Home vs. Church Meetings

INTRODUCTION
Nate has copied an article written by Eric Svendsen as justification for Home Meetings. Unfortunately for Nate, there are 3 immediate problems by doing so:

1) Eric Svendsen is not a 2x2. He is a self-declared “Reformed Evangelical” and has endorsed a formal declaration of doctrine from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.

2) Eric Svendsen belongs to a “worldly” religion. He even has his own website called the New Testament Research Ministries.

3) Eric Svendsen has a formal theological education, unlike the workers. He holds a B.A. in Biblical Studies from Tennessee Temple University and the University of Tennessee, an M.A. in New Testament Studies from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, a Doctorate in Theological Studies (D.T.S.) from Columbia Evangelical Seminary, and a Ph.D. in New Testament from Greenwich School of Theology/Potchefstroom University. Eric is a member of the Society of Biblical Literature, and has written several books.

[Svendsen] For the first three-hundred years of its existence, the church met primarily in the homes of its members, not in specially designed buildings.

[Clay] Wrong. While it is true that they met in private homes, they also met in public places (Acts 2:46, Acts 3:1, Acts 18:7). More importantly, absolutely nowhere is meeting in specifically designed building forbidden. It many cases it seemed prudent to meet in secret, (in the catacombs of Rome, for example) due to the fact that the first Christians were persecuted by Romans and Jews alike, but regardless, home meetings were NOT mandated by God.

[Svendsen] church that met in the house of Aquila and Priscilla. When Paul wrote to Philemon he also addressed his letter to Archippus and to the church in his house

[Clay] Mt 18:15-18 reads, “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.”

What is the “church” of which Jesus spoke? It was an obvious reference to Deuteronomy 17:8-10, 12: “If in your own community there is a case at issue which proves too complicated for you to decide, in a matter of bloodshed or of civil rights or of personal injury, you shall then go up to the place which the Lord, your God, chooses, to the Levitical priests or to the judge who is in office at that time. They shall study the case and then hand down to you their decision. According to this decision that they give you in the place which the Lord chooses, you shall act, being careful to do exactly as they direct…Any man who has the insolence to refuse to listen to the priest who officiates there in the ministry of the Lord, your God, or to the judge, shall die.”

In other words, far from abolishing the structured hierarchy in favor of individual private meetings, Jesus reminded His disciples of how things were to work by referring back to the way things had always been – with a structured, public organization, even down to the “two or three witness” (Deut 19:16).

[Svendsen] When Paul taught the newly formed churches, he did so from "house to house" (Ac 20:20).

[Clay] So what? Don’t forget that Jesus used to preach in the temple (Lk 19:47, Jn 7:14, Mt 21:14, Mk 14:49), as did Paul also teach at the synagogues and temple (Acts 9:20, Acts 13:5, Acts 13:14-15, Acts 14:1, Acts 17:17, Acts 18:4, Acts 19:8, Acts 21:26, Acts 22:17). Paul’s selection of a public venue was not an isolated event because we learn in Acts 17:1-2 that it was his custom to preach at the synagogue Peter’s first sermon at Pentecost miraculously able to speak to the Parthians, Medes, Elamites, inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Judea, and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia an Pamphylia, Egypt and the districts of Libya near Cyrene, as well as travelers from Rome, both Jews and converts to Judaism, Cretans and Arabs in their own language such that 3,000 were converted that day. This could NOT have happened at someone’s home. The purpose for assembly is to gain converts, not meet secretly in a house to the exclusion of everyone else, and let us not forget that 2x2s hold special meetings in schools, libraries, business offices and other public places while at the same time denouncing those of us who have dedicated churches.

[Svendsen] Conversely, there is no real evidence that the early church met anywhere else for their weekly meetings. True, the first five chapters of Acts pictures a church that was meeting daily in the temple (1:13, 2:46, 5:42), as well as in Solomon's Porch (5:12). But this was at a time before there was any attempt to develop a normative church practice.

[Clay] He admits that the early church DID meet publicly and admits that this was before there was any “normative church practice”. In other words, the early church did NOT just meet in homes, and the early church met at the temple before there was any sort of “normative practice”. Svendsen destroys his own argument.

[Svendsen] It is a fact that no other religious group of the first century (besides the church) met exclusively in homes. The Jews met in the temple and synagogues; the pagan religions at that time met in their pagan temples and shrines. So not only was the house-church not the culture of the day, it actually went against the culture of the day. The church could have patterned themselves after the other religions of that day and met in specially designed buildings-the pattern was there-but, significantly, they chose not to!

[Clay] Guess what? Jesus was a Jew who met at the temple. He taught at the temple and never once did He say that this should stop. The first Christians were Jewish converts who met at the temple (Acts 2:46). The “church” is nothing more than Christianized Judaism, because much that was Jewish was retained (and perfected) in the early church; for example, the Last Supper was the fulfillment of the Passover, water baptism replaced circumcision, etc. As Tertullian wrote, “In whom have all the nations believed but in Christ who is already come? In whom have they believed – the Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and those who inhabit Mesopotamia, Armenia, Phrygia, Cappadocis; those who live in Pontus, Asia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, in Africa beyond Cyrene; those born here and those who come here from Rome; also the Jews in Jerusalem and other national groups, as now the various tribes of the Gaetulians and of the wide regions of the Moors, and the Spaniards to their remotest boundaries; the different nations of Gaul; the haunts of the Britons, inaccessible to the Romans; the lands of the Sarmatians, Dacians, Germans, Scythians; and many remote nations, provices, and islands, which are unknown to us and which we cannot enumerate? We are but of yesterday, yet we have filled all that is yours: cities and islands, forts and towns, assemblies and even military camps, tribes, councils, the palace, the senate, the forum.”( Against the Jews VII; Apology 57)

[Svendsen] As a perusal through any reputable church history manual will readily show, all persecution before A.D. 250 was sporadic, localized and, more often than not, the result of mob hostility rather than the decree of a Roman ruler.

[Clay] I wish Svendsen would have done more than “peruse” church history before making such an assertion. Even if this were true (which it is not), does it make the persecution of the early church any less significant? Did the early Christians know that their being persecuted was merely “sporadic and localized” It probably didn’t seem that way to those who suffered for their faith. It is said that the ichthus symbol was a secret greeting Christians gave each other, afraid to be publicly recognized as Christians. They met in secret in the catacombs in Rome and set up altars there. From Herod to Nero to Domitian to Severus to Decius to Diocletian to Licinius to Valerian to Maximus and beyond, state-sanctioned persecution was ordered by the Roman emperors. In 177 A.D. The Letter of the Churchs of Vienna and Lyons to the Churches of Asia and Phrygia exposes a comprehensive oppression instead of “mob hostility”, “Now the blessed Pothinus, who had been entrusted with the bishopric of Lyons, was dragged before the judgment-seat. He was over ninety years of age and very infirm. Though he breathed with difficulty on account of the feebleness of the body, yet he was strengthened by spiritual zeal through his earnest desire to bear his testimony. His body, indeed, was already worn out by old age and disease, yet his life was preserved that Christ might triumph through him. When he was brought by the soldiers to the judgment-seat, accompanied by the civil magistrates and a multitude who shouted against him in every manner, as if he himself were the Christ, he gave the good testimony. When the governor asked who was the God of the Christians, he said, "If thou art worthy, thou shalt know." Then he was unmercifully dragged away and endured many blows. Those near him struck him with their hands and feet, showing no respect for his age. Those at a distance hurled against him whatever they could seize. All of them thought they would sin greatly if they omitted any abuse in their insulting treatment of him. For they thought that in this way they would avenge their gods. And Pothinus, breathing with difficulty, was cast into prison, and died two days later.” From De Mart. Pal. ch. 9 we learn that, “All at once decrees of Maximinus again got abroad against everywhere throughout the province. The governors, and in addition the military prefects, incited by edicts, letters and and public ordinances the magistrates, together with generals and the city clerks in all the cities, to fulfill the imperial edicts which commanded that the altars of the idols should be rebuilt with all zeal and that all the men, together with the women and children, even infants at the breast, should offer sacrifice and pour out libations;”. In other words, edicts and public ordinances and the military prefects and generals and city clerks ALL were involved in trying to suppress the Christian movement. No, it was not just “mob hostility” by which Polycarp was martyred, and one need merely to peruse Eusebius or Lactantius; for example, "At Nicomedia ten thousand holy martyrs who were put to the sword for the confession of Christ", and on 22 June: "On Mount Ararat the martyrdom of ten thousand holy martyrs who were crucified." The first entry, found in an old Greek martyrology, translated by Cardinal Sirleto and published by H.Canisius, probably notes the veneration of a number of those who gave their lives for Christ at the beginning of the prosecution of Diocletian, in 303 (Acta SS., March, II, 616). The Catholic Encyclopedia points out that "that the number is not an exaggeration is evident from Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., VIII, vi), Lactantius (De morte prosecut., xv)". Svendsen’s (and therefore Nate’s) implying that these sorts of persecutions were merely “sporadic” is a despicable display of historical revisionism which insults the memory of those who literally gave their lives for Christ.

[Svendsen] Moreover, the Roman rulers who were favorably disposed toward Christianity outnumbered those who opposed it. This is seen not only in Church history but even in the book of Acts. Luke goes to great lengths to show that the Roman authorities did not consider Christianity a threat, but instead (whenever the Jews tried to eradicate Christianity by means of the legal system) viewed it as a religious matter quite out of their jurisdiction (cf. 16:35, 17:6-9, 18:12-16, 19:37-38, 23:29, 25:18-20, 25:24-27, 26:31-32).

[Clay] Svendsen cites a number of texts without actually discussing them, making it seem as though Christians were tolerated; for example, he attempts to cite Acts 16:35 as proof that Christians were dealt with just by means of some benevolent legal system, he neglects to inform the reader of what happened just before – “they seized Paul and Silas and dragged them to the public square….The crowd joined in the attack on them and the magistrates had them stripped and beaten with rods. After inflicting many blows on them, they threw them in prison…and secured their feet to a stake.” (Acts 16:19-24) As early as in chapter 8 in Acts we see that "there broke out a severe persecution of the church in Jerusalem, and all were scattered throughout the countryside of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles." (Acts 8:1) Lest the reader decide this omission was a casual oversight, let us examine the surrounding context of the rest of Svendsen’s quotes:

Acts 17:6-9: Before that, the Jews formed a mob and marched on Jason’s house, dragging him and others before the magistrates.

Acts 18:12-16: Before that, Paul was reviled, and Sosthenes the synagogue official was beaten in full view of the tribunal.

Acts 19:37-38: Before than, a “serious disturbance” broke out among the silversmiths such that the city was “filled with confusion” .

Acts 23:29: Before that, the Jews had “made a plot and bound themselves by oath not to eat or drink until they had killed Paul” (v 12).

Acts 25:18-20, 24-27: Before that, the chief priests and Jewish leaders were plotting to kill Paul along the way to Jerusalem (v. 3)

Acts 26:31-31: Before that, Paul recounted how he himself used to persecute Christians.

Furthermore, John’s Book of Revelation connects the horrific beasts (example, Rev 13) to the Roman emperors, which does not give the impression of benevolent rule. One need look no further than Saul himself to see how successfully Christians were persecuted, and one need look no further than Paul’s efforts to preach to the Jews to see how dangerous it was to be a Christian – Paul was met with violence wherever he went (Acts 13:45, Acts 14:5, Acts 19:23-40, Acts 21). Specifically, Paul was (Acts 14:19-20) stoned and dragged and left for dead, (Acts 16:22) stripped and beaten, (Acts 21:31 and 25:3) plotted against to be killed, (Acts 22:22-29) imprisoned, and ultimately killed. Does it seem to the rational reader that the magistrates dealt with Christians in a charitable manner? I don’t think so, and this is why Christians met in homes. In those days it simply was not safe to be a Christian, much less try to preach the gospel.

Furthermore, when the persecution of Christianity was abandoned by the Roman Government, it was taken up by Rome's traditional enemy, the Persians, though formerly they had been more or less tolerant of the new religion. On the outbreak of war between the two empires, Sapor II (310-80), under the instigation of the Persian priests, initiated a severe persecution of the Christians in 339 or 340. It comprised the destruction or confiscation of churches and a general massacre, especially of bishops and priests. The number of victims, according to Sozomen (Hist. Eccl., II, 9-14), was no less than 16,000. And when Julian the Apostate (361-63) came to the throne, he supported the defenders of paganism, though he strove to strengthen the old religion by recommending works of charity and a priesthood of Strictly moral lives which, a thing unheard of, should preach and instruct. State protection was withdrawn from Christianity, and no section of the Church favored more than another, so that the Donatists and Arians were enabled to return…..the persecutions raised by pagan communities and governors, especially in Alexandria, Heliopolis, Maiouma, the port of Gaza, Antioch, Arethusa, and Cæsarea in Cappadocia (cf. Grergory of Nazianzus, Orat. IV, 86-95; P. G., XXXV, 613-28). Persecution by the pagan Visigoth King Athanaric. began about 370 and lasted for two, or perhaps six, years after his war with Valens. St. Sabas was drowned in 372, others were burnt, sometimes in a body in the tents which were used as churches. When, in the fifth and sixth centuries, the Visigoths invaded Italy, Gaul, and Spain, the churches were plundered, and the Catholic bishops and clergy were often murdered. The Vandals, Arians like the Visigoths and the others, were the most hostile of all towards the Church. During the period of their domination in Spain (422-29) the Church suffered persecution, In the sixth century the Christians were brutally persecuted by the Jewish King Dunaan, no less than five thousand, including the prince, Arethas, being said to have suffered execution in 523 after the capture of Nagra. (CE)

[Svendsen] Still others have dismissed house-churches as something true of the church in its infancy stage only. The apostles, it is argued, would naturally have expected the church in later centuries to develop its own forms and structures in keeping with the progress of Christianity. (One searches in vain for any indication of this supposed "expectation")

[Clay] Svendsen didn’t search very hard. Jesus knew that His Church would be a living, growing thing. Paul even describes the church as one Body with many parts (1 Cor 12). In Matthew 13, Jesus delivers the parable of the mustard seed: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that a person took and sowed in a field. It is the smallest of all the seeds, yet when full-grown it is the largest of plants. It becomes a large bush and the birds of the sky come and dwell in the branches." (Mt 13:31-34) Jesus goes on to give a similar parable about the yeast being mixed with the wheat flour. In these parables, the "kingdom of heaven" is Christ's church on earth, not in heaven. How can we know this? Because in heaven all things are perfectly realized. There are no mustard seeds in heaven - they have all developed into the large bush. The wheat among the weeds developed (Mt 13:24-30). The mustard seed developed into a bush large enough that birds of the sky come and dwell within its branches. The person's body develops into adulthood. The neophyte church began as a tiny mustard seed and has developed over time as well.

Therefore, just because the Christ's church, the kingdom of heaven, developed and doesn't always resemble the "New Testament Church" does not automatically mean that an apostasy has taken place. “Then every scribe who has been instructed in the kingdom of heaven is like the head of a household who brings from his storeroom both the new and the old." (Mt 13:52) "And he gave some as apostles, others as prophets, others as evangelists, others as pastors and teachers, to equip the holy ones for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ until we attain to the unity of faith and knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the extent of the full stature of Christ, so that we may no longer be infants, tossed by waves and swept along by every wind of teaching arising from human trickery, from their cunning in the interests of deceitful scheming. Rather, living the truth in love, we should grow in every way into him who is the head, Christ, from whom the whole body is joined and held together be every supporting ligament, with the proper functioning of each part, brings about the body's growth and builds itself up in love." (Eph 4:11-16)

[Svendsen] To spend wasted money and time building large, beautiful places of worship knowing that the Lord might come at any time was unthinkable to the NT church.

[Clay] “Have you ever thought that generosity towards God might not be a sin? Do not conclude that generous dispositions which are foreign to you are necessarily foreign to all other human beings. It is a mean-spirited man who, feeling the reproach of another’s generosity, seeks to rob him of all credit by attributing it to unworthy motives or to a craven submission to compulsion. The only good thing in such a man is that he does feel the reproach.” (Rumble & Carty, Radio Replies, vol. II, 1042) How similar is this thinking like what the disciples said to the woman who poured expensive oil on Jesus’ head? ”When they saw this, they were indignant and said, ‘Why this waste? It could have been sold for much, and the money given to the poor” (Mt 26:8-9). Jesus did NOT agree; rather, He rebuked them, and He praised the poor widow who contributed what little she had for the temple (Mk 12:42) Can you remember which specific disciple is mentioned for asking, “Why was this oil no sold for 300 days wages and given to the poor?” IT WAS JUDAS! (Jn 12:5) Do we really want to be identified with the one who betrayed Jesus? The early Christians would have had no reason to build church buildings at first, until they figured out that Jesus wasn’t coming back so soon. (Read Church Buildings Article)

[Svendsen] Moreover, we have adopted not the "alien" philosophy of Abraham but the world's philosophy that "bigger is better," only we've changed the words to "God deserves the best." Is this not how we've justified posh mega-churches, plush pews, stained-glass windows, extravagant church organs, exorbitant choir robes and the like (usually to the neglect of real needs of the saints such as food, clothing and shelter)?

[Clay] God commanded the Jews to build the Temple at Jerusalem as their main place of worship. Jesus, as God the Son, taught in the temple, calling it His Father's House. He became angry with those who would desecrate it by turning it into market and He drove out those buyers and sellers who would turn the temple into a den of thieves. Jesus was a Jew, and nowhere in Scripture does Jesus suddenly change His mind about using the temple as a public place of worship dedicated to God. Our Savior humbled Himself, but we are not to humble Him. Nothing is indeed too good for God; surely Svendsen doesn’t disagree with this? Moreover, the Catholic Church established hospitals for the care of their sick as well as schools for their education as well as shelters for their safety. Have the F/W’s ever done this? Incidently, a review of Svendsen’s site mentions nothing about his personal contributions to the needy in terms of food, clothing and shelter. As non-Catholic William Force Stead wrote, “We do right to seek God in a church. Some say they can worship better out-of-doors. They enjoy the idea of being ‘in tune with the Infinite’. But it is almost always a lazy and hazy idea. Real worship demands a focusing of the attention and effort. There is no better focus than the lighted altar. Out-of-doors our ideas of God are diffused, and God Himself is diffused. At Church our ideas of God become concentrated. Enter a dim Cathedral – and wait, and things will grow clearer. The divine discovery begins in darkness. We must find God, because the market place is not enough for us. We cannot live by bread alone. Men in terror and despair fled away from the work-a-day world and built their heavily-shadowed Cathedrals – not in terror of the unknown – but of the things they did know – the petty and the commonplace, the dreadful inadequacy of it all. The stones had no meaning until the spirit of man took hold of them. They have undergone a transfiguration. All that the Cathedral stands for is hidden in the human heart, as the stones were hidden in the earth; and it leads to the Supreme Spirit – God.” (In the Shadow of Mt. Carmel)

[Svendsen] "The entertaining room in a moderately well-to-do household could hold around thirty people comfortably-perhaps half as many again in an emergency. . . . it is unlikely that a meeting of the 'whole church' could have exceeded forty to forty-five people, and many may well have been smaller. . . . In any event we must not think of these [church meetings] as particularly large. . . Even the meetings of the 'whole church' were small enough for a relatively intimate relationship to develop between the members" (Paul's Idea of Community: The Early House Churches in Their Historical Setting [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988], 41-42).

[Clay] The traditional house of St. Peter was used for community gatherings as early as the third quarter of the first century A.D…We have shown that the Christian community of Capharnaum paid a special attention to the house of Simon Peter. That house became very soon ‘the house’ of the followers of Jesus, i.e., a domus-ecclesia. As a matter of fact, the rediscovered house of Peter is the first example of a domus-ecclesia in the Christian World (Stanislao Loffreda, Recovering Capharnaum Jerusalem: Francisican Printing Press, 1993, p 57)

About 400 the pilgrim Egeria wrote, ‘At Capharnaum the house of the Prince of the Apostles has become a church: the walls of the house are still preserved. There our Lord healed the paralytic. There is the Synagogoue where our Lord healed the demoniac, to which access is given through numerous stairs; this synagogue is made of cut stones’ “ (Eugene Hoade, Guide to the Holy Land Jerusalem: Franciscan Printing Press, 1976, p 759)

CONCLUSION
Nowhere in the Bible are church buildings forbidden. Jesus Himself taught at the Temple, and so did Paul. It is a mistake to assume that what the earliest Christians did must be the way we do things now – the most important reason why this logic is faulty is because there was no Bible at the time anyway! Svendsen (and therefore Nate) makes gigantic assumptions - the Bible did not exist for the first 4 centuries of Christianity. Even if it did, there was no means to mass-produce them. Even if they could have been mass-produced, the majority of the world was illiterate. Even if they could read, they wouldn’t have the time or the financial resources to buy a Bible and a commentary and a lexicon and a dictionary for personal study.

Instead, Jesus created a church and promised it divine guidance. Before his painful crucifixion, He prayed for unity among Christians, not disjointed groups meeting in secret on their own (Jn 17). In the vivid visual reminder of the rocks of Caesarea Philippi, Jesus changed Simon’s name to Peter (petros means “rock” in Greek) and said He would build his church. The symbolism behind giving Peter the Keys of the Kingdom is taken directly from Isaiah 22, where the Eliakim was given the key to the House of Judah. Everyone knows that this was not a private home, but a nation of believers with a structured organization.

1 Timothy 3:15 reads, “But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim 3:15). Paul makes the meaning clear – the household of God IS a church. The Greek word for “household” here is oikos which means “a public building, meeting-house”! The Greek word of “church” is ekklesia, and the connection between public meeting house and God’s assembly of believers is quite clear. Both times it is used by Jesus in the New Testament (Mt 16:18 and Mt 18:18) it does not mean some vague assembly of believers huddled in a private home. Even in the Greek Old Testament, ekklesia is used to mean “an assembly of the citizens regularly summoned, the legislative assembly, the Jewish congregation” (Deut 31:30). No, “a city set on a mountain cannot be hidden. Nor do they light a lamp and then put it under a bushel basket; it is set on a lampstand, where it gives light to all in the house. Just so, your light must shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your heavenly Father.” (Mt 5:14-16)