come in with somber faces. Nor is my home a place for believers to come and meet God. There is nothing sacrosanct about my home. We can just as well meet in someone’s home or in a park by the beach. I am more interested in the church (people) of God than the church (building), therefore my energies would not be channeled to lifeless stones but to living stones. Are you being realistic? Are you still living in those times? ++It’s about being biblical, not pragmatic. We still live in homes today as in times past. So tell me, where is the difference? Please do not make the mistake of caricaturing us who want to capture the expression of the first century church as archaic or living in the past. If that is so, the Christian faith you are professing is 2,000 years old. Does that qualify yourself as living in those times? Think about it, Jesus has fulfilled the requirements of the Law, Hebrews say that the New Covenant has rendered the Old Covenant obsolete with all its rituals and human priests and temple practices. Are you now bringing back the obsolete Old Covenant practices into the New Covenant life? I must say you cannot differentiate or fail to make applications by making it relevant in our times; you can adopt the principles and not stick to the old mode of application to buildings, transport, communication systems, the whole infrastructure in a certain place, etc. I am surprised by your old mode of thinking too in this regard. ++How is meeting in homes irrelevant today? Like others, you also make the mistake that just because someone wants to capture the first century expression of CHURCH life, you charge them with wanting to capture the first century expression of EVERYDAY secular/cultural life, right down to the clothes they wear and the modes of transport they have. That’s a strawman argument you have, often employed to make the other person look ridiculous and foolish. Oh yah, BTW, there is a movement to restore the five-fold ministries today, don’t you think it is being irrelevant and living in old times? I like to believe that the new CHC of such a size will meet and serve their needs as a Sanctuary and a School of Theology, and can further accommodate multiple ministries for outreach purposes. So, I maintain the fixation is well-placed and it is no hype; it is the height they have reached and I must say the depth as well they have gone into their experiences with God which is so beautifully symbolised by the 8ight-storey building of 4-storey high rising above ground and 4-storey deep below the ground. Will you give glory to God with me for this glorious building? ++When Jesus was with His disciples and were walking in the temple, note that it was the apostles who gawked at the glory of the temple. Did Jesus acted the same way as them? Did He compliment the Jews for having such a magnificent building? Did Jesus give glory to God for the temple? If not, why not? Sorry but I do not share the same sentiments concerning the building that you have built for yourselves. The reasons you give for the church building is not rooted in any NT theology but rest on nothing but pragmatism. OK, even if there is some remote justification for a church building, can you justify the budget? How does a rotating cross serve as an outreach? How does a titanium clad structure serve a spiritual need? As our Lord Jesus says, "Be it done, according to your faith." What are you trying to drive at by reducing God's stature in accordance to the size of the building. ++I thought it was you who talked about the church having great faith to build such a big building? That perhaps you are implying that building such a big thing requires big faith? Or am I mistaken? As far as I can see from the Bible, God does not even care about church buildings to derive any glory from them. He lives in us, and as we are changed into the likeness of Jesus Christ from glory to glory, God is glorified. Don't you ever be fooled by such arguments or thinking? It is our faith in a great God that makes the difference. By all means, if you want to build a small church building that will fit your simple requirements of providing for a Sanctuary and classrooms for nursery children. Or you want to build one once and for all and that one size fits all. It is still glorifying to God. Or you want to build one that allow you to see through the heavens while you worship God like the magnificent Crystal Cathedral-an all-glass structure-in Garden Grove, California whose Senior Pastor is Rev Dr Robert Schuller. It sure glorifies God! ++On the contrary, I am not the least interested in building any structure and labelling it as church. This will distort the biblical meaning of church. I am interested in life, not buildings. See my reply before the one above. I am sure they have follow the example of our early church leaders in exercising enduring faith. ++The early church endured the cross for the work of planting churches and to stand up for the Lord in the face of opposition. None of such enduring faith was towards a church building! Are you sure you are following the right example? All I have to say is that you are not in touch with reality and you are not making applications that are relevant in our times. Are you denying even the computer times where cyber-forum is made possible and we are so much part of it. ++The early church was as down to earth as anyone else can be. It is the same today. The fact that I can communicate with you on the computer shows that I do not suffer from any tension of having to live in denial of today’s advances on one hand and practicing the first century church life on the other. Anyway, I have already answered this point above. In short, it is important that you understand what I am actually advocating and what I am actually denying, rather than try to cast me in a mold of your own making. You said in your heading "I can see that", and yet you refuse to see the reward part of Heb 11:6. Then you are incoherent in your understanding of Scriptures. God rewards or answers those who ask, seek and knock by faith. ++Then maybe you have skipped Hebrews 1-10 and jumped to Heb 11? Also, Heb 11 tells us the content of the faith of the people mentioned. I don’t see any having to do with church buildings. Yes, indeed God rewards those who seek Him in faith. However, it is not just the presence of faith that God seeks. It is faith that seeks God IN ACCORDANCE to His revealed will and purpose. Did you ever ask whether it is God's will to have a church building. Or do you still insist that unless the Bible says specifically, "Arise and build the CHC" then it is OK to build. How about things like smoking, reading of pornography, etc which are not mentioned? Is it God's will? ++There is no need to ask that which is plainly taught in Scripture. And neither is it necessary for the Bible to make a specific statement about building CHC. The Bible is not a theological textbook that addresses every conceivable issue of our lives. However, if one has a proper understanding of the Bible, one can come to right conclusions about things, even if it is not specifically spoken. For example, the Bible forbids sexual immorality and the like. Do you then require the Bible to specifically speak out against pornography to justify forbidding it? I hope not! On the other hand, I can give you a well-presented case for meeting in homes from the NT as against meeting in church buildings, even though it is not commanded that we meet in homes or forbidden to build church buildings. Did you read about the church in Antioch which becomes a mission base to send out missionaries to evangelise the then known world? You are just trying to argue for argument sake which is unhealthy. You cannot relate the church building esp CHC with mission works and equipping of Christian workers by the School of Theology, etc with evangelism. How sad? ++First take a look at Acts 11. Antioch was probably the first Gentile city where the Gentiles first believed. The rest of the believers spoke to Jews only whereas some enlightened folks preached to the Gentiles. This is a background you must bear in mind! From Acts 11 to Acts 13 at least some years has passed. Then when we come to Acts 13 we see the existence of prophets and teachers (believers who matured through the soil of church life, not a theological seminary!). It was then that the Holy Spirit sent out Barnabas and Paul through the church at Antioch. Does that qualify as a mission base? Is the church at Antioch operating like a CHC? The answer is a resounding no. I am not arguing for argument sake. I am telling you the Scriptures! Certainly the NT do not see any relationship between the church building and the missionary work of the apostles. So why should we? How is it the world is smarter than the Christians? If they can think of a central provident fund which looks after the financial needs in old age, why not the church think of a central welfare fund (CWF) to look after the financial needs of the members in times of economic crisis when jobs are scarce and members need the basic food at the table daily to survive. ++The church, being born from above, has spiritual principles which are often at odds with the worldly methods of the world. The management styles of the world cannot be imposed on the spiritual-organic nature of the Bride of Christ without doing violence to Her. The NT shows us what the early church did when the church in Jerusalem was facing an economic crisis. Paul, together with a few co-workers, collected free-will giving from the Gentile churches to give to the Jewish church in Jerusalem. That was a test of breaking down walls of division between Gentiles and Jews, and the Gentiles passed the test! But the money was collected because there was a crisis. It wasn’t deposited in a central bank to earn interest for some future emergency. The arrangements were temporary and met immediate needs. Those who has gave to those who lacked was the practice of the early church. And they had no CPF! Do we have to wait till the people go hungry to be so desperately looking for food that they start looting supermarkets like the situation in Argentina. Will we learn? Can we tie the church tithing by members to provide for CWF? Anyone care to comment? ++Paul says to follow his example. What was his example? Paul worked to support himself and his co-workers. He rebuked those who would not work. Similarly, every believer should work with his or her own hands. In difficult times, believers who have lost their jobs should not be picky about jobs. And if they could not find work, fellow believers can be involved to help them through until they are self-sufficient again. This is what families do, don’t they? Or do family members require each other to contribute a certain amount into a central family fund and apply for its use when times are bad? |
to:
Messages
Outline:
RTC by John Doe 666, 2001, Dec 27
The Old and the New by Ivan, 2001, Dec 27
Question to Ivan by John Doe 666, 2001, Dec 28
You can read Eph 5:23-27 for yourself. eom. by Ivan, 2001, Dec 28
thanks ,...but... by John Doe 666, 2001, Dec 28
Look again by Ivan, 2001, Dec 28 
You are Wrong here..... by John Doe 666, 2001, Dec 31
Looking up... by Ivan, 2001, Dec 31
How sad.... by John Doe 666, 2001, Dec 31
Be of good cheer, Brother John by Ivan, 2001, Dec 31
You're right...else who is Jesus coming back for? EOM by saved-by-grace, 2001, Dec 31 
thanks for agreeing... by John Doe 666, 2002, Jan 02
The early church...... by John Doe 666, 2001, Dec 28
Why this waste by Ivan, 2001, Dec 28
On biblical grounds by RTC, 2001, Dec 29
No... by John Doe 666, 2001, Dec 31
reply by RTC, 2001, Dec 29
I am... by Ivan, 2001, Dec 29
What about my questions? by RTC, 2001, Dec 29
I try... by Ivan, 2001, Dec 29
Place of worship???? by RTC, 2001, Dec 30
I think... by Ivan, 2001, Dec 30
It is heartening.... by Ivan, 2001, Dec 31
Best of both worlds?? by RTC, 2001, Dec 31
RTC: Return To Christ by Ivan, 2002, Jan 01
Already have by RTC, 2002, Jan 02
On "house of God" by Ivan, 2002, Jan 03
No house of God by RTC, 2002, Jan 03
Of course happier up there by RTC, 2001, Dec 31
RTC by John Doe 666, 2001, Dec 31
Church in my home by RTC, 2002, Jan 02
May I.... by John Doe 666, 2002, Jan 02
Here's some info by RTC, 2002, Jan 02
to:
Back to Antioch's Home Page