DISCOVERIES OF EARLY HOUSE CHURCHES
REPORTED EVIDENCE OF EARLY HOUSE
What has been discovered? Let's begin with Christian architecture-that is--church buildings.
The Roman school declared that church buildings have been with us from the
second century on. It further taught that the church buildings erected during
the Constantinian era were built on the sites of previous church structures.
This dogma was universally accepted as fact. But recently, Christian archeology has gone back to reinvestigate ') those
sites.
The findings: Without exception, there was no church building or any
other kind of Christian meeting place to be found or buried beneath any
Constantinian-era church buildings. Archaeologists found either virgin land or
pagan temples or marketplaces or maybe even an occasional Pizza Hut, but no
evidence anywhere of any kind of building used for Christian gatherings.
The implications were staggering-and still are! They are a call to the whole
church, Catholic and Protestant, to rethink the nature of what we call
"church."
In one way, the most remarkable discovery was that of a single Christian
meeting place-the only one ever found from the preConstantine era! Even that was
not a church building, but a home that had been converted into a meeting place
for Christians. The site is a town in Syria with the odd name of Duro-Europa.
Exhaustive studies have been made of this building, The upshot is this: It was
just a home used in the mid-200s as a place for Christians to gather. One of
its peculiarities: A wall had been torn out between two bedrooms to make one
large room that would hold about seventy-five people sitting on the floor.
The point? Until Constantine, there was no such thing as a church building or
"Christian" architecture. A church building had never been dreamed of
in a dream. That which we know as the Christian faith was a living room
movement! The Christian faith was the first and only religion ever to exist
that did not use special temples of worship; it is the only 6'living room"
religion in hu¬man history.
House Churches in Africa
Let's look at yet another surprising archeological find.
Imagine, if you will, a group of Christian archaeologists plowing their way
through thousands of deeds and property records of towns and cities in North
Africa. These deeds, surveys, title changes and tax records an dated from A.D.
100 to 400, and often stated the uses being made of each building.
Some of these documents tell the name of the family that lived in each house,
the occupation of those employed, and their religion.
Some of these records also ten what other activities the building was used for
besides living quarters. ("Baking located here"; "Pots made
here," etc.) Lo and behold, from time to time notations are found that
say, essentially, "The Christian ecclesia sometimes holds meet¬ings in
this house"!
Exciting? Well, on some occasions archaeologists have been able to locate these
very sites and do a dig. The invariable findings: an ordinary house. No more,
no less. An scientific evidence of this era rises up to declare to us that the
Christian faith was utterly informal in its expression, and homes were its
base!
SO WHO ARE WE FOLLOWING?
NOT THE BIBLE--READ THE BIBLE. ACTS 2:41-47
41 "Then those who gladly
received his word were baptized. There were added that day about three thousand
souls."
WHERE DID 3,000 BELIEVERS MEET--THEY
DID MEET. MEETING IN HOUSES WAS NOT DUE TO PERSECUTION.
42 They continued steadfastly in the
apostles` teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and prayer.
43
Fear came on every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the
apostles.
44 All who believed were together,
and had all things common.
45 They sold their possessions and
goods, and distributed them to all, according as anyone had need.
46 Day by day, continuing
steadfastly with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread at home,
FROM HOUSE TO HOUSE...
With one accord in the
temple (Obviously there was no persecution at this time.)
(omoqumadon en twi ierwi).
See on Acts 1:14 for omoqumadon. They were still worshipping in the temple for
no breach had yet come between Christians and Jews. Daily they were here and
daily breaking bread at home (kat oikon)
which looks like the regular meal. They did take their food (metelambanon trophß). Imperfect tense again and clearly referring
to the regular meals at home. Does it refer also to the possible agapai or to the Lord's Supper afterwards as they had
common meals "from house to house" (kat oikon)?
We know there were local churches in the homes
where they had "worship rooms," the church in the house. At any rate
it was "with singleness" (apelothti)
of heart. The word occurs only here in the N.T., though a late Koin‚
word (papyri). It comes from apelhß,
free from rock (pelleuß
is stony ground), smooth. The old form was apeleia.
they took their food with gladness and
singleness of heart, 47 praising God, and having favor with all the people. The
Lord added to the assembly day by day those who were saved.
econteß carin). Cf. Luke 2:52 of the Boy Jesus. Added (prosetiqei). Imperfect active, kept on adding. If the Lord
only always "added" those who join our churches. Note verse Luke 41 where same verb is used of the 3,000. To them (epi to auto). Literally, "together." Why not
leave it so? "To the church" (th
ekklhsiai) is not genuine. Codex Bezae has "in the
church." Those that were being saved (touß
swzomenouß). Present passive participle. Probably for
repetition like the imperfect prosetiqei.
Better translate it "those saved from time to time." It was a
continuous revival, day by day. Swzw
like swthria
is used for "save" in three senses (beginning, process, conclusion), but here repetition is
clearly the point of the present tense.
One argument for plural elders and eldership rule is the use of plural word. "Pastors" and the eight pastors Paul called in Acts 20:17-29. We look at these verses in the view that the church in Ephesus met in one huge building. We know that there must have been a one very large church in Ephesus because of the success of the Apostle Paul's lengthy ministry there. However we know there was more than one meeting place, because Priscilla and Aquila had a house church. Hundreds of believers, maybe thousands, could not have met in their one house.
We are still in that chasm. Your own church may be as orthodox as sunshine in
July, but chances are that 50% to 90% of its practices are hand-me-downs from
Mr. Constantine. Small wonder that noted Temple University historian Franklin
Littell calls Constantine, "that great whale
that broke the net" pp. 55-56 Rutz, James H. , THE OPEN
CHURCH
