9a – Sustaining Prayer Through A House Church Form

A. As the Church awaits the good news of the coming Kingdom and resurrection, it is called to patient endurance in faith, perseverant war in holiness, and faithful proclamation of Jesus during its time of exile. These are the activities of this age upon which God has given his stamp of approval in the Holy Spirit.

Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. ¹⁹ Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ²⁰ teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age (cf. the Day of the Lord).” (^ESV Matthew 28:18-20)

I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life. ¹⁴ This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. ¹⁵ And if we know that he hears us– whatever we ask– we know that we have what we asked of him. (^NIV 1 John 5:13-15)

B. Since the Holy Spirit is the only means of faithfulness in this age, and since God only releases His Spirit when we ask, the Church seeks to order itself about the place of prayer, individually and corporately. Though this may take different forms in different contexts, this is the essential missiological function of the Church in context to the imminent Day of the Lord.

He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God… ⁴ he gave them this command: “Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. ⁵ For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.” ⁶ So when they met together, they asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” ⁷ He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. ⁸ But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” (^NIV Acts 1:3-8)

C. In this light, God has graciously given his people many gifts by his Spirit to help them abide in Him and remain faithful in their calling in this age. Internal disciplines and external hardships keep us humble, while various ministries of the Holy Spirit, administered uprightly to the Body through the five-fold ministry, keep us on a narrow path of righteousness.

But you, beloved, build yourselves up in your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit; ²¹ keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life. ²² And have mercy on those who doubt; ²³ save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh. ²⁴ Now to him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you blameless before the presence of his glory with great joy, ²⁵ to the only God, our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen. (^ESV Jude 1:20-25)

D. However, what is the broad context and form designed to facilitate these various elements and functions within the Body of Christ in this age? How ought the Body generally relate to one another and to society at large?

1. The modern church broadly relates these elements within a “corporate-based” or “institutional” form of assembly. The apostolic church, however, broadly related on a “home-based” or “private” form of assembly, meeting from “house to house” (cf. Acts 1:13; 2:46; 5:42; 8:3; 12:12; 20:7-9; Rom. 16:5; 1 Cor. 16:19; Col. 4:15; Phlm. 2; etc.). The reason for this is simple: the home-based model of church is the most effective means of faithful sojourning.

2. Unfortunately, the recent explosion of house church networks have generally been understood and interpreted under two broad banners: 1) escapist mission-stations, the means by which souls are saved for immaterial heaven, or 2) dominionist strongholds, the grassroots means by which the church will take over the world. Yet even with this poor Platonic identity, the house church form has proven a more effective form.

3. Entire books, groups and even movements have been devoted to the subject of the form/structure of the church. However, the emphasis of the New Testament is far more focused on the function of the church and sustaining faithfulness to that function by prayer and the grace of God. In other words, the Scriptures emphasize personal piety and righteousness rather than corporate form, since the corporate form is only unto strengthening individual faithfulness. Likewise, this class will devote a relatively small amount of time to the subject of ecclesiological form.[1] John references William Law’s A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life. You can download this at 9b’s audio.

A. Clarification of the Relationship between the Temple and the Church

1. The form of the Post-Constantinian church has been generally based on the pattern of the Old Testament Temple, with a corporate holding, sacred articles/space, professional clergy, etc. Moreover, the liturgical patterns of the church were generally adopted from the liturgy of the Jewish synagogues, which likewise derived from the Temple rituals.[1] This created what Wolfgang Simson calls the “Cathegogue System”:

Baptized with Greek pagan philosophy, separating the sacred from the secular, the cathegogue system developed into the Black Hole of Christianity, swallowing most of its society-transforming energies and inducing the church to become absorbed with itself for centuries to come. The Roman Catholic Church went on to canonize the system. Luther reformed the content of the gospel, but left the outer forms of ‘church’ remarkably untouched. The Free Churches freed the system from the State, the Baptists then baptized it, the Quakers dry-cleaned it, the Salvation Army put it in uniform, the Pentecostals anointed it and the Charismatics renewed it, but until today nobody has really changed the system. The time to do that has now arrived.[2]

2. The Temple was instituted by God in the pattern of the heavenly Temple (cf. Ex. 25:40; Acts 7:44; Heb. 8:5; 9:24). It was designed to be a prophetic signpost of the Day of the Lord, when the glory of God will cover the entire earth (cf. Ps. 72:19; Is. 11:9; 35:2; 40:5; 60:1; Hab. 2:14; etc.). Thus, the glory filling the inner sanctuary (cf. Ex. 40:34; 1 Ki. 8:10ff; 2 Chr. 7:1ff) was seen as a deposit of the glory to come.

When the priests withdrew from the Holy Place, the cloud filled the temple of the LORD. ¹¹ And the priests could not perform their service because of the cloud, for the glory of the LORD filled his temple. ¹² Then Solomon said, “The LORD has said that he would dwell in a dark cloud; ¹³ I have indeed built a magnificent temple for you, a place for you to dwell forever.” (^NIV 1 Kings 8:10-13)

“In the desert prepare the way for the LORD; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God… ⁵ And the glory of the LORD will be revealed, and all mankind together will see it. For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.” … ⁹ You who bring good tidings to Zion, go up on a high mountain. You who bring good tidings to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with a shout… ¹⁰ See, the Sovereign LORD comes with power, and his arm rules for him. See, his reward is with him, and his recompense accompanies him. (^NIV Isaiah 40:3-10)

3. As such the perpetuity of the Name and presence of God was interpreted in light of the age to come (cf. 1 Ki. 9:3; 1 Chr. 23:25; Ps. 68:16; Jer. 3:17; etc.), just as the perpetuity of the Davidic dynasty (cf. 2 Sam. 7:11-16; Ps. 89:29; Is. 9:7; etc.). As the Davidic dynasty came to a temporary end, so also the Temple was destroyed during the 70 year exile of Israel (c.586-516) and again under Roman rule in 70 AD. However, both the Temple and the Dynasty will be perpetually restored in the age to come.

I have heard your prayer and your supplication, which you have made before Me; I have consecrated this house which you have built by putting My name there forever, and My eyes and My heart will be there perpetually. (^NASB 1 Kings 9:3)

• When your days are over and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, who will come from your own body, and I will establish his kingdom. ¹³ He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever… ¹⁶ Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever. (^NIV 2 Samuel 7:11-16)

For the LORD has chosen Zion, he has desired it for his dwelling: ¹⁴ “This is my resting place for ever and ever; here I will sit enthroned, for I have desired it. (^NIV Psalm 132:13-14)

Then the Spirit lifted me up and brought me into the inner court, and the glory of the LORD filled the temple. ⁶ While the man was standing beside me, I heard someone speaking to me from inside the temple. ⁷ He said: “Son of man, this is the place of my throne and the place for the soles of my feet. This is where I will live among the Israelites forever. (^NIV Ezekiel 43:5-7)

4. In this way the Temple was never a pattern for ministry, but rather a signpost for the age to come. The disciples never attempted to replicate the Temple ministry. To replicate it would not only be illogical but blasphemous (cf. 1 Ki. 12:28-33), presumption against God’s chosen seat of redemptive history.

5. Thus, the locus of sojourning ministry was from home to home (cf. Acts 2:46; 5:42; 8:3; 12:12; 20:20; etc.), though the disciples continued to meet in the temple courts (cf. Lk. 24:53; Acts 2:46; Acts 3:1f; 5:20f; etc.). The Temple was never discounted, replaced or superseded; it was simply related to rightly in light of the Day of the Lord. The locus of ministry and sojourning has always been home-based, Old Testament and New (cf. Deut. 4-6; 2 Chr. 6; Ezra 9-10; etc.).

While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven. ⁵² Then they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. ⁵³ And they stayed continually at the temple, praising God. (^NIV Luke 24:51-53)

Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts… ^3:1 One day Peter and John were going up to the temple at the time of prayer… (^NIV Acts 2:46-3:1)

Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Christ. (^NIV Acts 5:42)

• Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. ⁵ Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. ⁶ These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. ⁷ Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. ⁸ Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. ⁹ Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates. (^NIV Deuteronomy 6:4-9)

6. Ultimately, the temple and home fellowships serve the same function—faithful sojourning—but the two forms are different and mutually exclusive. To mix the two forms convolutes the function of both. Thus the NT can speak of the analogous function and identity of the Temple and the church (cf. 1 Cor. 3:16f; 6:19; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21f; Heb. 3:6; 1 Pe. 2:5), while assuming a difference in form and ministry.

What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.” (cf. Ex. 29:45) (^NIV 2 Corinthians 6:16)

Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, ²⁰ built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. ²¹ In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. ²² And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. (^NIV Ephesians 2:19-22)

As you come to him, the living Stone– rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him– ⁵ you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ… ⁹ But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. (^NIV 1 Peter 2:4-9)

B. Brief History of the Church and Home-based Fellowships

1. Because of the early church’s sojourning theology in light of the kingdom and resurrection, early Christians lived in organic and easily multipliable house churches, equipped and guided by the five-fold ministry. As some have said, converts were “converted to marginality,” which had no place in the mainstream of wealth and power.[3]

2. The early church thus had no corporate holdings. There were no “church buildings” mentioned in history until the final quarter of the third century.[4] The question of house church versus corporate church was not even a consideration. As various missiologists have pointed out, if we want to return to the apostolic pattern of church planting, then we ought to aim at constructing our first building 300 years after we start!

When the church was very young, it had no buildings. Let us begin with that striking fact. That the church had no buildings is the most noticeable of the points of difference between the church of the early days and the church of today. In the minds of most people today, ‘church’ means first a building, probably something else second; but seldom does ‘the church’ stand for anything other than a building. Yet here is the fact with which we start: the early church possessed no buildings and carried on its work for a great many years without erecting any. This fact has something significant to teach us concerning the character of the church… There was practically nothing in the way of church building until the third century, and nothing with any pretension to architecture until after the conversion of Constantine early in the fourth century. During all this time the church carried on her mission without buildings of her own, without property, and without the burdens and responsibilities that the holding of property implies.[5]

3. It was not until the conversion of Constantine that the church wholeheartedly adopted corporate holdings endorsed by the State. As the church systematically transitioned to an institutional corporate base, the war against gnosticism subsided, and the Romanized church assumed the identity of the Kingdom Now before an immaterial heaven, i.e. “Christendom”. The theology was thus adopted to validate the ministerial ambition for wealth and power.

4. In time the logical consequence of kingdom now theology and praxis led to the banning of everything outside of the corporate form. On 27 February 380, emperor Theodosius published the so called “Edict of Thessalonica”, which not only outlawed traditional Roman religions but also persecuted all unauthorized gatherings of believers, i.e. house churches.[6]

5. Post-400 AD Christianity is a two-fold history of reformation of theology and praxis. Multitudes of books have been written on the reformation and restoration of apostolic doctrine, but few have even considered the restoration of apostolic ecclesiology. The reason for this: it contradicts the wealth and power of the church, so much so that the church persecuted anyone who even tried to live it out by themselves.

a) The first person to be executed as a heritic after Theodosius’ decree was Priscillian, bishop of Avila. Priscillian empowered a large lay movement in Spain and France of small fellowships called “brotherhoods” which met in private homes. Because they took communion and baptized new believers, the Roman episcopate put Priscillian and six of his leaders to death at Trier in 385.

b) Likewise, the Celtic movement of the 5^th and 6^th centuries initially came under Roman persecution because of their practice of peregrini (lit. “migrant ones”), who would travel in bands evangelizing and discipling new believers in unreached places.[7]

c) The Arminian Paulicians and Tondrakians, the Bogomilians of Bulgaria, the French Henricians (a.k.a. Petrobusians) and Albigensians (a.k.a. Cathars) were all accused of heresy, but the real reason for their systematic persecution was their refusal to assemble in the corporate holdings of their respective Christendom churches. This threatened the wealth and power of the state churches.

d) The rise of the Inquisition in the 12^th century led to the persecution and murder of millions of believers including the Waldensians (the “Poor Men of Lyons”), the English Lollards, the Bohemian Hussites, the Moriscos (Islamic converts) and Marranos (Jewish converts) of Spain and Portugal, and the Protestant Anabaptists, Labadians, Huguenots, etc.—all of which persisted though underground home-based gatherings.[8]

6. Lest we think this a “Catholic problem,” the Protestant Reformers were no less brutal in their persecution of non-sanctioned Christian meetings.

a) After Luther gained the support of the German Elector, Frederick III, Luther ordered the massacre of over 100,000 peasants in 1524-25. From 1526-29, Luther began to organize his movement, which alarmed one of his disciples Kaspar Schwenckfeld.[9] In 1530 Schwenckfeld parted ways with his mentor, and in 1535 he and his disciples were officially condemned as heretics (because of their views on Communion) and were subsequently “hunted like deer” throughout Europe.

b) The leaders of the Anabaptist movement, Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz and George Blaurock, were all sentenced in Zurich at the hands of reformer Ulrich Zwingli. Manz became the first Anabaptist martyr, drowned in Lake Zürich; Grebel died because of his time in prison; Blaurock was beaten, sent away and later burnt at the stake in near Klausen, Italy. Known as the “Radical Reformation,” the Anabaptist movement spread like wildfire throughout Europe as people sought not only a reformation of theology but also a reformation of praxis, the latter being the true source of their relentless persecution.[10]

c) Dictatorial rule was likewise established in Geneva under John Calvin and his successors. Any meetings outside the city ordinances were strictly condemned, and Michael Servetus became the first “libertine” heretic burned in the city square.[11]

d) If the inner motivations of the human heart were exposed, I suggest that the majority of the 30,000+ Protestant denominations were started because groups of people desired to meet outside the control of the corporate-based church, which would be a form of passive persecution.

7. The Protestant home-fellowship movement was given breathing room because of the folly of the Thirty Years’ War (1618-48) and the subsequent retaliation of the Enlightenment (c.1650-1800).

a) The modern home-based church movement began primarily within German pietism, the father of which being Jacob Spener (1635-1705) who recognized that though everyone had a bible in their homes no one actually read them. Thus, he established collegia pietatis, “pious gatherings,” biweekly house meetings that discussed the Sunday morning sermon. Spener quickly encountered opposition from the local Lutheran churches, and the city council of Frankfurt subsequently banned the meetings.

b) In like manner, Nicolaus Ludwig von Zinzendorf (1700-60), the godson of Spener, began a Moravian movement of “societies” and “bands” throughout Europe, which John Wesley multiplied after his Moravian conversion on Aldersgate St. Wesley’s “circuits” and “classes” spread throughout Europe and America, setting the standard of the Protestant evangelicalism by the end of the Second Great Awakening.[12] Essentially house churches, these small groups received intense opposition and ridicule (cf. “Methodist”) by the corporate-based churches.

c) Camp Meetings and the Holiness Movement

d) YMCA and the Student Volunteer Movement

e) Plymouth Brethren and the Little Flock Movement

f) Church Growth Movement and House Church Networks

Prophetically foreseen by Erich Reber and described by writers such as Robert Banks and Met Castillo, it was in 1996 when probably the first intentional house-church planting movement outside rather closed nations like China, Vietnam or Cuba, was initiated by Dr. Victor Choudhrie in North India. In later years, other initiatives followed, initiated by IBRA Radio, a Swedish Pentecostal Radio ministry, which started a new house church planting ministry in the Arab World, or apostolic persons like Bruce Carlton, inside, but clearly on the fringes of existing mission agencies like the Southern Baptists’ IMB (International Mission Board). First greatly ridiculed by traditional churches in almost all nations, the house church movement has grown to many hundreds of thousands of churches in an amazingly short period of time, and is, at this point, not only the main harvesting tool God seems to use in Muslim nations like Bangladesh, Pakistan, or Indonesia, but making its presence felt in many Western nations as well. Apostolic church planters like Neil Cole or Tony Dale, Bernard Sanders and Guy Muse, Victor John and David Watson, Peter Wenz or Jonathan Pattiasina are leading the way, and many in traditional churches who were watching are not laughing anymore. By now (2009) we know of at least 500,000 newly planted house churches (outside China), and, if George Barna is right in his predictions, published in his book Revolution, it will take but a few more years for house churches to become not only an extremely vital harvesting instrument of God, but quite simply the new mainline church, replacing CAWKI [church-as-we-know-it] with something introduced to the mindset of most Christians only a few years ago.[13]

8. The areas of the earth where the greatest growth of the Church is happening today is primarily facilitated through home-based meetings.[14] George Barna, perhaps the most influential pollster and church growth consultant in Evangelical Christianity, predicts that “revolutionary” expressions (i.e. home-based churches) will soon account for one third of American spirituality.[15]