"35,000 denominations, which are spoken against in scripture."
Yeah. So it doesn't prove they follow "men" whereas your group does not.
"Yes I know that is why when I was studying the New Testament Church I spoke to several denominational leaders and put several propositions to them. They all said they agree with me, but....then they defended non biblical denominational practice."
Spoken with all 35,000 of these followers of men have you? These blanket condemnations are very troubling to me. I find it to be very unbecoming of a Christian. Believe me, I love to champion the non-denominational cause. Lets not say they don't seek to follow Jesus as a whole. Finger pointing at 35,000 Christian groups as followers of men is ridiculous.
"And it is not to say they ARE following God. When a church relies on degrees, not the Holy Spirit it is obviously not following God and his word. "
All 35,000 groups rely on degrees or are you thinking of one in particular? However, another troubling accusation that they "rely" on degrees as if faith, love and discipleship are completely ignored for the sake of a degree.
"In most cases it does because they identify themselves as Lutheran, Wesleyan, RC, AOG etc. When I am asked what church I go to (I don't go to any church as I am the church) I say "His Church" and they ask "What church is that" and I reply "the one that Jesus said he would build.""
Yes, it must be nice to be in such an exclusive group. You know, if someone were on here saying that you were just following a man made American house church fad that started a few decades ago instead of being connected to an established tradition that stretches back for centuries... I'd defend you as well. I don't think we are in the position to make such judgments.
"George Barna Research Ministry"
Can u be any more specific?
"Again, you are making an assessment through third hand information."
So being part of a house church means I can accurately determine the evangelistic effectiveness and maturing capability of the movement across all of America? Come on now...
"Simple. The New Testament Church met in homes up to a maximum of 30 people. They met daily so they were on top of everyone needs as a result. With no building to finance, the money was used to help people. The central point of their meeting was the daily meal and that meant you did not invite people to church, you invited them into your home for a meal, which is one of the best forms of evangelism known. You had fellowship with people all evening, not just an hour and with the back of their heads. Everyone is a priest so all are invited to give and build up the body of Christ. This was easy because they did not have sermons they dialogued to name just a few. And they had no bible so they relied on the teaching that came via the Holy Spirit and prayer was a priority, not just something done once a week for an hour."
Well I've been involved with small churches of around 30 who have long since paid off their building and had fellowship meals weekly and everyone played a role in the gatherings. This did not make them more healthy than a church with a mortgage or more generous. Some of these small gatherings were some of the most unhealthy churches I've ever seen. I'm just saying that these things do not always equate a healthy gathering of believers. Nor does a mortgage equate an unhealthy gathering.
"And there are plenty of people who think otherwise hence the burgeoning house church movement. I prefer to keep away from "my estimation" in matters of this kind as that is just a personal opinion."
Yes I have noticed that most of your comments imply a divine perspective on the motives of millions. I try to distinguish my personal opinions from divine judgments and I think assessing denominations and house churches is a very subjective and opinion laden task. I'm comfortable saying both groups have those who are misguided and both have authentic and sincere Christ followers.