1

Contents
Copyright 2014........................................................................................ 4
Acknowledgements................................................................................... 5
Introduction ............................................................................................... 6
Churches in Houses.................................................................................. 8
Ministry from House to House ............................................................... 11
Important Events in Church History in Houses ................................... 12
Christ Ministered From His Own Home................................................. 15
Christ Does Not Discuss Church Buildings ......................................... 19
Christ's Ministry in People's Homes ..................................................... 21
Christ Teaches Disciples to Use Houses.............................................. 25
Growth in Numbers ................................................................................. 28
Growth in Spiritual Gifts ......................................................................... 31
No Performance on Sunday Morning .................................................... 32
Not Small Traditional Churches............................................................. 34
Independent Decision-Making Freedom ............................................... 36
Not Trying to Become a Traditional Church......................................... 37
Not "Exercising Authority Over" Believers .......................................... 38
Authority and Submission Not the Same Thing................................... 41
The Problem of Deception...................................................................... 42
Who is Your Covering?........................................................................... 45
The Passage Teaching "Covering"........................................................ 46
Feminist Teachings in the Church......................................................... 50
Examination of Submission in the Church ........................................... 51

Technology Gives Capacity to Dominate ............................................. 56

What About Accountability? .................................................................. 57
High Standards for Morality ................................................................... 57
Willingness to Compromise ................................................................... 59
How Finances Affect Churches ............................................................. 62
Not Affected By the Economy................................................................ 63
In Summary.............................................................................................. 65
Bibliography ............................................................................................ 66
About the Author..................................................................................... 69

Copyright 2014 Roger Sapp. All rights reserved. This book is protected
under the copyright laws of the United States of America. Unless otherwise
identified, Scripture quotations are from the Holy Bible, New American
Standard Version (NASV), Copyright 1960, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, The
Lockman Foundation.
A printed version of this book is available on our website
www.allnationsmin.org. It is also available as a printed or Kindle book on
Amazon.com.
All Nations Publications
P.O. Box 620
Springtown, Texas 76082 USA
1-817-514-0653
Secure website: www.allnationsmin.org

Acknowledgements
I want to thank Larry Frakes and John Beccacio for their extensive help on
this book. Both offered excellent suggestions and comments. Many of their
thoughts were incorporated into the book. Also Robert Short and Greg
Kiser offered encouragement and thoughts on various portions of this
book. Jenny Beamer used her excellent editing skills to make this book
much better. I much appreciate Jenny's work on this book. I appreciate the
excellent feedback that my wife, Ann, gave me on this book's content and
the cover design.

Introduction
The New Testament best expresses how the Church should meet and how
its leadership should function. The New Testament reveals only one
pattern of church life: Churches in houses. There is a great need to return
to this pattern as it provides the only church model that actually allows for
all believers to regularly participate and use their spiritual gifts.
House churches have been shown repeatedly to be the only pattern of
church life that is substantially reaching the lost throughout the world in our
day. It is a much tested pattern of church life that historically has been
spiritually vibrant in the most perilous times. Indeed, Christians meeting in
house churches completely evangelized the Roman Empire in less than
three centuries despite being often under severe persecution. House
churches will be the only pattern of church life that will survive and prosper
in the coming times of opportunity and trouble that Christians will
experience.
In the New Testament and Christian history there is ample evidence that
the home and not public buildings was the normal place of ministry with an
occasional larger meeting in another setting that was often outdoors. The
Church did not own church buildings until after the Third Century.
Ownership of church buildings was a clear signal of a decline in powerful
function as the Church entered the Dark Ages.
There are three expressions of the Church in the New Testament:
Churches in homes, churches in localities or regions and the Universal
Church. We will review the places that the New Testament speaks about
Churches in homes. Churches in localities would be like "the Church at
Corinth." These churches in localities would consist of a multitude of house
churches. The Universal Church consists of all believers everywhere. The
New Testament describes the Universal Church as Christs body."
There are many sincere and dedicated Christians who are not presently
meeting in house churches. What is written here is not an accusation
against them but is meant to be a straightforward encouragement to
everyone to start meeting in ways that Christ taught His disciples.
Transition to a more durable and fruitful way of meeting will be necessary
during this time of increasing pressure to compromise biblical truth.
Many of the organizations that call themselves "churches" today are not
found in the New Testament. They are often too large to be churches in
houses and have no intention of meeting in houses exclusively. They do

not include all Christians in a region or city so they cannot be the church of
the locality. The Church of the locality in the New Testament was not
divided into separate, competing groups of Christians by exclusive
membership and top-down authority structures.
These organizations that call themselves "churches" are Medieval - Dark
Ages - expressions and a departure from what Christ taught and
demonstrated Himself. They are a departure from the dynamic way of
Church life that is found in the New Testament. These Dark Ages ways of
doing Church are unfortunately the institutional way of thinking about
church life in Europe and North America.
This way of thinking about Church is found in Europe because that region
experienced "the Dark Ages. This way of thinking is found in North
America because of the influence of the British Empire. The Churches in
England were meeting in the Medieval pattern and brought it with them as
the British and other Europeans colonized and migrated to North America.
Therefore, this institutional way of thinking about Church life is found
strongly where the British Empire dominated.
There are probably many readers who consider their church to be
advanced and strongly biblical in doctrine. This book is not about doctrine
alone but rather the pattern in which a group of believers meets. Likewise,
it addresses how authority works in groups of believers meeting in the
Medieval pattern.
Groups that meet in buildings other than homes that have a "priestly
person" leading them - such as a pastor - are likely to be in the Medieval
pattern. If they sit in rows, have a Sunday morning service that involves a
musical worship team and hear a weekly message from that "priestly
person," and are encouraged to pay a tenth of their income in support of
salaries and costs of maintaining a building, they are likely to be in the
Medieval - Dark Ages - pattern no matter what they say they believe in a
theological sense. This institutional - Medieval - way of doing church
needs to be seriously examined in light of what the New Testament
teaches. It needs to be compared with what Christ Himself taught and
demonstrated on this matter.
This book has only one real aim and that is to review and encourage the
pattern that is found in the New Testament. That pattern is taught and
demonstrated by Jesus Christ. It is the pattern that will endure and prosper
as the end of the age approaches. What this book states is not meant as
criticism of the many dedicated Christians serving Christ in the traditional
7

pattern. It is meant to reveal that their dedication to Christ would produce

much more fruit if it were in the pattern that Christ taught.

Churches in Houses
The Early Church met primarily in homes. They did not own, buy, or build
buildings. The Early Church did not spend money on buildings for church
meetings. They did not worship in sanctuaries. They did not have high
building costs or the ongoing costs of maintaining a building and its
grounds. They did not raise money to build buildings for the purpose of
meetings of the Church. The Early Church demonstrates to us today that
they neither needed nor accepted the burden of specialized buildings used
for hosting church meetings.
The New Testament repeatedly reflects the truth of the Church gathering in
the homes of believers. For instance, a Christian couple - Prisca and
Aquila - had one of these churches in their home. Paul writes:
Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, who for my life
risked their own necks, to whom not only do I give thanks, but also all the
churches of the Gentiles; also greet the church that is in their house.
(Romans 16:3-5a)
Paul writes again of this married couple and the church that was in their
house at the end of 1 Corinthians. He writes:
The churches of Asia greet you. Aquila and Prisca greet you heartily in the
Lord, with the church that is in their house. (1 Corinthians 16:19)
Paul also mentions that a church met in the house of a woman named
Nympha. He writes:
Greet the brethren who are in Laodicea and also Nympha and the church
that is in her house. (Colossians 4:15)
Noteworthy here is that a woman hosted a house church in her home. In
his letter to Philemon, Paul greets a couple named Apphia and Archippus.
He mentions that they had a church meeting in their house. Paul writes:
And to Apphia our sister, and to Archippus our fellow soldier, and to the
church in your house: (Philemon 1:2)
Paul also greets a man named Gaius in his letter to the Romans. Paul
says that Gaius had been a "host" to him. This probably means that Paul 8

when he was in Rome - had stayed in Gaius' home. Paul also mentions
that Gaius was host "to the whole church. This suggests that Gaius
allowed meetings of the Church in his home. Paul writes:
Gaius, host to me and to the whole church, greets you. (Romans 16:23a)
The New Testament makes other references to what would seem to be
house churches. For instance, Paul writes twice about a particular
household:
Now I urge you, brethren (you know the household of Stephanus, that they
were the first fruits of Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves for
ministry to the saints), (1 Corinthians 16:15)
Paul refers to this household in another place. He writes:
Now I did baptize also the household of Stephanus; beyond that, I do not
know whether I baptized any other. (1 Corinthians 1:16a)
It appears that this household was comprised entirely of Christians. They
had been converted through the ministry of the Apostle Paul. He had
baptized the "household" which would mean - by implication - all of the
people living there. This household was "the first fruits of Achaia" and they
were "devoted" to "ministry." This suggests strongly that this house was a
meeting place of the Church.
There is another story in the Acts of the Apostles that is associated with
the Apostle Paul and a particular household. This is the household of Lydia
in Thyatira. Luke describes Paul's initial ministry to Lydia by writing:
And a certain woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of
purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her
heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul. And when she and her
household had been baptized, she urged us, saying, "If you have judged
me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay." And she
prevailed upon us. (Acts 16:14-15)
Paul stayed in Lydia's home while he did ministry in Thyatira. This passage
tells us of Paul having several significant supernatural events occur while
staying with Lydia. For instance, Paul casts an evil spirit out of a slave girl.
The evil spirit enabled the slave girl to be a fortune-teller. As a result of the
girl losing the ability to tell fortunes, Paul and his companion Silas are
arrested and are incarcerated in prison. While they are in the prison,
9

another set of supernatural events begins to unfold. Paul and Silas are
praying and singing praise to God, and an earthquake occurs. As a result
of this earthquake, Paul and Silas and all the prisoners are released
supernaturally from their bonds. Because the loss of prisoners means that
the jailer will be executed, the jailer begins the process of taking his own
life. He is interrupted by Paul and Silas who tell him not to take his life
because no one has escaped. As a result of these unusual events, the
jailer and his family become Christians. Shortly afterward, Paul and Silas
are released from the prison and they return to Lydia's home. Luke writes:
And they went out of the prison and entered the house of Lydia, and when
they saw the brethren, they encouraged them and departed. (Acts 16:40)
Because "they saw the brethren," it does appear that Lydia's home in
Thyatira was now a house church or in the process of becoming one. We
do know that there was a church associated with the city of Thyatira. The
Risen Christ, in the Revelation, speaks of this church. He says:
To the angel of the church in Thyatira write: The Son of God, who has
eyes like a flame of fire, and His feet are like burnished bronze, says this: 'I
know your deeds, and your love and faith and service and perseverance,
and that your deeds of late are greater than at first. 'But I have this against
you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess,
and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray, so that they commit
acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. (Revelation 2:18-20)
Christ says that their present deeds are greater than at first. He goes on to
say that they should not be tolerating a false prophetess who is influencing
Christians to commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols.
Of course, the point here is that there was an active Church that may have
had its origins in Lydia's home.
There is also a remarkable story in the Acts of the Apostles concerning the
imprisoned Apostle Peter. A group of believers was praying for him in the
house of Mary, the mother of John. Peter was rescued by an angel from
likely execution in the prison. After the angel released Peter from prison,
he went to the home of Mary. Luke recounts this:
He (Peter) went to the house of Mary, the mother of John, who was also
called Mark, where many were gathered together and were praying. (Acts
12:12b)

10

Peter knew about this group meeting in John's mothers house. It was
likely a house church that met there regularly. This particular John is also
called John Mark or just Mark. He is the writer of the Gospel of Mark. To
make the point perfectly clear, the writer of the Gospel of Mark attended a
house church. These references show that the Early Church did not meet
in buildings designed for that purpose. Meeting in buildings designed for
Church meetings began to happen during that period of time that is called
"the Dark Ages." Believers - living in close relationship with each other originally were identified as churches by the home in which they met. We
will need to shed the burden of the ownership of buildings as we prepare
for both opportunity and trouble in the days ahead as we approach the end
of the age.

Ministry from House to House

Shortly after the Day of Pentecost, the Church had public meetings in the
Temple and smaller meetings in people's homes where Christians took
their meals together.
And day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking
bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with
gladness and sincerity of heart, praising God, and having favor with all the
people. And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who
were being saved. (Acts 2:46-47)
Luke also records the content of the message that was being preached
both in the temple and house to house. It was about Jesus being the
Christ.
And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on
teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ. (Acts 5:42)
Meetings in Herod's Temple did not continue. Before long, the Temple was
unavailable to Christians because of their unpopularity with the unbelieving
Jewish leadership. Beyond that, the temple was destroyed in 70 AD when
the Roman General Titus sacked Jerusalem. (The Temple has never been
rebuilt.) Despite the destruction of the Temple, bold and fearless Christians
looked for opportunity to preach about Christ in public to the unbelieving
and in the homes of believers to both the unbelieving and believing. Paul
mentions this much later in his ministry. Luke records Paul saying this to
the elders of Ephesus after several decades of ministry:
I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and
teaching you publicly and from house to house, solemnly testifying to both
11

Jews and Greeks of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus
Christ. (Acts 20:20-21)
The end of the book of Acts reveals that the Apostle Paul was still
ministering out of houses. In fact, he was using his own quarters for
preaching and teaching.
He (Paul) stayed two full years in his own rented quarters, and was
welcoming all who came to him, preaching the kingdom of God, and
teaching concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all openness, unhindered.
(Acts 28:30-31)
The Early Church did not change this "house to house" pattern of ministry.
Before Pentecost, Christ had set this pattern. This pattern continued after
Pentecost and through the first several hundred years of Church history.
During this period of time, the entire Roman Empire was evangelized by
Christians meeting in house churches. This occurred despite very serious
persecution happening periodically. Unpopular Christians - who were
meeting primarily in house churches - were amazingly effective in reaching
multitudes of lost people. They were so effective that they overcame the
pagan Roman Empire through faith in Christ. The Empire was declared
"Christian" in 313 AD.
Perilous times have come and are coming to the Church. "Brick and
mortar" church buildings are often the first thing to become useless in
persecution. They become very obvious targets. They are attacked and
destroyed. Or worse, in the recent past, they have been confiscated and
used for "retraining" of Christians in times of persecution. Sometimes,
these buildings have been kept open to give the false appearance of
spiritual freedom. They are often rigidly controlled by governments hostile
to Christ who use them against Christ and His Church. If we are to be
prepared for challenging days to come as we near the end of the age, the
Church will need to be in the original pattern of house churches.
Important Events in Church History in Houses
The very birth of the Church on the Day of Pentecost did not happen in the
Temple or a specialized building for that purpose. It happened in a house
in Jerusalem. Luke records the event by writing:
And when the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one
place. And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent,
rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And
there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they
12

rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit
and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them
utterance. (Acts 2:1-4)
The Holy Spirit filled "the whole house." There is no reason to think that we
need church buildings for important spiritual things to happen. The Early
Church did not need them.
A very important event - one of the most important events in the life of the
Apostle Paul - occurred in a house. Paul had been blinded on the road to
Damascus by Christ appearing to him in a vision. God had sent a man
named Ananias to minister to Paul. Luke relates the event in this way:
And Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands
on him said, "Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the
road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your
sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit." And immediately there fell from his
eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he arose and
was baptized; (Acts 9:17-18)
Paul's vision is supernaturally restored and he was filled with the Holy
Spirit. Paul is the most influential writer of the New Testament. He may be
the most influential follower of Christ in history. Yet, these important events
in his life occurred in a house. Obviously, God does not need impressive
buildings to do His work in us.
In Chapter 10 of the Acts of the Apostles, there is a striking story that
reveals God initiating His plan to save the non-Jewish world. This story
involves the instructions of an angel appearing in a vision to a Roman
centurion named Cornelius and the Apostle Peter receiving a related
revelation. These very important events in Church history all occurred in
homes. Luke begins his account of this event by telling us about Cornelius
and his vision of an angel who gave him instructions. Luke writes:
Now there was a certain man at Caesarea named Cornelius, a centurion of
what was called the Italian cohort, a devout man, and one who feared God
with all his household, and gave many alms to the Jewish people, and
prayed to God continually. About the ninth hour of the day he clearly saw
in a vision an angel of God who had just come in to him, and said to him,
"Cornelius!" And fixing his gaze upon him and being much alarmed, he
said, "What is it, Lord?" And he said to him, "Your prayers and alms have
ascended as a memorial before God. And now dispatch some men to
Joppa, and send for a man named Simon, who is also called Peter; he is
13

staying with a certain tanner named Simon, whose house is by the sea."
(Acts 10:1-6)
Cornelius does as the angel commands and dispatches men to Simon's
house where Peter is staying. As they come near the city, God gives Peter
a revelation. Luke writes:
On the next day, as they (the men dispatched by Cornelius) were on their
way, and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the
sixth hour to pray. And he became hungry, and was desiring to eat; but
while they were making preparations, he fell into a trance; (Acts10:9-10)
Peter is praying on the housetop and falls into a trance. In the trance, God
reveals to Peter that He is accepting the Gentiles into the New Covenant.
By virtue of this revelation, God removes Peter's Jewish reluctance to
interact with Gentiles. Then the Spirit says for Peter to go with the Gentile
men who have just arrived at Simon's home.
And while Peter was reflecting on the vision, the Spirit said to him, "Behold,
three men are looking for you. But arise, go downstairs, and accompany
them without misgivings; for I have sent them Myself." And Peter went
down to the men and said, "Behold, I am the one you are looking for; what
is the reason for which you have come?" And they said, "Cornelius, a
centurion, a righteous and God-fearing man well spoken of by the entire
nation of the Jews, was divinely directed by a holy angel to send for you to
come to his house and hear a message from you." (Acts 10:19-22)
Peter goes with these Gentile men and arrives at Cornelius' home.
Cornelius has invited all his relatives and friends to come hear the divine
message that Peter is bringing to his home. Peter then preaches the Good
News about Jesus Christ and before he is finished, the Holy Spirit falls on
all who are listening. Luke writes:
While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all
those who were listening to the message. And all the circumcised believers
who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit
had been poured out upon the Gentiles also. For they were hearing them,
speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, "Surely no
one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the
Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?" And he ordered them to be baptized in
the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.
(Acts 10:44-48)

14

This extremely important historical event happened in a house. A vision of

an angel occurred in a house. Peter was given a revelation of the
acceptance of the Gentiles in a house. The Holy Spirit was first poured out
- on the day of Pentecost - on the Jewish followers of Christ in a house.
The Holy Spirit was first poured out on the Gentile believers in Christ in a
house also. No specialized buildings were necessary or required for these
extremely important supernatural events to happen. They will not be
necessary as we near the end of the age.
Prophetic ministry also happened in houses. Luke tells us of the Christian
Prophet Agabus giving Paul some important insight into future events.
Luke writes:
We departed and came to Caesarea; and entering the house of Philip the
evangelist, who was one of the seven, we stayed with him. Now this man
had four virgin daughters who were prophetesses. And as we were staying
there for some days, a certain prophet named Agabus came down from
Judea. And coming to us, he took Paul's belt and bound his own feet and
hands, and said, "This is what the Holy Spirit says: 'In this way the Jews at
Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the
hands of the Gentiles.'" (Acts 21:8-11)
This prophetic word from the Holy Spirit was given in Philip's home. A
specialized building was not necessary.

Christ Ministered From His Own Home

Many people are aware that Nazareth was Christ's hometown. However,
not many people are aware that Christ - during His three years of ministry made His home in Capernaum. They may be under the misconception that
Christ had no home during His three years of ministry. However, a closer
examination shows that Christ traveled to and from his home in
Capernaum. The Apostle Matthew tells his readers that Christ moved from
Nazareth to Capernaum at the very beginning of His ministry. Matthew
writes:
Leaving Nazareth, He (Christ) came and settled in Capernaum... (Matthew
4:13a)
Many may be unaware that Christ used His home in Capernaum for
teaching and healing ministry. Mark's Gospel records Christ doing both
from His home in Capernaum.

15

When He had come back to Capernaum several days afterward, it was

heard that He was at home. And many were gathered together, so that
there was no longer room, even near the door; and He was speaking the
word to them. And they came, bringing to Him a paralytic, carried by four
men. And being unable to get to Him because of the crowd, they removed
the roof above Him; and when they had dug an opening, they let down the
pallet on which the paralytic was lying. And Jesus, seeing their faith, said
to the paralytic, "My son, your sins are forgiven." (Mark 2:1-5)
This amazing healing occurred in Christ's home. It was Christ's roof that
was removed by the four men in this situation. The passage continues with
information that there were scribes sitting in Christ's house and were
critical and disturbed by Christ declaring the man's sins forgiven. Christ
responded to this criticism by saying:
But in order that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth
to forgive sins, He said to the paralytic, "I say to you, rise, take up your
pallet and go home." And he rose and immediately took up the pallet and
went out in the sight of all; so that they were all amazed and were
glorifying God, saying, "We have never seen anything like this." (Mark
2:9b-12)
This healing occurred in Christ's home in Capernaum. In other words,
there was ministry to everyone - His disciples and others - happening in
Christ's home in Capernaum.
Mark makes another mention of Christ ministering from His home a few
chapters later. In the context of this situation, Christ has been criticized by
the Pharisees for not keeping the traditions of the elders such as a
ceremonial washing of hands. Christ responded with telling them of their
willingness to set aside what God wanted in order to keep their traditions.
Christ ended His interaction with the scribes and Pharisees in Capernaum
by calling the multitude and saying:
Listen to Me, all of you, and understand: there is nothing outside the man
which going into him can defile him; but the things which proceed out of
the man are what defile the man. If any man has ears to hear, let him hear.
(Mark 7:14b-16)
Since it was the multitude, this was likely spoken outdoors in Capernaum.
However, in the very next verse, Christ enters His house in Capernaum
and explains in detail the statement He made to the multitude. Mark writes:

16

And when leaving the multitude, He (Christ) had entered the house, His
disciples questioned Him about the parable. And He said to them, "Are you
so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever
goes into the man from outside cannot defile him; because it does not go
into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated? (Thus He declared
all foods clean.) And He was saying, "That which proceeds out of the man,
that is what defiles the man. For from within, out of the heart of men,
proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, deeds
of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander,
pride and foolishness. All these evil things proceed from within and defile
the man." (Mark 7:17-23)
In this passage, we can see that there was private instruction to the
disciples also happening in Christ's home. This important teaching of
Christ has been called: "The Things That Defile" among other things.
There are many important teachings that Christ gave His disciples from His
home in Capernaum. For instance, Christ gave Peter some important
instruction just after Peter encountered the Temple tax collector. The
Apostle Matthew records this interaction between Peter and the tax
collector and then the interaction between Peter and Christ. The first
interaction occurred just outside of Christ's home and the second inside of
Christ's home.
When they had come to Capernaum, those who collected the two-drachma
tax came to Peter, and said, "Does your teacher not pay the two-drachma
tax?" He said, "Yes." And when he came into the house, Jesus spoke to
him first, saying, "What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of
the earth collect customs or poll-tax, from their sons or from strangers?"
And upon his saying, "From strangers," Jesus said to him, "Consequently
the sons are free." (Matthew 17:24-26)
Christ tells Peter that they are exempt - free - from paying this Old
Covenant tax because they are sons of God. While there is much more
that could be said about this, the point of discussing this passage is to
bring to light that this teaching occurred in Christ's home.
This teaching - "The Sons are Free" - occurred at the end of Chapter 17 of
Matthew's Gospel. The chapter divisions and verse numbering was added
much later in history for the purposes of translation. Without recognition of
this fact, we could possibly miss that all the verses in Chapter 18 occur in
Christ's home. The first verse in Chapter 18 reveals this. It says:

17

At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, "Who then is greatest in
the kingdom of heaven?" (Matthew 18:1)
This reveals that at the very same time that Christ had taught Peter about
his freedom from the temple tax, Christ taught all the His disciples many
things from His home in Capernaum. Chapter 18 is a long chapter
consisting of 35 verses and many of Christ's important teachings such as:
True Greatness (Matthew 18:1-5) (cf: Mark 9:33-37)
The Danger of Being a Stumbling Block (Matthew 18:6-9)
The Parable of the Lost Sheep (Matthew 18:10-14)
Correction of the Brother Who Sins (Matthew 18:15-20)
Seventy Times Seven Forgiveness (Matthew 18:21-22)
Parable of the Unforgiving Servant (Matthew 18:23-35)
All these important teachings of Christ were taught to Christ's disciples in
His home in Capernaum. Christ was setting a pattern for His apostles.
They were exposed to this pattern of ministry for three years. Ministry from
their homes was prominent in His pattern.
Mark's Gospel gives us other information about Christ's ministry from His
home in Capernaum. Crowds had gathered at Christ's home in
Capernaum. However, not everything was always positive about this. Mark
records Christ's family trying to "take custody" of Him, thinking that he had
gone insane.
He came home, and the multitude gathered again, to such an extent that
they could not even eat a meal. And when His own people heard of this,
they went out to take custody of Him; for they were saying, "He has lost
His senses." (Mark 3:20-21)
Apparently taking advantage of the accusation of Christ's own family that
He was crazy, the scribes added the accusation that Christ was possessed
by Beelzebul and was casting out demons by Satan's power. In answer to
that accusation, Christ once again teaches important things at his home in
Capernaum. Here are the teachings that Christ gives at His home at that
time:
A House Divided Against Itself (Mark 3:23-26)
Entering the Strong Man's House (Mark 3:27)
Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit (Mark 3:28-30)

18

Hopefully, this is enough to convince anyone that Christ's pattern of

ministry included using His own home. Using His own home set an
example for the Twelve Apostles and the Seventy and they continued
ministry using homes. It should be an example for all Christians.

Christ Does Not Discuss Church Buildings

There were numerous opportunities for Christ to tell His disciples to
acquire or build buildings for the purpose of worship. Christ never mentions
this. Christ spoke and did ministry at the Temple and often in synagogues
but never discusses creating buildings for the use of the Church. When the
subject comes up, Christ often changes the subject. For instance, His
disciples were impressed with Herod's Temple and pointed the buildings
out to Christ. Matthew recounts this situation for us. He writes:
Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples
came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. And He answered and
said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one
stone here shall be left upon another, which will not be torn down."
(Matthew 24:1-2, cf: Mark 13:1)
This would have been an ideal time to tell His disciples that He wanted
them to create such buildings for their use in the future. Using specialized
buildings was not a new idea. The Jews had built the Temple. They had
built synagogues throughout Israel and in the Gentile nations surrounding
them. Christ had used the Temple and synagogues to do ministry. Even
the pagan religions used special buildings for worship of false gods.
Christ and His disciples had plenty of examples to follow. Yet Christ is
silent on this point here and elsewhere in the Gospels.
This was not an oversight on Christ's part. Christ had complete clarity
about how the Church would need to function in the future. Instead, Christ
makes a prediction that the Temple will be torn down. This happened when
the Roman general Titus invaded Jerusalem in 70 AD. He destroyed the
Temple complex of buildings.
In another passage, shortly after Christ has driven the money changers out
of the Temple with a whip, Christ makes a statement that was seriously
misunderstood. The Jews were asking Jesus to produce a sign that would
validate His authority to drive the money changers out of the Temple. John
writes:

19

The Jews therefore answered and said to Him, "What sign do You show to
us, seeing that You do these things?" Jesus answered and said to them,
"Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." The Jews
therefore said, "It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You
raise it up in three days?" But He was speaking of the temple of His body.
(John 2:18-21)
Even when the subject starts out about a building used for worship, Jesus
changes the subject to something else. Again, if Christ wanted His
disciples to build buildings, He missed another good opportunity to make
that point. Instead, Christ predicts His resurrection from the dead by calling
His body "this temple." There is a striking absence of any indication that
Christ wished His disciples to build buildings for the purposes of worship.
Christ uses what exists for ministry and goes where people gather but
does not encourage building buildings.
Often things in the Old Covenant are types and symbols of the things in
the New Covenant. The Old Testament Temple seems to be one of those
things. The idea of the Temple being the temple of a Christian's body is
first revealed by Christ in the Gospels but is continued by the writers of the
New Testament. For instance, Paul makes two references in two verses
about the physical body of Christians being the "temple of God." He
writes:
Do you not know that you are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God
dwells in you? If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy
him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are. (1 Corinthians
3:16-17)
There is a third reference where Paul again describes the physical body of
a Christian as "the temple of the Holy Spirit." Paul writes:
Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you,
whom you have from God, and that you are not your own?" (1 Corinthians
6:19)
The dwelling place of God is no longer buildings as in the Old Testament.
God dwells in His people. Twice more Paul makes reference to the
dwelling place of God as now being Christians. He writes:
For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, "I will dwell in
them and walk among them; And I will be their God, and they shall be My
people. (2 Corinthians 6:16b)

20

We - Christians - are the temple of God. He dwells in us and not in

buildings. Paul expands this further by describing believers as "growing
into a holy temple in the Lord" and "being built together into a dwelling of
God in the Spirit."
So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens
with the saints, and are of God's household, having been built upon the
foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the
corner stone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together is growing
into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also are being built together
into a dwelling of God in the Spirit. (Ephesians 2:19-22)
The Old Testament Temple is a type of both our bodies and of all believers
together. We are now the building. We are now the temple. We should not
try to duplicate the obsolete Old Covenant experience. We should not try
to recreate that which God only intended to be types in the Old Covenant.
The Early Church prospered without them. We do not need them today
either. We will not need them to prosper in the last days of this age.
Buildings for worship are a reflection of the period of time where the
Church lost touch with what Christ taught. What He taught and
demonstrated sadly ceased to be the measure of what was Christian.
Church buildings are an enduring reflection of the Dark Ages. The Church
absorbed Jewish and pagan practices that the Early Church did not
practice. Meeting in church buildings was one of those practices borrowed
from the Jews and pagans. Buildings are also a reflection of a time when
persecution of Christians had largely ceased. Indeed, church buildings are
poorly suited to times of persecution. We do not need the burden of caring
for buildings in difficult times. The Early Church did not need them. We will
not need them as we approach the end of the age.

Christ's Ministry in People's Homes

Early in Christs ministry, He healed many sick people and cast out many
demons in the home of Peter and Andrew, who were brothers. Peter's
mother-in-law also received healing. Mark tells us the story and writes:
They came into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John.
Now Simon's mother-in-law was lying sick with a fever; and immediately
they spoke to Him about her. And He came to her and raised her up,
taking her by the hand, and the fever left her, and she waited on them.
And when evening had come, after the sun had set, they began bringing to
Him all who were ill and those who were demon-possessed. And the whole
21

city had gathered at the door. And He healed many who were ill with
various diseases, and cast out many demons... (Mark 1:29b-34a)
The houses that Christ used did not have to be houses of his disciples.
Christ did healing ministry on the Sabbath even in the house of one of His
potential critics. Luke describes it this way:
[Christ] went into the house of one of the leaders of the Pharisees on the
Sabbath to eat bread, [and] they were watching Him closely. And there, in
front of Him was a certain man suffering from dropsy. And Jesus answered
and spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, "Is it lawful to heal on the
Sabbath, or not?" But they kept silent. And He took hold of him, and healed
him, and sent him away. (Luke 14:1-4)
Sometimes, Christ simply did ministry where the problem existed, such as
a house. He did not require people to come to some special, holy place
such as the Temple to receive ministry. For instance, Christ raised a girl
from the dead in the house of her parents. Luke tells us this story in this
way:
[Christ] had come to the house, He did not allow anyone to enter with Him,
except Peter and John and James, and the girl's father and mother. Now
they were all weeping and lamenting for her; but He said, "Stop weeping,
for she has not died, but is asleep." And they began laughing at Him,
knowing that she had died. He, however, took her by the hand and called,
saying, "Child, arise!" And her spirit returned, and she rose immediately;
and He gave orders for something to be given her to eat. And her parents
were amazed; but He instructed them to tell no one what had happened.
(Luke 8:51)
Christ often taught the multitudes - using parables - in various places in the
outdoors. However, He explained the parables to His disciples in a house.
Matthew records this about Christ's ministry in parables:
All these things Jesus spoke to the multitudes in parables, and He did not
speak to them without a parable, so that what was spoken through the
prophet might be fulfilled, saying, "I WILL OPEN MY MOUTH IN
PARABLES; I WILL UTTER THINGS HIDDEN SINCE THE FOUNDATION
OF THE WORLD." Then He left the multitudes, and went into the house.
And His disciples came to Him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the
tares of the field." (Matthew 13:34-36)

22

There is another example of this in a passage that begins with an outdoor

public time of Christ teaching the multitudes. He is questioned by the
Pharisees on the subject of marriage and divorce.
Rising up, He went from there to the region of Judea, and beyond the
Jordan; and crowds gathered around Him again, and, according to His
custom, He once more began to teach them. And some Pharisees came
up to Him, testing Him, and began to question Him whether it was lawful
for a man to divorce a wife. (Mark 10:1-2)
Christ points out to the Pharisees that their easy way of divorce was never
intended by God. Then Christ enters a house and instructs His disciples
further about this matter.
And in the house the disciples began questioning Him about this again. He
said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman
commits adultery against her, and if she herself divorces her husband and
marries another man, she is committing adultery." (Mark 10:10-12)
Christ is revealing a pattern to His disciples in these accounts. Public
ministry is offered to whoever will hear. This happens in whatever setting is
possible--outdoors or indoors. However, private ministry - clarifying things
to His disciples - often is happening privately in a house. Public ministry
need not be just in the outdoors. It can be in a house as well. Luke also
tells us of the time that Jesus taught publicly to all in the house of Matthew,
who is called "Levi" in this passage.
Levi gave a big reception for Him in his house; and there was a great
crowd of tax-gatherers and other people who were reclining at the table
with them. And the Pharisees and their scribes began grumbling at His
disciples, saying, "Why do you eat and drink with the tax-gatherers and
sinners?" And Jesus answered and said to them, "It is not those who are
well who need a physician, but those who are sick. I have not come to call
the righteous but sinners to repentance." And they said to Him, "The
disciples of John often fast and offer prayers; the disciples of the Pharisees
also do the same; but Yours eat and drink." And Jesus said to them, "You
cannot make the attendants of the bridegroom fast while the bridegroom is
with them, can you? But the days will come; and when the bridegroom is
taken away from them, then they will fast in those days." (Luke 5:29-35)
Once again, public ministry could happen in someone's house. Likewise, it
can be followed by a more private instruction to those who are the
disciples of Christ. For instance, Christ taught His disciples about why they
23

had failed to deliver a boy from a demon. Christ cast out the spirit in front
of a crowd outdoors but the private instruction of His disciples, shortly
thereafter about why they had failed, happened in a house.
When Jesus saw that a crowd was rapidly gathering, He rebuked the
unclean spirit, saying to it, "You deaf and dumb spirit, I command you,
come out of him and do not enter him again." And after crying out and
throwing him into terrible convulsions, it came out; and the boy became so
much like a corpse that most of them said, "He is dead!" But Jesus took
him by the hand and raised him; and he got up. And when He had come
into the house, His disciples began questioning Him privately, "Why could
we not cast it out?" And He said to them, "This kind cannot come out by
anything but prayer." (Mark 9:25-29)
Not only did Christ heal the sick and teach His disciples in homes, but
other important matters happened in homes as well. For instance, after
Christ had entered Jerusalem, He sent the disciples to make arrangements
to celebrate the Passover in a particular home. This is, of course, the first
celebration of the Lord's Supper. Matthew, recounting Christ's words,
writes:
He said, "Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, ' The Teacher
says," My time is at hand; I am to keep the Passover at your house with
My disciples." (Matthew 26:18)
Other important matters occurred in people's homes also. Two houses in
Bethany, a village located about two miles east of Jerusalem, are
mentioned in connection with Christ. The home of Lazarus, Mary, and
Martha in Bethany and perhaps the home of Simon the Leper were
important places of ministry. These households had the privilege of hosting
Christ as He did ministry in Jerusalem. The Gospels record Christ and His
disciples leaving Bethany to go to Jerusalem and then returning to
Bethany.
He entered Jerusalem and came into the temple; and after looking all
around, He departed for Bethany with the twelve, since it was already late.
And on the next day, when they had departed from Bethany, He became
hungry. And seeing at a distance a fig tree in leaf, He went to see if
perhaps He would find anything on it; and when He came to it, He found
nothing but leaves, for it was not the season for figs. And He answered
and said to it, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again!" And His disciples
were listening. (Mark 11:11-14)

24

In this situation, Christ taught an important lesson to His disciples on faith

for the miraculous as He traveled from Bethany to Jerusalem. There is no
doubt that those who lived in Bethany - who believed in Him - hosted
Christ in their homes as He ministered in Jerusalem. Bethany was so
important to Christ that He chose it as the place of His Ascension into
Heaven.
He led them out as far as Bethany, and He lifted up His hands and blessed
them. And it came about that while He was blessing them, He parted from
them. (Luke 24:50-51)
The first chapter of Acts expands significantly on this event. Luke writes:
Gathering them together, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem,
but to wait for what the Father had promised, "Which," He said, "you heard
of from Me; for John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the
Holy Spirit not many days from now." And so when they had come
together, they were asking Him, saying, "Lord, is it at this time You are
restoring the kingdom to Israel?" He said to them, "It is not for you to know
times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; but you
shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall
be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and
even to the remotest part of the earth." And after He had said these things,
He was lifted up while they were looking on, and a cloud received Him out
of their sight. (Acts 1:4-9)
Here Luke tells us that Christ told them to wait for "the Father's promise."
He said that they were going to be "baptized in the Holy Spirit" and that
they would "receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon" them.
Tradition says that all this happened at the home of Mary, Martha, and
Lazarus in Bethany. Once again, we see that many important significant
events happened in relationship with people's homes. This was no
accident. Christ did not forget to tell His disciples to use specialized
buildings for Christian ministry. Christ was setting an important pattern for
future ministry. Christ was not only silent about using specialized buildings
but He specifically taught His disciples to use houses. In order for the
Church to complete this age in the power of the Spirit, she will need to
obey the Lord in this important matter.

Christ Teaches Disciples to Use Houses

Many Christians are aware of Christ commissioning His disciples to do His
ministry. That can be found in the following passage:

25

As you go, preach, saying, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand." Heal the
sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons; freely you
received, freely give. Do not acquire gold, or silver, or copper for your
money belts, or a bag for your journey, or even two tunics, or sandals, or a
staff; for the worker is worthy of his support. (Matthew 10:7-11)
What Christ says after this commissioning may not be as familiar to
Christians. In the next part of this passage, Christ tells them to minister out
of the house of a worthy person. Christ says:
And into whatever city or village you enter, inquire who is worthy in it; and
abide there until you go away. And as you enter the house, give it your
greeting. And if the house is worthy, let your greeting of peace come upon
it; but if it is not worthy, let your greeting of peace return to you. (Matthew
10:12-13)
To place further emphasis on a house being a primary place of ministry,
Christ tells them in this passage what to do if they are not received. Christ
says "go out of that house."
Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that
house or that city, shake off the dust of your feet. Truly I say to you, it will
be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of
judgment than for that city. (Matthew 10:14-15)
Later in this same chapter, Christ tells His apostles where they are to
proclaim the things that He taught them. Christ instructed his disciples to
proclaim the truth from housetops, but western culture may not fully
understand the implications. Housetops were generally flat and people
gathered in the cool of the evening on their rooftops. It would have been an
ideal place to proclaim the Good News. The house was the most common
place of ministry in the New Testament era. Christ says:
What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear
whispered in your ear, proclaim upon the housetops. (Matthew 10:27)
In a similar passage, Christ warns His disciples not to indulge in hypocrisy
because the truth will be eventually known. Christ says:
Accordingly, whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light,
and what you have whispered in the inner rooms shall be proclaimed upon
the housetops. (Luke 12:3)

26

Houses were used by the church to proclaim the truth. Often, this
happened on the housetops.
In another passage, Christ again commands the Twelve Apostles to use
houses in ministry that required a journey. Mark writes:
He summoned the twelve and began to send them out in pairs; and He
was giving them authority over the unclean spirits; and He instructed them
that they should take nothing for their journey, except a mere staff; no
bread, no bag, no money in their belt; but to wear sandals; and He added,
"Do not put on two tunics." And He said to them, "Wherever you enter a
house, stay there until you leave town. And any place that does not receive
you or listen to you, as you go out from there, shake off the dust from the
soles of your feet for a testimony against them." And they went out and
preached that men should repent. And they were casting out many
demons and were anointing with oil many sick people and healing them.
(Mark 6:7-13, cf: Luke 9:1-6)
Not only does Christ command the Twelve Apostles to use homes but He
gives a similar command and instruction to the Seventy that He sent out.
The Lord appointed seventy others, and sent them two and two ahead of
Him to every city and place where He Himself was going to come. And He
was saying to them, "The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few;
therefore beseech the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His
harvest. Go your ways; behold, I send you out as lambs in the midst of
wolves. Carry no purse, no bag, no shoes; and greet no one on the way.
And whatever house you enter, first say, 'Peace be to this house.' And if a
man of peace is there, your peace will rest upon him; but if not, it will return
to you. And stay in that house, eating and drinking what they give you; for
the laborer is worthy of his wages. Do not keep moving from house to
house. And whatever city you enter, and they receive you, eat what is set
before you; and heal those in it who are sick, and say to them, 'The
kingdom of God has come near to you.'" (Luke 10:1b-9)
Again, the house will be the primary place of Christian ministry. Christ tells
them to offer a blessing to whatever house hosts them. Christ says that the
blessing "Peace be to this house" should be given. If a man of peace is
present in the house, then "your peace will rest on him" but if not, it will
return to you.
Christ also tells them not to move from house to house as they do this.
Perhaps, this is to avoid the temptation to look for a better situation.
27

Additionally, not moving from place to place might provide the advantage
of people in the region knowing of what house to go to find Christ's
disciples doing ministry. Again, it should be noted, that Christ had homes
at the center of His plan to reach the lost sheep of Israel. It is still at the
center of His plan to reach the world. The time is short. It is time to yield to
the Lord on this important matter and prepare for the end of the age.
There are other statements by Jesus Christ that show that He intended the
home to be the primary place of ministry. For instance, Matthew records
Christ saying...
You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do
men light a lamp, and put it under the peck-measure, but on the
lampstand; and it gives light to all who are in the house. (Matthew 5:14-15)
Christ teaches that lamps are related to the witness and watchfulness of
the Church in the "Parable of the Ten Virgins" and the "Parable of the Lost
Coin." In the Revelation, Christ says that "lampstands" are churches. Both
lamps and lampstands are ordinary objects found in First Century homes.
Light is being given to "all who are in the house." People of that period
hearing Christ would have understood that He was saying that Christian
ministry would ordinarily take place in a house.
The Apostle John also offers us this apostolic commandment:
Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ,
does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the
Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this
teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a
greeting... (2 John 1:9-10)
John says that believers should identify a false teacher by the fact that he
does not "abide in the teaching of Christ." This would mean that he doesn't
do or teach what Christ taught. A few phrases later, he further identifies
that a false teacher "does not bring this teaching." In other words, if a
teacher is not living in what Christ taught and does not teach what Christ
taught, he should not be "received into your house." Again, the place of
ministry where someone would teach is "your house."

Growth in Numbers
As already stated, the New Testament reveals only one model of church
life and that is the house church. It has a proven history under the most
difficult of circumstances. Even in the best of times, it has shown a
28

superior capacity in a variety of areas. For instance, in today's world, the

only continents in the world where the Church is growing dynamically
through new believers is where the house church is prominent. In fact,
where the institutional "brick and mortar" Medieval pattern of Church life is
prominent, this pattern of church life is rapidly losing size and influence in
those cultures. This is true in Europe and in North America. It is true in the
United Kingdom and nations that were once part of the British Empire.
It is estimated that only 3% of US "brick and mortar "churches are growing
through adding new converts. The vast majority of "brick and mortar"
churches that are growing are doing so through the migration of believers
from one congregation to another. Believers can be deceived into thinking
that their church is succeeding in reaching the lost, when all it is actually
doing is reaching Christians. There is an unpleasant truth concerning this.
It is that some large traditional churches have grown only by weakening
the smaller traditional churches around them by absorbing their
membership.
Some have thought that persecution is the cause of the rapid growth in
new believers in some countries but this seems to be a false assumption.
Some places where the institutional "brick and mortar" pattern of church
life is present and have come under persecution, there has been little to no
growth. Conversely, where the house church exists and there is no
persecution, there is still strong growth in numbers of new Christians.
Some reporting sources tell us of this dynamic growth in various countries
and continents:
Bangladesh: 500,000 new believers in house churches in a country that is
90% Muslim and 9% Hindu. Christians constitute less than 1% but are
growing dynamically in house churches.
Cambodia: 1,000 new house churches from 1990 to 2000 in a country that
is 90% Buddhist and less than 1% Christian.
Canada: as many as 2,000 house churches in Canada in the last few
years.
China: 80100 million believers in house churches, according to nonprofit
group China Aid. Despite the majority of the people being non-religious
and the Communist government persecuting unapproved, underground
house churches, there has been huge growth in numbers of Christians.

29

Cuba: 6,00010,000 house churches since 1992. After decades of state

atheism, only abut 2% of the 11 million people were involved in anything
that could be remotely considered religious. Things are rapidly changing
due to the effect of house churches.
Egypt: 4,000 house churches. Egypt is a predominantly Sunni Muslim
country with Islam as its state religion. 90% of the population is identified
as Muslim, 9% are Coptic Christians. Unfortunately, the Copts are also
hierarchal in authority and even have their own Pope.
Ethiopia: growth from 5,000 to 50,000 believers in house churches during
the 1980s. Christians make up 62.8% of the country's population (43.5%
Ethiopian Orthodox, 19.3% other denominations), Muslims 33.9%,
practitioners of traditional faiths 2.6%, and other religions 0.6%.
Christianity is the most widely practiced religion in Ethiopia.
India: approx. 100,000 house churches started during 20012006. The
2001 census reported that Hinduism, with over 800 million adherents
(80.5% of the population), was the largest religion in India; it is followed by
Islam (13.4%), Christianity (2.3%), Sikhism (1.9%), Buddhism (0.8%),
Jainism (0.4%), Judaism, Zoroastrianism, and the Bah' Faith. India has
the world's largest Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Zoroastrian, and Bah' populations,
and has the third-largest Muslim population and the largest Muslim
population for a non-Muslim majority country.
Sri Lanka: The "Kithu Sevena Church Movement" started 131 new house
churches in 7 months in 2004. Buddhist is the country's official religion with
69.1% of the people being Buddhist. The Muslim population is second with
7.6% of the population, followed by Hindu 7.1%, and Christian 6.2%.
Vietnam: One church-planting team started 550 new house churches in 2
years from 1997 to 1999. Reportedly, 81% of Vietnamese people do not
believe in God; 85% identify with Buddhism, but may not practice it. The
vast majority practice ancestor worship of some form. Most who claim to
be Christian are Roman Catholic and these total about 8 million.
USA: 1,600 house churches on internet alone (as of 2003) with possibly as
many as 30,000 house churches (according to American pollster George
Barna); as of 2009, about 30,700,650 adults. If this number is correct, then
about 10% of all Americans are already meeting in house churches and
that number is growing.

30

Recently, a number of established Christian denominations and mission

organizations have officially supported efforts to develop house church
networks. These include the following: The Free Methodist Church in
Canada, The Foursquare Gospel Church of Canada, The Evangelical
Fellowship of Canada, The Presbyterian Church in Canada, Partners in
Harvest, The Southern Baptist Convention (USA), Dove Christian
Fellowship International, DAWN Ministries (Discipling a Whole Nation),
The Progressive Christian Alliance, Youth With A Mission (YWAM), Eternal
Grace, and the recently launched Underground Churches, among others.
The above information is already dated. Some of it is more than a decade
old. House churches have been growing dynamically throughout the
nations of the world, even where the institutional "brick and mortar" church
has been diminishing in numbers and influence. This is a quiet move of the
Holy Spirit to reestablish the original pattern of Church life. This is the Holy
Spirit's compassionate preparation of the Church for the challenges of the
end of the age. Unfortunately, like all moves of the Holy Spirit, there has
been resistance from those in the traditional pattern of church life,
particularly those who have a financial interest in seeing it continue. This is
simply human nature.
There is no intention of bashing anyone personally. There have been some
exceptionally strong and ethical Christians functioning in the Medieval
system. Bad as this system is, when strong Christians are leading it, they
seem to make it work. However, this is not a good justification for
continuing in a system that is a departure from what Christ taught and
demonstrated. This Medieval way of doing Church tends to wear down and
can corrupt even the best of these leaders over a period of time.
The people in this system are often good. Nevertheless, the Medieval
system is a bad system. Thankfully, good people leading a bad system can
make it work. However, a bad system can limit and corrupt good people.
Isn't it much wiser for good Christian people to work in the way that Christ
taught and demonstrated? The wisdom of doing Church in the way that
Christ demonstrated is increasingly apparent as the end of the age
approaches.

Growth in Spiritual Gifts

The large majority who attend institutional "brick and mortar" churches do
not and will not ever exercise spiritual gifts. It is not expected or desired
from them. Many who are mature enough and prepared enough to
successfully do ministry are waiting in vain for someone to give them
permission to do it. The permission is unlikely to come to a large majority
31

of these people. They are limited in their spiritual growth and ministry by
the Medieval system.
The problem is partly that the authority structure of an institutional "brick
and mortar" church creates a pyramid of people. It has a single leader at
the top and then a secondary layer of leaders that have been given some
limited permission to do ministry. The secondary layer consists of at best
20% of the church and fills up all of the available places of ministry. The
remaining 80% of the church is not expected to do much of anything but be
present to worship and to be involved in giving financially.
The great problem with this is that half of the 80% are capable of doing
significant ministry but will never be given permission or opportunity to do
so. In fact, if an equipped and growing Christian begins doing significant
ministry - without specific permission - they will often be considered rebels.
They may even be seen as a threat to the leadership.
This way of doing church often stifles people who are growing spiritually
and need to do ministry to continue growing. It creates a "cork in the bottle"
effect. If someone begins to have a dynamic life in the Spirit, there is an
attempt from leadership to "cork" them. Often these people will never find
significant ministry with a church like this if they are marked by the
leadership as needing to be "corked." In order for them to continue to
grow, they will have to go someplace else. Of course, there are a few
exceptional leaders that work diligently to involve people at a greater level.
However, as the church grows larger, the number of people that are not
involved in ministry will also grow proportionately. There is no way to fix
this problem of uninvolved people, as it is built into the nature of a
Medieval hierarchal church.
These uninvolved people are a wasted asset of the Church. If they go too
long in this unfulfilling situation, they may also lose heart and drop out of
church life, while not dropping out of faith in Christ. "Bricks and mortar"
churches often have many gifted, bored, and unchallenged people who
continue attending church only because they see it as the right thing to do.
If they are not in the approved 20% and have been "corked" in the past,
they may attend without real passion any longer. Eventually, they may lose
heart and quit attending all together.

No Performance on Sunday Morning

Beyond this, the Sunday morning service in larger "brick and mortar"
churches takes on the characteristics of a performance before an
audience. This means that it can only involve the most professional of
32

speakers and musicians. The speaker may even use a prompter to deliver
what appears to be a spontaneous message but was written out and
practiced repeatedly. Those who are learning will have a hard time getting
much opportunity to do ministry in the environment of a performance
before an audience. They are simply not professional enough to
participate.
Surely there are quite a few in a church of more than a thousand members
that have the spiritual gift of prophecy. However, the free exercise of
spontaneous spiritual gifts does not fit into this performance. It will often
seem too risky to leaders to allow congregational members to have
freedom to exercise spiritual gifts. Therefore, the leadership will often
suppress those who could function. There are some larger churches that
may approve those that they trust explicitly to function. They may fit a nonspontaneous planned prophecy into the schedule of the service.
Typically, these "brick and mortar" churches will acknowledge the
existence of spiritual gifts but have congregations that have little
knowledge or expectation of functioning in spiritual gifts. Most
congregational members will not have a sense of permission to do
anything spontaneous as far as spiritual gifts are concerned. This doesn't
seem to be an oversight of leadership but often the result of concerns
about creating a bad performance on Sunday morning. In many cases,
leaders would rather not have spiritual gifts happen at all, if they have to
deal with unexpected things happening on Sunday morning. There is no
expectation or flexibility in these churches for the Holy Spirit to guide and
direct.
Obviously, the environment of a performance is not conducive to
Christians learning to function in these gifts. God never intended a meeting
of the church to be a performance before an audience. There should be no
audience, and worship should not be a performance. The Father expects
that every one of His children could participate with their gifts. Consider the
description that the Apostle Paul offers concerning a meeting of the Early
Church. Paul writes:
What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a
psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an
interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. (1 Corinthians 14:26)
Each one - each believer - was expected to participate. This is, of course,
a simple definition of what should happen at a house church gathering.
Everyone should offer something to help others. Everyone's purpose
33

should be to edify other people. The house church has the capacity for all
to use their gifts regularly.
There is no concern about how professional people may be in their
ministry in the house church. Because house churches thrive on
relationships, coaching is a common occurrence. Such coaching can help
every Christian to learn to use spiritual gifts to edify all. Spiritual growth
can quickly happen in a house church. There is freedom to exercise
spiritual gifts. Permission is already given without expectation of
professionalism.
Experience leads to maturity in a caring environment. Therefore,
substantial growth in the quality of spiritual gifts happens as time goes by.
The person exercising spiritual gifts becomes more skilled and gains a
mature exercise of the gifts as they are exercised regularly. The
"perfectionist" environment of many institutional "brick and mortar"
churches does not produce the same fast growth because of a lack of
opportunity.
Christ will need multitudes of His followers functioning in their gifts and
ministries at the end of the age. The great harvest of souls will need
millions of laborers who are fully equipped in spiritual gifts and the
ministries of Christ. The Church - in the Medieval pattern - has already
demonstrated its inability to equip the majority of those who attend
regularly. The house church, on the other hand, is preparing millions of
Christian laborers for the amazing time to come of a great harvest of souls
at the end of the age.

Not Small Traditional Churches

Some who are committed to house churches consider the term "house
church" to be problematic. They assert that the main issue for Christians
who practice their faith in this manner is not the house but the type of
meeting that takes place. As a result, they use other terms such as "simple
church," "relational church," "primitive church," "body life," "organic
church," or "biblical church."
We agree strongly that the type of meeting should not be similar to
institutional churches. House churches are not small institutional churches
meeting in houses. However, all of the practices and attitudes implied by
these terms are sometimes found in the institutional "brick and mortar"
pattern as well. Even the term "home church" is problematic. While it is the
home of one family that is hosting the Church, it is not the home of those

34

who attend. Therefore, "house church" remains the favored term to the
author.
House churches should not be small institutional churches. A house
church is not an institutional church that has divided itself into small groups
but still meets together on Sundays as a traditional church. We should not
apply institutional "brick and mortar" concepts to house churches. Those
concepts are too limited. The great strength of a house church is its
freedom to be whatever it needs to be in the moment.
There should be no ambition to grow in numbers. That is an ambition of
the traditional church. (House churches do grow without this ambition.)
There should only be one ambition and that is to be together with a group
of friends and the Lord. Indeed, the basic and most simple definition of a
house church is found in Christ's statement:
For where two or three have gathered together in My name, there I am in
their midst. (Matthew 18:20)
The key element is the pure motive of "gathering together in My name."
House churches, unlike institutional "brick and mortar" churches, are not
looking for validation by large numbers. People who meet in house
churches do not find their significance in having large numbers attend
services. Those that lead house churches do not obtain significance by
being able to draw financial support from larger numbers of people
attending. The motives of leaders remain much more pure.
There should be no sense of failure if there are more empty chairs than
last week. There is no ambition to be a large gathering in a building. There
is no hidden ambition to be known as successful. The motives in house
churches remain simple and pure. Those that do house church should only
be interested in being together and being with Jesus.
The institutional pattern of a leader who does the great majority of the
ministry while everyone else sits in rows for a limited time on Sunday
morning should not be what happens with a house church. There should
not be a leader who dominates things. That is the Medieval pattern of
church meetings but is not the pattern of the Early Church. A healthy
house church will not be dominated by anyone but the Holy Spirit.
A house church will respond to present needs of those who attend and to
the leading of the Holy Spirit. Teaching can happen as a planned event but
will often happen spontaneously as the need and opportunity arises. (This
35

is much like the example of Christ interacting with His disciples.) Mature
Christians will have much influence but not as a result of their authority
over anyone. They will be highly influential because of their maturity,
wisdom, and fruitfulness.

Independent Decision-Making Freedom

House churches have freedoms that institutional "brick and mortar"
churches do not have. In our view, an institutional church becomes less
and less responsive to the needs of the moment and the work of the Holy
Spirit as it gets larger. A large institutional church often has inflexible plans
for events and speakers. These plans are often for a year or more into the
future.
A house church can meet whenever it decides. It is not forced to meet on
Sunday if that day is not the best for the group. It does not have to meet at
all for a season or can meet more frequently over a period of time to do
something important together. A house church can come together at any
particular time to meet a specific need or take advantage of an opportunity
such as a gifted traveling minister being in the area.
A house church can meet at other locations. A house church can decide
that their meeting will happen in a park on a beautiful day. It can decide to
meet over a weekend at a lake cabin. It can decide that its program for
those days is to teach all the children in the families how to water ski. It
can decide to meet with other house churches with a similar vision and
have a larger meeting. The members can go to a conference together and
skip their ordinary meeting that week.
Some house churches organize to do important ministry such as serving
the poor. A house church could run a clothing closet. One group of house
churches in Texas has opened soup kitchens to serve the poor in their
community. House churches have financial resources to use to serve the
poor that traditional churches often are consuming to take care of a
building.
"Seamlessness" is a characteristic of house churches. They move from
event to event - with or without any planning - simply led by the Holy Spirit.
Even if something is planned, that plan can be "put on hold" if the Holy
Spirit seems to be doing something else. A house church can function
informally and simply flow together at times for unplanned times of
fellowship or worship as the Holy Spirit leads. A group of Christians in a
house church can flow seamlessly from a group of people watching a
sports event together to a time of worship together.
36

Christians in house churches can be more responsive to the Holy Spirit in

the moment. A teenage Christian can be used of the Holy Spirit to change
the direction of a meeting. This responsiveness to the Holy Spirit becomes
instinctive and intuitive after a time. This is true for all believers and not just
for leaders. As the end of the age approaches, responsiveness to the Holy
Spirit by all Christians will insure a great harvest of souls. Beyond this,
responsiveness to the Holy Spirit will insure survival and prosperity of
every believer during the perilous times to come at the end of the age.

Not Trying to Become a Traditional Church

Institutional "brick and mortar" churches often begin as house churches.
Among those who do not understand the difference, the transformation
from house church to institutional "brick and mortar" church is often
attempted. However, a large majority of them fail to make the transition.
The attempt to become a traditional church is often the death knell of a
strong house church. Within a five year time frame, most groups that
attempt to make this transition give up trying to become a traditional
church. Unfortunately, this generally means that they give up being a
house church also.
It is not too hard to understand that a group of sincere Christians who meet
together and have no other motive than to be with the Lord and each other
will prosper spiritually. They often grow in numbers and quality because of
the house church environment. However, growth in numbers and the work
of the Holy Spirit among them may tempt a gifted person - the leader - to
become a larger "brick and mortar" church. Some of this may come with
the hidden desire to be respected and to earn a living through this group of
believers.
This destructive transition from a house church to a traditional church often
happens in a similar pattern. The leader rents a store-front or a small
church building. The house church paradigm of ministry begins to change
to the Medieval pattern. Now Christians sit in rows and listen to the leader
preach a message each Sunday. This changes the atmosphere and many
of the original people no longer get their needs met through participation.
Over a period of time, they cease to come to the now more traditionally
structured meeting. The leader may now struggle to pay the bills that are
generated by having a building (and trying to provide himself a salary.)
Before, this group of Christians had money to help others, such as the
poor, but now all the available resources are being used and there is a
developing focus that there is still not enough money.

37

Leaders in this situation tend to forget that they were succeeding at doing
good ministry. They forget that the people were being blessed without a
building before. This new financial situation forces the leader to spend
more time publicly raising money to pay the bills. He ends up teaching
questionable things about giving. (Giving to pay for the cost of building is
not found in the New Testament.)
Often the relationships change subtly in a situation like this. An
authoritarian attitude is gradually adopted by the leader. This may be so
subtle that even the leader does not perceive it happening. Before, the
leader was simply a more mature or more gifted Christian who was
positively influencing his brothers and sisters. Everyone was growing
through participation in ministry to each other and to the Lord. The leader
now seeks to "exercise authority over" his brothers and sisters in an
authoritarian manner. The other Christians have less and less opportunity
to actually do significant ministry.
Authoritarianism is a characteristic pattern of church life that comes from
the Medieval period. It is not characteristic of the house churches in the
New Testament. Even the Apostle Paul appealed to the Churches that he
had planted as their "father." In the context, "father" means "founder." He
did not seek to influence them as someone who had "authority over them."
He influenced them as one who had a history in relationship and friendship
with them.
No growing house church has to become an institutional "brick and mortar"
church. It should remain in the biblical pattern. Believers can continue as a
house church. If they become too large for practicality, they should plant
new house churches. Everyone could have resisted the temptation to
become an institutional "brick and mortar" church and maintained their
purity of motive.

Not "Exercising Authority Over" Believers

There is a common but false accusation against house churches coming
from those in the institutional "brick and mortar" pattern. It suggests that
house churches are not "covered" by proper authority and therefore they
will not be protected from heresy and spiritual deception. Interestingly,
many in house churches would agree that they are not "covered" by a
spiritual authority. This is because many in house churches understand
that "covering" is a modern authoritarian teaching that finds its roots in the
Dark Ages.

38

"Exercising authority over" a congregation of believers is commonly

thought to be the right thing for leaders today. However, this idea comes
from the Dark Ages and represents a departure from what Christ taught. In
two Gospels, Christ forbids Christian leaders from "exercising authority
over" Christ's followers.
Jesus called them (His disciples) to Himself, and said, "You know that the
rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise
authority over them. It is not so among you, but whoever wishes to become
great among you shall be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first
among you shall be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be
served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many." (Matthew
20:25-28 CR: Mark 10:42-45)
Christ says "it is not so among you." He is referring to two phrases. The
first is "rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them." The Greek word that is
translated "Lord" as in "Lord Jesus Christ" is "kurios." The Greek word that
is translated "lord it over them" is a form of the Greek word for "Lord." It is
"katakurieuo." It means "to exercise dominion over." It is translated as "to
lord over" most often in the New Testament.
Christ is forbidding Church leaders from "exercising dominion over" other
believers. Christ is forbidding any Christian leader from taking His place as
Lord over them. Unfortunately, this is the practice of many leaders in the
Medieval pattern of Church life. In fact, many believers influenced by this
pattern are much less concerned about obeying the Lord than they are in
being submitted to a leader who is teaching this Medieval pattern. In fact,
many believers may wrongly think that it is the same thing.
Christ uses a second phrase in this teaching to His disciples to illustrate
what "It is not so among you" means. He says "their great men exercise
authority over them." The Greek word for "authority" is "exousia." A form
of that Greek word is used in "exercise authority over". It is "katexousiazo"
and it is translated properly in this passage as meaning "to exercise
authority over."
Christ forbids His disciples to "exercise authority over" each other. This is,
of course, exactly what many leaders who are living in the Medieval
pattern think that they should be doing. They are often in a hierarchal
system with authority being exercised over believers from top to bottom
with layers of authority. This is exactly what Christ is forbidding.

39

How did the "brick and mortar" churches end up in a pattern of authority
that is in conflict with what Christ taught? Let us remember that Christ
referred to "rulers of the Gentiles" and "great men among them" in His
teaching forbidding this kind of authority. The most obvious example of
"lording it over" and "exercising authority over" in Christ's time was the
Roman Empire.
The Roman Empire was highly conscious of authority. It was hierarchal in
nature with the Roman Emperor, Caesar, at the top and subordinate
authorities such as Governors and their appointed servants who all
"exercised authority and "lorded it over" the citizens and slaves of the
Empire.
The Christians of the First and Second Centuries, on the other hand, were
strikingly free of authority consciousness. In fact, they were labeled by the
unbelieving people of the Empire as "levelers" meaning that they did not
acknowledge a hierarchal authority among believers. The authorityconscious Romans found this very strange. This is not to say that they
were rebellious. Quite the contrary was true. They submitted first to the
Lord and secondarily to secular authority. They practiced mutual
submission with each other. They were highly submitted but not in a
hierarchal pattern.
After the Roman Empire became "Christian" in 313 AD, the Church began
to be reshaped and came to resemble the system of authority of the
Roman Empire. It began to do what Christ had forbidden. (This is also the
period of time that it began to build buildings for Christian worship.) The
Church took on the characteristics of being a layered, top-down,
hierarchical authority. Instead of an Emperor, it had a Pope. He had
subordinate authorities of archbishops and bishops "exercising authority
over" priests. The priests, in turn, "exercised authority over" the common
people. This is all very much in disobedience to Christ's teaching of not
"exercising authority over" believers.
When the Protestant Reformation came, Protestants rejected the authority
of the Pope, his bishops and priests, but established a nearly identical
system of hierarchal authority. It just had fewer layers of authority. While
the Protestants reformed portions of theology, they still maintained the
hierarchal system and authority practices that Christ had forbidden.
The Protestants also had a priestly person at the top of each congregation.
Luther named his Protestant leaders "pastors" using the French word for
"shepherd"--to draw a distinction between them and the Roman Catholic
40

priests. 1 He also had them wear black robes rather than the various
colored robes of Roman Catholic priests. These distinctions were very
superficial especially concerning the exercise of authority. The pastor
"exercised authority over" another group of subordinate leaders - elders or
deacons - and they together exercised authority over the common people 2 .
Layers of authority still existed no matter what they called them and how
they were arranged.
Protestant leaders were still "exercising authority over" other Christians.
Unfortunately, this way of thinking about authority in the Church affected
the thinking of other independent groups of believers that were neither
Protestant nor Roman Catholic. Many are in this pattern simply because it
is all that they have known. They may not be aware that many Christians in
the world today have never been in this pattern and will never adopt it.

Authority and Submission Not the Same Thing

While we are instructed by the New Testament to submit one to another 3 ,
this is not the same thing as having authority over each other. Only Christ
has authority over His Church. Matthew records the events just before
Christ's ascension into Heaven. The words of Christ tell us who has
authority in the Church.
Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to
Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the
Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I
am with you always, even to the end of the age." (Matthew 28:18-20)
Christ did not delegate His authority to Church leaders to now "exercise
authority over" believers. No Christian replaces Him in His authority over
1

King James, a Protestant, wanted to harmonize the Bible with the existing hierarchal structures
in his day. The Anglican Church had existing hierarchal "pastors." King James had the translators
insert the word "pastor" in Ephesians 4:11 for the Greek word that is translated everywhere else
in the New Testament as "shepherd." This gives the wrong impression that the early church had
"pastors" as we know them today. However, there is not a single passage where a "pastor" or a
"shepherd" is in authority leading a congregation as we know them today. King James translators
did similar things with the word "bishop."
2
In some "brick and mortar" churches (such as Baptists) the deacons are actually elected by
majority vote by the congregation. Usually the deacons control a hired pastor who also must be
elected by majority vote by the church. Despite this more democratic way of doing church
business, it is still a departure from what the New Testament teaches. In our observation of these
churches, usually either the pastor or the deacons become entrenched in authority over a time.
Leaders will "exercise authority over" other believers and will strongly dominate the politics of
these churches.
3
Ephesians 5:21

41

His Church. Christ has direct authority over each believer. He alone is Lord
over them. Christ leads His disciples - in a direct and personal way - by the
guidance of the Holy Spirit. By mutual submission to each other, there is
no "exercising authority over" any believer by any other believer. Every
believer has Christ indwelling and therefore can be His spokesperson.
Therefore, we listen to and cooperate with each other - submit to each
other - as we obey the Lord.
If our submission to another believer is in clear conflict with obedience to
the Lord, then we are obligated to obey the Lord as we continue to do our
best to patiently and kindly submit to each other. If our obedience in
specific matters violates our conscience and our understanding of what
Christ teaches, we must kindly refuse to obey. If we believe that it would
be unethical or immoral to obey, then we must respectfully refuse to
cooperate. Ultimately, Christ remains Lord over us as we remained
submitted to other believers.
Submission is always mutual. Everyone is required to submit to each
other. Leaders must submit to every other Christian and not just a small
group of leaders "above" them in hierarchy. This means even those who
are mature Christians must submit to the youngest believer among us. Any
believer can speak for Christ because He lives within them and not just
those at the top of a hierarchal authority system. All believers are honored
by mutual submission. Every believer must be willing to listen to every
believer as we seek to do the will of Christ.

The Problem of Deception

Doctrines, such as "Covering," are expressions of the "Dark Ages"
authoritarian mindset about the nature of the Church. This particular
doctrine encourages believers to submit to the leadership that is "above"
them in a hierarchy. This doctrine teaches that this kind of submission will
protect the believer from deception. However, the reality is that a selective
submission to a single leader or a group of leaders is not protective at all.
There is definitely a need for protection from deception as we near the end
of the age. Christ's disciples privately asked Him an important question
about the end of the age. They asked:
Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of Your
coming, and of the end of the age? (Matthew 24:3)
Christ's immediate answer to this question is simple and straightforward.
He says:
42

See to it that no one misleads you For many will come in My name, saying,
"I am the Christ," and will mislead many. (Matthew 24:4-5)
Confirming the same sign, a few verses later, Christ says:
And many false prophets will arise, and will mislead many.
(Matthew 24:11)
At the end of this chapter, Christ then says:
"Then if anyone says to you, 'Behold, here is the Christ,' or 'There He is,'
do not believe him. For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will
show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the
elect. Behold, I have told you in advance. (Matthew 24:23-25)
While there are many things that Christ mentions in this description of the
end of the age, there is only one thing that he mentions more than once.
Christ warns of religious deception three times. He warns about being
misled.
The Medieval model of the Church developed as the Church had largely
departed from Christ's teaching to His disciples. It is highly unlikely that
submission to a hierarchal Medieval Church will be protective at all. Since
the house church is what Christ taught and demonstrated to His disciples,
it is much more likely to be protective from deception.
Submission in the Medieval model is to a narrow group of leaders.
Common sense should acknowledge that this would not be protective of
deception. This model is likely to protect heresies of various kinds by
stifling those who would ask important questions. Since in the house
church model, every believer can speak for Christ, it is unlikely that a
heresy can be taught for long without someone asking important questions
about it.
The Medieval model of the Church has already been in violation of Christ's
teaching on not "exercising authority over" believers for more than a
thousand years. There is already much heresy being protected by this
model. This is unlikely to change significantly. We should place little
confidence in this model's ability to protect us from deception in any
significant way.

43

We will need protection at the end of the age from deceptions. That
protection will not come from a selective submission to a few leaders in a
hierarchy. That protection will come to us as submit to one to another and
as we honor all believers - especially mature Christians - to speak to us for
Christ.
The leader that is supposedly "covering" a believer is submitting only to a
single person "above" him in the hierarchy. If that person at the top of the
hierarchy is in error, then there is no one who will be able to correct him.
He will only listen to someone "above" him. Since those that he is
"exercising authority over" or "covering" will only listen to him, this insures
that a false teaching never gets corrected.
Those that question leaders about doctrinal issues in authoritarian
structured groups are likely to either be encouraged to silence or shown
the door. In a church group like this, they are much more likely to
encounter the attitude-- "my way or the highway." Despite the fact that the
believer has committed money, time, and service to this group, nothing of
their investment will be honored if the leader marks them a rebel due to
their questions. Sadly, this spiritual abuse is thought to be the right way to
do things in many groups of believers.
No one who is not an acknowledged authority will be able to get someone
in authority to listen to them because they are only listening to those
"above" them. The problems of a bad teaching will not be corrected in this
kind of relationship. Heresy will be protected by the hierarchal relationship.
This arrangement is not protective at all. It is likely to propagate doctrines
that are seriously questionable but are being protected by a hierarchy.
Consider that the Roman Catholic Church is the most "covered"
denomination in the world with each person in a congregation submitting to
a priest. Each priest is submitting to a bishop. Each bishop is submitting to
the Pope. Nevertheless, the highly submitted Roman Catholic Church is
full of heresy and superstitions. Historically, this institution has also been
the source of many abusive financial practices of the poor such as selling
indulgences. Historically, it has been the source of persecution, torture and
murder of other non-Catholic Christians and Jews. This is hardly an
endorsement for the idea of being covered by layers of authority.
Those who believe in mutual submission are in a much more protected
state. No leader can propagate a false doctrine without being
compassionately challenged by those in fellowship with him. He is likely to
see that there are flaws in a questionable teaching. Believers who practice
44

mutual submission have the right to ask difficult questions about the
biblical merit of what is being taught. They are not silenced by authoritarian
attitudes. People in house churches are often engaged in a dialogue with
teachers. They want to know leaders and are unsatisfied at simply hearing
a monologue without really knowing the person who is giving it.

Who is Your Covering?

This is a commonly heard question in the hierarchal church today. What do
people mean when they ask this question? They are asking Who is the
person that is your spiritual authority? It is another way of asking "Who is
in control of you?" When they ask these questions, they are revealing
certain beliefs. These seem to be the common beliefs about "covering":
They believe that God requires everyone in the Church to be "covered" by
human authority. They believe that everyone should have a human
spiritual authority "exercising authority over" them. In most cases, this
authority would have the title of "Pastor" or in some cases "Apostle." They
might even call that person "their pastor" or "their apostle." They believe
that "covering" is produced by allowing another person "above you" to
"exercise authority over" your decisions and beliefs. They believe that
"covering" creates accountability and protects a believer from deception.
They believe that this is Gods way of protecting a believer from deception
and the work of evil spirits. They believe that this authority relationship will
also produce accountability for the believer.
We have already explored the fact that Christ forbids His disciples to
"exercise authority over" other believers. So at a basic level without
needing serious examination, we can see that the "covering" doctrine is in
direct conflict with what Christ said about not "exercising authority over"
other believers.
Normally speaking, when someone asks you about your "covering", they
are looking for you to identify a single person that you are allowing to
"exercise authority over" you. Of course, anyone who has real biblical
clarity about this cannot give them an answer that will satisfy them. They
will react negatively if you say that Jesus Christ is the one who is in
authority over you. However, this is absolutely the correct answer. They
will immediately distrust you if you give the correct answer and assume of
you an inferior status and possibly mark you as "deceived," "rebellious," or
even "conceited." However, they are the actual ones who have been
misled into doing something that Christ said not to do. This disobedience
comes out of ignorance as they may have never thought beyond what they
have been taught.

45

The Passage Teaching "Covering"

The best place to begin a thorough examination of the doctrine of
"covering" is the only place where the term appears in the New Testament.
It is the only place where the New Testament authorizes "exercising
authority over" anyone. It is found in Pauls writings in 1 Corinthians,
Chapter 11. There Paul writes:
But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the
man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. (1 Corinthians
11:3)
The beginning of Pauls explanation of "covering" is clearly about authority.
In fact, the term "head" in English usage has long meant "authority." For
example, a familiar use of this word would be to say that a Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) is "head of a company." This simply means that the CEO is
in authority over the company. Verse 10 in this passage also verifies that
Paul's teaching is about authority. That verse, found seven verses later,
reads:
Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head,
because of the angels. (1 Corinthians 11:10)
Since the word "authority" is used in verse 10 in connection with the
woman's "covering," it only seems reasonable to conclude that both "head"
and "covering" in this passage have to do with "authority."
Many conservative hierarchal churches that had taught this biblical
concept of family have ceased to do so because some Christian women
and men have been influenced by feminism. Leaders are concerned that
they will get a negative reaction to teaching it and are very concerned that
this teaching will be unpopular. Thankfully, there are courageous men and
women in the Body of Christ that will stand strong for this essential truth of
the family.
There are two related points that need to be noticed in this context. The
first point is generally understood (although it is being challenged today by
feminist theology.) The second point is largely ignored in this passage but
is highly important to the proper understanding of submission and authority
in the Church. Here is the verse again:
But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the

46

man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. (1 Corinthians
11:3)
This is the first point. This verse says "the man is the head of a woman."
Normally, this is taken to mean that a wife and unmarried daughters - of
any age - remain under the protective "covering" authority of the man who
is their husband or father. This is completely consistent with many other
passages in the Bible located in both New and Old Testaments. Readers
should note that the only passage about "covering" is not about the
authority of church leaders at all. It is entirely about the family.
The New Testament actually has six more places where wives are
encouraged to submit to their husbands. 4 This does reinforce the biblical
ideal that wives and daughters have a special protected place in the family
under the "covering" authority of the husband and father. The family is the
only place where any man may righteously exercise spiritual authority over
another person.
The protective "covering" of the authority of a husband or father is the
scriptural and normal meaning of covering. It was widely accepted
throughout the Church until the Shepherding Movement of the 1970's
began to misuse the idea of "covering." They taught a regimented
hierarchal view of the authority of leaders over their followers. At the same
time, feminism was undermining the authority of husbands and fathers
over their families. In effect, "covering" authority was stolen from husbands
and fathers by the devil and given to leaders in the Church.
The "Shepherding Movement" duped believers into thinking that being
"covered" would protect them spiritually. Christians were taught that
leaders spoke for God even if they were wrong. This resulted in much
abuse of ordinary Christians by leaders. This movement was thoroughly
discredited by exceptionally bad fruit. Nevertheless, because the
"covering" teaching was compatible with the "Dark Ages" model of the
Church, it was widely adopted to reinforce the hierarchal system.
As stated before, the second point in Pauls teaching of covering is
largely ignored but should not be as it has very strong implications that
contradict the present day teaching of "covering" in many churches. Here it
is:

Ephesians 5:21-22, Colossians 3:18, Titus 2:5, 1 Peter 2:13, 1 Peter 3:1

47

While the husband is properly head of his wife and his unmarried
daughters, the head of the husband is not a spiritual authority in the
Church but Christ Himself.
Remember that Paul started this teaching on "covering" by writing:
...Christ is the head of every man and the man is the head of a woman....
(1 Corinthians 11:3b)
This passage does not mention another earthbound human "exercising
authority over" the man as his "covering." In stark contrast to the idea that
a man needs a human being to be his "covering," Paul actually
discourages the man being "covered" by an earthbound human authority.
Paul writes about a "covered" man by stating:
Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying,
disgraces his head. But every woman who has her head uncovered while
praying or prophesying, disgraces her head. (1 Corinthians 11:4-5a)
The man should be "uncovered" or he "disgraces his head, who is Christ.
If a Christian man has an earthbound human authority "exercising authority
over" him, he disgraces Christ. There should be nothing on a man's head
because Christ is his "head." The same passage that says that a woman
should be "covered" by the authority of her husband says that the mans
head should not be "covered."
The later verses in this passage state that a womans longer hair and a
cloth "covering" for her head were used to illustrate - by means of a symbol
- her husbands or fathers authority over her. The husband or father, on
the other hand, was not to be "covered" in the same manner as a wife or
daughter or he disgraces his 'head, who is Christ.
In summary, these verses have said that a woman should be "covered" but
a man should not be "covered." There has been no mention of another
man acting as a "covering" for a man at all. In fact, this passage forbids the
man being "covered" like his wife is "covered". The passage also makes it
abundantly clear that Christ is the head of every man. Paul continues the
context with some of the same ideas.
For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off;
but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head
shaved, let her cover her head. For a man ought not to have his head

48

covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the
glory of man. (1 Corinthians 11:6-7)
Again, the same two ideas emerge from this passage but this time with a
precise explanation from Paul. A woman - a wife or a daughter - should be
"covered" but a man "ought not" to be "covered." Again, Paul forbids a man
to be "covered" like the mans wife or daughter is "covered". Paul gives a
clear and reasoned biblical explanation of why this is important. He says
that the man "ought not" to be "covered" like his wife is "covered" since he,
the man, is "the image and glory of God." His wife is to be "covered"
because she is "the glory of the man." Again, there has been no mention of
the need of the man to be "covered" by another mans authority. In fact,
this kind of authority has been forbidden a second time and Paul has
explained why this is so. Pauls explanation certainly contradicts modern
reasoning on this issue. Paul explains why a woman should be "covered"
and a man should not be "covered" in the next two verses in the passage:
For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed
man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake.
Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head,
because of the angels. (1 Corinthians 11:8-10)
Paul elaborates on why a woman, a wife, needs to be "covered" and why a
man should not be "covered". It is because the woman was created for the
mans sake and not the reverse. (The man was not created for the
womans sake.) The wife is to be "covered" by her husband because she
was created to be his helper. The man, on the other hand, was not created
to be the helper of his wife and therefore should not be "covered" as the
wife is "covered".
The implications of Pauls explanation are obvious. In the family
relationship, the womans role is to help her husband as Eves role was to
help Adam. However, in the Church, this is not so. No man was ever
created to emulate a "covered" wife to a leader. Additionally, no man or his
wife is "covered" by a leader in the Church. Obviously, the spiritual
relationship between a husband and wife are of a different nature than
relationships between believers in the Church.
What Paul has taught is not evident to many today who have been taught
to believe nearly the opposite of what these verses actually say. The
hierarchal church - in some places - is actually reversing what this passage
teaches. The hierarchal Church is often subverting the authority of
husbands and the submission of wives. They do this by silence on this
49

subject or by teaching popular feminist doctrines. At the same time, they

may teach that men need to be "covered" by the authority of another,
supposedly higher-ranking, man or woman.

Feminist Teachings in the Church

Feminists - religious and secular - who want to debate the spiritual
authority of a husband over his wife would like the above verse to mean
something else. Attempts at redefining and changing the meaning of the
word "head" from "authority" to something else are unconvincing when all
the information is considered. If the normal meaning of "head" as
"authority" is taken seriously, then the above passage means that there is
a one-on-one chain of spiritual authority in the family. God is in authority
over Christ. Christ is in authority over the man. This man - who is a
husband - is in authority over the woman, his wife. This is rather orthodox
and is the traditional understanding of the arrangement of authority in the
family. While believers should not "exercise authority over" each other in
the Church, men do properly have a protective "covering" authority over
their wives and daughters.
The author of this book is a graduate of a well-known liberal seminary. He
was a theologically conservative Spirit-filled believer when the Lord called
him to attend this seminary to obtain a Master of Divinity degree. Truthfully,
the author was unable for a season to understand why God called him to
this seminary in particular. Today, the answer is abundantly clear. So
many things that he was exposed to in liberal and feminist theology he can
identify today in the teaching of many institutional "brick and mortar"
churches that think of themselves as conservative and perhaps as a
renewal church.
There were many Christian feminist professors in this seminary. Male
and female liberal professors identified themselves proudly as "Christian
Feminists." Decades later these same liberal and feminist teachings have
found their way into many churches and writings of popular authors.
Generally speaking these leaders do not identify themselves publically as
"feminists" but are teaching exactly the same things that those liberal
"feminist professors" were teaching.
Many Christian women have been influenced today to think that they have
no special obligation to the authority of their husband. Likewise, many men
have been taught that they need a special "covering" relationship of
authority with a more mature Christian man, usually a pastor or someone
who thinks of himself as an apostle. However, it is clear from this passage
that the idea and terminology of "being covered" or "covering" does not
50

apply to men at all. There is absolutely no encouragement in the New

Testament for a man to be "covered" by anyone. In fact, there is repeated
discouragement for men to be "covered" in the only passage where
"covering" is taught. The true biblical teaching of "covering" found in this
passage is this:
Wives and unmarried daughters are required by God to be spiritually
covered by the authority of the man who is their husband or father. On the
other hand, mature men should never accept a similar specific relationship
of spiritual authority over them by any person. Christ alone is their
"covering". Men should practice mutual submission to all believers and not
simply to a single authority. The Church and its leaders were not given by
God this kind of "covering" authority over another man's wife and children.
Husbands and fathers cover the women in their families and not the
Church. When no husband or father is available, then the most mature and
concerned male, a brother or uncle, in the family becomes the "covering"
authority; the head of the family. Family relationships always take priority
over relationships in the Church. After all, the family was created before
the Church. The Church does not "cover" women. The Church does not
"cover" men either, despite their submission to each other.
While being a good husband and father certainly helps to equip men to
lead in the Church, it is not the same thing. Members of a local expression
of the Church are not wives and immature children to the leadership of the
local assemblies. When authorities in the Church try to "exercise authority
over" or "cover" people in the Church, they will almost always cross over
into domination and will usurp the God-given authority of husbands and
fathers over their families.
While Christ has unlimited authority over believers, church leaders have no
legitimate, God-given call to "exercise authority over" believers. Believers
cooperate with leadership - as the Lord leads them - and everyone
practices mutual submission one to another. No one thinks in terms of
submitting only to those believers "above" them. Christ is the only One
above them. Nevertheless, each believer should listen seriously to their
brothers and sisters when they offer input.

Examination of Submission in the Church

When the concept of "covering" is extended improperly into the Church,
several problems in relationships emerge. Church leaders can exercise
authority in improper ways. For instance, they may require covenant-like
relationships and bind the believer specifically to themselves. This is
improper, but is relatively common. The New Testament calls believers to
51

a much more general submission, not just to a single leader but to all
leaders and believers in a region. We must see the church beyond the
walls of the institutional "brick and mortar" church and not allow ourselves
to be committed only to those believers who fellowship in the same
building. We need to know the believers who live near us. This will become
increasingly important as we near the end of the age. We should not
accept the artificial and unwholesome divisions created by "membership"
to church organizations.
We should no longer accept the idea that a periodic meeting of leaders is
the "unity of the Church." As long as leaders purposely seek an exclusive
commitment - membership - of believers to their group, they create
structural disunity in the Church. This kind of disunity originated in the Dark
Ages. This kind of disunity is continued by believers continuing to meet in a
Medieval pattern. The unity of the Church will only be realized when
believers in the same neighborhood know each other well. When believers
can fellowship - without institutional barriers and without exclusive
submission to hierarchies of leaders - we can begin to declare unity.
There are six places where the New Testament speaks of the submission
of a wife to her husband 5 . The New Testament only speaks to this issue of
submission to leaders in the Church in three places 6 . The traditional
church often places great emphasis on submission to leaders but is often
silent on submission of wives to husbands. This is certainly out of balance.
All three of the passages about submission to leaders reveal a general
submission that should be thought of as "cooperation." The first of these
passages is found in the Apostle Pauls writings. This passage was quoted
early in this book concerning house churches. It is quoted here in
reference to submission - subjection - to leaders. Paul writes:
Now I urge you, brethren (you know the household of Stephanas, that they
were the first fruits of Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves for
ministry to the saints), that you also be in subjection to such men and to
everyone who helps in the work and labors. (1 Corinthians 16:15-16)
This passage encourages the believers to be submitted to leaders in the
area of Achaia. It also encourages them to be submitted to everyone who
5

Ephesians 5:21-22, Colossians 3:18, Titus 2:5, 1 Peter 2:13, 1 Peter 3:1
and while 1 Corinthians 11:3 does not use the word "submit," it declares the husband as "head"
of the wife. It could be considered a seventh encouragement for wives to submit to their
husbands.
6
1 Corinthians 16:15-16, 1 Peter 5:5, Hebrews 13:17

52

is helping in the work. This is a much more general kind of submission.

The submission here is not like the one-to-one personal submission of a
wife to a husband. It is not a specific submission to a single leader and
then an ignoring of every other leader and every other person in the
Church. It is not a one-on-one submission to a personal pastor.
This idea of having a personal pastor is relatively new in the Western
church and was popularized by the Shepherding Movement. No one ever
heard of the idea of a personal pastor before 1970. The "covering"
teaching is not revealed by this verse about submission to those in
ministry. The call to submission here is more an encouragement toward
cooperation with leadership and everyone else than it is anything like the
one-on-one concept of "spiritual covering". This passage calls believers to
submit to everyone who helps in the work and labors. The idea of mutual
submission is present here. Everyone submits to everyone and not just to
leaders.
The second passage is similar:
You younger men, likewise, be subject to your elders; and all of you, clothe
yourselves with humility toward one another, for God is opposed to the
proud but gives grace to the humble. (1 Peter 5:5)
Here again, there is a general encouragement to submit to leadership in
the church. However, there is no hint of a one-on-one "covering"
relationship for men that would be similar to marriage here either. That
meaning must be improperly read into these verses. These verses say that
the younger men are to be subject to the elders. The word "elders" is
plural. The younger men are to be subject to all the elders not just a single
elder as their "covering" and ignore all the rest of the elders. We need to
keep in mind that the Early Church was not divided into separate groups,
each having their separate elders. Elders were scattered over a region.
Submission to elders would have to be extended today to acknowledge
those elders locally that do not attend the same worship service that we do
but are local to us. We cannot legitimately refuse to acknowledge them
and only submit to the leadership in our group.
According to this passage, all men, elders included, are to take a humble
posture to each other. This is consistent with the idea that everyone, elders
included, submits to everyone in the body of Christ. There was no oneway, top-down, layer-by-layer hierarchy of authority in the Early Church. In
the Early Church anyone could speak for Christ to anyone else. From the
least to the greatest, they were all called to humbly submit one to another.
53

Indeed, this call to mutual submission is found in various places in the New
Testament. For example, the passage that calls twice for the submission of
wives to husbands begins with this:
and be subject to one another in the fear of Christ. (Ephesians 5:21)
Clearly, Pauls understanding of the submission of a wife included the
understanding that a wife could speak to her husband on behalf of Christ.
If a husband loves his wife as Christ loves the Church, then he will take
seriously what she has to say. No one is exempt from submitting to the
most humble believer in the Body of Christ. All know Him from least to the
greatest. All can speak on His behalf.
This class-free, hierarchy-free, attitude was a distinguishing characteristic
of Christians in the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire was so aware of
hierarchy and class distinctions that they derisively called the Christians
levelers. These unbelieving critics meant that the Christians leveled
everyone by treating everyone exactly the same. Christians did not see
other Christians as being an authority over them. Leaders did not "exercise
authority over" other believers. (Strong evidence of this attitude can be
easily found in the Book of James.)
The third passage on submission to leaders is found in the last chapter of
the book of Hebrews. It reads like this:
Obey your leaders, and submit to them; for they keep watch over your
souls, as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not
with grief, for this would be unprofitable to you. (Hebrews 13:17)
Once again, there is no evidence of submission to a single individual as a
personal pastor or personal apostle. This passage calls for submission to
the leaders. Once again, it is "leaders" in the plural. This is a call to submit
to all the leaders in a region.
There were no divisions of the Church like we have today. We have to
remember that when this was written that the Church was not divided into
separate fellowships of believers each with a separate group of elders. The
church consisted only of house churches scattered over a region with a
few acknowledged elders mixed into possibly hundreds of small house
churches. Therefore, it is not a call to submit only to those leaders at a
particular building and then to ignore the other leaders in the region. The
passage is encouraging submission to all the leaders in a region.

54

The English translation of this verse may make it appear to be more

authoritarian than the Greek text seems to indicate. Unfortunately, the
word "obey" is a poor translation of the Greek word "peitho." This Greek
word means "to convince by argument." The second part of the English
translation is somewhat better but still reads somewhat authoritarian. Here
the Greek word translated "submit" is "hupeiko" which is often translated
as "yield," "surrender," or "submit." A better translation of the first part of
this verse is:
Allow your leaders to convince you and yield to them.
This translation allows for a reasonable discussion between a believer and
a leader. It is not calling for a lock-step, mindless obedience to any
particular command of a leader. It is calling believers to careful
consideration and dialogue with a leader over what the leader thinks that
the believer should do. The decision still belongs to the believer.
This verse is not giving permission to a leader to dominate or make all the
decisions of a believer. It is encouraging the believer to be responsive in
receiving counsel and to know that the leader has a responsibility before
God to offer the counsel. The believer still needs to make his or her own
decision without undue pressure from a leader.
Those leaders captured by the Medieval system often focus on their
authority. This focus creates authoritarian teaching. Being "under authority"
to a leader is often a favorite teaching in traditional churches. Many
leaders adopt titles and even priestly garments that display their
ecclesiastical authority over others. Of course, this is just what Christ was
saying that His true servants would not do. Christ's disciples were not to
"exercise authority over" other believers.
Christs true servants would not focus upon their authority over others
since they have none. They should focus on their service to others. It is not
possible to be a servant to someone and "exercise authority over" them at
the same time. These two ideas are mutually exclusive of each other.
Servants do not "exercise authority over" anyone they are serving. Christ
drew a strong distinction between these things and we need to keep that
distinction clear in our minds. Christ never suggested that it was possible
to do both at the same time. In fact, He strongly warned about not
"exercising authority over" other believers. He strongly encouraged leaders
to service at the same time.
Some leaders claim to be able to serve an institutional "brick and mortar"
congregation in the Medieval pattern and remain a servant in spirit. This is
55

unquestionably true. There are some unusually strong individuals who can
accomplish this. However, the Medieval system will have its corrupting
influences even on these strong individuals of good character as it does on
all those who sit in the chairs.
Good leaders might embrace the theology of "the priesthood of all
believers, but in practice, they will not demonstrate it. The people in the
chairs will not see themselves as the equal of the leader in matters
pertaining to God. The truth of their inequality is continually demonstrated
by the meetings of the Medieval system. The person acting in the "priestly
role" needs to seriously consider if continuing in that role is demonstrating
the actual truths of the New Testament to believers. Proper belief is not
just taught. False beliefs are also "caught" by continual exposure to
practices that do not conform to the truth.

Technology Gives Capacity to Dominate

In the New Testament era, the ability of apostles and other leaders to
"exercise authority over" believers would have been very limited. There
were no modern conveniences to communicate with people over a
distance such as telephones and email.
The church consisted of multitudes of house churches spread over large
geographic areas with very few appointed elders and overseers mixed into
these areas. Only a very few house churches among thousands had an
overseer or elder leading it. The capacity to know what was going on in
each house church was limited by distance.
The best that the apostles ministering in another area could do in many
situations was simply to write a letter that would eventually circulate
through the house churches. Their capacity to know about the everyday
affairs of churches and to affect individuals and individual situations was
greatly limited. A leader in that day would have had to entrust house
churches, believers, and their decisions to the Holy Spirit. He would have
had no other choice. This reliance on the Holy Spirit by leaders was a
strength of the Early Church's leadership.
Unfortunately, a leader today can be involved directly and intimately in
many situations that he should not be involved in at all. In other words, the
capacity of a leader to communicate through technology today highly
increases his capacity to dominate in ways that the Early Church could not
have imagined.

56

What About Accountability?

Another accusation suggests that the institutional hierarchal arrangement
of top-down authority produces accountability but house churches do not
have accountability. However, top-down authority structures do not create
accountability. The only thing that produces accountability is honesty.
Without the character trait of honesty, there is no accountability in any
system. Seeing yourself "under the authority" of another does not mean
that you have a close relationship with them. If the one "exercising
authority over" you has authority to harm your reputation or punish you in
some way, it may be even more difficult to be accountable to them.
Recent history abounds with examples of public figures - in top-down
authority structures - who were supposedly under the authority of others
but were exposed in serious sin. The authority structure did not produce
accountability. Only honesty could have done that. Having your submission
to an authority "on paper" for others to observe is not the same thing as
being honest enough to admit to a problem before the exposure happens.
On the other hand, house churches have a much stronger relational focus.
People who attend house churches are very interested in having
friendships with the other people who attend. It is much easier to be
accountable with people who you know care about you. It is much easier to
be honest with your peers and ask for help than be honest with someone
in an authority structure that you may not see as your friend. It is much
easier to be honest with a friend who is a peer than it is with someone who
may use their position to punish you.
Because numbers are intentionally smaller in a house church, people know
each other better and can often perceive when someone is having a
problem. People in house churches have a much harder time hiding their
sins than people in larger "brick and mortar" churches. If they are absent
from fellowship in a house church for a time, their friends will notice. If
there is a change in their personality due to involvement in sin, their friends
will notice. So the bottom line is this: House churches create a much better
atmosphere for accountability than do institutional "brick and mortar"
churches.

High Standards for Morality

Both house churches and institutional "brick and mortar" churches will
have stated high standards for morality. However, the larger an institutional
"brick and mortar" church is, the more likely that leadership is unaware of
what is actually happening in the lives of the people who attend. Large
churches often have a percentage of people living in serious sin. Beyond
57

this, large "Medieval" churches attract unsaved men and women whose
primary purpose for being there is to develop a relationship with someone
of the opposite sex. Sometimes these are people of bad character. They
go from relationship to relationship and create havoc in the lives of people
they encounter in a large church. Often a large church has little interest in
identifying these victimizers and disciplining them. In general, large
"Medieval" churches avoid doing what the New Testament says about the
discipline of sinning members.
Institutional schools of ministry often teach formally and informally that the
leader of a church should not become friends with congregational
members. The concern is that a leader will not be able to "exercise
authority over" a friend. Beyond that, there are concerns that if
congregational members discover his weaknesses, that he will lose
respect.
The traditional leader who lives this way is very vulnerable to temptation.
He doesn't have peers in his congregation who know him and can tell
when he needs help. These kinds of solitary leaders are not protective at
all of the people that they are serving. They may even enter into temptation
and become the victimizer. There is an ongoing exposure of ministers of
large churches using their position for sexual seduction. In fact, the week
that this paragraph was written, there have been five individuals in ministry
in the Dallas-Fort Worth area exposed in serious sexual sin in three large
churches in this region. This has all been from "brick and mortar" churches
in the area. All of them have a hierarchal type of authority structure.
One pastor in our region was recorded privately begging a 17-year-old girl
in his congregation to take off her clothing so he could see her naked. She
recorded two hours of this shameful behavior - without him knowing - on
her smart phone. She repeatedly tells him that what he is asking is wrong
and particularly wrong since he is a preacher. Additionally, three ordained
young ministers - working for another "brick and mortar" church with
hierarchal authority - were exposed using underage girls in the youth group
for sex. A third "brick and mortar" church in the region revealed this week
that they had hired men who were undocumented child molesters to care
for children in their nursery.
It was a bad week for the reputation of the Church in this region. It was a
bad week for those families that had children involved in these incidents. It
is apparent that a good deal of this kind of sinful and abusive behavior
goes on in "brick and mortar" churches that teach "covering" and criticize
house churches for a lack of accountability. There is likely to be much
58

more of this kind of secret sinful behavior happening in these kinds of

churches at any given moment. Unfortunately, those that promise the
protection of submission - the ministry - have often been those who do the
victimizing.
This is not to suggest that all of those in ministry in traditional churches are
victimizers. This is simply not true. The vast majority of those in ministry
are people of good character. Nevertheless, the idea that accountability
and protection is produced by mindless submission to the authority of
those in ministry is simply false.
Abusive, secret, and sinful things are less likely to happen in a house
church. They often happen where there are lots of people who are
relatively unknown by others. They happen where things can go on in
secret. In a house church, people get to know each other and develop trust
at a level where there are few secrets. A smaller group means fewer
opportunities for those who have a tendency towards abuse of others. A
larger church means more opportunities for sinful behavior to go
unnoticed. Without doubt, house churches are much safer for families than
larger, more institutional "brick and mortar" churches.

Willingness to Compromise
In the 1990's, I had several uncomfortable lessons about how willing
ministers of "brick and mortar" churches are to compromise the truth and to
conform to the expectations of the public. Perhaps this comes from
pressure to fill the seats in order to be able to pay the bills. These lessons
occurred after I had retired from the US Army Chaplaincy and had started
traveling in healing ministry.
One of these lessons happened at a large Christian conference. I was one
of six men who were speakers at this six-day conference. One of the
meetings was a board discussion on five-fold ministry. This occurred on
the first day. A woman in the audience asked about our views concerning
the submission of women to their husbands. Each of the men expressed
his view on the subject. The first four men expressed the popular feminist
view on the subject. Each of them challenged the validity of the idea that
wives should submit to their husbands. Of course, this view is very similar
to what the non-Christian American culture believes about these things.
When it was my turn to speak, I expressed what I believed to be the proper
biblical view of the subject. I even quoted from the New Testament
passages. I was aware that this view was likely not to be popular at this
conference. Nevertheless, I spoke what I believed to be the truth on this
59

matter. I was openly "booed" from the audience and the first four men each
immediately and strongly disagreed with me loudly and publicly. The fifth
man said that he agreed with me somewhat but saw the other perspective
as well. He spoke only about three sentences.
During the next few days of the conference, I had an amazing amount of
healings and miracles happen despite being unpopular. There was an
unusual amount of grace to minister by the Spirit. The healings and
miracles did seem to change people's opinion of me. Nevertheless, not a
single person said that they agreed with me during the first four days of the
conference.
I did not really expect what happened next. On the last day of the
conference, each of the four ministers - who had publicly disagreed with
me - approached me separately. Each of them said that they actually did
agree with my perspective. I asked them why they had not said that
publicly. Each of them said in their own way that they were afraid. They
knew it was the unpopular position. They were intimidated by the idea of
the majority of the people not agreeing with them. I suspect that there were
quite a few of the people attending that did agree with me, but they were
also intimidated by how I was treated.
This was a real eye-opener for me to discover that ministers would say
publicly something that they did not believe privately simply because it was
the popular position and acceptable in the culture. These ministers had
allowed me to take the heat of standing for the unpopular position even
though they believed it also. They had even openly criticized what I had
said despite believing it themselves. They were willing to lie about what
they believed and be unfairly aggressive with me all for the sake of
remaining popular. Remaining popular does seem to be necessary to get
people to come to a "brick and mortar" church. Filling the seats is required
to pay the bills.
Getting my mind around this willingness to compromise was tough but it
was another lesson in how the Medieval system influences ministers to
compromise with the culture. It is only the strongest ministers who function
in this system that are able to maintain their integrity and still publicly
speak the truth.
A second lesson occurred when I was invited by some other ministers to
go to a ministers conference that was several hours drive away. There
were six of us going together to this ministers conference at a large
church. We arrived and found that there were about sixty ministers that
had come to this conference. We fellowshipped for a half hour or so and
60

then the meeting began with the senior minister of the church leading it.
After an hour or so, the senior leader introduced two men from Africa. He
told us of how fruitful they were and how powerful they were in the Spirit.
He told us in several ways that these men were the modern-day
equivalents to "Peter" and "Paul."
The senior leader told us that we needed to let these men lay hands on us
to receive an anointing of power. Who can be opposed to this? So all sixty
of us lined up close to the altar to let "Peter" and "Paul" lay hands on us.
"Peter" and "Paul" started at the opposite end of the altar from where my
minister friends and I were standing. As these two men laid hands on the
ministers, they were falling down one after another. Falling down is
believed to be evidence that the power of the Holy Spirit has come and as
a result the person cannot remain standing. Because my friends and I
were at the other end of the altar, we got to see all the ministers fall down.
Then the two African men arrived at our group. All of the men that I came
with fell down when "Peter" and "Paul" laid their hands on them. However,
when these African Christian ministers got to me, I didn't feel a thing. I felt
nothing different. I felt peaceful, but I generally feel peaceful. Well, "Peter"
and "Paul" got much louder and ended up pushing me backwards but not
down. The senior minister began to rebuke me saying, "You need to yield
to the Spirit, brother." I replied, "I would be glad to yield to the Spirit, but I
don't feel anything particularly different." Thankfully, after I said that "Peter"
and "Paul" gave up. It was embarrassing and confusing to be the only one
standing and the only one who did not feel anything.
Well, we finished the meeting and I felt the whole time that I had been
marked as rebellious and unspiritual. I was glad to be done and to be
heading home. I didn't say much on the trip home because my mood was
not good. This situation had discouraged me. However, the other five
ministers did a lot of talking. In fact, each of them admitted that they had
not felt anything when "Peter" and "Paul" had prayed for them. I sat there
quietly taking this in. They had pretended to feel something by falling
down. All five of them had conformed to the expectation and had misled
everyone at the time, including me, that they had felt something. I quietly
took in that they really didn't think that doing this was wrong either. It made
me wonder just how much compromising and deception each of them was
willing to practice in their ministry to obtain the approval of people. It also
made me wonder if any of the sixty ministers had felt something. It was an
eye-opener. The Medieval church system seems to create ministers that
are willing to compromise their integrity to obtain the approval of people. I

61

am sure that this is not true of all, but it was certainly true of the majority in
this situation.

How Finances Affect Churches

Having a church building can affect what a minister teaches from week to
week. If the building was bought through a loan, the pressure that servicing
this debt and maintaining the building exerts on the church leadership can
compromise the message of the Gospel. Often "brick and mortar" churches
become highly focused on attendance. This is because they know that
attendance is necessary for the finances of the church to continue. They
are aware that an empty seat means no giving coming from that seat.
The leadership may be tempted to compromise controversial aspects of
the Gospel to obtain a larger attendance. They may decide to opt for what
appears to be a popular message and go completely silent on important
but controversial things. They may neglect calling the Church to
repentance from sin. This neglect of the full message of the Gospel may
increase attendance for a time but those exposed to it will not be
experiencing the full blessing of God. They may ignore sin in the
congregation because of fear of controversy affecting their attendance and
ultimately affecting the finances of the Church. They may even resist
dealing with sin in the congregation that is impacting the families for fear
that dealing with it will affect their finances.
When these kinds of churches feel financial pressure, they will sometimes
resort to using pragmatic methods to encourage giving. They may even
hire specialists to increase the giving. They may resort to "give and get"
financial messages and repeatedly encourage their congregation to give a
tenth of their income. Giving a tenth of a person's income is part of the
Medieval system but was not a practice of the Early Church. Christ did not
teach His disciples to tithe their incomes. None of the Apostles of Christ
teach tithing of income.
Tithing of income is extremely easy for the rich and very difficult for the
poor. The rich tithe out of their abundance. The poor tithe out of their
poverty. It is not the same. The poor often need what the church takes.
The rich do not need what the church takes. Tithing is an unrighteous Dark
Ages practice and needs to be abandoned completely 7 .

See the author's books "The Children are Free" and "Take the Tithing Test" for a detailed,
biblical analysis of the doctrine and practice of tithing. They are available on
www.allnationsmin.org.

62

House churches seldom ask for giving except when they are helping the
poor or perhaps to quietly help one of the Christian families that is
attending. All may "chip" in for food and other expenses. They do not need
tithing to pay the cost of buildings and salaries. They are free to support
evangelism, house church planting and helping the poor. They are free to
use their money to bring in gifted ministries to serve a community of house
churches and support public meetings that reach the lost and other
Christians.

Not Affected By the Economy

House churches are not dependent upon giving. Therefore, they are much
more immune to what is happening in the economy. On the other hand,
downturns in the economy often cause serious pressure on institutional
"brick and mortar churches. In fact, the last downturn in the American
economy caused many "brick and mortar" churches to close their doors.
Their properties were foreclosed on by the banks that loaned them money
to build the building. All of that money that God's people invested was lost.
This is a clear example of bad stewardship of the money that people give
to the Lord. We should never build buildings for worship. We should build
people to worship. Our money should not go to service debt on buildings. It
should go to affect the lives of people in a direct way.
Those who have spent their lives in ministry and have invested themselves
in serious study should still be honored by the Church. However, there is
no example in the New Testament of a servant of Christ receiving a salary
to do ministry. It is possible for these servants of Christ to be supported by
house churches as they serve them as were the original apostles.
However, service to house churches should be freely given according to
Christ's command.
As you go, preach, saying, 'The kingdom of heaven is at hand.' "Heal the
sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons; freely you
received, freely give. "Do not acquire gold, or silver, or copper for your
money belts, or a bag for your journey, or even two tunics, or sandals, or a
staff; for the worker is worthy of his support. (Matthew 10:7-10)
Spiritually gifted Christians should freely give because what they have was
freely received from God. In this passage, Christ disconnected spiritual
gifts from obtaining money. It does seem evident that Christ's apostles
were willing to support themselves with secular work when the situation
demanded it. Gifted people should also be willing to do this if necessary.

63

No believer should see bi-vocational ministry as inferior. Bi-vocational

ministry is superior in our view. A bi-vocational minister may actually be
working in a non-ministry situation to maintain his integrity before God.
Too many in "full-time" ministry do ministry for their personal benefit. If
persecution came, many would quickly abandon service to the Church.
Too many in "full-time" ministry have attached a fee to their service to the
Church. If the "brick and mortar" church quit paying their salary, many of
them would abandon the people of that church and move on to another
paid situation. Likewise, the offer of a higher salary will often cause a
minister in the Medieval system to abandon his present congregation to go
to a new one. They often state that they had a "call from God" to the
present congregation. However, it is apparent that more money creates a
"call from God" to the new church and negates the previous call. We have
seen this happen many times.
Christ says that anyone who serves Him when it is convenient and
lucrative is a "hireling." There are probably very few people who become
ministers in the Medieval system that do so for money initially. However,
this system does seem to have a corrupting effect on many of them. It is
only a small minority of ministers that do seem to maintain their integrity in
the Medieval system. The unfortunate truth is the institutional "brick and
mortar" church has many "hirelings."
These ministers are largely responsible for the accusation that ministers
are "in it for the money." Unfortunately, this is a true description of many
serving in the traditional Church. Even the unbelieving world can see that
this is an ongoing failure of the "brick and mortar" Church. The Church
would be better served if these ministers for hire would abandon ministry
now and find an ordinary job.
Those that serve in house churches have purer motives. They are not
doing it for money even though there may be temptation. I once had a
leader - a successful church planter - in the house church movement call
me to discuss financial aspects of ministry. He was motivated by the books
that I have written on this subject 8 . He described the churches that he was
serving as not consistently giving to his ministry. He said that they seemed
to do what they wanted to do in the area of finances. He asked me "What
can I do to control the flow of finances in these house churches?" I said to
him "The solution is really simple. You have to cause them to become
traditional churches." He and I both laughed. The truth was that he was

The "Paid in Full" series of three books available on www.allnationsmin.org.

64

troubled by the freedom that people in house churches have in the area of
finances. He was tempted to attach a price tag to his ministry.
Christ has better solutions for ministry than compromising like this. While
the Church should financially support legitimate ministry, that ministry
should be only be dependent upon the Lord and not the Church. Failure to
keep this focus creates a compromise of integrity and financial
manipulation of the Church.
People in house churches do what they choose to do in giving. Leaders
can appeal to them as did the Apostle Paul. Like Paul, a leader can teach
them to be generous but he cannot legitimately take away their freedom to
make their own financial decisions before the Lord. Freedom of choice is
one of the greatest strengths of house churches.

In Summary
The original pattern of the Church was house churches. Christ Himself
demonstrated that pattern and commanded His apostles to continue that
pattern. The Early Church completely evangelized the hostile Roman
Empire without buildings and without layers of hierarchal authority. These
institutional "brick and mortar" ways of thinking and doing church began to
happen in the Dark Ages. The Dark Ages way of doing church is not
superior to the way that Christ taught the Church to function. It is inferior in
many ways. It will not protect us from deception and is likely to increasingly
compromise the truth to attract a larger audience. It will not be what the
Church needs for prosperity, fruitfulness, and survival as we near the end
of the age. While we may have some serious adjustments to make and
some learning to do, this pattern of church life will produce abundant life. It
will be what Christ and His Church needs it to be. Let us quickly return to
the original pattern of church life. The sooner that we do this, the better
that we will be prepared for the end of the age.
We are in the process of establishing the Guardian House Church
Fellowship. If you are looking for advice about how to move from your
present situation to a house church situation, there will be those who are
highly experienced in these matters to provide help and consultation. The
network will be a non-authoritarian, value-based network. If you find
yourself in harmony with the values expressed in this book, we invite you
to further examine the network by joining our email update for the network
by clicking on this link and adding your email address:
Guardian House Church Fellowship Email Update Form

65

Bibliography
On House Church
Houses that Change the World: The Return of the House Churches.
Simson, Wolfgang (2001). This is a short but insightful book that explains
the differences philosophically and in practice between three kinds of
churches. They are the traditional "brick and mortar" church, the Cell
Church and the House Church. This book seems to have some filler at the
end to make it longer but the first half is excellent.
Reimagining Church: Pursuing the Dream of Organic Christianity.
Colorado Springs: Viola, Frank (2008) A constructive follow-up to Pagan
Christianity; explains the purpose of Christian fellowship, spontaneous
church meetings (1 Cor. 14:26), and the priesthood of all believers (1 Pet.
2:9). This book has an extensive bibliography of house church literature.
Rethinking the Wineskin: The Practice of the New Testament Church.
Frank Viola. This book examines the divine genius of Jesus Christ and His
Apostles in growing organic, indigenous church communities in houses.
Viola balances fresh biblical exegesis with a broad range of scholarship
and church history.
On the Medieval Church System
Pagan Christianity? Exploring the Roots of Our Church Practices.
Frank Viola and George Barna (2008) A scholarly work based on the Bible
and church history that dismantles institutional sermons, pastors, pulpits,
church buildings, Sunday clothes, tithing, seminaries, etc. This book
reveals that many of these practices are based on a mixture of the New
Testament with Old Testament and Roman pagan practices.
On Abusive Authoritarian Teachings and Practices
Apostolic Fathers and Spiritual Bastards, Roger Sapp, All Nations
Publications, (1999) This book focuses on what the Bible teaches
concerning modern apostles and the relationships with other Christians.
Reviews the authoritarian teaching - that sometimes leads to abuse - that

66

each Christian must have a spiritual father or they will be illegitimate.

Available on www.allnationsmin.org.
Beware of Spiritual Wolves, Roger Sapp, All Nations Publications, booklet.
Characteristics of false ministry drawn from current research on wolves.
Reviews the Bible's many references to wolves as types of false ministry.
Particularly focuses on the well-known characteristic of wolves as being
authority-conscious and the hierarchal authority in a pack. This is
contrasted to very little authority consciousness in a flock. Available on
www.allnationsmin.org.
Who is Your Covering? A Fresh Look at Leadership, Authority, and
Accountability. Frank Viola. This book dives into what Rethinking the
Wineskin began. Viola looks at the current leadership model (CEO-type
professional clergy or "pastors, ministers, or priests") and examines the
practice in light of the New Testament model of Jesus in Matthew 20:2028. He offers clear exposition from the Bible and practical insights from his
own experiences in house churches.
On Medieval Financial Practices Such as Tithing
The Children are Free, Roger Sapp. This is the third book in the "Paid in
Full" series. It analyzes biblically the various points of the Medieval
teaching of tithing to show that it is a practice borrowed from the Old
Testament and twisted to justify persuading Christians to pay a tenth of
their income. The first book Radical Trust in God for Finances focuses on
the radical financial teaching of Christ to His disciples. This essential
teaching is often overlooked and neglected in the Medieval church system
because it does not tend to increase the offering. The second book
Miracles, Money and Motives is about what the Early Church and the
Apostles seemed to know about finances that the modern Church seems
not to know. All books are available on www.allnationsmin.org.
Take the Tithing Test, Roger Sapp. This 18-page booklet has ten "TrueFalse" questions that are common misconceptions in the tithing teaching.
Each question is answered biblically and shows that the tithing teaching
makes many assertions that are not true biblically. On the last few pages is
a collection of quotes from ancient and modern leaders of the Church that
show that tithing is not a New Covenant doctrine or practice. Available on
www.allnationsmin.org.
Tithing: Low-Realm, Obsolete and Defunct, Matthew Narramore,

67

On Women in Ministry and in the Family

The Christian Family, (1970) Larry Christenson. This is a book that
strongly supports the New Testament model of family relationships. It is
unaffected by feminism. It is dense with good information on family life.
However, we note that there are certain statements - in passing - that
seem to support tithing. Some statements may not be totally consistent
with being Christ-centered on healing or deliverance ministry.
The Spiritually Gifted Woman, A Scriptural and Theological Study of
Women in Ministry. (1998) Roger Sapp. 210 pages. Considers honestly
what the Bible teaches concerning women in ministry and reviews the
twisting of Scripture that feminist authors are offering. Available on
www.allnationsmin.org.
On Apostles and Five-fold ministry functioning in the Church
The Last Apostles on Earth, (1995) Roger Sapp. 182 pages. Considers
what the New Testament teaches in light of the functioning of modern
apostles. Available on www.allnationsmin.org.

68

About the Author

Roger Sapp received Christ as his Savior and Baptizer in the Holy Spirit in
a Youth With A Mission coffeehouse ministry for American soldiers in
former West Germany in 1972. For next twenty years his experience of
physical healing was unpredictable, unreliable and mysterious. In 1993, he
had a breakthrough that changed his understanding of healing by focusing
him on Christ as the perfect example of healing ministry. Since that time,
more than twenty-five thousand healings, deliverances, and creative
miracles have accompanied his ministry
.
For the past fifteen years, he has been equipping other believers to do
Christ-like healing. He is the author of ten books and many booklets and
articles. His most popular books are Performing Miracles and Healing, a
comprehensive biblical guide to developing a Christ-like supernatural
ministry, Beyond a Shadow of a Doubt, a shorter book dealing with the
doubts that block healing and Paid in Full, a radical series of three books
on grace in biblical finances.
His background includes the Eagle Scout award earned in his youth. He
has served local churches as an elder, assistant pastor and pastor. He has
been an Army Artillery officer, a prison, hospital, troop and pastor chaplain.
He honorably retired from the U.S. Army in 1993 and was a theology
professor until 1997. He holds earned Bachelor, Master of Divinity and
Doctor of Philosophy degrees.
Many have commented favorably on Dr. Sapp's relaxed style of ministry.
He was frequently a guest speaker at the Toronto Airport Christian
Fellowship. He has appeared as a guest on John & Carol Arnott's
television program. He has been a guest on several national Christian
radio programs including Sid Roth's Messianic Vision and his television
program Its Supernatural. He has spoken in more than 300 churches
worldwide during the last two decades.
Dr. Sapp presently travels full-time in ministry by invitation of local
churches, conferences and house churches. He is associated with and
recommended by the leaders of several networks of churches. He has
been happily married to his high-school sweetheart, Ann for more than
forty years. Ann, a registered nurse has frequently traveled with Dr. Sapp.
They and their adult children and their spouses live in the Dallas/Fort
Worth area. Dr. Sapp can be reached at 1-817-514-0653, All Nations

69

Ministries, P.O. Box 620, Springtown, Texas 76082 USA, website:

www.allnationsmin.org or by email at contact@allnationsmin.org.

70