- by Rob Oxenbridge May 30, 2006 in response to

http://home.iprimus.com.au/pruephillip/#HomeWorship

 

Before beginning I would like to reference Prue’s own words and see how she measures up to them. The following is from her site:

• Take scripture out of context. Force meanings out of scripture that scripture never intended. Whole sections of text or even scriptural themes can be disallowed by other texts. Classic examples include "speaking in tongues;" "saved once, saved forever" and "the Sabbath is the seventh day." See Bible Quoters.
• Argue by implication. Master the half-truth to make deceitful assumptions. An example is to point to a human founder to imply the way was not founded by God. See The Implications of Knowledge.
• Repetitively quote/isolate scripture. Sometimes the more people memorize highly specific verses the less comfortable they are with the bible in general. For instance Paul mentions being saved by grace twenty one times. Some of these verses are quoted to “prove” that we need not bother with works. But Paul mentions the works that we must do over eighty times. See Bible Quoters.

According to Prue, VOTs take scripture out of context, argue by implication and isolate scripture. Fair enough, these are not the traits one should expect from a Christian. I agree that we should avoid these cardinal sins of exegesis (the work of drawing meaning out of scripture - as opposed to eisegesis, the act of reading pre-conceptions into scripture). So let’s see what her claims are regarding home worship. Quotes from her site will be in blue.

 

This section of her site is opened with the following scripture:

 

“Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”  Mathew 18:20

 

Does this verse have anything to do with home worship? Let’s see the entire context.

 

"“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.” " (Matthew 18:15-20, ESV)

^[i]

This whole passage lays out the steps of dealing with an unrepentant Christian in the context of the congregation. Prue quotes the final verse from the passage to underline home worship. But as an honest reading reveals, the text does not have fellowship/worship meetings in mind. It is discussing the authority of the congregation to deal with certain situations. They have this authority because wherever “two or three are gathered in my name, there am I (Jesus) among them.” This passage does not even give a location of where such a meeting should or could take place. We can draw an inductive conclusion from this passage that Jesus is among two or three gathered in His name for the purpose of fellowship and corporate worship. But we cannot draw any conclusions regarding where such meetings take place.

 

Prue does not actually tell us so we must assume that she uses this verse in this particular section (Home Worship) as some kind of proof about meeting in homes. But she draws no explicit connections and provides no reason why this verse is even quoted. Probably the safest comment we can make is that if she is trying to defend “home worship only” then she has isolated a scripture without regard for its context and drawn an implication that is not warranted. This highlights again how the task of responding to this site is so difficult. Coupled with inconsistency and unfounded generalizations is this tendency towards vagueness which leaves the reader thinking, “So what are you saying? If you have a point, make it!”

 

At the end of His ministry Jesus held a home service where he met with His disciples. The liturgy was a talk followed by prayer and hymns.

 

Another fallacy liberally employed by Prue is that of anachronism. Instead of engaging a historical account on its own terms in the context of its culture, the reader attempts to understand the account in light of their own culture and context. It seems reasonably clear that Prue is claiming that just as modern F&Ws hold home services, we have here an example of Jesus doing the same – the unstated assumption that what the F&W do is really only following Jesus’ example. What is typically called The Last Supper (Mt 26:17-30; Mk 14:12-26; Lk 22:7-38; Jn 13:1-17:26) involved the celebration of the Passover, the institution of the Eucharist and teaching and prayers and hymns. For those wishing to learn more about how the Passover was celebrated at that time, the internet will provide abundant information. I will recommend these links:

 

http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=554

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11512b.htm

 

The Passover was to be celebrated in the home. It was a time of somber reflection and joyous celebration. It included a meal, stories and readings, prayers and songs. History shows that the form and content of the Passover has changed little in Judaic observance from the time of Christ until today. It is a celebration of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. We know that Jesus’ parents went up to Jerusalem every year to celebrate (Lk 2:41). Jesus’ also celebrated it with His disciples – that was after all one of the reasons they gathered for what is called the Last Supper. John 2:13 also implies that Jesus had celebrated it yearly. We can deduce this as true from another line of thinking – Jesus perfectly obeyed the Law. Observing Passover was a Lawful requirement. Therefore, Jesus observed Passover as required.

 

Although the Law was fulfilled and the believer freed from their obligation to observe it in letter, we find  Paul encouraging believers to celebrate Passover in a new way that  finds its fulfillment in Christ, the true Passover Lamb (1 Cor.5:7). This exhortation was part of a corrective message to that church in order to encourage them to raise their ethical standards. That Paul is encouraging them to celebrate Passover in a better way requires the fact that they were celebrating it at all. In other words, Christians continued to hold the Passover and Paul’s teaching was not to reject their celebration, but to correct the manner of its observance. It was an annual event – not a weekly meeting.

 

Additionally, though, our Lord instituted the Eucharist (from Greek eucharisteo – thanksgiving) as a celebration for His followers. In it believers find a symbol and substance of what Christ has achieved. There is very little in scripture regarding the ongoing observance of the Eucharist. Paul discusses it for the Corinthians in his first letter in 10:1-22 and 11:17-34. What is highlighted by its absence is any restriction on where and how often. We could make a lot of assumptions, but it isn’t wise to go too far beyond scripture. The practice of the early church in history shows that it was originally part of a communal meal called the agape (love) feast. This is evidently in view in Paul’s comments to the church in Corinth. Over time the Eucharist became detached from the communal meal. Philip Schaff comments similarly:

 

In the apostolic period the Eucharist was celebrated daily in connection with a simple meal of brotherly love (agape), in which the Christians, in communion with their common Redeemer, forgot all distinctions of rank, wealth, and culture, and felt themselves to be members of one family of God. But this childlike exhibition of brotherly unity became more and more difficult as the church increased, and led to all sorts of abuses, such as we find rebuked in the Corinthians by Paul. The lovefeasts, therefore, which indeed were no more enjoined by law than the community of goods at Jerusalem, were gradually severed from the Eucharist, and in the course of the second and third centuries gradually disappeared.^[ii]

 

Of the ante-Nicene church (the period between the end of the apostolic age and the Council of Nicea circa AD100-325) he writes:

 

The celebration of the Eucharist or holy communion with appropriate prayers of the faithful was the culmination of Christian worship. ^400 Justin Martyr gives us the following description, which still bespeaks the primitive simplicity: ^401 "After the prayers [of the catechumen worship] we greet one another with the brotherly kiss. Then bread and a cup with water and wine are handed to the president (bishop) of the brethren. He receives them, and offers praise, glory, and thanks to the Father of all, through the name of the Son and the Holy Spirit, for these his gifts. When he has ended the prayers and thanksgiving, the whole congregation responds: ’Amen.’ For ’Amen’ in the Hebrew tongue means: ’Be it so.’ Upon this the deacons, as we call them, give to each of those present some of the blessed bread, ^402 and of the wine mingled with water, and carry it to the absent in their dwellings. This food is called with us the eucharist, of which none can partake, but the believing and baptized, who live according to the commands of Christ. For we use these not as common bread and common drink; but like as Jesus Christ our Redeemer was made flesh through the word of God, and took upon him flesh and blood for our redemption; so we are taught, that the nourishment blessed by the word of prayer, by which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation (assimilation), is the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus."^[iii]

 

The communion was a regular and the most solemn part of the Sunday worship; or it was the worship of God in the stricter sense, in which none but full members of the church could engage. In many places and by many Christians it was celebrated even daily, after apostolic precedent, and according to the very common mystical interpretation of the fourth petition of the Lord’s prayer. ^{403[iv]}

 

It is largely uncontroversial that the primitive church continued to observe the annual Passover as a celebration of Israel’s deliverance from Egypt foreshadowing and finding fulfillment in the believer’s deliverance from the destruction of sin through the true Passover Lamb, Jesus Christ. Also apparent is that the church held no uniform understanding of how often the Eucharist was to be observed. My reason in presenting this information is to defeat Prue’s assumption that the weekly meeting of the F&Ws is in any way an emulation of an example allegedly set by Christ. Jesus did not start meetings in the home. He observed the festivals and feasts under the Law and He instituted the Eucharist for His followers. As we have seen, the practice of anachronism leads to unwarranted conclusions – it inevitably assumes the truth of what it sets out to prove instead of allowing the evidence to fall where it may. So we have here a scripture taken out of context and an argument by implication. Prue is not doing so well by her own standards for critiquing ex-members of the F&W group.

 

The disciples continued to meet on the Sunday, as opposed to the Sabbath (Saturday.)

 

It is true that the disciples met on Sunday’s, but not as opposed to meeting on the Sabbath. Again, we will let the historian Schaff speak:

 

Besides the Christian Sunday, the Jewish Christians observed their ancient Sabbath also, till Jerusalem was destroyed. After that event, the Jewish habit continued only among the Ebionites and Nazarenes.^[v]

 

The venue was their homes. There was no longer any "worldly sanctuary."

 

The primitive church was predominantly composed of those with Judaistic backgrounds (followers of Judaism) and as it spread out across the world the ratio naturally changed. But since Prue is focusing on the example of that earliest church then we should look more closely at it. Firstly, those earliest Christians did not see themselves as starting a new religion. In Christ, they found the revelation and fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets. They were largely considered a sect of Judaism. Even the Jews who complained about Paul usually did so under the accusation that he was subverting the Law, not starting a new religion. This is important because we will see that Christians from Judaism largely continued their old customs. They did not suddenly avoid the synagogues and the Temple and start to meet predominantly in homes. As is more likely, the community of believers found that meeting in homes was a natural addition for the location of fellowship as the excited early community grew at a staggering rate (Ac 2:31-47).

 

Prue gives no scriptural references for her claim that the meeting venue was now the home and no longer in a “worldly sanctuary”. If by “worldly sanctuary” Prue is referring to the Temple, then she is setting herself in opposition to Christ who had a very high view of the Temple. He drove out those who had profaned it with their trade and called it “my Father’s house” (Jn 2:14-17).

 

We have no disagreement that members of the church met in their homes. The following scriptures confirm it - Acts 2:2, 5:42; Romans 16:5; 1 Corinthians 16:19; Colossians 4:15 and others. But believers also gathered in other places – the Temple court (Ac 3:1,5:42; 22:17), synagogues (Ac 18:8; 19:8), the hall of Tyrannus (Ac 19:9), beside a river (Ac 16:13), on a mountain (Jn 6:3) and more. If we look to extra-biblical records of the time we find other places as well.

 

There will be immediate objection to the inclusion of the synagogue as a place where believers gathered to meet. I would suggest the primary reason for the objection would be based on the deep distinction between Judaism and Christianity in our day. That distinction did not exist for the early church. Again, I will quote from Schaff:

As the Christian Church rests historically on the Jewish Church, so Christian worship and the congregational organization rest on that of the synagogue, and cannot be well understood without it.

The synagogue was and is still an institution of immense conservative power. It was the local centre of the religious and social life of the Jews, as the temple of Jerusalem was the centre of their national life. It was a school as well as a church, and the nursery and guardian of all that is peculiar in this peculiar people. It dates probably from the age of the captivity and of Ezra. ^641 It was fully organized at the time of Christ and the apostles, and used by them as a basis of their public instruction. ^642 It survived the temple, and continues to this day unaltered in its essential features, the chief nursery and protection of the Jewish nationality and religion. ^643

The term "synagogue" (like our word church) signifies first the congregation, then also the building where the congregation meet for public worship. ^644 Every town, however small, had a synagogue, or at least a place of prayer in a private house or in the open air (usually near a river or the sea-shore, on account of the ceremonial washings). Ten men were sufficient to constitute a religious assembly. "Moses from generations of old hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath." ^{645 [vi]}

Christian worship, or cultus, is the public adoration of God in the name of Christ; the celebration of the communion of believers as a congregation with their heavenly Head, for the glory of the Lord, and for the promotion and enjoyment of spiritual life. While it aims primarily at the devotion and edification of the church itself, it has at the same time a missionary character, and attracts the outside world. This was the case on the Day of Pentecost when Christian worship in its distinctive character first appeared.

As our Lord himself in his youth and manhood worshipped in the synagogue and the temple, so did his early disciples as long as they were tolerated. Even Paul preached Christ in the synagogues of Damascus, Cyprus, Antioch in Pisidia, Amphipolis, Berea, Athens, Corinth, Ephesus. He "reasoned with the Jews every sabbath in the synagogues" which furnished him a pulpit and an audience.

The Jewish Christians, at least in Palestine, conformed as closely as possible to the venerable forms of the cultus of their fathers, which in truth were divinely ordained, and were an expressive type of the Christian worship. So far as we know, they scrupulously observed the Sabbath, the annual Jewish feasts, the hours of daily prayer, and the whole Mosaic ritual, and celebrated, in addition to these, the Christian Sunday, the death and the resurrection of the Lord, and the holy Supper. But this union was gradually weakened by the stubborn opposition of the Jews, and was at last entirely broken by the destruction of the temple, except among the Ebionites and Nazarenes.

The reasons Christians gathered in all these different places and felt no compulsion to restrict themselves will become clearer as we lay a foundation for the reasons believers gather. One last direct quote will be answered before we move on with the larger task of the topic of worship (how, where, when, why, what).

 

The reference to buildings "not made with hands" did not exclude homes, it referred to buildings dedicated for worship.

 

This is a commonly (mis)used verse employed by 2x2 apologists (I should remark that I distinguish between genuine inclusive Christians within the group of F&W and those whose only agenda seems to be the defense of a particular methodology, which I summarise as 2x2ism). What is the context for starters?

 

"Now while Paul was waiting for them at Athens, his spirit was provoked within him as he saw that the city was full of idols. So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the devout persons, and in the marketplace every day with those who happened to be there. Some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers also conversed with him. And some said, “What does this babbler wish to say?” Others said, “He seems to be a preacher of foreign divinities”—because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection. And they took hold of him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, “May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? For you bring some strange things to our ears. We wish to know therefore what these things mean.” Now all the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there would spend their time in nothing except telling or hearing something new. So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything." (Acts 17:16-25, ESV)

 

Athens was home to temples for many gods in the Greco-Roman pantheons.  In responding, Paul proclaims the true God to which they have attributed a shrine as “The Unknown God”. He asserts that in contrast to the rest of the pantheon, the Unknown God does not live in man-made buildings (not that all the pantheon did) nor does He need the service of humans, since He is above all and the creator of all – as opposed to the gods of the pantheon who were just as much swept along by the tide of history as were mere mortals. This true God is the source of life and existence and can not be contained in the way the anthropomorphic gods of the pantheon were often characterized. In Judaic thought the Temple of Jerusalem was not typically understood as a place where God lived, but rather as a place where man and God connected, where sinful humans approached the presence of a holy and righteous God and where the national and spiritual identity of the nation was regulated through the rituals of the Temple cultus. Both Jew and Christian understood that God lives in the heart of the human, and that He is not contained by anything which is seen, especially not mere man-made buildings.

 

Paul’s proclamation no more denies the validity of a gathering of Christians in a church building than it does a gathering of Christians in a home – the context was the rejection of an anthropomorphic view of God and the assertion that He cannot be contained by buildings or appeased by the rituals of humans as the Greco-Roman gods could. God is God and is above and beyond all other things.

 

Solomon’s benediction perhaps says it best:

 

"Behold, I am about to build a house for the name of the Lord my God and dedicate it to him for the burning of incense of sweet spices before him, and for the regular arrangement of the showbread, and for burnt offerings morning and evening, on the Sabbaths and the new moons and the appointed feasts of the Lord our God, as ordained forever for Israel. The house that I am to build will be great, for our God is greater than all gods. But who is able to build him a house, since heaven, even highest heaven, cannot contain him? Who am I to build a house for him, except as a place to make offerings before him?" (2 Chronicles 2:4-6, ESV)

 

So let us make a point as clearly as possible. To any current Friend or Worker who has read this far and is still unsure:

 

No Christian believes that God lives in church buildings.

 

Just in case that wasn’t clear enough, I’ll say it differently:

 

Church buildings exist for the benefit of humans, not God.

 

They are places where Christians gather for many different reasons. All Christians understand very well that we, the church, are the current Temple on earth. It is in us that God lives, and it is in our individual and corporate expressions of love to the world that He is glorified and His presence made known.

 

Having made a few direct responses, we are going to move on to an examination of worship so that in seeing what worship is about we can make a more robust response to Prue’s fundamental assumption that “home worship” ought to be normative.

 

 

1. What is worship?

 

The English word “worship” is used in a broad way to translate the underlying Hebrew and Greek words. It’s worth first considering the English word. The following is quoted from Merriam-Webster, at http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/worship :

 

Main Entry: ¹wor·ship
Pronunciation: 'w&r-sh&p
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English worshipe worthiness, respect, reverence paid to a divine being, from Old English weorthscipe worthiness, respect, from weorth worthy, worth + -scipe -ship
1 chiefly British : a person of importance -- used as a title for various officials (as magistrates and some mayors)
2 : reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power; also : an act of expressing such reverence
3 : a form of religious practice with its creed and ritual
4 : extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem <worship of the dollar>

 

Definitions 2 and 3 are relevant to our study. Worship can either be a general term to refer to any act or expression of reverence to a being considered worthy. Or it can be formalized into a ritual or liturgy. In the Old Testament (OT), “worship” is used primarily to translate a form of the Hebrew word שָׁחָה transliterated as shachah which means “bow down”. The transliterated form of interest is “hištaḥăwâ  “to prostrate oneself” or “to worship.”^[vii] 

 

In the New Testament (NT) “worship” is used to translate several words.

 

53.53 σέβομαι ; σεβάζομαι ; εὐσεβέω ^a : to express in attitude and ritual one’s allegiance to and regard for deity—‘to worship, to venerate.’^[viii] (Transliterated as sebomai and forms)

 

17.21 προσκυνέω ^b ; κλίνω τὸ πρόσωπον εἰς τὴν γη̂ν (an idiom, literally ‘to incline the face to the ground’): to prostrate oneself before someone as an act of reverence, fear, or supplication—‘to prostrate oneself before.’ ^6[ix] (Transliterated as proskyneo and forms)

 

53.14 λατρεύω ; λατρεία , ας f : to perform religious rites as a part of worship—‘to perform religious rites, to worship, to venerate, worship.’ ^3[x] (Transliterated as latreuo and forms)

 

Biblically, worship includes attitude, behaviour, service, ritual, rites and descension or prostration (physically and psychologically). In other words it is a life response to God that shows itself in everything we do. We are the creature and He is the creator. To commit ourselves in total submission and veneration of the One above all is the only worthy response. But this response can be displayed in variant ways. This will become clear as we move on to see where and how believers worshiped.

 

 

2. Acts of worship

 

This list is just examples.  I want to stress that scripture is so replete with acts of worship in all their variety that these are included merely as typical and representative, not exhaustive:

 

Burnt offerings (Ge 22:5-8; He 10:2)

Bowing of the head (Ge 24:48; Ex 34:8)

Prostration (Ge 19:1; Jsh 5:14)

Tithing to the Levites and the needy (Dt 26)

Singing of praises – with or without instruments (Ps 66:4, Ps 150)

Dancing (2 Sa 6:14; Ps 150:4)

Burning of incense (Ex 30:1; Nu 16:17-18)

Prayer (He 5:7; Re 8:3-4; 1 Ti 2:1)

Public reading of the scriptures (Neh 8:1-8; 1 Ti 4:13)

Obedience (Ex 19:5; 1 Pe 1:22)

Celebrating the Passover (Ex 12:14; 1 Co 5:7-8)

Celebration of the Eucharist (Lk 22:17-20; 1 Co 11:23-26)

Gathering for fellowship and corporate praise (2 Ch 5-7; Ac 2:42-47)

Communal agape (love) feast (Dt 26:12; 1 Co 11:17-33)

Giving generously and joyously (Ac 2:44-45; 2 Co 9:6-15)

Thanksgiving (Ez 3:11; Ps 106; Ro 1:21; Ep 5:20; 1 Th 5:18)

Service according to giftings (Ro 12:3-8; 1 Co 12-14)

Fasting (Joel 1:14; Mt 6:16-18)

 

I could easily continue giving many more references for each of these acts of worship and also provide examples of other acts. But hopefully the point has been made. Worship is performed not only in directly glorifying God but also in our service to one another. Worship can take the form of obeying God, praising Him, serving according to our individual gifts and talents, singing and dancing to Him, giving thanks, reading the scriptures, ad infinitum. Perhaps the fact of the multi-faceted nature and expression of worship is what lead Paul to say:

 

"I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship." (Romans 12:1, ESV)

 

Worship is a way of life, not just an activity that occurs when believers meet.

 

 

3. Places of worship

 

Home (Ex 12:46; Ac 2:46)

Beside a river (Ac 16:13)

Synagogues (Mt 4:23, Ac 18:8, Ac 19:8)

Tabernacle (Ex 40)

Temple courts (2 Chr 5-7; Lk 1:9, 2:37, 18:10, 24:53; Ac 2:46, 3:1)

Wilderness (Ex 8:27)

Mountains (Ge 22:1-5; Mt 5:1, 28:16; Jn 4:20)

Door of their tents (Ex 33:1)

In a boat (Mt 14:33)

 

And many more. For those who are interested in searching this out for themselves you will be surprised by the variety of activities and locations for worship.

 

 

4. Conclusion

 

Worship is simply whatever we do that glorifies and venerates God whether on our own or with others. If worship is a lifestyle, then it follows that worship can occur wherever we are and in whatever form we offer it. It can be as simple as offering a prayer while having a shower, or listening to a CD of hymns and praise while driving to work or meeting with believers to have a Bible study. It could be as complex as attending the liturgy of a high church. It could be as monotonous as doing our day job in such a way that others cannot fault our ethics. It can be as profound and meaningful as contributing time and expertise to Medecins Sans Frontieres. It can be found in the corporate singing of a congregation and found in offering food and essentials to the poor and homeless.

 

If all these things are worship then it follows that worship can no more be contained to a home than God can be contained by a building. We must therefore conclude that Prue has intentionally or unintentionally reduced worship to something which occurs when according to her believers normatively meet in a home to sing hymns and share testimonies. The VOTs have not strayed from the biblical example of worship. Instead, Prue (and the collective F&W group) has restricted worship to a few small examples normally occurring in the home of a member. All in all, we are lead to conclude that Prue has failed to meet the standards she herself has set by which to critique the VOTs.

 

We believe Jesus says it best:

 

"Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”" (John 4:21-24, ESV)