God is always adding to the Church, the Church being the body of Christ worldwide. now as far as local assemblies go, i don’t see where the NT advocates the Church acquiring any property of their own for the sole purpose of having a meeting place- their homes were sufficient.

my question is why should a home fellowship outgrow its space? this, i believe, is where people have a hard time letting people go- and where people don’t want to move on. we become clannish. so instead of us branching out when the assembly begins to grow, we start to look for a larger edifice that will hold everyone. alas, the numbers business begins again.

i think the model going on in the majority of congregations today is wrong on so many levels from the way money is gathered and dispersed, to choosing elders, to Church discipline.

1. I would definitely say no to any (I do mean any) OT models to adapt for a New Covenant Church. This could be due to other views but I don’t think we are to model anything under the Old Covenant as it relates to gathering of New Covenant believers. The only conclusion from the New Testament would be that they met in homes primarily and secondary (Council of Jerusalem) to discuss weighty matters. Other than that they were in homes and that is how the New Testament Church always functions as far as I can read.

2. I honestly believe that what we see today is a detriment. I haven’t seen all buildings but ALL the ones I have seen are not conducive for mutual efication or fellowship. I am talking throughout the entire gathering, not for special classes and eating.

3. I believe there are times where it would be neccessary. For example the church makes a decision to bring on a new elder. That may take the entire church (depending on how you define church) meeting to make such a decision. Sometimes we need to bring in teachers to help on certain issues. Something like Egalitarianism/Complementarianism. We may need to bring in a gifted teacher in this area for a few weeks to handle and work through this issue. I believe we can rent out a public place for such a meeting. There are times where a monologue then open for questions is acceptable. But this is the exception not the rule which is radically opposed to what I see every Sunday.

4. Brother Smith. When 80% never leaves the congregation we have a problem when 100% left Corinthian and Phillipi.

Ha Ha! Sorry for the one-liner.

I asked you in an earlier blog if you thought the house-church model was the only biblical model. At that time, you said “no.” Did I misunderstand because you seem to say that here?

To your earlier points:
1. I agree that building construction is not “prescribed” in the NT. I was just wondering if you thought scripture (OT/NT) gives us any insight into corporate-worship places that glorify God?

2. I agree that many “churches” are poorly situated for fellowship and community. Again, that’s why I’m wondering if there are any clues in scriptures OR are building for corporate-worship a bad/wrong thing.

3. So you think it is biblical to meet in “public places” but we should not build our own places? Not assuming, just asking.

4. Hey, I am 100% percent with you on the need for local churches to consider stewardship issues, especially spending priorities and the matter of DEBT.

Is “fellowshipping and one another ministry” the only acceptable model? (Mrs. Maverick) What happens if God “adds to the church?” Has the Church always been wrong on buildings? Or is that a recent development due to poor stewardship, in light of missions and burdensome debt?

ps. what do you mean by worship?

-Alan