New Testament Church Proliferation Digest


Spreading the Gospel via House Churches



New Testament Church Proliferation Digest Wednesday, January 23 2002 Vol 02 : 018
[NTCP] new user... house church planter
RE: [NTCP] cell groups
Re: [NTCP] cell groups - short response to Sam
Re: [NTCP] cell groups - short response to Sam
[NTCP] Re: A "Just War"
[NTCP] Re: A "Just War"
Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War"
Re: [NTCP] cell groups
Re: [NTCP] cell groups
Re: [NTCP] cell groups - short response to Jim
RE: [NTCP] cell groups - short response to Jim
[NTCP] Re: Mentoring - I'm glad it's being discussed.
Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War" - reply to Mike
Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War"
[NTCP] A Re-Intorduction
Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War"
[NTCP] RE:NTCP TRINIDAD
Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War" - reply to Mike
Re: [NTCP] cell groups
Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War" - reply to Willard

Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 16:02:57 -0500
From: "Chris Stewart"
Subject: [NTCP] new
user... house church planter

Hello everyone... I just signed on to this discussion today. I am a church
planter, and have recently developed a vision for our church to be a network of
home churches. Our people are very excited about this vision. We launch our
first 3 house churches this week. I will write more later. I just wanted to see
how this thing works first.


------- <><><> -------



Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 16:49:13 -0500
From: Nathan Smith
Subject: Re: [NTCP] cell groups

Hi all. I was wondering if Michael can "re-hash" the biblical evidence that he
is referring to in regards to the NT model for how believers met and
fellowshipped together. This must've been posted a few months ago - before I
joined the email list, because I don't remember seeing it. Thanks.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Deborah
[mailto:deborah.millier(--AT--)juccampus.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002
3:36 AM To: ntcp(--AT--)homechurch.org
Subject: Re: [NTCP] cell groups Jim Rutz
wrote:

>The spirit of religion is more common among laymen. When you meet someone
>whose heart is eager for the things of God and yet he has an almost violent
>reaction toward rearranging his traditional church service in any way, you've
>probably got a mind that has been seriously invaded by the spirit of
>religiosity or religion.

I don't doubt that many works of the flesh are coaxed from us by malevolent
spirits. But not necessarily through direct "inva[sion]". Not only that, but
the above scenario is explained easily enough by the demonstrable fact that
most people simply prefer things to stay as they are. And
Evangelical/Charismatic Christians tend to be more conservative on almost all
points of life than most folks, attaching sacred significance to things most
mundane. This has been my observation.

>Let me take a few more paragraphs to give you my (non-inspired) version of how
>these demons came to roost in the church in history. Remember, this is just my
>opinion. But it seems to make sense to most house church folk I tell it
>to.....

Big on imagination, small on facts, Jim. A problem. Your scenario does not
address my supported position that "*free-form* house meetings" were not the
norm nor the ideal in New Testament times. One could get the impression from,
say, 1 Cor. 12-14 that in that age there was no pre-planned structure to
congregational meetings; that the H.S. would not have freedom to work in a
liturgical environment. But it would be the wrong impression. Scripture,
carefully studied, presents a different story.

Your "opinion" (see above) of course makes sense to a lot of house church folk
because they may be predisposed to accept it, earnestly desiring to be New
Testament in relationships, Spirit, form and expression, but not really having
a handle on the early church's practice and environment. My impression is that
they tend to operate more on romance with an idea(s) than on solid scriptural
and historical evidence.

>So an elder stands up and says, "Excuse me! This is not the time to bring up
>such matters. Please save that sort of thing for afterward thankew." And so
>the spirit of control drops into the midst of the fellowship like an African
>bull elephant and takes over.

It could be that-- it could be that they don't want any questions. That they're
closed to any honest inquiry. Or it could be that they have in mind a verse
such as, "But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way" (1 Cor.
14:40). And act accordingly. Culture often defines how and when people are
allowed to ask questions. How violators of social norms are policed should be
addressed in terms of appropriateness. But a desire to obey the Bible and,
within the covenant community, enforce its commandments is almost certainly not
demonic.

>the leaders learned to fear ... also the occasional visiting skeptic or
>critical Christian, people who would create dissension by questioning or
>arguing about the plainly artificial foundation of that ekklesia.

Skeptics and critical Christians like me? Right now? And an artificial
EKKLESIA like the one in the yarn you have been spinning? Jim, my basic
contention is that your foundational model does not fit the scriptural or
historical facts. We on this list keep going around the mulberry bush on such
things as whether or not "religion" is a dirty word in the Bible, whether
liturgy is wrong, whether all churches in the NT were house churches, whether
monoepiscopacy is unscriptural, etc. I try to present a researched and
substantial case which, in many cases doesn't fit with some people's paradigm,
and the evidence is simply ignored and people go on discussing the same issues
as if their position(s) are a given.

Ignoring the bogey man will not make him go away. The testimonies I've read of
abuse at the hands of some in the "institutional church " are more real than I
would like to admit; there is a great deal of evil that goes on in the guise of
our faith. But we must accept what the Bible itself presents to us as NT
Christianity and not simply react to injustices we have witnessed or
experienced. Within that biblical presentation we find "religion" as a good
thing, liturgy and the moving of the H.S. going hand-in-hand, early Christians,
and even Apostles, meeting in religious buildings, and mention of "*THE*
overseer" (Gk. TON EPISKOPON-- assuming a singlular church leader) not once but
twice in the writings of Paul (1 Tim 3:2; Tit. 1:7).

We can't just keep on discussing things as if that evidence did not exist. If
a person can shoot it down, well then, have at it. The floor is open. I for
one want the truth more than my views on display at the top of the heap. But
for you (Jim) to present a picture where these biblical practices are
symptomatic of demonic infestation is simply not fair. And furthermore, it is
not wise.

Michael
Jerusalem


------- <><><> -------



Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 18:33:44 EST
From: JAMESRUTZ
Subject: Re: [NTCP] cell groups - short response to Sam

Sam,

Just a tiny point: I think it's OK to, say, introduce someone with, "This is
John Jones, who is the pastor at First Church." That simply recognizes who he
is in relationship to the structure of his old wineskin. It doesn't condone the
structure.

Where I draw the line is addressing someone as "Pastor John" or "Pastor Jones,"
which implies approval of "pastor" as a TITLE. That's the sort of thing Jesus
condemned, saying, "Call no man your father."

Too fine a distinction?

Best,

Jim Rutz Colorado Springs


------- <><><> -------



Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 19:32:51 -0800
From: jferris
Subject: Re: [NTCP] cell
groups - short response to Sam

Dear Jim,

Shucks,... I was hoping to be called "Contractor Jay", and my wife, "Teacher
Carleen". Or maybe "On The Level Contractor, Jay" would carry a little more
weight. My oldest son thought perhaps by now he should be called "Son William"
, but I said that, if he did that, I would want to be called "Father Jay".
Actually I prefer "Dad", but even that isn't essential, just as long as he
calls me. A good "church hopping" friend of mine wants to be called an
"Itinerant Parishoner", which seemed fair enough to me. Back in 1980, I
watched Bob Girard deal with a church with Title problems, by ordaining the
whole congregation. It didn't go over to big with the deacon board, but then
you can't please everybody. How about the "Right Intimate Pastor Jones", now
there's an oxymoron for you.

Well, just a little tongue in cheek meditation to chew on.

Say, "Goodnight Gracie". Good Night.

Jay, ...at least, that's what my friends call me.


------- <><><> -------



Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 20:37:19 EST
From: TheologusCrucis

Subject: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War"

Sam,

I'm sorry, perhaps I'm confused and you could help me understand?

You wrote:

>>I understand your arguments, as I defended Augustine's premise of just war
in seminary, but it won't wash.>Just as you said, we as believers are a
different nation, and we need to wage war in the heavenlies, and not in the
wanton killing and murder in the natural.>We wage war on our knees and not with
napalm! We wage war through the words in our Bibles, and not bullets! We wage
war through healing and binding up wounds, and not in being the cause of them!
We wage war by turning the other cheek, and loving our enemy, and in feeding
and clothing and caring for him. Doesn't look like the war in Afghanistan to
me!!!! And it won't be that way in Iraq either!>No sir, we need to awaken from
our slumber and we need to repent and seek the mercy and forgiveness of God,
and not justify our wars by differientiating between secular and sacred! God
is the ruler of the universe and satan is the usurper! We have had the Kingdom
come, and it is a Kingdom of hearts, and it is extended one person at time!
Just how many Afghans have been won to Christ through this war? How many
Afghans love the west or the US more now because of this war? Just how many
tears has Jesus wept interceding for us as we battle a spiritual war with the
weapons of flesh?! How many rivers of tears has He shed for the dead that we
are responsible for?>I ache just thinking this through.Sam,

I'm sorry, perhaps I'm confused and you could help me understand?

You wrote:

>>I understand your arguments, as I defended Augustine's premise of just war
in seminary, but it won't wash.

Actually, I've never read Agustines thoughts about a just war. The reason I
named the thread, in parenthesis, A Just War is because the idea of a just war
is very ironic.

>>Just as you said, we as believers are a different nation, and we need to
wage war in the heavenlies, and not in the wanton killing and murder in the
natural.

Yes, this is the point I was making, and I'm following you here.

>>We wage war on our knees and not with napalm! We wage war through the words
in our Bibles, and not bullets! We wage war through healing and binding up
wounds, and not in being the cause of them! We wage war by turning the other
cheek, and loving our enemy, and in feeding and clothing and caring for him.
Doesn't look like the war in Afghanistan to me!!!! And it won't be that way in
Iraq either!

OK, this is where you lost me. I do believe the Church should do exactly as you
say. However, it will not be the church using napalm and bullets, it will be
the US government wielding that sword. I don't like it, but unfortunately, I
believe it to be a just response to 9/11 by the US.

>>No sir, we need to awaken from our slumber and we need to repent and seek
the mercy and forgiveness of God, and not justify our wars by differientiating
between secular and sacred! God is the ruler of the universe and satan is the
usurper! We have had the Kingdom come, and it is a Kingdom of hearts, and it
is extended one person at time! Just how many Afghans have been won to Christ
through this war? How many Afghans love the west or the US more now because of
this war? Just how many tears has Jesus wept interceding for us as we battle a
spiritual war with the weapons of flesh?! How many rivers of tears has He shed
for the dead that we are responsible for?

And I pray that the Church, the Redeemed of the Lord, does just that! But the
US isn't the Church -- it is a nation just like any other on this planet. I
very much prefer and support the democratic republican ideals she was founded
on over other types of governments represented in other nations, so don't get
me wrong. I just don't think the Delta, Ranger, and other forces involved in
the conflict actually care about how many people are won to Christ, or that the
body count is of their enemies is a bad thing. How can they care about
spiritual warfare when most of them aren't even believers, and are "dead"
spiritually?

And although war is terrible, I don't think God sheds that many tears over it.
Actually, I think He uses war to justly judge the nations -- all are condemned
by their sin and transgressions, there is none righteous, thus there are no
innocents. Victims, yes -- innocents, no. God is firmly sovereign, and when war
comes, who is enough to ask Him why?

>>I ache just thinking this through.

As do I! Yet in this fallen world in the fallen governments we live with as
Christ's Body and citizens in His Nation, peace remains the time spent in
between wars. I say to this, "Even so, Jesus, come!"

TC


------- <><><> -------



Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 20:56:45 EST
From: TheologusCrucis

Subject: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War"

David,

I did not write the quote you pasted about the Afghan war, brother! That would
have been Sam. I thought I'd reply just to be clear. I hope that all is well
with you and yours? God's blessings, David,

TC

>>Theo said:

I will be opposed to this war not just in my prayer closet, but on the streets!
I was opposed to my governments participation in Afghanistan! I am even more
opposed to this one! How arrogant is this US administration?! I am baffled.
Where are the Christians in all this? Are they blindly waving their Stars and
Stripes and cheering the troops? My God, have mercy on us! What are we
doing?David,

I did not write the quote you pasted about the Afghan war, brother! That would
have been Sam. I thought I'd reply just to be clear. I hope that all is well
with you and yours? God's blessings, David,

TC

>>Theo said:

I will be opposed to this war not just in my prayer closet, but on the streets!
I was opposed to my governments participation in Afghanistan! I am even more
opposed to this one! How arrogant is this US administration?! I am baffled.
Where are the Christians in all this? Are they blindly waving their Stars and
Stripes and cheering the troops? My God, have mercy on us! What are we doing?


------- <><><> -------



Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 21:36:49 -0500
From: "Michael Gastin"
Subject: Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War"

- ----- Original Message -----
From: TheologusCrucis To:
ntcp(--AT--)homechurch.org Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 8:37 PM
Subject: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War"

Sam,I'm sorry, perhaps I'm confused and you could help me understand? We wage
war on our knees and not with napalm! We wage war through the words in our
Bibles, and not bullets! We wage war through healing and binding up wounds, and
not in being the cause of them! We wage war by turning the other cheek, and
loving our enemy, and in feeding and clothing and caring for him. Doesn't look
like the war in Afghanistan to me!!!! And it won't be that way in Iraq
either!OK, this is where you lost me. I do believe the Church should do exactly
as you say. However, it will not be the church using napalm and bullets, it
will be the US government wielding that sword. I don't like it, but
unfortunately, I believe it to be a just response to 9/11 by the US.


Subject: Re: [NTCP] cell groups

I had written:

>>We can't just keep on discussing things as if that evidence did not exist.
>>If a person can shoot it down, well then, have at it. The floor is open. I
>>for one want the truth more than my views on display at the top of the heap.
>>But for you (Jim) to present a picture where these biblical practices are
>>symptomatic of demonic infestation is simply not fair. And furthermore, it
>>is not wise.

To which Jay Ferris replied:

>Dear Michael,
>
>YOU CAN'T MAKE A SILK PURSE OUT OF A SOU'S EAR

Hi again Jay. You've provided a blitzkrieg of verses with some (grrrrrrrrrr--
we've talked about this) allegorical interpretation to boot. But I'm still
wondering what your point was. If the NT itself allows for

1) (good) religion (Nov. 8 "'Religion' is not a dirty word") 2) liturgy (Jan. 7
"How should the house church relate to the institutional church ?") 3)
religious buildings (Jan. 7 "How should the house church relate to the
institutional church ?") 4) one-pastor churches (Jul. 9 "Constantine-house
church whipping boy")

(QUALIFIER: I am saying that the above are all *allowed* in Scripture, not that
they are the *only* way to conduct church-- except, of course, for [good]
religion, which should characterize *every* congregation)

... then how does the info in your Jan. 22 post counteract that evidence? Since
you are not directly engaging each point I have made, it is difficult to see
what you are doing, save pitting one aspect of the Bible against another. And
thinking that proves your case. It does not. I've got to tell you Jay (and
everyone else), that it does not matter to me either way. I am not absolutely
dug in to any particular stance. I simply want to follow the Lord according to
his word. And for others to do the same. If my present position is against
God's revelation for His people, I want to be corrected. This is not a big
"ego challenge" for me but merely a quest for truth. So far however-- I'm
sorry to say-- I have not seen a big commitment to truth from the members of
this list who continue to act as if the above evidence does not exist.

Michael
Jerusalem


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 05:36:30 -0800
From: jferris
Subject: Re: [NTCP] cell
groups

Deborah wrote:

>Hi again Jay. You've provided a blitzkrieg of verses with some (grrrrrrrrrr--
>we've talked about this) allegorical interpretation to boot. But I'm still
>wondering what your point was.
>
Dear Michael,

Not to be unteachable, but my point was, that with Sam, I'm not yet convinced
of your understanding of the New Testament. I believe that it has led many to
attempt to make a silk purse out of a sou's ear. My point was, that there is
another way to understand the evidence.

Yours in Christ,

Jay


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 07:13:33 -0500
From: "Samuel Buick"
Subject: Re: [NTCP] cell groups - short response to Jim

Thanks Jim, and that's actually how I do that very thing. I appreciate you
clarifying even my own thinking!!! That's what happens when you first language
is not English! Sometimes you think in your mother tongue and write in the
second one!!! :-)

Sam


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 08:52:58 -0400
From: "vanessadd"
Subject: Re: [NTCP] cell groups - short response to Jim

I had thought this was more applicable to 'reverend'. I don't like titles of
ANY kind. But pastor simply seems to mean one who guides the sheep, and is NOT
necessarily the owner of the sheep (that would be God). A shepherd can be a
hired man.

BTW, in spanish 'shepherd' and 'pastor' are the same word: pastor (with an
accent on the last syllable)

Vanessa


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 08:38:54 -0500
From: David Anderson
Subject: [NTCP] Re:
Mentoring - I'm glad it's being discussed.

>Mentoring has been my main ministry for 35 years. In Honduras we called it
>"pastoral training by extension" and tried to do it the same way Jesus and
>Paul did. In the States we first called it "discipling on the leader level"
>but many confused it with "one on one" (Jesus mentored12, sometimes 3,
>sometimes 1) or merely teaching doctrine to new believers. So when the word
>'mentoring' became common we started using it. Be careful translating it into
>Latin-based languages--a mentor is a liar! George Patterson

Hey der George,

Praise the Lord for those 35 big years of service to the saints - an enduring
offering unto our Lord Jesus Christ.

Wish the term "mentoring" had not received such cool reception on ntcp but
surely you are aware that the loudest voices on an email list don't necessarily
represent the majority. Regardless of the terminology, your principles are
rock-solid, brother. Press on.

(Oh yea, we know that things like leadership have been greatly abused in some
circles - but so has sexuality - yet few seem interested in giving up on that
one ...)

I really enjoyed receiving your MentorNet messages. They were real gems,
covering a wide array of related subjects though just a page or two in length.
I was wondering if it would be OK to pass these shiny nuggets around for others
to inspect, provided the footer and copyright notice is left intact. Would you
have me locked up, say if I posted MentorNet now and then?

David Anderson Bristol, TN


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 09:12:10 -0500
From: "Samuel Buick"
Subject: Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War" - reply to Mike

Hi Mike:

The issue is simply this:

1. Should Christians, be involved the military at all, if the governments of
nations cannot reflect Kingdom principles?

2. If there are so many Christians in government, and I know there is a goodly
number in the US, UK, and Canada, what is their role in all this? How do you
commit yourself to the King and His Kingdom, and stand for righteousness in the
nation, and on the other hand condone war? Does not one invalidate the other?

3. I think it would do all of us some good to study Anabaptist history and
theology. They were murdered by the Reformed, Lutheran and Roman Catholics for
what they lived and practiced concerning government and the sword!

4. Christians need to thoroughly examine what citizenship they hold and what
their role is in the culture in which they live.

5. As far as I am concerned the war in afghanistan was not justified, and the
proposed war in Iraq, and wherever else 'Battlin' Bush' wants to go will be
just as unjustified. The weapons of his warfare are carnal and not spiritual.

6. Do we have a 'right' to defend ourselves? Do we have a right to 'avenge'
ourselves? Have we asked God's perspective on these things?

Hey, I am just asking the questions, that's all. But so far, I have not be
comfortable with what I have heard, and I have become increasingly concerned at
the Christian responses I have heard. They sound no different than those
people outside the Kingdom. That really disturbs me.

Blessings,

Sam


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 09:13:12 -0500
From: "Samuel Buick"
Subject: Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War"

Hey TC, imagine you being confused with me! Wow!

Sam
>
From: TheologusCrucis Reply-To: ntcp(--AT--)homechurch.org To:
>ntcp(--AT--)homechurch.org
Subject: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War" Date: Tue, 22 Jan
>2002 20:56:45 EST
>
>David,
>
>I did not write the quote you pasted about the Afghan war, brother! That would
>have been Sam. I thought I'd reply just to be clear. I hope that all is well
>with you and yours? God's blessings, David,
>
>TC
>
>>>Theo said:
>
>I will be opposed to this war not just in my prayer closet, but on the
>streets! I was opposed to my governments participation in Afghanistan! I am
>even more opposed to this one! How arrogant is this US administration?! I am
>baffled. Where are the Christians in all this? Are they blindly waving their
>Stars and Stripes and cheering the troops? My God, have mercy on us! What are
>we doing?


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 09:26:39 -0500
From: "Michael Gastin"
Subject: [NTCP] A
Re-Intorduction

Greetings from New York.

My name is Mike Gastin. I joined this list when it first started a while back,
but dropped out due to time constraints. I have recently rejoined and noticed
some new members here, so I thought an introduction of sorts is in order.

My wife and I left the institutional church over a year ago to start a
fellowship in our home. Our group consists of our family of five, another
family of six and a bachelor. We have been meeting for a year now once a week
in each other's homes. We also have a early morning bible study that the men
attend once a week.

The rural village we live in has a population of about 500 homes and another
2000+ in the outlying areas. There are a number of churches in the region of
many different denominational flavors, but, unfortunately, this region is not
proportionally impacted for the Gospel. Here the accepted idea of church is
rather cultural with a common attitude something like, "I know I need to get
back to church and listen to the preacher, but first I have to get my life
right and quit drinking and smoking."

I think most on this list would agree that the above attitude represents a
gross misunderstanding of the nature of the Gospel and the love of Christ and
even church structure. I should add that the above attitude is implicitly
supported and propagated by the attitudes, comments and actions of church-going
people here.

Our desire (My wife and I) is to make disciples. We know that God has moved us
to this place for a specific reason and we have come to believe that reason is
to plant churches. (We moved here a few years ago after living in South Africa
for a time.) We are committed to the home church format. We are committed to it
not because we think that Jesus preached house church to the masses, but
because we know that form should follow function. Our function here on earth is
to serve and obey Christ, to put off sin, grow in Him, preach the Good News and
to make disciples of all nations. We are convinced from our many years inside
and outside the institutional church that the institutional church form does
not encourage, facilitate or support the basic believers' functions. Mainly, it
encourages a Levitical relationship whereas the 'pastor/leader' (as well
intentioned as he is - and I am making generalities here - I know some guys do
not fit in my sweeping comments) performs the necessary functions before the
Lord, the congregation witnesses it and falls under the pastor's sacrifice
becoming right before God.

Remember, I am not talking about original Greek here or defending any
theological positions. Acts does support the house church concept, but not in
exclusion of other meeting places. I am making observations of *dynamics*
within our current situation in the body. Moving on ...

So, we have a desire to plant a network of home churches that focus on the
priesthood of every believer. We desire these gatherings to be open in nature
to encourage body ministry, exhortation, encouragement, correction, teaching,
prayer, worship and praise, a common meal and so on. We desire that these
related gatherings will meet on a regular basis (once a month or once a
quarter?) for a larger corporate meeting - possibly in a rented hall or another
space provided that allows a large number to meet and fellowship. We also
desire to see the raising-up of scriptural leadership - such as elders as
defined by the NT descriptions. We desire to see believers moving in their
individual and corporate gifts. We desire to see churches that reach out to
their community and shun insular attitudes.

We desire a great deal. Yet, we know God is able and we pray that we would
understand and share His heart for this area. We are praying and trying to be
obedient.

I have probably told you more than you want to know. If you have gotten this
far, thank you for reading it. I hope it is an encouragement to others here
that are planting or wish to plant home churches. I would enjoy hearing about
what you are doing or wish to do in your area.

Blessings,

Mike Gastin


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 16:05:40
From: "David Jaggernauth"
Subject: Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War"

Sorry, my mistake.

David J.
>
From: TheologusCrucis Reply-To: ntcp(--AT--)homechurch.org To:
>ntcp(--AT--)homechurch.org
Subject: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War" Date: Tue, 22 Jan
>2002 20:56:45 EST
>
>David,
>
>I did not write the quote you pasted about the Afghan war, brother! That would
>have been Sam. I thought I'd reply just to be clear. I hope that all is well
>with you and yours? God's blessings, David,
>
>TC
>
>>>Theo said:
>
>I will be opposed to this war not just in my prayer closet, but on the
>streets! I was opposed to my governments participation in Afghanistan! I am
>even more opposed to this one! How arrogant is this US administration?! I am
>baffled. Where are the Christians in all this? Are they blindly waving their
>Stars and Stripes and cheering the troops? My God, have mercy on us! What are
>we doing?


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 16:46:39
From: "David Jaggernauth"
Subject: [NTCP]
RE:NTCP TRINIDAD

Hello evryone,

Its been a while since I've updated you on our church planter efforts here.

We have started a new meeting recently and now have three. We are in the
process of starting four more but I am trying to figure how we are going to do
all this, I may have to try and consolidate one or two meetings with others.

The last home we started work in has proven to be a big challenge. The family
has been bound by satan for many years. They have been the victims of
witchcraft and abuse by Churches as well.

They have three daughters at home and the oldest has been mentally opressed by
satan for years ( she was committed to an asylum ),we know it is a demonic
possession, she is prone to fits of violence. The last daugter was molested in
school and taken out because she became bound by a spirit of fear, she is now
19 yrs old and has no education. Her spine has also been affected by the
demonic oppression and is slightly bent ( we have seen pictures of her from
before when she was normal). The three girls are very demonically oppressed,
you can see it in their eyes, they are unable to look at you in the face. They
are bound by some kind of guilt and condemnation, including the parents.

The father has problems as well, he was orphaned at a young age and has never
experienced real love in his life so is unable to love his own family.

The street where they live abounds with practioners of witchcraft (in various
forms of religion). No one in the home works and they live off a very small
pension that the father gets. The second daughter hasnt been able to get a job
in about 4 or 5 years.

During the first meeting there God revealed many things through members of the
team which were confirmed. They have become turned off towards the Church
because of their experience there.

Since our first meeting they have reported some breakthroughs in their
spiritual lives. They said we were the first people to ever come to their homes
to do this kind of ministry with them ( a sad story of the Church).

We know that they need much deliverance but it is not going to come overnight,
it will be a slow process, removing layer by layer, all the forces that are
opressing them.

I reported some time ago about the attacks we were experiencing (the team) I
was suffering severe back pains, my wife as well. Another member of the team
reported the same exact problem as well, in the exact place as myself. He also
said it moved down to his knees as well and about two days ago it moved down to
my knees too.

Fortunately we are much better today, except for my wife.

I would appreciate prayer for this last family we have started working with.
They need a lot of prayer for breakthrough.

Thanks for your support.

David Jagg. Trinidad


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:04:55 -0400
From: "Willard Smith"
Subject: Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War" - reply to Mike

Just curious Sam, do you have any a wife and children? Have you been exposed to
war up close? Are you involved in the academic scene? Just curious?

Willard


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:34:13 EST
From: JAMESRUTZ
Subject: Re: [NTCP] cell groups

Vanessa,

Technically, "reverend" is a lot worse than "pastor"!!

"Reverend" means "he who is to be revered." And a brief thumb-through of the
OT will reveal that Yahweh is kind of fussy about just who deserves to be
revered!

Jim Rutz Colorado Springs


------- <><><> -------



Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:40:42 -0500
From: "Samuel Buick"
Subject: Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War" - reply to Willard

Actually Willard I have a wife and two kids (teen daughters). I served in the
Canadian infantry as a senior NCO, served with NATO, and my specialty was close
quarter combat, and I taught hand to hand and close quarter tactics, also
taught recruits, and a host of other COMBAT roles and training. So, I have
been taught and trained for war. I also experienced explosions first hand from
the IRA in Belfast. So yeah, I know what can happen, but what's the point of
your comments?

Just because I ask the questions does not mean I don't care about what
happens. I care deeply, but ours as believers is a different Kingdom, and so
my question to you and everyone else, to whom do you give your allegiance and
loyalty, your nation or God and His Kingdom? I will NEVER fight in a war. I
will NEVER do what I was trained to do, even if it means the death of my wife
and kids. I will run and take cover and I will seek refuge, but I will NEVER
raise a hand in violence to an enemy. Jesus would never do it, and neither
will I.

Blessings, Sam

>
From: "Willard Smith" To: ntcp(--AT--)homechurch.org,
>ntcp(--AT--)homechurch.org
Subject: Re: [NTCP] Re: A "Just War" - reply to
>Mike Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:04:55 -0400
>
>Just curious Sam, do you have any a wife and children? Have you been exposed
>to war up close? Are you involved in the academic scene? Just curious?
>
>Willard

New Testament Church Proliferation Digest V2 #18

< Previous Digest Next Digest >

 


house church eldership servanthood lord's day lord's supper world missions