I would agree with you that many in the house church movement are lovers of Christ - but I would caution that there is no inherent spirituality in such an arrangement and it is fraught with just as many pitfalls as the organized church. I would submit to you that the Catholic Church became worldly not because it was organized, but because hearts became hardened to the Lorship of Jesus Christ and then the organization became corrupt. If you think there is not corruption in Amish and Mennonite circles, you obviously haven’t spent any time there. The Bible tells us that “the heart is deceitful, and above all things, desperatly wicked, who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9) In light of all this, I find the New Testament Church described in the Bible to be organized down to the church officers and their responsibilities, with church growth in mind. If you don’t have friends in a house church , how would you ever even find one? It could be really tough if you moved to a new town and looked in the yellow pages for a ‘house church’ to attend. Hmm….

Having said all this, I can’t even find the original post I was commenting on. I’m not necessarily a Frank Viola critic and I’m responding more to what you have said than on the original post.

Thanks for stopping by.

Never-the-less, regardless of theological differences, I love Paul’s attitude about rejoicing that Christ is proclaimed (Phil 1:18). Considering all the heresy that Paul had to deal with, I think it’s a phenomenally graceful viewpoint.

Your comment, “I chose to look at scriptures from a non literal point of view”, tells more about you than anything else you said. As with Mel White and many others, you seem to have decided what you wish to believe and are now trying to create a theology to scam ignorant people. The sad thing is this; we have ALL sinned and fall short of the glory of God and without Jesus paying the price of that with his shed blood on the cross, neither I nor Mother Theresa can enter into the presence of God, EVER. Cheating on one’s taxes is just as much of a sin as engaging in homosexual activity. Of course if I have accepted the forgiveness of my sin (a plural and all-encompassing term) and am truly contrite in my heart, the Holy Spirit will convict me of my sin and I will repent and go the opposite way. If you wish to use the rationale that we can’t really take the Bible literally on the issue of homosexuality then you must give up on all other sin: murder, adultery, lying, cheating. Get’s kind of sticky doesn’t it? You state that the homosexuality spoken of in both OT and NT is different than what is practised today. I’ve heard that argument frequently given, and again, that would render other sins mentioned also justifiable in today’s world. Let’s take greed for instance; I’m sure Mel White and Tony Campolo would argue that what matters to Jesus today is that we care for the poor and the environment. But if the scriptures can’t be taken literally, then Larry Ellison (Wall Street’s highest paid CEO) would be just as righteous as Mother Theresa (and I could do an entire post on why this actually could be true) and there’s no particular reason to care about global warming.

Felix, the issue for you is this: You can’t have it both ways despite what Mel White says. You can either have it God’s way as laid out for you in His Word, or you can have it Mel’s way. Mel’s way leads to destruction and death and the way of the bible leads to freedom and life. Do not be decieved, God is not mocked, for whatsoever a man sows, this he also reaps. I would encourage you read the Bible through with a fresh perspective which would be this; Ask God to show you the truth through His Word and allow the Holy Spirit to enlighten your heart. Mel White or Tony Campolo cannot be trusted any more than I can be trusted to tell you the truth. God can, and He has chosen to do that through His written word. Study it with an open heart.

Moderates, of course, can print an INVISIBLE bible (in invisible ink, of course), because nothing really means what it says anyway, which is why we have to judge each matter on its own merits.

Suddenly the old monchromatic treasure is looking pretty good to me.