More Unity or More Cliques?

[Landmark Laf]

This thread is dedicated solely to discussing the unity, or lack thereof, in churches that use a 'house to house' ministry. If you would like to express your opinion or simply speak from experience, it's all you.

[Landmark Laf]

Our church has effectively used Home Friendship Groups as an outreach. Various groups meet at various locations on various days throughout the week.

-------------------------------------------------------
The Structure of our HFGs are as follows:

*Pastor

*Associate Pastor

*Zone Leaders (# dependent on church size)

*Section Leaders (5 per Zone)

*Cell Leaders (5 per Section)

*Interns (1 per cell)

*Members (6-12ish per cell)
-------------------------------------------------------

Every Cell meets once per week. Every Section meets once per quarter. Every Zone meets twice per year. Everyone meets together once per week.

-------------------------------------------------------

This can, quite obviously, enhance unity in almost all churches. An Example:
The average Protestant Church in the USA runs 75 people per Sunday. Of those 75, 60 only meet at the church building. On average, those 15 who meet on other nights are young people, just hanging out.
The HFG atmosphere makes it more likely for a person to have 10 or so close friends that they can rely on for anything and talk openly with. It also enables them to communicate frequently in a nonchalant or very spiritual atmosphere with members of other cells. We have had HFGs for over 5 years and have yet to experience a problem with division or cliques. In fact, the unity in our church has reached an unbelievable height and is still growing.

One more point to back up my opinion. It is very complicated to keep a high level of unity in a growing church. Your core group of members will always be unified, but the new converts (especially if you have more new converts than members) will have to attempt to break into that unity without destroying it. How are you to keep unity and trust when more and more faces keep showing up? Well, with cells, you just simply create another group (by way of multiplication) that allows people to develop trust and friendship with 10 or so people, then with 50 or so, then with 200 or so...etc... Solving that problem.

Unified.

Life is Good,
Matt

[In His Service]

Bro. Matt,
I have to ask why you keep speaking of the percentages and such of the average protestant church to support the G-12 concept.

The apostolic church is in no way like an average protestant church. Not even remotely such, unless the group tends to lean more to following an organiztions ways over letting God have control.

It always has and I believe, always will bother me when Apostolic go outside of the apostolic ranks to use numbers and ideas for the Apostolic church.

Be blessed
Bro. Timothy

[Landmark Laf]

I apologize for stating Protestant Statistics. The book I was getting my information from speaks of 'Protestant' in general. I do have the statistics of 'Oneness' (UPCI, ALJC, etc.), but not with me at this time, I will be sure to get them. They are very similar. Honestly, I'm not a fan of statistics, but I tried to present them in a straightforward manner without bending them to my needs.

[ddc101]

Hi Brother Matt,
I agree that cell groups promote unity and fellowship.We were a part of a church that effectively used cell ministry in the later part of the 1980's.Yes cell groups were alive and kicking then also.In fact one of the leaders who was a very humble spainish man approached us and invited us to his first.We loved it and decided to remain in that cell even though many ask us to change cells.During this time we developed true friends within the church and became a part of that cell structure.It was mentioned that because we were ministry that we might try to take over the cell.Quite the contrary.We helped that man all we could to shepherd and looked up to him as well.He was a miricle as he could not read and write until he started reading the bible and the Lord helped him to read.It was awesome...such great faith.And I also learned to make tamales which was a plus for a newlywed.

I believe its the fellowshipping and breaking bread house to house concept that causes the church to have a family feel.Cajun people love that.lv sis.c

[Landmark Laf]

Pastor Langford recently posted a couple of articles onto www.LandmarkLafayette.com (http://www.LandmarkLafayette.com). The first is an article about Landmark Lafayette's Small Groups, how we came to love them, and what they have done for us, plus more. This article was published in Forward Magazine (sent to all UPC pastors) and can be found at www.LandmarkLafayette.com/smallgroupshistory.htm (http://www.LandmarkLafayette.com/smallgroupshistory.htm).
The second is an article casting the vision for 2004. It lists vision specific to our various ministries and our goals for the year. It also lists financial accolades, church assessment, and more. It can be found at www.LandmarkLafayette.com/Vision2004.htm (http://www.LandmarkLafayette.com/Vision2004.htm).
Enjoy, and don't forget to give your feedback at LandmarkLafayette.com.

[garyfroth]

I am not sure what you men by "Apostolic go outside of the apostolic ranks that use numbers and ideas for the Apostolic church."

Not sure if the implication is do not meet for fellowship in homes and confine fellowship to corporate worship and prayer to the House of God. Personally, i think if people only meet one another in church, it is still about worship, prayer...but seems lives are parallel; they do not interesect....and the relationship part is neglected.

my 2 cents worth


Bro. Matt,
I have to ask why you keep speaking of the percentages and such of the average protestant church to support the G-12 concept.

The apostolic church is in no way like an average protestant church. Not even remotely such, unless the group tends to lean more to following an organiztions ways over letting God have control.

It always has and I believe, always will bother me when Apostolic go outside of the apostolic ranks to use numbers and ideas for the Apostolic church.

Be blessed
Bro. Timothy

[hna_diana]

Our local church began home fellowship groups as an aid to church growth. We had all the seminars and training, and we were ready to begin.

Most of what happened was not too surprising. The people who were already on fire for God and loved souls enjoyed the implementation of 'church approved' fellowship. They get their lesson every Sunday, teach it some day during the week, and turn in their report. There have been many visitors to the home fellowships, sometimes equal to half the membership!

The people who were already men pleasers are still at it. They have their group because they have to in order to be politically correct. When the time comes to share personal needs or areas that need improvement in their own lives . . . well, whattaya know? They always have to give an example of some other poor weakling that needs God's help. Their groups don't grow and prosper because they don't really love souls.

Then there are the people who were so full of the Holy Ghost that they were having home fellowships before the church sanctioned it. Unfortunately, these people who were seeking the face of God for their friends and acquaintances, fasting, praying, and studying to prayerfully do God's will . . . . are no longer required to think, or feel, or hear from God. They are now required to hear from the pastor, and teach the pastor's lesson. I see this as a giant step BACKWARDS from God's will.

I talked with my pastor about this concept. I told him that the original church didn't organize or sanction home fellowships. The believers were so excited about what they had experienced that they couldn't keep from telling everyone they knew and spoke and thought of little else. They didn't meet in their homes as a way to boost church attendance ratings. They met in their homes because they lived the life!

What a blessing it would be, and what a tremendous spiritual growth for a congregation to allow and encourage the group leaders to hear from God for their own groups. Can you imagine? Instead of one guy praying and getting a one size fits all anointing, you would have at least 10% of your church learning how to study, how to prepare, how to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit to minister. What could be better?

My pastor agreed that my point of view is scripturally correct, but he said that few of the people in our church are experienced enough to lead groups without the prepared lessons. Additionally, many of them don't have, or are not willing to take the time to develop their own lessons.

What disturbs me the most about the organization generated lessons is that the groups are forced to stick to the program. We might as well be ritualists! The group that had home fellowships before the church interfered was already experiencing a powerful move of the Holy Ghost. People were being baptized in the spirit in the living room, and baptized in water soon after. They were growing in the Bible way. But the church organization has fenced and boxed in this group. If the pastor finds out that they are not sticking to the timing and exact guidelines of the lesson, he sends a monitor to force them to conform. In my opinion, this is a MAN taking control, and NOT trusting God to do the work. The results I have seen when the leadership dominates is that they demonstrate a lack of respect for the brethren, and model and promote dictatorial attitudes which open the door for resentment and almost guarantee dissention. But overly-controlling leadership is a theme for another forum . .. .

God bless all!

[Truthseeker]

Our local church began home fellowship groups as an aid to church growth. We had all the seminars and training, and we were ready to begin.

Most of what happened was not too surprising. The people who were already on fire for God and loved souls enjoyed the implementation of 'church approved' fellowship. They get their lesson every Sunday, teach it some day during the week, and turn in their report. There have been many visitors to the home fellowships, sometimes equal to half the membership!

The people who were already men pleasers are still at it. They have their group because they have to in order to be politically correct. When the time comes to share personal needs or areas that need improvement in their own lives . . . well, whattaya know? They always have to give an example of some other poor weakling that needs God's help. Their groups don't grow and prosper because they don't really love souls.

Then there are the people who were so full of the Holy Ghost that they were having home fellowships before the church sanctioned it. Unfortunately, these people who were seeking the face of God for their friends and acquaintances, fasting, praying, and studying to prayerfully do God's will . . . . are no longer required to think, or feel, or hear from God. They are now required to hear from the pastor, and teach the pastor's lesson. I see this as a giant step BACKWARDS from God's will.

I talked with my pastor about this concept. I told him that the original church didn't organize or sanction home fellowships. The believers were so excited about what they had experienced that they couldn't keep from telling everyone they knew and spoke and thought of little else. They didn't meet in their homes as a way to boost church attendance ratings. They met in their homes because they lived the life!

What a blessing it would be, and what a tremendous spiritual growth for a congregation to allow and encourage the group leaders to hear from God for their own groups. Can you imagine? Instead of one guy praying and getting a one size fits all anointing, you would have at least 10% of your church learning how to study, how to prepare, how to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit to minister. What could be better?

My pastor agreed that my point of view is scripturally correct, but he said that few of the people in our church are experienced enough to lead groups without the prepared lessons. Additionally, many of them don't have, or are not willing to take the time to develop their own lessons.

What disturbs me the most about the organization generated lessons is that the groups are forced to stick to the program. We might as well be ritualists! The group that had home fellowships before the church interfered was already experiencing a powerful move of the Holy Ghost. People were being baptized in the spirit in the living room, and baptized in water soon after. They were growing in the Bible way. But the church organization has fenced and boxed in this group. If the pastor finds out that they are not sticking to the timing and exact guidelines of the lesson, he sends a monitor to force them to conform. In my opinion, this is a MAN taking control, and NOT trusting God to do the work. The results I have seen when the leadership dominates is that they demonstrate a lack of respect for the brethren, and model and promote dictatorial attitudes which open the door for resentment and almost guarantee dissention. But overly-controlling leadership is a theme for another forum . .. .

God bless all!

All I can sayn is a 1,000 amens. It's overdue that we return to the ministry.

[Abigail4476]

Our local church began home fellowship groups as an aid to church growth. We had all the seminars and training, and we were ready to begin.

Most of what happened was not too surprising. The people who were already on fire for God and loved souls enjoyed the implementation of 'church approved' fellowship. They get their lesson every Sunday, teach it some day during the week, and turn in their report. There have been many visitors to the home fellowships, sometimes equal to half the membership!

The people who were already men pleasers are still at it. They have their group because they have to in order to be politically correct. When the time comes to share personal needs or areas that need improvement in their own lives . . . well, whattaya know? They always have to give an example of some other poor weakling that needs God's help. Their groups don't grow and prosper because they don't really love souls.

Then there are the people who were so full of the Holy Ghost that they were having home fellowships before the church sanctioned it. Unfortunately, these people who were seeking the face of God for their friends and acquaintances, fasting, praying, and studying to prayerfully do God's will . . . . are no longer required to think, or feel, or hear from God. They are now required to hear from the pastor, and teach the pastor's lesson. I see this as a giant step BACKWARDS from God's will.

I talked with my pastor about this concept. I told him that the original church didn't organize or sanction home fellowships. The believers were so excited about what they had experienced that they couldn't keep from telling everyone they knew and spoke and thought of little else. They didn't meet in their homes as a way to boost church attendance ratings. They met in their homes because they lived the life!

What a blessing it would be, and what a tremendous spiritual growth for a congregation to allow and encourage the group leaders to hear from God for their own groups. Can you imagine? Instead of one guy praying and getting a one size fits all anointing, you would have at least 10% of your church learning how to study, how to prepare, how to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit to minister. What could be better?

My pastor agreed that my point of view is scripturally correct, but he said that few of the people in our church are experienced enough to lead groups without the prepared lessons. Additionally, many of them don't have, or are not willing to take the time to develop their own lessons.

What disturbs me the most about the organization generated lessons is that the groups are forced to stick to the program. We might as well be ritualists! The group that had home fellowships before the church interfered was already experiencing a powerful move of the Holy Ghost. People were being baptized in the spirit in the living room, and baptized in water soon after. They were growing in the Bible way. But the church organization has fenced and boxed in this group. If the pastor finds out that they are not sticking to the timing and exact guidelines of the lesson, he sends a monitor to force them to conform. In my opinion, this is a MAN taking control, and NOT trusting God to do the work. The results I have seen when the leadership dominates is that they demonstrate a lack of respect for the brethren, and model and promote dictatorial attitudes which open the door for resentment and almost guarantee dissention. But overly-controlling leadership is a theme for another forum . .. .

God bless all!
I understand some of your concerns, though I don't agree with all of your statements.

However, having literature handed down from a pastor, organization or other church leadership is only problematic if,
1. the material isn't based on the Word of God, &
2. If you believe your pastor/leadership isn't anointed of God and/or does not work within God's will.

Question: Are the home groups you are speaking of forbidden to have Biblical conversations, classes and Bible studies that are above and beyond the "core curriculum" they are given by the church leadership?

[hna_diana]

The exact group that I am familiar with was having revival in their home. My friends go to that group, and told me that the leadership heard that they were continuing as they had before, so a monitor was sent to make sure that they followed the curriculum provided by the church.

You say that this doesn't bother you as long as the pastor is in the Word. Sis Abigail, just to give you a comparison, so you think it would be problematic for any wife if her husband picked her clothes for her every day and told her what to wear, clothes, shoes, purse, stockings, and undergarments? After all, her closet is filled with modest, tasteful clothing. There's nothing at all wrong with any of her clothes, and she even bought them herself! Why should it bother her for her husband to tell her exactly what to wear every day?

You see, the husband would soon inspire rebellion and bitterness in his wife, because he would be infringing on her created-in-God's-image free will, the right to choose. He would be displaying his lack of confidence in her ability to make right choices, even though she may have had no record of making wrong choices. In every authority system we are at risk of causing rebellion and dissention by snatching more control than is necessary. He would cause even more problems by telling her that he is her God-given authority, and he has a right to take that kind of control.

I think it is perfectly fine for the leadership to provide a lesson. But I also feel that the host of each group should be free to follow the lesson, or veer off of the lesson, as long as they stay in the Word and in the Spirit of Truth. Let the monitors come to the meeting, and commend the leaders for their sensitivity in ministering instead of criticizing them for violating the schedule.

My friends that are in this group enjoyed the group much more in its original form. They were growing more spiritually before they were restricted with church-mandated lessons and procedures. Now it seems that they just tolerate the program.

What are my statements that you don't agree with?

Hna D

[Abigail4476]

The exact group that I am familiar with was having revival in their home. My friends go to that group, and told me that the leadership heard that they were continuing as they had before, so a monitor was sent to make sure that they followed the curriculum provided by the church.
It is highly possible that the church leadership had a good reason for sending in a monitor and/or making sure they followed the curriculum. I teach Sunday School, and occasionally the pastor or other ministers sit in the class to evaluate the teacher. One of the things that is evaluated is the content of the lesson. I am not expected to go by it word for word, but since the church leadership is ultimately responsible for what is taught, then I can understand them being concerned that the literature is not deviated from very much.

You say that this doesn't bother you as long as the pastor is in the Word. Sis Abigail, just to give you a comparison, so you think it would be problematic for any wife if her husband picked her clothes for her every day and told her what to wear, clothes, shoes, purse, stockings, and undergarments? After all, her closet is filled with modest, tasteful clothing. There's nothing at all wrong with any of her clothes, and she even bought them herself! Why should it bother her for her husband to tell her exactly what to wear every day?
My husband does not select my clothing, but as his wife, I represent him as well as Christ; what I wear reflects on him. Therefore, if I were to wear something he found objectionable he would most likely "edit" my choices. There are several issues in clothing that we do not agree upon, and in those cases I defer to his beliefs. The same is the case with church leadership; I seriously doubt if a "monitor" would be sent in, unless the leadership had some legitimate reason to believe that their church doctrines or guidelines were not being adequately followed.


You see, the husband would soon inspire rebellion and bitterness in his wife, because he would be infringing on her created-in-God's-image free will, the right to choose. He would be displaying his lack of confidence in her ability to make right choices, even though she may have had no record of making wrong choices. In every authority system we are at risk of causing rebellion and dissention by snatching more control than is necessary. He would cause even more problems by telling her that he is her God-given authority, and he has a right to take that kind of control.
If a group does not want the pastor to choose what they teach in home groups, perhaps they should not participate in the program, and merely continue to have independent meetings in their home. Would the church object to having these other Bible Studies? As long as they were "in addition to", rather than instead of? If the group objects to the literature, then they should not be teaching it, I agree.

I think it is perfectly fine for the leadership to provide a lesson. But I also feel that the host of each group should be free to follow the lesson, or veer off of the lesson, as long as they stay in the Word and in the Spirit of Truth. Let the monitors come to the meeting, and commend the leaders for their sensitivity in ministering instead of criticizing them for violating the schedule.
If the monitors are being nitpicky, then I agree. Some room should be allowed for spontaneity, just as in a regular church service, in fact, probably more so. However, one of the key concepts of home groups is usually that the lessons don't last more than a certain time. This keeps people coming back for more, rather than feeling worn out because the meeting was so lengthy. Some teachers take advantage of the home group atmosphere by being longwinded and inconsiderate of the schedules of others.

My friends that are in this group enjoyed the group much more in its original form. They were growing more spiritually before they were restricted with church-mandated lessons and procedures. Now it seems that they just tolerate the program.

What are my statements that you don't agree with?

Hna D
I agree that some literature can be boring for those who have already learned the basic concepts. However, it should be kept in mind that if there are new converts or younger christians, the basics are vital and necessary, and while boring and repetitive for some, may be "fresh bread" for others. It would be nice if groups could be divided up according to knowledge level or some similar grouping method. Or perhaps, on top of the regular classes, advanced study groups could meet once a week as well, in addition to attending and supporting the basic groups.

I disagree with the following premise:

Then there are the people who were so full of the Holy Ghost that they were having home fellowships before the church sanctioned it. Unfortunately, these people who were seeking the face of God for their friends and acquaintances, fasting, praying, and studying to prayerfully do God's will . . . . are no longer required to think, or feel, or hear from God. They are now required to hear from the pastor, and teach the pastor's lesson. I see this as a giant step BACKWARDS from God's will.
With this paragraph, you are making hearing from a pastor and teaching a lesson handed down by the pastor equivalent to passivity on the part of the saints. The lesson should still be studied, prayed over, fasted about, etc. by the saints. It also works on the assumption that the pastor has not fasted, prayed, studied or otherwise obtained the lesson directly from God and/or His word. I do not believe that submission to leadership is ever stepping backwards from God's will. In fact, we have a Biblical mandate to submit ourselves to the elders. Submission includes submitting our time, efforts, opinions, etc. It doesn't just mean not wearing pants or jewelry when the pastor asks us not to.

I get annoyed when folks think they have somehow attained a level of spirituality that makes them more "in tune" with God than the pastor, and suddenly they want to minister without any accountability to leadership, and/or without any guidance from the elders in the church.

Could you answer my question from the previous post?

And these:

In the home group you are referring to, are the new converts that were brought in through their "prior-to-program" Bible studies still attending? Are they still seeing folks filled with the Holy Ghost? Are they still baptizing people in Jesus' name? If not, why not? How can a piece of literature hinder the move of God? Does God only annoint spontaneity? Does He not speak through His established Word and Principles? If a piece of literature contains the WORD of GOD, how is it not fresh bread? How can it not be anointed? Is the literature truly the issue? Or is the group merely frustrated by the new "control", and therefore have allowed the frustration to discourage them from seeking the face of God as they did previously?

I won't be back online till Sunday afternoon, so take your time answering. :cool:

[ddc101]

Matt Langford change your avatar.Its summer and looking at that hat is giving me the sweats in this ninety degree heat.lv sis.c

[hna_diana]

Sis. Abigail,

My first post was in response to the opening of the thread, to give our experiences and our opinions of home Bible fellowship. I was trying to share, not trying to offend anyone! I attemt to answer your questions the best I can.

It is highly possible that the church leadership had a good reason for sending in a monitor and/or making sure they followed the curriculum.
The leadership was well aware that this family was having revival in their home: The family kept calling and asking for someone to open the church and send a minister to baptize the people that were getting the Holy Ghost! No one was sent to monitor or interfere at the home until the church began its own organized home fellowship. The family is now being forced to conform only for the sake of conforming, not because there were doing or might do something wrong.

My husband does not select my clothing, but as his wife, I represent him as well as Christ; what I wear reflects on him. Therefore, if I were to wear something he found objectionable he would most likely "edit" my choices.
That sounds fairly reasonable. The scenario I presented, where the wife has only good choices to make, has a history of making good choices, yet must yield to her husbands choices from now on from foundations to overcoats with no opportunity to vary--is not reasonable.

I seriously doubt if a "monitor" would be sent in, unless the leadership had some legitimate reason
I see that you have great faith in church leadership. Good, kind, humble Godly leaders inspire confidence and build churches. Overly controlling ones suffocate.

perhaps they should not participate in the program, and merely continue to have independent meetings in their home.
They would be branded as 'difficult'

Would the church object to having these other Bible Studies? As long as they were "in addition to", rather than instead of? If the group objects to the literature, then they should not be teaching it, I agree.
The church might not object to 'additional' studies, but they absolutely would not accept 'instead' studies. I don't think the group necessarily objects to the literature, but it's like haviing training wheels. They already have shown their ability to have revival in their home, but they are being made to step backwards to the training wheels.

However, one of the key concepts keeps people coming back for more, rather than feeling worn out because the meeting was so lengthy. Some teachers take advantage of the home group atmosphere
I agree with the concept of not trapping or boring people. But I don't need to have my pastor come to my house and tell my guests to go home because I am tired. I can tell them myself. If I am a guest in someone's home and they are boring me or being inconsiderate of me, I can gather my things and find the door. The problem here is that we're not encouraging people to be mature, and take responsibility where they should. We are treating them like children who wouldn't do the right thing unless someone who is bigger and stronger makes them.


I agree that some literature can be boring for those who have already learned the basic concepts. It would be nice if groups could be divided up according to knowledge level or some similar grouping method.
Sorry, Sis. I didn't say that and I don't agree with you at all. Every time I hear this wonderful message, it thrills me. From the blood of Jesus to the concept of holiness to the catching away of the church to the paying of tithes, I love it! That which is new and interesting captivates me, and that which is familiar and regular conforts me. I don't like much separation, either. I see the church family as an extended family, with newborns, toddlers, children, pre-teens, teens, young adults, young marrieds, old marrieds, widows and widowers--I think they can all benefit from the insights and experiences of the others.

you are making hearing from a pastor and teaching a lesson handed down by the pastor equivalent to passivity on the part of the saints. The lesson should still be studied, prayed over, fasted about, etc. by the saints. It also works on the assumption that the pastor has not fasted, prayed, studied or otherwise obtained the lesson directly from God and/or His word.
Again, I must disagree. It makes no assumption whatsoever about the qualities of the pastor's annointing. It only states that we are adults, we have brains, and we have the Holy Ghost. Go back to the example of the wife who doesn't have anything in her closet that will be a bad choice, yet her husband still will never let her choose her own clothes. I can't imagine what kind of woman would wake up every morning and exclaim with glee, "I wonder what my husband has chosen for me to wear today!"

I do not believe that submission to leadership is ever stepping backwards from God's will.
Sister, pastors are just men, and they can make mistakes. That's why Paul instructed the believers to follow him as he followed Christ. We hope that the pastor makes good choices most of the time, but each one of us is responsible for our own salvation. We will not get to the day of judgement and be able to use the excuse, "My pastor told me . . . " or "My pastor didn't tell me . . .."

I get annoyed when folks think they have somehow attained a level of spirituality that makes them more "in tune" with God than the pastor, and suddenly they want to minister without any accountability to leadership, and/or without any guidance from the elders in the church.
I don't promote rebellion, but I think it is erroneous to expect and allow the pastor to have dictatorial control over people. I do encourage people to learn how to pray and hear from God.

There is nowhere that I suggested that anyone should minister without accountability. My suggestion is that each home fellowship leader that feels confident should pray and fast for his message for his fellowship, and submit that message to his captain (1st level captain). If there is any question, the captain can send it up to the next guy, and so on. There would not have to be any crunch for time, because the leader could turn in his outline for the lesson weeks in advance, or prepare a month's or a quarter's worth of lessons and have them approved before he ever mentions it to his home fellowship group. It always generates more excitement and interest when people can take part in the process. It seems to me like the blessing would be multiplied.

Could you answer my question from the previous post? Sorry that I am so inexperienced with posting. I am just learning how to use the quoter. Please forgive me that I will have to answer you in a separate post when I figure out what you asked.

In the home group you are referring to, are the new converts that were brought in through their "prior-to-program" Bible studies still attending?
I think so, but my friends said that that it's not the same.

Are they still seeing folks filled with the Holy Ghost? Are they still baptizing people in Jesus' name? If not, why not? How can a piece of literature hinder the move of God?
It sounds like you are being challenged or offended by my opinions. Am I so far out of the Book that you feel compelled to straighten me out and keep me from spreading false doctrine?

Control for the sake of control is stifling; it is not edifying or satisfying. We are set free by the blood of Christ. We are not free to do whatever we want, but we are free from the bonds of sin that compel us to do what we ought not. If we are thus saved and set free, we should be expecting that Spirit-filled people will be growing in grace, and walking in light instead of expecting them to be fumbling in the darkness.

Does God only annoint spontaneity? Does He not speak through His established Word and Principles? If a piece of literature contains the WORD of GOD, how is it not fresh bread? How can it not be anointed? Is the literature truly the issue? Or is the group merely frustrated by the new "control", and therefore have allowed the frustration to discourage them from seeking the face of God as they did previously?
Lets go back to the clothing example. This time, the wife takes out her calendar for August, and in July she writes out her schedule of what she will be wearing each and every day. She shows it to her husband, and he approves. I don't know anyone who would be happy and contented to stick to such a schedule, even though they wrote it themselves. They might get up in the morning, look at the list and say, "I just don't FEEL like stripes today." What makes the schedule so almighty important that it has to rule? Why should she wear stripes, just because it's on her schedule, when every other article of clothing she has is good and modest and appropriate? How about if she made up the schedule expecting it to be hot, and the weather has turned unseasonably cold. Or she chose a wrap or circular skirt, and it turned out to be a breezy day?

If I have been offensive to you in any way, please forgive me. My intention was to contribute, not to stir up controversy.

Hna D

[hna_diana]

I think I found the question:


Question: Are the home groups you are speaking of forbidden to have Biblical conversations, classes and Bible studies that are above and beyond the "core curriculum" they are given by the church leadership?

Hmmmm, it seems like you're looking at this whole issue through the whole perspective of "Who Has Control?"

When we apply unnecessary control over people we place a load and a burden on them that weights them down and slows them down. Training wheels don't slow down a child who doesn't know how to ride a bike. They help him because he doesn't yet have his balance. Once he gets his balance and coordination, the training wheels aren't a help anymore, they're a hindrance.

Remember, I didn't know your opinion on this subject until you went through a line by line dissection of everything I said. I thought I was bringing a pasta salad to the pot luck, but you thought I was trying to spoil your lo-carb diet.

Can't we just share and glean the ideas and insights that apply to our own situations?

Hna. D

[Abigail4476]

well, I can't sleep (again), so here I am on here before Sunday afternoon!

Diana,

First of all, let me just say that this is a discussion forum, and for the most part, you can expect anything you post to be read through, analyzed, dissected, questioned, agreed or disagreed with, and then responded to, unless you are posting on one of the more "lighthearted" threads like kids' pictures, favorite web sites, word association, etc.

Secondly, I wasn't offended by anything you had to say, and the questions I posed weren't rhetorical; they were legitimate questions I wanted you to actually answer. Nor were they meant to be "trick" questions.

You still didn't answer my first question. If you don't intend to, just say so. I won't be offended if you don't. Just don't make me beg...lol. :)

Finally, when I post, I like for the readers to take my words at face value and not assume or presume the emotions behind the words. It is difficult[for me] to write in correct emotional timbre, and therefore it can be easily misunderstood or inaccurately assumed that something is a challenge, when in fact it is only a question. It would be easier if you would just respond to my words alone and don't try to read a "challenge", "offense", or some other emotion into my post that doesn't actually exist.

[Abigail4476]

I see that you have great faith in church leadership. Good, kind, humble Godly leaders inspire confidence and build churches. Overly controlling ones suffocate.
That is the case. Our church is blessed with godly, kind leaders who hold themselves accountable to God and to the congregation. However, I have been under the leadership of a tyrant in the past, so I know what that is like as well. I'm just not sure that a pastor giving folks a particular literature to teach in their homes qualifies as being overly dictatorial or controlling.

The church might not object to 'additional' studies, but they absolutely would not accept 'instead' studies. I don't think the group necessarily objects to the literature, but it's like haviing training wheels. They already have shown their ability to have revival in their home, but they are being made to step backwards to the training wheels.
Well, I think they should go along with the church-guided classes, and have their own services in addition to them just like they were before. They were having their previous in-home services in addition to regular church services, right? So why not keep the same format? (Unless I'm misunderstanding the method)


Sorry, Sis. I didn't say that and I don't agree with you at all. Every time I hear this wonderful message, it thrills me. From the blood of Jesus to the concept of holiness to the catching away of the church to the paying of tithes, I love it! That which is new and interesting captivates me, and that which is familiar and regular conforts me. I don't like much separation, either. I see the church family as an extended family, with newborns, toddlers, children, pre-teens, teens, young adults, young marrieds, old marrieds, widows and widowers--I think they can all benefit from the insights and experiences of the others.
I never said that the Gospel message didn't thrill me. However, having grown up in a pastor's home, I can probably tell the story of David and Goliath(and many others) in my sleep, and unless there is a really good, exciting story-teller retelling it in a new way, it has the potential of causing my mind to drift. Apparently I misunderstood you. You said that the folks were being hindered from developing spiritually by the newly imposed literature; if the message, no matter how basic is still exciting for everyone, then how are they being stifled? I'm just asking, not challenging. You seemed to imply that the group was bored by this statement: They were growing more spiritually before they were restricted with church-mandated lessons and procedures. Now it seems that they just tolerate the program.
The words "they just tolerate" seemed to imply boredom. Sorry if that is a misunderstanding.

It sounds like you are being challenged or offended by my opinions. Am I so far out of the Book that you feel compelled to straighten me out and keep me from spreading false doctrine?
I don't believe I accused you of any of the above. :wah: We are just discussing opinions, aren't we? I'm not trying to "straighten you out"...I'm just having a discussion on the topic. I am genuinely interested, mainly because our church has expressed interest in home groups as well.

Control for the sake of control is stifling; it is not edifying or satisfying. We are set free by the blood of Christ. We are not free to do whatever we want, but we are free from the bonds of sin that compel us to do what we ought not. If we are thus saved and set free, we should be expecting that Spirit-filled people will be growing in grace, and walking in light instead of expecting them to be fumbling in the darkness.
I agree. However, on the flip side, do you think that the pastor/monitors are being controlling "just for the sake of control?" Is it possible they have other reasons? I know our pastor and staff closely monitor literature, because at one time we had a youth pastor who taught trinitarian/anti-UPC doctrine in the youth class without the pastor's knowledge (at first), and by the time the pastor figured out what was going on, several young people, young couples and the youth pastor had left the church, some going to trinitarian churches, and some quitting church completely. I understand that is an extreme example, but I do think it is the pastor's obligation to protect young, tender converts from any erroneous doctrine. I think many pastor's take that responsibility seriously, and that is why they try to "control" the core curriculum. I dont' know very many that don't allow some leeway for personal elaboration; most just want the basic foundation adhered to.

Lets go back to the clothing example. This time, the wife takes out her calendar for August, and in July she writes out her schedule of what she will be wearing each and every day. She shows it to her husband, and he approves. I don't know anyone who would be happy and contented to stick to such a schedule, even though they wrote it themselves. They might get up in the morning, look at the list and say, "I just don't FEEL like stripes today." What makes the schedule so almighty important that it has to rule? Why should she wear stripes, just because it's on her schedule, when every other article of clothing she has is good and modest and appropriate? How about if she made up the schedule expecting it to be hot, and the weather has turned unseasonably cold. Or she chose a wrap or circular skirt, and it turned out to be a breezy day?
I understand your example. I'm just saying that it doesn't hurt anyone to submit to authority. I also think that there are always those who can do the job better than the leadership (not being facetious--those in leadership are not always the most qualified); however, the position should be respected with submission, even if the person submitting has better ideas, is more intelligent, and could do a much better job.

If I have been offensive to you in any way, please forgive me. My intention was to contribute, not to stir up controversy.

Hna D
Nothing you said was offensive; your post is a good contribution to this thread; you can say the sky is blue and stir up controversy in this forum--welcome to the GNC! :cool:

[Abigail4476]

Remember, I didn't know your opinion on this subject until you went through a line by line dissection of everything I said. I thought I was bringing a pasta salad to the pot luck, but you thought I was trying to spoil your lo-carb diet.
Huh? You haven't spoiled anything for me. I enjoy discussion. And line by line dissection is a compliment [well, it can be]; it means I read your post. Thoroughly. And was interested enough in it to reply.

Can't we just share and glean the ideas and insights that apply to our own situations?

Hna. D
Absolutely not! Disagreements must be aired and discussed! :p Plus, if I'm not clear on a statement, I like to get clarification.

[hna_diana]

Sis. Abigail

I'm just not sure that a pastor giving folks a particular literature to teach in their homes qualifies as being overly dictatorial or controlling.

I asked my pastor what he would do if headquarters sent him the sermons to preach each week and the Bible studies to teach. After all, this follows your assertion that the leadership is anointed and placed by God. Don't we believe that God has or can give them the anointed message? He told me that he would leave the orgainization if that's the way they ran things.


Well, I think they should go along with the church-guided classes, and have their own services in addition to them just like they were before. They were having their previous in-home services in addition to regular church services, right? So why not keep the same format? (Unless I'm misunderstanding the method)
Yes, there were having revival in their home on a church off-nite. But now, they have mandated Home Bible Fellowship instead of their successful revival services. I cannot understand how you can believe so strongly in the absolute, almost divine rights of the leadership to micromanage people's lives. The LETTER should not violate the SPIRIT. The Pharisees set up their rules, and Jesus upbraided them for it.

They were having revival on a church off-night, on the best night for them, and on the best night for their friends and acquanitances. I will say again, it was a giant step backward for these people to force them to submit to the letter of the church-mandated ministry, and to depart from the God-inspired revival. What's the point? So the 'church' can take credit for the success of the church program?

I think that the thing that disturbs me most about this is having the pastor say repeatedly how Home Bible Fellowship is the method of the early church. Having a message handed down from some leader, and being forced to conform to a schedule and method is most certainly NOT anything like way that the early church spread the gospel.

I believe in authority and accountability, but I do not believe in control for the sake of control. It's a little like coming to your son's doorway and yelling at him to clean his room when he is already in his room cleaning it, and decided to do it on his own. That parent will cause problems where none existed previously.


You said that the folks were being hindered from developing spiritually by the newly imposed literature; if the message, no matter how basic is still exciting for everyone, then how are they being stifled?
They are not being stifled by the literature. They are being stifled by being forced to conform when they were already doing good, and already having success. They are being stifled by being discouraged or prohibited from blessing their group with what God has inspired them with in the preceeding week. They are being stifled by being forced to ice-break for 5 minutes, sing for 10 minutes, read the lesson verbatim for 20 minutes, ask the lesson questions and give the lesson answers for 10 minutes, and eat snacks for 15 minutes.

They are tolerating because they are submitting to the church-imposed program. They have been taught that the way to please God is to do what your pastor, or church leaders tell you to do. It's like the Pharisees, putting rules around the rules. But in this case, it's not even instruction to keep people from being tempted or falling into sin. It's merely control for the sake of control.

This is the illustration that God told me to give you. Can you solve the equations, X=1? You would probably say, "Of course!" and "Obviously, 1=1!". But is it not also true that 1X1=1, 1/1=1, 10-9=1, 456789/456789=1 and so on? You see, all of these equations are equivalent. None are any more or any less 1. But when the pastor says, you must throw out all those other equations--in this church, we only use 1=1, then you are limiting the saints to a pastor preference instead of allowing them to use the fullness of what God can do.


I'm just having a discussion on the topic.

I guess it's your way, and I haven't been here long enough to know you. Forgive me if I misinterpreted your words.

I agree. However, on the flip side, do you think that the pastor/monitors are being controlling "just for the sake of control?" Is it possible they have other reasons? I know our pastor and staff closely monitor literature, because at one time we had a youth pastor who taught trinitarian/anti-UPC doctrine in the youth class without the pastor's knowledge (at first), and by the time the pastor figured out what was going on, several young people, young couples and the youth pastor had left the church, some going to trinitarian churches, and some quitting church completely. I understand that is an extreme example, but I do think it is the pastor's obligation to protect young, tender converts from any erroneous doctrine. I think many pastor's take that responsibility seriously, and that is why they try to "control" the core curriculum. I dont' know very many that don't allow some leeway for personal elaboration; most just want the basic foundation adhered to.
As I stated before, I believe strongly in accountability. But I feel just as strongly against excessive control. I think it would be great for every group, Sunday School, Praise Team, Choir, Home Fellowship, ALL of them to be attended by a monitor or chapperone. All of them should be accountable to someone higher up. And ALL of the people who attend should have someone higher up to turn to if there is a problem in their group, and the first person in line can't or won't handle it. It's too bad about the errant Sunday School teacher, but that would not be a reason to force all the others to conform. After all, the troublemaker is gone, the faithful should not be castigated.


I understand your example. I'm just saying that it doesn't hurt anyone to submit to authority.
Bad, stupid, lazy, misguided, or inexperienced shepherds may have some or many good sheep, but it certainly isn't due to their shepherding. It can and does hurt people to submit to authority when that authority is misused or abused.

I also think that there are always those who can do the job better than the leadership (not being facetious--those in leadership are not always the most qualified); however, the position should be respected with submission, even if the person submitting has better ideas, is more intelligent, and could do a much better job.
It is good for us to learn to keep quiet sometimes, and keep our ideas to ourselves, sometimes. But here is what often happens. The pastor is on the platform, service after service, telling the saints to step out by faith. He is telling them to hear from God. He is telling them to be bold in the spirit. So the obedient saint follows this plan, prays, and feels inspired of God to do something, let's say he feels led to go to the park and hand out tracts. So the pastor tells him, great, we hand out tracts in the park on Saturday. Well, poor Bro. Joe has to work on Saturday. Saturday is the handing-out-tracts-in-the-park day, and Joe never knew that, because he has always worked on Saturday. But the pastor doesn't want him to do it alone, he wants him to do it as part of the group activity.

So Joe gets another idea. He notices that the church bulletin seems like it has an awful lot of white space in it, and he wants to put in some testimonies, or some inspiration that he has received recently. Well, no, we can't do that either. You never know when we might want to put something ELSE in that space, so, Sorry, Bro. Joe. Nice idea, but it won't work here.

Well, maybe Bro. Joe can teach a Bible Study. Too bad, Bible Study teacher's meeting is on Saturday. Remember, he works on Saturday. Can't go to the meetings, can't get the teacher's certificate, can't teach a Bible study with the church's approval. Now, he could go ahead and teach without the church's approval, but he has been so inundated with the idea of submittinig to authority, that he can't do this without feeling that he is somehow violating the rules.

After a while, poor ole Bro. Joe just quits trying. He tried to do what the pastor asked with sincerity and humility in his heart, but the 'system' didn't allow him to act on the inspiration he received. Rather than be perceived as a troublemaker, he just sits back and learns to ignore the parts of the sermon that he knows will only bring frustration if he acts.

You can probably find all kinds of reason to justify why the leadership wouldn't let Bro. Joe do anything. And when Joe leaves because he is frustrated and stifled, they will blame him for having too little faith or too little patience.

The same as the example of the wife who husband controls her dressing. He makes it impossible for her to act with enthusiasm and satisfaction in this area, because it all belongs to him.

I can tell by your words that your authority people give you a lot of freedom to act according to your preferences, energy level, and personality. I am thankful that you have them, and it would be good if more authority people would be like that.

God bless!

[Landmark Laf]

HNA Diana,

I really think you have somehow received a very distorted perception of Home Friendship Groups. While I understand that many different people have had many different experiences, some good, some bad, with Home Friendship Groups, I don't understand how your accusation can hold any merit.

First, God himself handed down lessons for us to teach to the church, he even put all of those lessons in a manual (Bible). In order to be a part of the organization, you must agree to teach the organizational beliefs regarding holiness, standards, Godhead, steps to being saved, and much more. The members at our church have no leash on their necks that tightens to disallow any anointing that they may receive. Sure, our pastor, assistant pastor, cell director, and others may write a topic for a certain week, but ultimately the individual cell leader is in charge of his or her meeting. It is his/her responsibility to feel for the presence of God and his annointing. We recommend they pray over their meeting for the entirity of the week, much like a pastor for the weekly service.

Secondly, the groups are not meant to be a church service. They are meant to reach out to people by discussing everyday issues and other topics that will aid in the winning of a soul. Afterall, the easiest person to win to God is your friend.

From the cool area of Louisiana.... Today's Heat Index: 112 degrees.... Amazing thing is....that's the lowest high this week...

Me Out

[hna_diana]

Bro. Matt,

I really think you have somehow received a very distorted perception of Home Friendship Groups.
You've missed it completely. I am not giving you a distorted perception. I am giving you a historical account of what happened and is happening under a local church.

While I understand that many different people have had many different experiences, some good, some bad, with Home Friendship Groups, I don't understand how your accusation can hold any merit.
Your accusation, my dear brother, has no merit. By discounting my experiences, you are saying that I am either not telling the truth, or have a very vivid imagination.

We were supposed to give our opinions and experiences with home group ministries, and I gave mine. I don't like the way it's micromanaged by that church, and the pastor will not accept any variance from their exact lesson and schedule. I would not, and will not participate under those terms.


First, God himself handed down lessons for us to teach to the church, he even put all of those lessons in a manual (Bible). In order to be a part of the organization, you must agree to teach the organizational beliefs regarding holiness, standards, Godhead, steps to being saved, and much more.

God does give us a manual, and He leads and guides us through His Word and His Spirit. But one of the biggest themes in the Bible is our FREE WILL. God has given us the ability to choose from a multitude of right choices. The pastor is not giving the home group leaders the freedom to choose a multitude of right choices. They are admonished to follow the lesson plan to the item and to the minute, and they are upbraided and monitored if the pastor discovers that they have strayed from the exact format.

The members at our church have no leash on their necks that tightens to disallow any anointing that they may receive. Sure, our pastor, assistant pastor, cell director, and others may write a topic for a certain week, but ultimately the individual cell leader is in charge of his or her meeting. It is his/her responsibility to feel for the presence of God and his annointing. We recommend they pray over their meeting for the entirity of the week, much like a pastor for the weekly service.

The members at your church may have no leash on their necks, but the members at this church do! Home fellowship is something that naturally developed from the excitement of the believers. This church has become very legalistic in enforcing the law, and they are stifling the spirit.

Secondly, the groups are not meant to be a church service. They are meant to reach out to people by discussing everyday issues and other topics that will aid in the winning of a soul. Afterall, the easiest person to win to God is your friend.
There are many things that Home Fellowship should be. I think this thread examines what works well, and what defeats home fellowships. I have given some examples of personal experiences with home fellowship that demonstrate the problems that can develop from overly controlling leadership.

The home group that was having revival BEFORE the church mandated program had it right!

Sis. D

[Landmark Laf]

Sis. D,

I apologize for misunderstanding your posts and for replying in such a tone. I don't mean to speak for Abigail, but I believe we both had the same misunderstandings. When I read your posts, I thought you were speaking of Home Friendship Groups in general, not just the actions of one particular church.

I've had many many false accusations about Home Friendship Groups and it's been me on kind of a guard. Once again, I apologize.

[hna_diana]

We all respond from the experiences that have shaped our lives.

I'm not a perfect person, nor do I have perfect understanding. I just have strong opinions!

God bless!

Sis. D.

[Ace]

We all respond from the experiences that have shaped our lives.

I'm not a perfect person, nor do I have perfect understanding. I just have strong opinions!

God bless!

Sis. D.
Well thanks to your strong opinions I have to break the news to my wife that I won't be providing her with her weekly wardrobe scheduling. This is really going to start changing things around here... could lead to an all out revival ...oohps, I mean revolt. :eek:

[foxfamily238]

Let's see what saith the scriptures, eh?


Acts 8:3 - As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison. (Where did he make havock of the church? In every HOUSE.)
Romans 16:5 - Likewise greet the church that is in their house. (In their HOUSE)
1st Corinthians 16:19 - The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house. (Got a house church churchin'!)
Colosians 4:15 - Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house. (Yet another church in the house)
Philemon 1:2 - And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house (Ditto!)
Who and where did they pray for Peter when he was in prison?
Acts 12:5 says,

Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him..." So it was the church. Where was the church? In their Church building? No....vs 12- And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying.

Of course they gathered in a normal Synagogue / Temple as well as homes, but home church is as scriptural as it gets! Praise Him!:)

[LilOrphanAnnie]

Then there are the people who were so full of the Holy Ghost that they were having home fellowships before the church sanctioned it. Unfortunately, these people who were seeking the face of God for their friends and acquaintances, fasting, praying, and studying to prayerfully do God's will . . . . are no longer required to think, or feel, or hear from God. They are now required to hear from the pastor, and teach the pastor's lesson. I see this as a giant step BACKWARDS from God's will.

<snip>

What disturbs me the most about the organization generated lessons is that the groups are forced to stick to the program. We might as well be ritualists! The group that had home fellowships before the church interfered was already experiencing a powerful move of the Holy Ghost. People were being baptized in the spirit in the living room, and baptized in water soon after. They were growing in the Bible way. But the church organization has fenced and boxed in this group. If the pastor finds out that they are not sticking to the timing and exact guidelines of the lesson, he sends a monitor to force them to conform. In my opinion, this is a MAN taking control, and NOT trusting God to do the work. The results I have seen when the leadership dominates is that they demonstrate a lack of respect for the brethren, and model and promote dictatorial attitudes which open the door for resentment and almost guarantee dissention. But overly-controlling leadership is a theme for another forum . .. .


I perfectly see what you are saying and agree with you. It's a vile situation. I think much of what I see in the Apostolic ranks little resembles a true walk in the Spirit (me included). I think mass pre-printed, distributed lesson plans are vile and fleshly.

[Estrada]

as long as this precious gospel is being spread and souls are being saved let it be so Amen

[NanaRenan]

I perfectly see what you are saying and agree with you.

Annie.....??

Caya.....???

Is that really YOU....?

Where ya been gal....? We've MISSED you!!!!