To All My Ecclesiology Folks: Check out Apex
Nov 03
When you get a chance, I want you all to check out Apex Community Church . They are a network of House Churches who meet corporately and own a building, pretty much a traditional Sunday service, but are real interdepedent house churches. Go through the site, see what they do and let me know what you think. Would this be a model that you would particpate in? Is this a model that you believe reflects what Church should look like (even if not perfectly). I am intrigued by them and heard about them through Jon Zens who did an 11 part teaching there.
Lionel,
Hope you are ready for this and hope that you respond. Please forgive me if you feel that my comments are inappropriate for this post.
Now to my comments regarding their website.
As I’m reading their “What We Believe” page on their site, their beliefs seem to contradict themselves in a key area.
From their site:
“We believe that mankind was created in the image of God to have fellowship with Him, but through Adam’s disobedience, the entire human race was separated from God. As a result, man is incapable of regaining a right relationship with God through his own effort alone. (Romans 2:2-5; Ephesians 2:8-9; Genesis 1:27, 9:6; Psalms 51:5, 58:3; Romans 5:12, 3:23; Ephesians 2:1)
We believe that the blood of Jesus Christ, shed on the cross, provides the sole basis for the forgiveness of sin. Therefore, the only means to salvation is belief in Christ’s substitutional death and resurrection. (Acts 4:12, 13:38-39; 1st Corinthians 15:1-4; Romans 4:4-5, 5:1; John 3:16; Ephesians 2:8-9; Acts 16:31; Ephesians 1:4-5)
We believe that man was created to exist forever. He will either exist eternally separated from God by sin or in union with God through forgiveness and salvation. To be eternally separated from God is Hell. To be eternally in union with Him is eternal life. Heaven and Hell are places of eternal existence. (John 3:16; John 2:25; John 5:11-13; Romans 6:23; Revelation 20:15; 1st John 5:11-12; Matthew 25:31-46)”
My response:
Let me first begin by stating that I do not believe that man has the power to draw himself to belief in Christ. I believe that Christ has the sole power in drawing man to believing in Him and this includes all men for there is no exception to this rule for any man.
Now for my comments about their statements.
Notice how they state that “man is incapable of regaining a right relationship with God through his own effort alone”, but then further down state “We believe that the blood of Jesus Christ, shed on the cross, provides the sole basis for the forgiveness of sin”. And then the contradictions continue when they also state “Therefore, the only means to salvation is belief in Christ’s substitutional death and resurrection”
So which one is it?
We know that God is faithful and that He has the sole power to draw man to Him and He has the sole power of mercy and forgiveness over His creation.
So is it really left soley up to man to believe in Christ?
If so, how then is man somehow capable of drawing to Christ on his own?
And what about scriptures such as:
John 12:32 (Young’s Literal Translation)
“and I, if I may be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto myself.”
Rom 11:32
“for as ye also once did not believe in God, and now did find kindness by the unbelief of these: so also these now did not believe, that in your kindness they also may find kindness; for God did shut up together the whole to unbelief, that to the whole He might do kindness.”
I Cor 15:22
“for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive”
I Cor 15:45
“so also it hath been written, `The first man Adam became a living creature,’ the last Adam [is] for a life-giving spirit”
Jon,
One question who is the “these” in Romans 11?
Lionel,
The scriptures seem to be speaking of the relationship between Jews and Gentiles.
Big L-
At least they got the eternal conscious torment right. Grin.
Hee,Hee,Hee,Hee…I’m just joking with you, I am sure they have a lot of things right and they are a viable option for those who still want to support a building and paid staff/elders who control teh resources (did you check out the reimbursment forms-wierd) and for thsoe who want their home meeting orchestrated for them with the curriculumn and study materials prepared before hand by the young men who run the show. Can you participate if you do not give any money towards the structure?
To me it looks like some young men who graduated from seminary who are somewhat convicted about proper ecclesiology but still want to run the show and get paid. Grin.
WARNING, WARNING, WARNING-Will Robinson!
WARNING: Jon Paden, teaches that nobody will exist forever separated from God in a state of literal conscious torment in clear contradiction to the teachings of Christ and His Word.
E-bunny
You asked: Is this a model that you believe reflects what Church should look like (even if not perfectly).
You will not find a perfect representation of the Body of Christ in any structure or format so if you would feel comfortable there and feel you can support it wholeheartedly, then go for it!
They are wise to have Jon Zens come and teach, I would really like to have that tecahing series for Christmas, I need to inform Stacy.
E-Bunny, I believe that also, where I disagree is that Jon believes everyone will live for eternity in Christ, or what is known as universal redemption. I believe in particular redemption, where those who reject the Gospel will be judged and destroyed/consumed/burned up (like the chaff), and where those who trust Christ will be given the gift of eternal life.
Thats not me.
But I do agree.
Hutch,
I know, because you have a much longer explanation
touche
Lionel,
I guess you had no defense for the apparent contradiction.
You still seem to believe that salvation is based on the will of man.
I believe that salvation is based on the will of God for He alone is in control of the redemption of His creation.
LOL @ Jon, if you think that I believe that salvation is based on the “will of man” you haven’t read anything I have written, and should pull back from the computer delete any links I have and act like I never existed
E bunny,
You stated that my current understanding is a:
“…clear contradiction to the teachings of Christ and His Word.”
My response:
Obviously this is not clear to me and many others including some of the trusted early church fathers. I could easily post the same comment about your belief that Christ has created beings to torment them forever. Makes no sense to me. But I am wise enough to know that people can understand scripture differently and that it is up to God to bring all to the knowledge of His truth in due time.
“The greatest theological school of the Patristic era — which directly descended from the Apostles themselves — was called the Didascalium and was based in Alexandria, Egypt. It was founded by St. Pantaenus (d. ca. 216) in the year 190 C.E…
The Didascalium was the earliest catechetical school, and it played a very influential role in the development of Christian theology prior to the rise of the imperial Roman Church…The Alexandria school of Christianity was thoroughly Universalist in its theology. One wonders how history would have been different had Alexandria remained the center of gravity of Christian thought instead of Rome, which developed a diametrically opposite theological system based on the teaching of eternal damnation.”
Consider this statement from Clement of Alexandria (150-220) regarding salvation that he wrote in his Stormata and Pedagogue:
“For all things are ordered both universally and in particular by the Lord of the universe, with a view to the salvation of the universe. But needful corrections, by the goodness of the great, overseeing judge, through the attendant angels, through various prior judgments, through the final judgment, compel even those who have become more callous to repent…. So He saves all; but some He converts by penalties, others who follow Him of their own will, and in accordance with the worthiness of His honor, that every knee may be bent to Him of celestial, terrestrial and infernal things (Phil. 2:10), that is angels, men, and souls who before his [Christ's] advent migrated from this mortal life…. For there are partial corrections (paideiai) which are called chastisements (kolasis), which many of us who have been in transgression incur by falling away from the Lord’s people. But as children are chastised by their teacher, or their father, so are we by Providence… for good to those who are chastised collectively and individually.”
BTW: I have given this info before, however noone was able to reject this historical truth. Will you be so kind to give some explanation to this? (I doubt it!!!)
Lionel,
Who are you kidding? You just made this comment:
“I believe in particular redemption, where those who reject the Gospel will be judged and destroyed/consumed/burned up (like the chaff), and where those who trust Christ will be given the gift of eternal life.”
Based on your above comment, salvation is based on the will of man. For man alone, not God, decides his eternal fate.
I actually believe in a conterversial doctrine called Election Jon, thus I do not believe man can will saving faith, it is a free gift from God, but you already know this
OK, whose gonna convert? Jon, are you changing your mind? What about you Lionel, ready to embrace Universalism? Jon have you converted anybody here in the last two years? Do you think Lionel is on the verge of joining your cause?
What about the post? Jon do you want to discuss the posted question? Lioneld did not ask for your opinion of Apex’s being at odds doctrinally with your favorite topic, Universalism, He asked us to do this: Go through the site, see what they do and let me know what you think. Would this be a model that you would particpate in? Is this a model that you believe reflects what Church should look like (even if not perfectly).
Lionel-
What do you think about Apex’s structure? What do you like about it? What things would you have reservations about?
What about the quick off the cuff comments I made? Give me some push back, lets mix it up.
Hutch,
Are you suggesting that I not risk a head-splitting migraine in trying to respond to Jon concerning his perception of “contradictions”?
!
Hutch I got some coming back for you, I actually was actually laughing last night while doing the dishes thinking about your response.
Bro. Lionel,
I skimmed through the site and was impressed at their stated stances. However, of course, there was one point of contention. Let me explain. Their statement on membership:
“About Membership
As with most group settings, the concept of “membership” comes up often. To be clear, the focus of Apex is membership in the body of Christ. Therefore, we do not follow a formal local membership process. Anyone who has committed his or her life to Jesus Christ, has been baptized and purposes to follow Him, and is committed to an Apex House Church is considered a member of the Apex Community.
To provide for some necessary legal, administrative, and church discipline purposes, a survey will be taken on a regular basis to account for all current members of house churches within the Apex Network. Membership is required for some administrative purposes such as building reservations, weddings, etc. For more questions on this, contact our administrative team.
I agree with the first paragraph but would have a question about how they might define “c0mmittment an Apex House Church.”
In the second paragraph, I would definitely want to know how Spirit-directed the “legal, administrative and church discipline” is. And I’d also be interested in how it seems that being a believer makes you a member but yet the “survey” is necessary to provide “building reservations, weddings, etc.” Seems that a mission to love would make these things available to a professing believer regardless to their “membership”.
I also wonder if this is part of what Hutch keyed in on.
LD,
Whenever a church becomes incorporated it IMMEDIATELY can be sued, so since they have been incorporated (for many pragmatic and beneficial reasons) they immediately have to now submit to the government of the land. That is a question each church has to ask itself as it pursues tax relief and the tax benefits and some other perks that come with being a religious organization. It is a very tough question that I am currently wrestling with, because if you ever decide to rent a facility there may be some legal entity issues that come up, not saying that will ever happen and we will definitely cross that bridge if we were to ever officialy start something (or recognize something).
Finally I would agree, but I think they look at is from the preference of first rights. For example you may love the kid down the street however your children have first rights to the money you earn and rightfully so. In their paradigm (as they own land and a building) their church family has first rights.
Thoughts?
Bro. Lionel,
Thanks for the context. Perhaps it would be my personal decision to keep the government as far away as possible from anything having to do with our gathering. I can see it as being beneficial to us as individuals but I don’t see it as beneficial to the corporate Body of Christ. I’d much rather we “rendered” to whom it was due, just for the freedom itself. In our group, we don’t collect any money. Everyone is encouraged to give directly to whomever they find in need, as the Lord directs them.
I’m not sure about the idea of “first rights” for any of us. I think you have been beating the drum of “giving up our rights” for the cause of Christ and though it is challenging and easier said than done, it is still “music to my spiritual ears”.
I meant this statement:
“I can see it as being beneficial to us as individuals but I don’t see it as beneficial to the corporate Body of Christ.”
in the sense that for tax purposes these things are beneficial but in regards to the furthering of the Kingdom of God, they have no benefit, so far as I see it.
Payment Request Form
By Apex Administrative Team
September 1, 2009
category: Administration
series: Administrative Forms
tags: administration
Available for this resource:
Description about this resource:
Use this form when you want Apex to make a payment, reimbursement, etc. to you or another person.
For example, this could reimburse you for an expense incurred purchasing things for a ministry such as Apex Kids or Apex Students.
Or another example, you might be requesting a check for a benevolence gift your house church region wishes to provide to a person in need.
Questions? Contact the Administrative Team Lead at the Apex Office.
__________________________________
Ok, so how do they do this, are they saying that the giving is done to the Apex mothership and then the local home assemblies request the money back to give to someone in need?
Hutch,
It appears that the Apex leadership considers themselves or their account the “Apostle’s feet”.
Hutch and LD,
I think they do this because they do feel that they are the “mothership” so to say. All of the money is collected there to cover the monthly expenses (including salaries). If you have a building and a church of that size who owns anything I do believe that this is necessary (not that is necessary to do those things though there could be some benefit). For us collection is only done to meet immediate needs (I believe this is what the scripture teaches). I think the reimbursement is due to the fact that the money is given at the mega church or at least assembled there.
Also please understand I neither agree nor disagree, though I do believe it can be very complicated no matter how hard you try to prevent it, logistics will always be a huge concern, but then again let me ask you guys something. How do we gather 35-50 people together. I believe this number would be optimal, no more than a 100 but when we remain small (10-15) there is an inherent danger to put a barrier about ourselves and to become insulated.
LD-
That what I’m saying. Give it to us and then we will determine who gets the benevolence, just put in your request and we will get back to you. I do not think all giving should be one on one and that a local assembly can and should decide together to take up a voluntary collection from time to time for a specific need or person. But it should be like the only ones we have as modeled in scripture, Paul took up a voluntary offering for the poor saints in Jerusalem, each local assembly and the individuals within them could decide to participate or not. Seems like a wasted step of me and I cannot think of a good motivation
Some more questions.
The young men who are the paid head honcho’s refer to themselves as elders/shepherds, yet they have what they call House Church Facilitators who seem to actually be expected to kind of function as elders, but they do not call them elders. So, do the guys who are paid actually function as exemplary slaves/servants to the local assemblies, do they know the people well enough to shepherd them? Do they live with the people in community and share their burdens and joys etc. It does not seem that those who are called elders function as elders and those who kind of function as elders are called something else. Seems mixed up and an insertion of an additional unbiblical layer of control.
Another question: They provide local gathering “sermons” is the group expected to be controlled by the motherships “white Papers”, “position statements” and provided lessons to facilitate the life of the assemblies? This is a usurpation of the New Covenant Priesthood and a quenching of the Holy Spirits ability to direct the meeting as He determines as each one is led to share and exhort. Again, it seems like some seminary kids got somewhat convicted about the Priesthood of the Believer but that they still want to get paid, control the resources and make the decision. Sounds like they are conflicted and confused to me.
Lionel,
Your understanding on election then makes no sense!!!
Realize what you are saying man!!!
You say that God decides to save only a few (probably less than 1% of all humanity according to your standards) of His creation. And the rest have never had and will never have any hope of being restored since they were born. Yet the scriptures repeately state that God’s desire/will is for all to come to repentence and for all things to be restored through Christ. Who then should we trust? Your belief, Hutch’s, Javetta’s, BLD’s or what scriptures speak?
It should be obvious by now that I am not one who seeks to please men at the expense of me continuing to seek and understand Christ in truth. Hopefully you will do the same and one day abandon this most horrible teaching about our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ who desires to seek and draw the lost. All are lost not just a few of what you consider to be the elect. God created us in His image not to be desroyed because of sin but to be restored back to His image as a result of sin. Sin is what God destroys not His creation that He made in His image.
Jon,
I will consider abandoning this “most horrible teaching”……… okay I considered it. Nope
Bro. Lionel,
Did you mean, “how do we gather 35-50 people without a building other than someone’s home?”?
Jon,
I’ve asked you several times. I’ve even painstakingly pointed it out to you. Why do you inject this particular doctrine into just about every discussion? There have been hundreds of posts on other things (all Lionel’s blogs included) and you only comment when YOU believe that your hobby horse doctrine is relavant. Why Jon, why? Has God given this message to you as your personal mission? What gives man? How does your constant mentioning of this doctrine glorify Christ or edify His Body?
Please stop.
Lionel-
I think groups of home churches, should get together regularly. As you know, the Greater Houston area is huge, I know of an assembly in the Memorial area, South of I10 and another one way North in The Woodlands/Spring area, I know there must be many more. I would envision at some point that there would be multiple groups just in the Katy area these might meet together maybe monthly and then groups from the four corners of Houston may meet together perhaps quarterly for Camp-outs, BBQ’s, symposiums, testimonies, teachings etc. however this is done and facilitated, each group should have its own organically developed dynamics and servant leadership. Youa nd I and BLD do not need our marching orders from anyone other than Christ to share the Word of God together in community. I’ll bring what the Lord gives me and will long to hear from both you and BLD, what more do we need?
BLD-
Some blogs do not post off topic dialogue, but that would be Lionel’s call! Grin.
Jon-
Do you want to discuss the theme of this post with us? I’d like you to stay around and discuss it with us-give it a shot.
Ain’t nobody stuting Jon and that foolishness
If I may say,
I thought the ministry of APEX was actually very intriguing—-though it reminded me of something that that was brought up on your ministry not too long ago in the article known as “An Appeal for the Use of House Churches to Extend Sanctuary-Style Churches by Jim Elliff” ( http://blackandreformedministries.com/2008/12/01/an-appeal-for-the-use-of-house-churches-to-extend-sanctuary-style-churches-by-jim-elliff/ )—and the same kind of Dynamic occurs with another ministry known as Xenos (http://www.xenos.org/homegroups/theory.htm ) and “Church within a church” (http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/faith_values/stories/2009/02/13/smallgroups.ART_ART_02-13-09_B4_SRCRORR.html ), as they utilize physical resources/facilities when it comes to their Urban Outreaches/ inner-city charity drives ( http://www.xenos.org/ministries/urbanconcern/history.htm ). Of course, unlike Apex, they’re centered around home church activities rather than traditional Sunday morning sermons…..
But with Apex, I think it’s the basic reality of having One Organism break up throughout the Week—and yet have a central gathering place for them to celebrate to the Lord/do festivities. I personally do not care to condemn people who wish to rent or own a building anymore than others who own a home/pay for it themselves —with others who use it having to pitch in for aid.
Gabriel,
I am not against any church (group of local believers) owning/renting a facility either. I think it has pros and cons from a business perspective, but with much prayer and love I believe it can work and work well. Zens has spoken highly of the Apex community though he has reservations but what will any of us ever agree with totally? I think they are making strides and I wouldn’t be suprised that in a few years they make some more changes as they seem to be a teachable and open community. The allowed Zens to do a 11-part DVD series, check it out in the link. I think for the mobilization of meeting needs in a community and so forth they do an awesome job.
Shalom, L..
I was actually glad that Jon Zens did the series which he did—–as it was a very good read/link, with others within the House Church Movement seeking to note the same for a good bit when it comes to people being so against how buildings are used within more traditional models that they either forget the practical purposes behind why people wanted to actually own their own property/building—-or they forget that just because other fellowships have buildings being mishandled does not equate to all being the same case. The issue gets more complex when a church begins to expand rapidly in areas such as the hundreds or thousands——as it doesn’t seem very productive to have thousands of converts and yet have a “choose the greater of 2 evils” gig? For which would be better—–a Large Building (rented or bought) to accomodate numbers….or No Building at all/Intimacy with others in small groups and yet no corporate gatherings on a large scale for certain activities where man-power is needed? Although I believe that small churches are the best way for intimate fellowship & that it gets cumbersome when things are TOO large, it can also be a battle if there’s never any corporate meeting together….or having something aside in the event that a home is not available—and to that end I think APEX is on point.
Additionally, I more than understand where you’re coming from—as in reading your threads, it’s apparent your main concern isn’t about the form as much as it is about Effectiveness determining what form we’re in. And I do agree that though, owning/renting a facility has pros and cons from a business perspective, with much prayer and love it can work and work well. For more info, one can look into the E-Book entitled House Church Advantages and Disadvantages ). Additionally, as Zane Anderson of “House Church Network” said best when it came to others having issue with people meeting in buildings,
Gabe,
I like the quote brother. Lets see what the responses may be. I have a post coming titled “Too Small or Too Big: Balancing Edifices For Optimal Edification”
I have no problem with local assemblies agreeing to rent or own facilities either, my issues are with unbiblical authority structures, people being recognized as elders who do not function as elders, unbiblical understandings of eldership, centralized control of resources/giving and management of what is shared and taught and the mere lip service to the New Covenant Scriptures.
I think renting or owning a meeting house as I have mentioned on all of the different incarnations of your blogs is fine, I think tehre can be some great benefits…just don’t call it a church! Grin.
Lionel,
I think to a degree, APEX would be the model that I’d tend to lean toward—-as IMHO, it seems to be one of the examples of having the “best of both worlds” when it comes to traditional models and organic (or house church models). On leadership, I really don’t see why it’s an issue seeing how they’ve diversified it—-for when things become SIGNIFICANTLY large, it’d seem like common sense that administration of some sort is needed.
On leadership, as I went to their page to investigate (http://apexcommunity.org/what-we-do/leadership-philosophy/ ), I didn’t anything that even remotely was an issue—-especially as it realates to the issue of making disciples/aiding others in giving opportunity for their gifting to be utilized. And with elders, I don’t see it in the scriptures where one can have a gift of administration and yet MUST be an elder—-as in having the position of such. If I were in a church fellowship and you/whoever else were elders in that group, I’d really have no problem working under someone and being apart of a team if they really had need of others managing affairs for some of the things that they may not be able to process as easily. I know that others disagree—but I don’t see where it is the case that things such as Acts 6:1-7 would not be applicable for what it is that Apex does….as there seems to be clear diversity of organization for effectively getting tasks done. The burgeoning ministry of charity was distracting the apostles from their work in ministering the Word/Prayer for new converts….and in order to cope, they chose the Greek-Speaking Hellenists since they were better equipped to serve/communicate to the widows.
The Church Membership
Glad you like the quote, Brother Lionel…and looking forward to your article on the issue.
On the quote, I was glad the man said it when he did—-as it seemed extremely grieving when people read the work by Viola & then (As he warned against) ran into traditional churches/starting causing havok with “JIHAD” against any/all with buildings………….and some of the most foolish things I’ve ever heard (to be blunt) were done as a result. Some of the ways people operated seemed to be based on nothing short of the logical fallacy of converse accident, where generalizations are given without dealing with the exception…like saying “all swans I’ve seen are brown–therefore, all swans are brown”. One can say when standing in the GRAND Canyon seeing no vegetation and proclaim “There are NO TREES ANYWHERE IN EXISTENCE!!!”–which would be inaccurate, since their viewpoint is skewed by their experience/vantage point. Same with church buildings—-as for people who grew up in churches with buildings/were cool with funding it for the benefits that came about, it is always a bit bothersome when people label them alongside all others who WORSHIPPED a building…or who never moved the Church (the people) outside of the 4 walls for practical work in the world they were to reach. I’ve seen the single mothers who were glad to have a building/somewhere their kids could go with other saints/be mentored in the Lord—as that’s what the entire issue with “Storefront” churches in the city were about.
It’s one thing to argue that there are problems with our existing ways of doing church….and it’s also cool to discuss how many models/formats of church sidesteps certain issues (provided one be consistent & show in their own side how they do the same). Some questions that come to mind on the quote when it comes to buildings:
The issue is not a building the issue is does the building and the structure of the organization allow or keep the people from functioning as the church. Most of what passes for “church” in America is a structure that does everything but allow the people to function as a church, so it’s a different type of organization it is not a church it’s something else. Granted there may be people who participate in this other organization who are Christians, but it is not an expression of the Body of Christ as presented in the scriptures. It is so bad here that when you present a biblical Christianity of crucified living and a gathering as the church that flows in the Spirit of Life in Christ where mutual teaching, sharing and ministry is practiced, they call what is good(biblical Christianity) evil and evil(whatever they are doing) good.
So the question is does Apex’s super structure allow the people to function as the church? My answer is probably better than most but not fully.
Gabriel-
They call elders men who are not shepherds at the local level and call people who somewhat function as shepherds at the local level facilitators. So they do not know what biblical eldership looks like.
Hutch,
No one is talking–at all–about the leadership structure…and again, people can complain. But as long as DISCIPLES are being made and actually doing what Christ called, as it relates to Luke 10:25-35 when it comes to the Good Samaritan, there’s not anything to argue on. Minus the reality that the church of Apex as well as others like it already have believers using their giftings/talents to build others up in faith and love, the issue seems to be one of fighting the WRONG war. Neil Cole of the book “Organic Leadership” discussed the issue in-depth concerning the reality of how most of the time people TRIP for nothing—and thankfully, as it comes to leadership, David Flowers interviewed the man on his ministry ( http://www.organicchurch.us/capturethemoment/Neil_Cole_Organic_Leadership.php )
Again, if the church is not FAMILY—or if it is not an environment where others are not loving each other and the world they’re called to witness to–then and only then are they NOT a church. As it is, APEX has not been shown to be that.
As it is, have you even BEEN to APEX? Have you interacted AT ALL with the people there to see their lives and how they live for Christ? The only one who has done so thus far was Jon Zens—and they and he were cool with each other. That said, if you cannot do that much, what right is there for you to even begin a war against them based on what you percieve? That’d be like me hearing of a friend of mine with a family where they have a very structured family—and then assuming that “Structure” for them is the same as how I saw it in very authoratitive/overbearing familes and then condeming them. If I cannot take the time to even GO TO THEIR DOOR/Ring the Door bell and examine their lives, what I’m doing is opening the door for nothing short of slander.
As it is, it seems the logic by many is that the only thing qualifying as “church” is what THEY agree with (in their view) of how things should be. That’s a problem, Bruh…
The rest of the post is semantics—as again, FUNCITION (i.e. maturity, encouraging others, building up saints in the Lord, serving in love, etc) is exactly what the elders in their fellowship do…..and the issue of “facilitators” is no more different than NUMEROUS OTHER house churches around the world that have people in positions of administration/leadership but who do not wish to lead the church. That’s their gig…and not mine to trip about, Bruh. As it is, ELDERSHIP was about character above all else—-and as it is, it does not seem you are evaluating them properly on it …according to I Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-9 and Titus 2:1-10
Hutch where is it on the site where the elders are called one thing and the house church leaders are called something else. I couldn’t find it.
On a side note, the reality is that people (again) around the world have been meeting in homes/having structures of leadership such as APEX….and they’ve been making real disciples at a more alarming rate than anything often produced in the states. For more info, one can look up “The Underground Church in History” ( http://www.xenos.org/essays/index.htm#underground ) or “Watchman Nee
and the House Church Movement
in China” ( http://www.xenos.org/essays/neeframe.htm )
One needs to go no further than look into the history/dynamics of what occurs in the UNDERGROUND Churches in China. For more info on the issue, one can go to “Persecution News Reports from China” ( http://www.persecution.net/china.htm )–or “Chinese Police Proudly Record Their Torture of Christians” ( http://www.epm.org/artman2/publish/missions_china/Chinese_Police_Proudly_Record_Their_Torture_of_Christians.shtml ) and “”Church in China, Inc” ( http://www.churchinchina.com/ ). Going on the Mission Field abroad tends to shape perspective on what is or isn’t really important in the large scheme of things—-as it relates to the Great Comission of Matthew 28:16-19–and have some friends who’ve been on the mission field in China. It’s a different world, of course…..but generally, the people were all able to recognize the leaders in the churches as servants who loved the ones God had entrusted them with (ones who did as Jesus noted in Matthew 20:20-28 , Mark 9:33-41, and Luke 22:24-30, etc)—ones such as I Corinthians 16:13-18 notes of leaders having functions—-yet they also had NO problems with organized leadership alongside things such as mutual edification/one anothering. For they could do both—and at times, significant organization was necessary for the sake of survival. Logically, as they were able to produce some of the BEST disciples on the planet in the WORSE of situations, is it now the case that the same replicated here in form of how they operate is going to produce less?
As it is, the central issue is one of showing where decentralized leadership always leads to people being willing to either evangelize, preach the Good News, or be DISICIPLES more so that those in churches where there is significant structure done voluntarily.
Going through the site, I actually found some things that were HIGHLY impressive …as I had no idea they actually had people Actually, Lionel…
Going back through the site, I didn’t see anywhere that the term “Facilitators” was even used. Though in going to their page on “Who We Are: Leadership” ( http://apexcommunity.org/what-we-do/leadership-philosophy/ ), it was nothing short of organized teams for certain jobs/functions in the church ………no more different than how it is in many house CHURCHES when it comes to some being elders who teach primarily new converts while others lead in differing capacities–and then, when people have gotten mature, then move out/replicate the process …with things in place so that there’s a continual stream of individuals coming in/out (much like what occurs in a classroom setting).
All that aside, I was impressed when going through the site and seeing the ladies from India come in to do a service for them…as seen in “Women’s empowerment among the Dalits of India” ( http://apexcommunity.org/womens-empowerment-among-the-dalits-of-india/ ). For those wishing to make an impact across the seas, Praise GOD for their work
Hutch,
That brings up good questions (what Gabe said). What about cultures whose homes are not equipped to house more than 4 people because of architecture?
Network Leadership
Network Elder Team
Rennes Bowers
Chris Cardiff
Ben Helwig
Gary Palmer
Jim Schindler
Rob Turner
These are the elders. In one of Rob’s speeches he refers to men who shepherd the local hosue meetings as HC Facilitators.
Answer to your question: If a house is not equipped to handle more than four people meeting, if a group has more than four people, they should meet somewhere else.
Thats a wierd questions why was that asked? I said above it is fine to meet in homes, public areas, parks, rented facilities, owned facilities- a meeting house, just don’t call the structure/building a church. People meet in homes(most home churches) and do not meet in a NT fashion. The location is irrelevant a group of believers meet as the church when they fucntion according to the NT pattern. I can hold a bible study in my home, but that is not a church. I can go and hear a man give a speech, but that is not a church. The location is unimportant, its how teh meeting functions thatd etermines if it is a meeting of teh church. Why are we still go round and round on this, I think my position over the past 2 years on location has been clearly spelled out. If the Priesthood is functioning without the hated works of the Nicolatians/hirelings surpressing the Saints, then you have a church meeting.