For three hundred years, Christians met in each others homes. They say the habit of building church buildings started in the 300's under Constantine.

I read somewhere that about 80% of the average churches budget goes to clergy salaries and costs for building and maintaining church buildings. One of my sociology professors in collge talked about how little a church building is used compared to the money that goes in to build it.

The early church met from house to house. the Jews built synagogues, and the pagans built temples. But Christians recognized that the congregation was God's building, and did not build temples. It was the practice for pagan temples to be named after gods. I've read that when Constantine started building church buildings, he named the buildigns after saints.

Do you think building church buildings is a big waste of kingdom money?

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Answers

Link.....

Go back and read history for yourself rather than taking someone's word for it.....church buildings were being built long before Constantine ever came on the scene.

I wish everyone, including Nelta, who is so anti-church building would get something through their thick skulls.

For most of the first three hundred years of church history the church was a persecuted church. One thing persecuted churches do not do.....is build a building with the times of the services posted outside!!!

At least be historically honest when discussing why the early church often met in people's homes.

And Michael D. is right....much corporate worship took place in catacombs and graveyards....which shows how important the early Christians considered "corporate worship."

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

I think we should meet in the sewers in cities so we can REALLY be like the early church!

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Or maybe in the Colosseum as guests of the lions!

No, I agree, we spend too much on buildings. Perhaps that started because whoever was hosting it each week got tired of doing so.

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

I am not really anti church building. I think it is an issue of wisdom and the leading of the Spirit for each congregation.

Here in Indonesia, on the one hand, if you are going to build a big church building in some areas, you might as well put a 'burn me' on the sign right after the name of the church. I've heard of other situations where people live in little enclaves, and had to meet 'from house to house' rather than in one house each week, so the M'slim neighbors wouldn't throw rocks each week when they sang. This group of believers, I think, is now meeting in a rented facility so they can meet without having rocks thrown at them.

When you think about the amount of money spent on church buildings in the US, and then see the nice houses some of the church members have, it doesn't make sense.

You hear people talk about 'the Biblical pattern.' Well, why do we assume that the early church met in homes simply because they were persecuted. The church was not persecuted as constantly and instensly for 300 years as some of us may believe. We hear about certain periods of time when Christians were fed to thelions adn things like that. There was an ebb and flow of persecution.

As for the comments about history- I didn't say that the first church building that ever existed was built by Constantine, but that the 'habit' of building church buildings as a regular thing, from what I've read, started with Constantine. DuetoEuropa, the two houses made into one big one to accomodate a church meeting, was around before Constantine. Even it was made from houses. What evidence do you have for other special purpose religious buildings buillt by Christians before then?

Early Christians met in the temple, lecture halls, synagogues, and private homes. (I don't know if the synagogues were ever 100% Christian though.)

Back to the idea of a 'Biblical pattern'- if there is a Biblical pattern for finances, it is to support widows, to help those who have need, and to support those who evangelize and 'honor' elders who labor among us. There is no 'Biblical pattern' for spending huge amounts of God's money on fancy church structures when we could just as well use private homes.

I don't think the reason for moving out of homes into church buildings was lack of hospitality on the part of the hosts. Plenty of people open their homes for cell groups nowadays, but think of 'real meetings' as occuring in the building. It's a tradition. Constantine's government started building buildings for Christians to meet in, built like government buildings. Soon, it became a tradition to meet in such a structure. Later, huge cathedrals were built as well, adding to the tradition.

Traditional church ocnstruction also make New Testament style meetings difficult. The building is constructed to hear one speaker speak to the congregation rather than for prophesying 'one by one.' It can be done, but the away the seats are arranged encourage the tradition of believers sitting back and being exhorted rather than exhorting one another as Hebrews 10:24-25 says to do in church meetings.

God doesn't dwell in buildings made with human hands, whether church buildings, Roman catacombs, or homes that host meetings. Our buildings cannot contain Him. Yet Chirst is present when two or three are gathered in His name. Believers can meet in church buildings or homes. I just think it is unprofitable for there to always be an expection that a house church plant will one day meet in a steeplehouse, as if moving to a steeplehouse or rented hall were the 'default.' The Biblical 'default' seems to be to meet in private homes.

Here in Indonesia, there are a lot of unbelievers who have never heard the gospel. A lot of people's plans to reach them include training up professional pastors to plant and be clergy for each individual congregation and to construct church buildings. The apostles planted churches, let them develop elders, and then appointed elders that God had made overseers in each church/city. They didn't have to raise a huge amount of money for church buildings before they went on their journey. They planted churches by winning people to Christ.

Link Hudson

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Linc. Are you any relation to Hal Hudson? (now deceased)

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Oh, my. Not only is there fresh air on the 'Holy Spirit' thread; someone has turned the lights on in here.

Can you 'exegete' or 'hermeneut' 'teleios'?

Thank you.

-- Anonymous, July 10, 2000

I don't know of any relatives named Hal, but my Dad's side of the family is so big, I don't know all of my first cousins. I had 32 first cousins on his side of the family at one time. We are from Georgia, and I think our family came from a town in South Carolina a few generations back.

-- Anonymous, July 11, 2000

A couple of days ago I visited a ministry that my church sponsors. I sat in a training class for church planters. The students meet for about a week of training, go out in the field for a few weeks with a training, filling out a workbook as they go. They go out there and share the gospel in Muslim areas. Sensitive work.

A lot of them still have the idea, from going to Bible school, of one day building a church building. One line of reasoning the trainers use with them to discourage this type of thinking is to point out that the Muslims are always wanting to build bigger mosques. You don't want to be like the Muslims do you? Thought that was an interesting line of reasnoing.

I wonder how many church buildings are built because they congregation and especially the paid minister want to have a grand building.

-- Anonymous, July 20, 2000