Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Dear Gubei and Oregon,
Simply put, you both have failed to prove conclusively that the house churches in the NT are city churches. And there is no way you can prove it. You can argue all you want and believe what you want, but there is no way you can conclusively show this. Thus it is unreasonable for you to expect others to accept your interpretation. So for you to call others divisive for not meeting as a city church is itself divisive.
If you cannot see this or understand at all what I'm getting at then this conversation is basically over, because you just don't get it.
|
Igzy,
You wrote.
"So for you to call others divisive for not meeting as a city church is itself divisive."
Please quote my words in previous posts in which I said that.
And you wrote.
"Simply put, you both have
failed to prove
conclusively that the house churches in the NT are city churches."
My clarification is as follows.
Philippians 1:1 『Paul and Timothy, servants of Jesus Christ, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:』
Philippians 4:15 Now you Philippians know also that in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church shared with me concerning giving and receiving but you only.
The ALL THE SAINTS in Philippi is a church – city church if you will.
(Acts 14:23) 『So when they had appointed elders in every church, and prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.』
(Titus 1:5) 『For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you--』
So, one city – one church – one eldership.
For “house churches,”
(Rom 16:3,4,5) 『[3] Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, [4] who risked their own necks for my life, to whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles. [5] Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Greet my beloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia to Christ.』
(1Cor 16:19) 『The churches of Asia greet you. Aquila and Priscilla greet you heartily in the Lord, with the church that is in their house.』
(Col 4:15) 『Greet the brethren who are in Laodicea, and Nymphas and the church that is in his house.』
(Philemon 1:2) 『to the beloved Apphia, Archippus our fellow soldier, and to the church in your house:』
Please pay attention to the fact that whenever “house churches” are mentioned, it is with juxtaposition of other churches which is obviously city churches. In case of Philemon 1:2, the key of understanding is “Archippus”
and Archippus our fellow soldier; that this Archippus was a preacher of the Gospel at Colosse is manifest from Col_4:17 wherefore the apostle styles him a fellow soldier; (Gill)
Archippus is believed to be an elder in Colosse. By juxtaposing Archippus and Philemon’s house, Paul seems to be mentioning the two churches which were under the eldership of Archippus and Philemon each.
I believe this is proper understanding of house churches. In short, at that time, due to small number of saints in a city, they were able to gather together in a house, which people intimately call a church, actually meaning the church in that city judging from the other city-church related verses.
Is it possible to use these verses related to “house churches” in order to justify such names as Methodist, Baptist, Community, etc? I do not think so. The only possibility to be taken by any one who believes city church is not the same house church is that there are two kinds of churches in the Bible – city church and house church, not that there are as many churches as we want.
I hope that any one will try conclusively to prove that the Bible give us the permission to conduct denominations.
Gubei