How to Start a Home Church (Part 1)

Image

Reposted courtesy of Randy White Ministries

In my last article, I wrote about the difficulty your church will have finding a pastor in the future, especially if it is a small to medium sized church. In previous articles, I’ve written about why I couldn’t join most churches. With these kinds of problems, now it is time to write about How to Start a Home Church.

A Bible Believer’s Biggest Problem

Without a doubt, the largest number of emails, letters, and phone calls I’ve received over the past few years has been on the topic of finding a local church. I’ve literally received hundreds of these contacts, from all parts of the country. It isn’t just small towns, its big cities also. It isn’t just from secular-minded states, it is the Bible belt as well.

A decade ago, I would have just told these people that they were expecting too much, that there was no perfect church, that they should just join, serve, and make the church better. But a lot has changed in 10 years, both in church society and in my own belief system. I used to be a pragmatist, an “already/not yet” kingdom builder, a “pick and choose your Bible translation to suit your needs” preacher. I never went all-out for secular church-growth methods, but I certainly did my fair share of “whatever it takes” kind of leadership. And it worked. It worked because there are certain principles of group dynamics that attract crowds and keep them.

But now I loath manipulation. I can’t stand soft music that sets the “evangelistic” mood. I groan over yet-another-invitation to the Pastor’s leadership conferences. I get disgusted when churches have book studies that they call Bible studies. And I am so sick and tired of hearing sermons that abuse the Word of God (if they even use the Word of God.) I don’t have a problem with churches teaching about marriage or money or even how to win friends and influence people…but I don’t want the sermon or the Sunday School Bible Study class to be used for those things.

So, in short, I’m now sympathetic when people tell me they can’t find a church.

You might need a home church if …

There are legitimate reasons to start a home church. In fact, while I don’t know the immediate circumstances, my great-grandfather started a church in Cheyenne, Wyoming in 1944, a church that still exists today (I am one of 62 great-grandchildren of Frank W. Garber). I am almost certain that he, along with my grandparents and other family members, started the church for doctrinal reasons. They were from the Brethren Church, and doubtless wanted like-minded fellowship in their worship.

Like my great-grandfather, you might need a home church.

  • If doctrine matters to you, you might need a home church.
  • If fellowship with like-minded believers matters to you, you might need a home church.
  • If the study of the Word matters to you, you might need a home church.
  • If yet another “awesome” program of dazzle and glitter makes you roll your eyes, you might need a home church.
  • If you’re not interested in a multi-gazillion dollar building program, you might need a home church.
  • If you’ve grown weary of perfect music by hired musicians or plastic-smiled primadonnas, you might need a home church.
  • If you’ve been kicked out of your church (“Brother, we think you would be more comfortable somewhere else”) because you asked too many questions, you might need a home church.
  • If your pastor doesn’t know your name, and never will, you might need a home church.

Each of these issues is often problematic in today’s show-biz church environment (though almost every church denies that it is a problem, and many of the people in the pew don’t get it).

So, if you need a home church, what should you do?

(Tomorrow: Steps to Starting a Home Church)

Randy White Bio

Randy White Ministries began in 2011 as an online and radio Bible teaching ministry. Today, the ministry is focused on producing verse-by-verse Bible teaching resources for individuals. White has 25 years of pastoral experience—including 12 years at First Baptist Church of Katy, Texas, where he ministered to a large congregation and preached numerous times each week.

Discussion

I was a member of a small church (record attendance of 70) from 1980 - 2000. For frame of reference, that instance of 70 in attendance was in the mid-80’s, on the church’s 10th anniversary, and to this day that record has never come close to being challenged. Although we rented space on Sundays, one could label the church a “Home Church,” since for much of my time there we met in the pastor’s living room on Wednesday nights.

Since 2000, I have been a member of a large church (record attendance of around 4,000). For frame of reference, the church has seen significant growth in just the past three years, and those instances of around 4,000 in attendance are recent: both Easter and Christmas of 2016.

Having spent 20 years in a small church, and soon 20 years in a large church, I can testify to the pros & cons of both. Both have advantages, and both have disadvantages. One is not by default better than the other. My conviction is that the assertion that there is some (hypothetically) best size for a church is not only divisive and irresponsible, it is biblically indefensible.

Your perspective on large (“mega”?) churches is refreshing and I appreciate it. There is a stereotype against large megachurches (or pseudo-mega churches) for a reason. For example, I recently listened to a sermon from a local pseudo-mega church near my home. It was blasphemy. It epitomized moral, therapeutic deism. It was not Christianity. Your experiences give me hope that they’re not all bad.

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.

Regarding the article, I find myself agreeing with just about every point, but then remembering what our Catholic friends will note; the Reformation did indeed open things up to almost infinite varieties of churches. I’d love to find myself somewhere in between; sound doctrine but not divisive.

Along other lines, it strikes me that a lot of what we debate regarding the advantages of various church sizes is more or less the psychology of groups in various sizes. It would be really nice to….say…have churches where the ministry of the Word of God transcended this.

And yes, sin nature messes things up, sure, all of that….just dreamin’ I guess.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

It seems to me to depend on what is meant by a “home church.” If one means a properly organized church with a pastor(s), ordinances, discipline, etc. that meets in someone’s home that is one thing. If, on the other hand, it means a group of believers who are meeting together without biblical organization, structure, and purpose, that is entirely something else.

Home churches by my experience lack leadership, ordinances, discipline etc. I am sure that is not always the case however and would not be surprised to see a trend towards home churches in the future.

Excerpt:

“If you’ve grown weary of perfect music by hired musicians or plastic-smiled primadonnas, you might need a home church.”

–––––––––––––––––

Because skilled musicians are a BAD thing, right?:

“Shout for joy in the Lord, O you righteous!
Praise befits the upright.
Give thanks to the Lord with the lyre;
make melody to him with the harp of ten strings!
Sing to him a new song;
play skillfully on the strings, with loud shouts.”
(Psalm 33:1-3 ESV)

The Levites, all who were skillful with instruments of music,” (2 Chronicles 34:14b ESV)

“The number of them along with their brothers, who were trained in singing to the Lord, all who were skillful, was 288.” (1 Chronicles 25:7 ESV)

Etc.

Or is the author’s beef that the skilled musicians are “hired” or “plastic-smiled primadonnas,” in which case his remarks come across as simply petty. Speaking as someone who attends a large church that has “perfect music” at its services (both traditional and contemporary), such assertions don’t ring true at all.

We have a couple of worship/music pastors who are obviously paid, but anyone else on the platform playing an instrument or singing during any of our services is a volunteer. Having said that, we do have some musicians who are professional musicians in their day jobs (two violinists who play professionally: think “Minnesota Orchestra” for an example), but their service is without remuneration at church.

“Plastic-smiled primadonnas?” Well, we probably have some sort of unwritten rule against scowling…..but then, I believe our singers & musicians are genuinely happy to be doing what they do before the Lord.

Larry:

Randy White is a Southern Baptist who has a passion for teaching expositionally, and values deep Bible teaching (e.g. he’s the CEO of Dispensational Publishing House). His sarcastic remarks are probably best taken as referring to shallow, evangelical maga-churches with little to no bible teaching, shallow topical messages, and an entertainment culture.

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.

Excerpt:

“If you’re not interested in a multi-gazillion dollar building program, you might need a home church.”

––––––––––––-

You’re a member of a church of 700 in attendance, and the church leadership proposes constructing a new 130,000 square foot building, that includes a 1,000 seat auditorium, at a cost of over $22,000,000.

If you’re opposed, is it time to leave that church?

(Note: this is a real church that some SI members know well, and many are at least familiar with.)

I’ve never been in that position, but my inclination would be to spin off into a new church plant rather than build. If the existing building is crumbling to bits and needs to be repaired/replaced, that is another story.

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.

I’m talking about Fourth Baptist (Plymouth, MN), circa the mid-1990’s.

When they voted to move from north Minneapolis to Plymouth in the mid-1990’s, Fourth’s attendance was 700 (as stated in their debt-retirement celebration last Spring).

The building opened in 1998, at a total cost (land, architect’s fee, construction, etc.) of $14,800,000 (equivalent to over $22,000,000 in 2017 dollars, adjusted for inflation):

http://www.mcgough.com/projects/educational/fourth-baptist-church-school-and-seminary/

The final payment was made on the property last Spring.

[Larry Nelson]

Excerpt:

“If you’re not interested in a multi-gazillion dollar building program, you might need a home church.”

––––––––––––-

You’re a member of a church of 700 in attendance, and the church leadership proposes constructing a new 130,000 square foot building, that includes a 1,000 seat auditorium, at a cost of over $22,000,000.

If you’re opposed, is it time to leave that church?

Except for the price, sounds a lot like 4th around 2000, and it strikes me that in that situation, or others like it, you’ve got a lot of questions about how a church ought to operate in a given city. I’ve got a lot of respect for Pastors Maclachlan and Morrell for realizing that unless you can count on having a man of Pastor Clearwaters’ abilities, along with a city that resembles Minneapolis in the 1960s and 1970s, you’re going to have a lot of trouble holding all the things together (camp, radio station, seminary, Pillsbury, day school, etc..) that Clearwaters did.

On the flip side, lots of buildings the same size are silent testimony to the fact that many pastors couldn’t see past the end of their own noses….

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

For those not that familiar with 4th, the old building was huge, had a fair amount of lead/asbestos/etc., to remediate, and was definitely in the rougher part of town. It was sold to the school district, and the school district ended up, I believe, spending a tremendous amount of money on lead and asbestos removal before realizing that population was down about 140,000 people (25% of total or more) since 1950. They ended up tearing it down a few years ago—financially they appear to have taken a bath on the whole deal.

More or less, 4th moved to where their members already were. Driving in from St. Louis Park wasn’t a big deal in the 1960s, but the problems got pretty bad by the 1980s, and members in places like Maple Grove were decidedly less enthusiastic about driving to get mugged.

It’s a good study on the advantages and risks of going big vs. splitting, in my view, just like Bethlehem or Larry’s church. Lot of good out of old 4th, but a lot of suburbs that might have had a good local Baptist church ended up having their Baptists drive to Minneapolis.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

It just seems way too easy to shoot from the hip and indiscriminately condemn “multi-gazillion dollar building program(s)”.

So I thought I would toss out an example of “a multi-gazillion dollar building program” which I believed nobody on SI would so quickly & unequivocally denounce. (I certainly would never begrudge Fourth their current building: I’ve witnessed first-hand their good stewardship & use of it on numerous occasions.)

Under the right circumstances, there are good, valid reasons for churches to build new (even “multi-gazillion dollar”) buildings.

I’m picturing the author of the OP article jeering at Solomon, “That new temple in Jerusalem is MUCH too big and expensive…..”

I think you’re right - there are good and valid reasons for a church to expand and build, rather than plant a new one. Each church knows its own situation. However, I think Bro. White (the author) is really aiming at pseudo-mega churches looking to build an empire.

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.

A church’s leadership proposes constructing a new auditorium with the following specifications:

“Capacity: 6,000 people, with 5,500 seated, 500 standing room; dimensions: 146’ long, 81’ wide, 68’ high”

Critics express outrage. “Conceit!” some cry. (The young pastor has no objections.)

––––––––––––––––—

Time to leave this church?