Christianity versus 'Churchianity'

[NedFlanders]

It's possible to be a Christian without a church, just like it's possible to be a human whilst missing parts of your body. But the sincere believer longs for the fellowship of other believers, and the church is where much of the Holy Spirit's ministry on the earth actually happens.

Without A church - yes - possible. But not without The church as it is a part of being a Christian.

It’s possible - lots of people get born again, read their Bible, have a private prayer life and seem to have a testimony. But they never connect to or become part of a congregation.

I don’t believe the church exists apart from actual, real assemblies of believers worshipping together.

I tend to think that there is a spiritual connection that we cannot avoid by just not being part of a local congregation - or when someone is locked in prison. When one member suffers we all do - I think I can cause other members to suffer when I fail and this can take place without them knowing. This probably effects the local congregation the most but am I wrong to think it does effect other believers too?

[Josh]

I don’t think “the church” exist outside of 2 or 3 believers gathered together, or else a lot of the New Testament makes no sense.

[NedFlanders]

I don’t think “the church” exist outside of 2 or 3 believers gathered together, or else a lot of the New Testament makes no sense.

So does Christianity exist outside 2 or 3 since it was Christ saying there He is?

[Josh]

I don’t think “the church” exist outside of 2 or 3 believers gathered together, or else a lot of the New Testament makes no sense.

So does Christianity exist outside 2 or 3 since it was Christ saying there He is?

The relationship of the individual believer being born again exists, but the “body of Christ” doesn’t exist.

This things like salvation and the Holy Spirit speaking to the individual exist, but anything involving the community of believers like baptism, communion, Christian marriage (for a new couple getting married), anointing with oil, church discipline, restoring a lost one back to the faith, and so on doesn’t exist.

[Sudsy]

If we are to consider what is the lowest form of a local church, then could a church be any group of born again Christians which includes the fellowship that Christians have on these forums ? Is God not 'in the midst' of the fellowship that goes on here ? Are we not encouraged and challenged by our Christian beliefs wherever we meet with other believers ?

Here is an article on 'house churches' in the NT times - https://jesusalive.cc/house-churches-in-bible/

This statement in this article I find interesting -

Christians may one day be forced to return to the New Testament formula of meeting in “house churches.” Actually, this may not be such a bad thing.

I would go further to say it could be a good thing that could have a more positive impact on Christianity than the current divisiveness that happens between all the brands of Christians. Instead of constant arguments on who is the best representation of a NT church, the focus would be more on bringing more into The Church of born again believers.

[Josh]

Having attended house churches for much of my life, I can attest they are no different than a building except cramped and unorganised.

The Amish use 99% house churches. They set aside room in basements or barns so that everyone can attend.

[Sudsy]

Having attended house churches for much of my life, I can attest they are no different than a building except cramped and unorganised.

The Amish use 99% house churches. They set aside room in basements or barns so that everyone can attend.

When I consider what a 'house church' to be, I am thinking of a small group of Christians (i.e. half a dozen families) that fellowship together wherever (a house, a barn, a park, a beach, a forest) and don't attempt to force anyone to adhere to a narrow understanding of being a Christian aside from being born again.

But I can see where some that are very dogmatic about their beliefs and they start up a house church will not have this kind of church fellowship. They will just be another group of believers that all must think and act the same.

We have recently been invited to join a 'house church' group that is made up of couples who have left the super organized, programs for everyone, super facilities type churches and they currently meet in a local park each week to fellowship. I don't know what format they go by (probably not as unstructured as the Quakers) but if I return to a church fellowship, this would likely be the kind I would be most interested in.

[Josh]

Having attended house churches for much of my life, I can attest they are no different than a building except cramped and unorganised.

The Amish use 99% house churches. They set aside room in basements or barns so that everyone can attend.

When I consider what a 'house church' to be, I am thinking of a small group of Christians (i.e. half a dozen families) that fellowship together wherever (a house, a barn, a park, a beach, a forest) and don't attempt to force anyone to adhere to a narrow understanding of being a Christian aside from being born again.

I would consider a “house church” to be a church that meets in a house, and perhaps desires to keep meeting in a house.

Considering the Amish have been faithfully doing so for hundreds of years, perhaps we should respect their example.

[Sudsy]

I would think that the Kingdom of God would be building at a far greater pace if Churchianity was taking a back seat to real Christianity. It seems to me much time is wasted in trying to build churches where members all believe and practise the same when we could be out winning the lost where they habit. I guess at judgment day we will find out whether our works when tested by fire will hold up or not.

If I do find an Anabaptist church to fellowship in, it will be one that is very evangelical but so far, in our area, most Anabaptist churches are Mennonite churches of sorts that primarily isolate themselves from other ethnic groups and separate amongst themselves with their own distinct ways. They are not attracting outsiders.

[NedFlanders]

At least being unattractive is Christlike:
Isaiah 53:2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.