With all this talk about how traditional worship, has been shifting from the sanctuary to small groups, I can see the Lord’s warning coming to pass...... 2 Timothy 4:2-4
V.2
Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
V.3
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
V.4
And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
Replacing “preaching” with “teaching”!
--------------------------------------------------
The reason this “small group idea” is so popular, is because people don’t like to be preached to, from God’s Word.
People don’t like the authoritative way that preachers proclaim God’s truth:
They would rather hear it “taught”, as something that they can take or leave.
I've not heard that people are abandoning the corporate worship and teaching for small groups.
Our church has both and we see it as the two wings of the church.
Our small groups are of vital importance for sharpening, fellowship, ministry and learning and the corporate worship is for fellowship, worship and teaching.
I don't understand the issue.
You're assuming that small groups do not have or want preaching.
How do you know this?
Proof?
Since when is the pastor the "boss" of other Christians?
Also, where two or three are gathered in Christ's name, he is there in the midst. It doesn't matter if the church is small and meets in homes, or large in number and meets in a big sanctuary.
You asked.........
“Since when is the pastor the "boss" of other Christians?”
Hebrews 13:17
“Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that [is] unprofitable for you.”
Heb 13:17 isn't referring to pastors, and 2 Tim 4:2-4 isn't referring to the corporate worship setting. Scripture doesn't support your assertion. Then again, your assertion doesn't appear anything more than idle chatter.
Odd, since a large number of first century churches were house churches. The problem with your conclusion, though, is that it assumes house churches are abandoning corporate worship. A houe church IS corporate worship. It's just smaller in number than meeting in a formal church building.
Regardless, the scriptures Stilllearning posted don't support his assertions.
As long as the word of God is being taught, why is this wrong?
It would seem to me that it would cut out a lot of the church politics and problems we find in corporate worship.
We don't have to have a choir, a music minister, a church secretary, etc. in order to worship and/or study the scriptures.
As long as believers are accountable to God and one another, do they really need a "pastor" and deacon board?
What about godly men who take turns preaching for the house churches?
Or do they do that?
I'm not familiar enough with the practice to know whether they do or not, but I had assumed they had men sharing the duties that a pastor would normally do, maybe acting as elders.
I don't know that home church is right or wrong, but I do know that we shouldn't judge something as wrong simply because it's different than what we've always done, or judge their motives without proof.
It could be that they DON'T want a pastor because they have experienced dictator preachers who want to control with rules and legalism instead of serving their sheep as a loving leader.
I've only been a visitor to a house church, and yes, that's pretty much it.
Agreed.
The early churches were often house churches.
Scripturel is silent on how the corporate setup should be (in-home vs a public building).
Possible, but I'm sure you'll agree that's an issue outside of the house church issue.
A house church should not be condemned simply because it's a house church.