tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23191203.post5881514308045606186..comments2023-09-25T04:24:45.407-05:00Comments on The M Blog: A thoughtful response to: "Why are we afraid of house churches"J. Guy Musehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17751691713410311094noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23191203.post-21240231548275565722009-06-22T15:31:14.450-05:002009-06-22T15:31:14.450-05:00KDS,
I would be interested in reading anything yo...KDS,<br /><br />I would be interested in reading anything you come up with as to what constitutes a NT church. Blog away!J. Guy Musehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17751691713410311094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23191203.post-48735238253173109182009-06-22T15:19:19.036-05:002009-06-22T15:19:19.036-05:00Guy,
I believe that we would all benefit from a d...Guy,<br /><br />I believe that we would all benefit from a dialog about what defines a NT church. What are the distinctives so that we can call an assembly a NT assembly? I may blog about it myself if I can make time to do that. Brother Lance has given a good point of view in his words. <br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br />KDSKevin, Somewhere in Southern Americahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08626012795690485950noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23191203.post-78694569963556597602009-06-20T11:55:37.330-05:002009-06-20T11:55:37.330-05:00movementquebec,
Thanks for visiting the M Blog an...movementquebec,<br /><br />Thanks for visiting the M Blog and for the kind words. Feel free to stop by any time and share your thoughts as well. Tell Titus and family "hola" for us, and that we are anxious for them to get back!J. Guy Musehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17751691713410311094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23191203.post-2386268768356190592009-06-19T16:13:29.649-05:002009-06-19T16:13:29.649-05:00Guy,
I just wanted to let you know that I appreci...Guy,<br /><br />I just wanted to let you know that I appreciate many of your observations on church planting, cross-cultural ministry, and theology. Your blog was recommended to me through my good friend Titus Folden (whom I have the pleasure to spend time with in Oregon as we are both back visiting supporting churches at the same time).<br /><br />Just wanted to throw out a word of encouragement. Keep at it brother!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23191203.post-75550097554749421122009-06-19T06:38:20.404-05:002009-06-19T06:38:20.404-05:00Jeff and Lance,
Good words from both of you. Ther...Jeff and Lance,<br /><br />Good words from both of you. There is much I could comment on, but your thoughts stand on their own merit.<br /><br />Just as there is a need for the more traditional churches to learn from the simple/organic church movement and our desire to return to more of a 1st century form of church; the same hold true that the simple/organic church movement can learn from the history, experience and deep Biblical scholarship coming out of Institutional Christianity.<br /><br />Wolfgang Simson wisely wrote several years back an article entitled, <strong><i>3 Strands of Church - finishing The Task together<br />Traditional Church - Cell Church - House church</i></strong><br /><br />Today we see the global presence of three distinctively different types of mission-minded Churches, who quite radically differ in their genetic code, core values and therefore practices, but still have the same Lord, Jesus Christ. Each family of churches will have a unique contribution to make, and has specific strengths - and weaknesses. If the strengths are brought together in synergy, the African proverb might prove true again:<br /><br />One donkey carries one man, two donkeys pull a cart, three donkeys can move a mountain!<br /><br />The current challenge is not to use valuable energy and resources to "evangelize" each other, but to facilitate the corporate fulfillment of God´s main purpose for His Church on Earth: to disciple the nations - together!<br /><br />He then goes on to describe the three main strands: traditional, cell, and house/city church with what he sees as the strengths and weaknesses of each.<br /><br />While I am solidly convinced in my heart of the "third strand", we are first and foremost KINGDOM oriented. The Kingdom is made up of all kinds of believers, churches, persuasions, organizations, ministries, etc. <br /><br />One of the tasks I feel is imperative and one I work hard at, is to strive for unity and cooperation within the many expressions of Kingdom outreach. It is not easy, especially when other Kingdom believers do not share one's own convictions about the church, the task, and ministry in general. But, nevertheless, we are One Body in Christ, and anyone who seeks to divide the Body is going against Christ himself.J. Guy Musehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17751691713410311094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23191203.post-64295373831659827292009-06-19T04:38:23.685-05:002009-06-19T04:38:23.685-05:00Quickly, Guy, let me make a couple of comments abo...Quickly, Guy, let me make a couple of comments about your questions. First, NT teaching is always relevant today (I am sure you know that and are speaking rhetorically), and while the NT does not mandate a specific church organization, there are principles which must apply to all ages. For example, the emphasis on evangelism and fellowship and the instructions about social impartiality. One of the things that often frustrates us is that God generally spoke to us through stories rather than instructional texts, so we must understand God's character and will from examples rather than a list of bullet-points. In other words he gave us a redemptive history rather than a systematic theology. (See my most recent two and the next five posts on my blog for more about this. The series is "Just One Story".) Our challenge is to faithfully understand and apply the great truths contained in the stories to our lives and world.<br /><br />Secondly, you asked, "Since we are not part of the Roman-Greco world, are the apostolic prescriptions for church something intended only for the first century ekklesia?" I may be making more of your choices of words than you intended, but of course the "prescriptions" are intended for the church in all ages. Those are the basics I mentioned above and are true regardless of culture or generation. Other issues—frequency and time of services, facilities, small vs. large congregations, independent or denominational structure, and many more—are an entirely different matter. <br /><br />Thanks for the post, Guy, and the mention of the blog. It does not get updated nearly as often as I would like. One of the negatives of bi-vocational ministry is there is just not enough time.<br /><br />Blessings my friend.Lance Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08658525748126215787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23191203.post-86829039915198329752009-06-18T23:08:54.395-05:002009-06-18T23:08:54.395-05:00Guy,
I liked a lot of what Lance said. The NT is...Guy,<br /><br />I liked a lot of what Lance said. The NT is not a church governance manual - had God wanted to leave us one, He could have quite easily - but He didn't. We tend to cause problems when we try to make one way (usually our way) "God's way." The Lord seems to use a lot of different ways to get His work done. <br /><br />I remember reading about the “Great Escape” when I was young. As you probably recall, several hundred allied prisoners escaped after months of building a tunnel from their prisoner of war camp. The tunnel was shored up with wood, had air pumps, electric lights and a train. I recall reading (from years ago, so take my facts as my memory) that a couple of prisoners, however, developed another type of tunnel – they called it “a mole.” They would dig a shallow tunnel and push the dirt behind them, closing the tunnel up behind them as they went. They took a rod to push air holes for fresh air. In this manner, they could basically tunnel out overnight. Which method was better? Which method was right? Both led to freedom.<br /><br />Too often, people will say that one way or the other is "God's way." We like to focus on certain aspects of Scripture and build huge arguments as to how or why this must be right. I have moved to a simple view of what it takes to be a church - a view that would include your house churches and the group that meets in the red brick building on Main Street. "Which is better?" is probably the wrong question. "Which is obedient?" is probably a better question.<br /><br />I like the simple church model, but have to admit that God has used more than the simple church to reach people. Taking a group back through Experiencing God this spring has reminded me that God uses His people when they are obedient - the context doesn't seem to be the issue. I do see a problem in that the "non-simple" church too often becomes an organization rather than a living organism. But there are dangers in the simple church as well.<br /><br />It was my impression going through seminary that the seminary training was partly to "make us safe" - to keep us orthodox. I would like to have the time to study church awakenings and their relationship with clergy training. My impression from church history (perhaps erroneous) is that a well-educated clergy has kept the church from heresy, but an uneducated clergy has made the church fly higher and closer to God. <br /><br />I speak from a strange position - my heart and desire is the simple church. God, however, has put me in the traditional church. I know He has me here for a reason, so I serve where planted. <br /><br />Jeffjeff w.noreply@blogger.com