<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.7" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Church Size - Decided by whom?</title>
	<link>http://thoughtpaths.com/archives/133</link>
	<description>ThoughtPaths with Ken Wilson et al</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:35:44 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: kwilson</title>
		<link>http://thoughtpaths.com/archives/133#comment-69</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 01:45:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thoughtpaths.com/archives/133#comment-69</guid>
					<description>[quote post="133"]Does one have to attend a church to be a Christian [/quote]

Absolutely not. They are unrelated. Notice also that I eliminated your “if one can sustain his faith without the church”. I did that because I see no conditions. Saved is saved, alone or not. Scripture puts no conditions of that sort on salvation, conditions that could be affected by the Saint, and this would be a condition.

[quote post="133"]Are we not each a church? [/quote]

I think that there is some scriptural support for this in some senses, or at least nothing to negate it. What it actually brings to mind is Merrill's book "Kingdom of Priests", although it is not precisely on point. Scripture states “let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.” &lt;a title="Hebrews 10:24-25" href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=hebrews%2010:24-25&#038;version=49" rel="nofollow"&gt;Hebrews 10:24-25&lt;/a&gt;. That seems pretty clear. I don’t see any indication in the passage that it was a provision applying only to that time period. In Biblical times, it is likely that some also felt out of place in the church of the time, but irrespective of that were directed to continue in fellowship. The simple intent was for the family of believers to gather in the name of the Lord and I would see that as continuing today. All this would seem to imply more than solitary worship.

Let us also remember that when the Lord said “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst” &lt;a title="Matthew 18:20" href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2018:20;&#038;version=49;" rel="nofollow"&gt;Matthew 18:20&lt;/a&gt;, he deliberately used the plural. Could one draw an implication about gathering here? (admittedly, I have never read this in any theology so it is just speculation).

If we consider gathering together as intended, then the format is another question.

[quote post="133"]churches have become not much more that entertainment centers where I live[/quote]

Sadly, I would agree and would suggest it is true in a lot of places. The church growth movement, often combined with the over application of business and performance models, has in my opinion produced exactly that in many, many congregations. As a direct result, many have been alienated, and as a result the church can become narrow and exclusive while trying to be inclusive. It is ironic, actually. At least partially, the value of traditional, simple worship has given way to an ‘entitlement’ so the congregant is engaged and not bored. While this is certainly not the intent, the resultant conditioning is nonetheless the same – a responsibility to entertain. This problem is endemic in many areas of our social fabric, and now it has unfortunately invaded the church (we could follow this theme, but I’ll leave that to another time).

To return to your comments, I do think it is expected of us that we gather with other believers. I personally think it not only glorifies our Lord but brings believers many benefits in the realm of fellowship, accountability, corporate prayer, support and more. Most of these are not available alone. Also, our development in Christian character is more likely to be accomplished in fellowship. Beyond that, however, it is a case of simple obedience in gathering - doing His biding in love. I personally find all those things essential. I will also add that many of individual joys can get lost as size and associated impersonality increase (I will discuss this in a coming post).

There are some assembly models that do not suffer from these problems. What about a house church? Much of the grass roots house church movement has grown from exactly the feelings that you are expressing. There are also small congregations that value more fundamental, simple worship and fellowship. One possible example might be some of those associated with the Sovereign Grace Fellowship (in Canada, but there is a US web site), but there are others. As with any assembly of people, none is perfect, but in either the house church or small Bible based congregation setting I suspect and hope that there is a solution for you.

I hope my comments don’t sound like platitudes. I understand your sentiments and have struggled with these things myself, as have many brothers and sisters that I have spoken too. Though I don’t know your geographic location, there are very likely others who feel as you do in reasonable proximity. The problem is connecting with them. I would like to encourage you, and the Lord will surely provide as He sees the need.

Thanks for you comment. This reply seems to have turned into the size of a post. I had not considered this aspect when writing the next couple of posts in this series.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote cite="http://thoughtpaths.com/archives/133"><p>
Does one have to attend a church to be a Christian </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Absolutely not. They are unrelated. Notice also that I eliminated your “if one can sustain his faith without the church”. I did that because I see no conditions. Saved is saved, alone or not. Scripture puts no conditions of that sort on salvation, conditions that could be affected by the Saint, and this would be a condition.</p>
<blockquote cite="http://thoughtpaths.com/archives/133"><p>
Are we not each a church? </p>
</blockquote>
<p>I think that there is some scriptural support for this in some senses, or at least nothing to negate it. What it actually brings to mind is Merrill&#8217;s book &#8220;Kingdom of Priests&#8221;, although it is not precisely on point. Scripture states “let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.” <a title="Hebrews 10:24-25" href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=hebrews%2010:24-25&#038;version=49" rel="nofollow"></a><a href="http://biblegateway.com/bible?version=NASB&amp;passage=Hebrews+10%3A24-25" title="Bible Gateway">Hebrews 10:24-25</a>. That seems pretty clear. I don’t see any indication in the passage that it was a provision applying only to that time period. In Biblical times, it is likely that some also felt out of place in the church of the time, but irrespective of that were directed to continue in fellowship. The simple intent was for the family of believers to gather in the name of the Lord and I would see that as continuing today. All this would seem to imply more than solitary worship.</p>
<p>Let us also remember that when the Lord said “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst” <a title="Matthew 18:20" href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2018:20;&#038;version=49;" rel="nofollow"></a><a href="http://biblegateway.com/bible?version=NASB&amp;passage=Matthew+18%3A20" title="Bible Gateway">Matthew 18:20</a>, he deliberately used the plural. Could one draw an implication about gathering here? (admittedly, I have never read this in any theology so it is just speculation).</p>
<p>If we consider gathering together as intended, then the format is another question.</p>
<blockquote cite="http://thoughtpaths.com/archives/133"><p>
churches have become not much more that entertainment centers where I live</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Sadly, I would agree and would suggest it is true in a lot of places. The church growth movement, often combined with the over application of business and performance models, has in my opinion produced exactly that in many, many congregations. As a direct result, many have been alienated, and as a result the church can become narrow and exclusive while trying to be inclusive. It is ironic, actually. At least partially, the value of traditional, simple worship has given way to an ‘entitlement’ so the congregant is engaged and not bored. While this is certainly not the intent, the resultant conditioning is nonetheless the same – a responsibility to entertain. This problem is endemic in many areas of our social fabric, and now it has unfortunately invaded the church (we could follow this theme, but I’ll leave that to another time).</p>
<p>To return to your comments, I do think it is expected of us that we gather with other believers. I personally think it not only glorifies our Lord but brings believers many benefits in the realm of fellowship, accountability, corporate prayer, support and more. Most of these are not available alone. Also, our development in Christian character is more likely to be accomplished in fellowship. Beyond that, however, it is a case of simple obedience in gathering - doing His biding in love. I personally find all those things essential. I will also add that many of individual joys can get lost as size and associated impersonality increase (I will discuss this in a coming post).</p>
<p>There are some assembly models that do not suffer from these problems. What about a house church? Much of the grass roots house church movement has grown from exactly the feelings that you are expressing. There are also small congregations that value more fundamental, simple worship and fellowship. One possible example might be some of those associated with the Sovereign Grace Fellowship (in Canada, but there is a US web site), but there are others. As with any assembly of people, none is perfect, but in either the house church or small Bible based congregation setting I suspect and hope that there is a solution for you.</p>
<p>I hope my comments don’t sound like platitudes. I understand your sentiments and have struggled with these things myself, as have many brothers and sisters that I have spoken too. Though I don’t know your geographic location, there are very likely others who feel as you do in reasonable proximity. The problem is connecting with them. I would like to encourage you, and the Lord will surely provide as He sees the need.</p>
<p>Thanks for you comment. This reply seems to have turned into the size of a post. I had not considered this aspect when writing the next couple of posts in this series.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Don</title>
		<link>http://thoughtpaths.com/archives/133#comment-68</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2007 05:31:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thoughtpaths.com/archives/133#comment-68</guid>
					<description>Does one have to attend a church to be a Christian if one can sustain his faith without the church?  As such, can not a church then be one person?  Are we not each a church?

Just curious what your thoughts are on this as churches have become not much more that entertainment centers where I live.  I don't enjoy them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does one have to attend a church to be a Christian if one can sustain his faith without the church?  As such, can not a church then be one person?  Are we not each a church?</p>
<p>Just curious what your thoughts are on this as churches have become not much more that entertainment centers where I live.  I don&#8217;t enjoy them.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
