posted
Who would have guessed that, by some accounts, there are now more house churchers than Southern Baptists, the largest protestant denomination in the USA? House Churchers, therefore, are all around us, likely in every public place, even at every major intersection. If the "one in five adults" figure is accurate and you're sitting in a restaurant at meal time, there are statistically several others present who could join you for an impromptu church meeting.
This would mean that traditional churches have lost members by the millions, tithes and offerings by the billions. If "one in five adults" are participating in house churches, tens of millions of children would also be involved.
These new churches, we are informed, are not "cell churches" attached to a traditional church but real house church participants.
I am very optimistic in my prophetic views of the end times but I must confess that such figures exceed anything I could have ever imagined. The amazing findings of George Barna can be tracked in the articles below.
And somewhere, there must be a sizable group of "house church planters" who have been more successful than anything previously documented in the whole history of the church. Would these please step forward and identify yourselves? God will get all the glory, of course, we just want to know who you are.
It should be noted that serious disparity does exist in the polling. Take, for example, the data reported in the Friday Fax, published by researcher and author Wolfgang Simson. About a year ago (May 13. 2005) it was documented that USA house churches "had probably doubled in the past 18 months, from 2,500 to 5,000."
Hmmmm... Let's take that "43 million" number of house churchERS and then double again the number of house churchES to 10,000 to represent another doubling for the year 2006 - this time in only a year. That translates, I believe, into 4,300 adults per house church!
What do you think about the implications of the alleged "70 million who regularly attend or have experimented with a house church?" What do you see in your corner of the world to confirm such an unprecedented shift in social behavior?
Me, I've gone door to door for 20 something years as a UPS driver in more than a dozen counties in Tennessee and Virginia. I've gotten to know a lot of families very well along the way. Total number of known house churchers encountered: Zero.
I believe the numbers are skewed by a few factors. People don't like others to think they aren't religious (stigma) so they may say they churched at home.
My Mom resigned from her church because they kicked out her friend. So she now is a house church of one--if you ask her.
My Dad is much older--close to 90--and most often is not able to attend church. He may also say he has church at home.
My younger sister was put off by my Mom leaving the church so she doesn't attend either. Guess she considers herself as a home-churcher also.
The neighbors down the street used to attend a Baptist church until a schism splintered it. Being older, they never went back to any church. I would imagine they would still consider themselves as a "church."
So there are 5 people right there that I know who don't regularly attend church or don't attend at all which would probably say they get/take their church at home. Not home churchers in the purest sense, though.
People also "lie" on surveys for several reasons. One, the correct answer isn't present so they pick the best. Two, they don't want to be lumped into "that" group. Maybe they don't truly know what a home church is. Maybe they want to avoid the stigma of being a non-church goer. And, there are other reasons. Like being too tired or feeling ill so they "church" at home--which may consist of reading a scripture, saying a prayer, or even just thinking about doing both or either. More like fulfilling a legal obligation than participating in a celebratory worship service with like-minded Christians to give thanks to God from a grateful heart.
Of those who do attend church I think it would shock us to know how many attend because they feel they have to rather than because they desire to. You can't blame Catholics who feel this way. It is exactly how their religion is dished out to them. But I bet it flows over into other denoms as well. Maybe even HC at times.
If I was asked if I home-churched I might answer Yes. I do, sorta, don't I? But I am still a registered member of an IC. So the outcome really depends upon the quality of the survey questions.
quote:So there are 5 people right there that I know who don't regularly attend church or don't attend at all which would probably say they get/take their church at home. Not home churchers in the purest sense, though.
Jeff, Hmm, and what is the purest sense? What exactly are the requirements?
Isn't the church made up of believers regardless of if they got kicked out of church, splintered from church, (Paul and others were run all the way out of town!)or too old and sick to travel to church?
Faith
-------------------- 1 Thes. 5:21 (KJV) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
True, the church is made up of ALL believers whether IC or HC. But that is not what we are trying to assess here. For statistical purposes the only fair representation must consist of those who were able to IC but made an intelligent and conscious decision to HC.
Otherwise, it's like grouping those who cannot afford to partake of health care with those who choose not to partake of traditional health care in preference to herbs, diet, and other preventative and remedial alternatives.
It depends on what trend you are trying to exact from the data.
Can you see how someone who cannot afford traditional health care might profess to prefer alternative medicines to save face when in reality they would love to be able to afford good medical care?
Our human traits can muddy the waters when it comes to certain types of statistical reporting.
posted
I agree that the numbers should be received cautiously. When sociological surveys of church attendance have been conducted in the past, they've often reported that around 40% of Americans say that they go to church each week, but attempts to verify such a big percentage by tallying those in attendance in whatever region was being studied showed that no similarly large percentage actually attended. And this was before house churches were in the news, so they don't seem to account for the disparity. No doubt some people like to say that they're going to church more often than they actually do, at least when questioned about it, perhaps because they don't want to drive the pro-church numbers down in any poll.
In the case of a survey of house church participants, the same problem could arise of people wanting to say that they're participants, without actually being such, yet in this case an individual's attendance/nonattendance would be impossible to verify. However, the very high number of 1 out of 5 is said to be lower than what one might think from attendance at house church conferences, regional celebrations, etc.
If even 1 out of 10 Americans participated in house churches weekly, that would represent a huge number. It seems clear that interest in house churches has grown considerably over the last one or two decades, and that such interest seems likely to increase in the coming decade. I wouldn't be surprised if the number of participants doubled in the coming decade. But my hunch is that an estimate of 1 out of 5 is not accurate. Perhaps the figure suggests that a lot more people would like to belong to a house church than actually do, so this figure (even if inaccurate) could give participants some encouragement.
posted
Barna's conclusions become more incredible the more I consider them. Try this on for size:
quote:The people most likely to attend only a conventional church were women, people 60 or older, residents of the Midwest, and evangelicals. In contrast, the people most likely to attend a house church but not a conventional church were men, home-school families, residents of the West, and non-whites.
Non-whites? It was news to me that a significant majority of non-whites were involved in home-schooling OR house churching. My own experiences (very limited, of course) did not reflect it. (All of the HS and HC conferences which I attended were dominated by white man.) If it's true, then it's great!
And here is the shocking tithing stat from the Barna Research Group, as referenced in the second Barna web address above:
quote:The average amount of money donated by revolutionaries in 2005 was $2990. That surpasses the mean giving total among non-revolutionary born again adults ($1641) by 82%, despite household income levels that are similar.
I multiplied the “tithe” of the revolutionaries by the alleged 43 million of them and the number was so great that my calculator kicked into the scientific notation mode to display the number.
Here's yet another "blow me down" statistic:
quote:In a June 19 report from the Barna Group, evangelical researcher George Barna said 70 million Americans regularly attend or have “experimented with” a house church. That’s an increase of 8 percent since 1996, the report said. Moreover, the movement is taking on evidence of permanence, he said.
In other words, there must have been tens of millions of house churchers way back in 1996 - an entire decade ago. Why wasn't this fact ever documented? Was it documented? Where? What poll?
Well, what have you observed in your part of the world? Surely a movement this big with so much money could not be invisible. Something big must be going on in every city, town, and village in the USA.
quote:In other words, there must have been tens of millions of house churchers way back in 1996 - an entire decade ago. Why wasn't this fact ever documented? Was it documented? Where? What poll?
Well, I hope it is that big; but..............haven't seen the proof in the actions of the nation. How could it be documented? Maybe on the census every 10 years? But then what would be the criteria? Who would actually answer such questions?
The very nature of home church makes it hard to track. Homeschoolers may be estimated fairly accurately as many are registered with church or state, leaving a paper trail to follow. Also birth record could be compared to school records. But so far the government hasn't stepped in to try to register those who beleive in God, but shun organizations. Somehow, I doubt many would register. I never give out information on polls because, I don't know who they are or what their motives are.
Why can't all that money be seen? Well, if there really are that many it seems we would hear of many anonymous donations and good deeds being done. However, often those small individual deeds do go unnoticed because we are not to blow our own horns like the big guys do!
BTW, I see this type of report much like the reports that most Americans are Christians. Isn't it some 90% or something similar? And yet our nation is at it's vilest in history.
-------------------- 1 Thes. 5:21 (KJV) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
posted
So, what signs of these numbers are you encountering in your locality? Again, I ask.
What they mean is that at the present rate of growth, house churchers will shortly become the largest group in the church. Outnumbering even the catholics and all others.
If so, I say: "... now lettest thy servant depart in peace." :-)
But where are the signs? Every hamlet, village, city and street, apartment building should be manifesting non-traditional church activity and ministry on an enormous scale. A societal shift of such a magnitude couldn't be hidden nor could it be unverifiable, methinks.
Where are the house church books being sold by the millions? Where are the conferences being attended by thousands? Where are the bloggers eagerly to compare notes about the new and exciting changes they have experienced? I can just find a few, as in single digits, who regularly post.
Why is there such disparity in the numbers reported by Time, the Washington Post when compared to those reported by George Barna and others who stand to profit from "The Revolution"?
Truly, Christianity wasn't meant to be a private, underground sort of thing. We are to be salt, light, and a shining city upon a hill. Of the early Christians - though few - it was recorded that they turned the whole world upside-down. Acts 17:6.
quote:Truly, Christianity wasn't meant to be a private, underground sort of thing. We are to be salt, light, and a shining city upon a hill. Of the early Christians - though few - it was recorded that they turned the whole world upside-down. Acts 17:6.
That was then. Now we live in the end of the end times or at least 2000 years closer to the end. What of the underground church in China? It is growing but kept underground.
While so far, we are not arrested here for not being part of the OC, how far is that day? I read a book several years ago about the underground church here in US. Seems to be growing and yes it is underground. Some network and others don’t. Why is it going underground? Because of the persecution of the OC? Because of the political atmosphere toward bible believers? Because of the men who are prophesied to wax worse and worse? Because of the wolves who would come in to devour the saints?
The way is very narrow and few find it. Matt. 7:13-14. Jesus asks if there will be any faithful when he returns. (I forget the passage. Does someone remember the exact wording?) The church is often pictured as the small flock scattered among the world. Each of us is a light; but I don’t see the world being revived or turned upside down prophesied for the last of the last days. Rather just the opposite, a big falling away and a scattered few who remain faithful.
As for seeing growth myself, 20+ years ago, there was no one who did HC. We did for we couldn’t find a church organization true to God’s word and saw a lot of very wrong things going on. Gradually, we exposed this type error to others and talked of it. Passed out tracts asking folks to search their hearts about religion versus belief. Usually, we met with a bad reaction; but a few agreed. We began to see others leaving the churches. Others began studying for themselves. However, we have seen many trying to figure out the how to and the leadership to their detriment. The HC is growing in many homes. It is the networking and government that is struggling for all the baggage folks carry.
I think when we try to look for the kingdom of God as the salt and light upon a hill, we need to remember the kingdom of God is not physical ,but spiritual and in the hearts of men. There we will see the love and light of Christ. However, it is not the big glittery kingdom of the world which is easily seen. There are few who have found it.
However, I do wonder about folks here. There are 723 HC members here. And yet I could name only about 5-10 who have posted here over several years. Why don’t more talk here? Surely we could all praise the Lord and thank him for leading us out of OC to be alone with the Lord for a season., sprinkled and scattered just like salt, among the world but not of the world.
We are not meant to be gathered in bundles of HC ers; for then we would be just like the OC. We are salt, scattered in the world to season the world. Many of the true conversions in the Bible were done as a result of one on one interaction; not because of a big group event seen by all. I think the HC is growing by word of mouth one person at a time. Why must we want to group and poll and see them all in one place? Maybe they can’t be seen because they are busy living for Christ just where they are, at home, with their neighbor, in their job, in town, etc. However, an occasional word via this site or other means wouldn’t hurt but could exhort each other to continue on. I was grateful to find others here and on other sites who are also lone sprinkles of salt.
OC keeps the salt in the shaker. HC sprinkles the salt in the world.
IMO. So what is yours, anyone else?
-------------------- 1 Thes. 5:21 (KJV) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
posted
Faith, you have raised a few peripheral issues which are worthy of separate threads and further exploration. I'll work on these in a day or two.
For now, here are some other very incredible things being reported. Essentially, house churches have gone from thousands to millions in N. America in a couple of years.
quote:John White challenged us with what he calls 'the leadership solution', daily praying the Luke 10:2b prayer for laborers, together with a soul mate. Since he started doing this, and teaching this organic principle to other believers, God sent people on his way, one after the other, asking advice on how to plant churches, and he could simply coach them in doing that. This way, the simple church networks in the States are growing exponentially. While 530 simple churches were planned 'in faith' for 2005, they hit the 6,000 mark. While they intended to train 530 church planters in 2005, they saw 1,000 church planters trained in the first two months of 2006 alone. With this kind exponential growth (the current growth rate is 70%) they could reach their target of 4 million simple churches in North America (400,000 networks, 40,000 network coaches, 4,000 lead coaches) by the year 2018. Then they still have two years left to rest from their labors.
So, I went with haste to John's site and then to his blog expecting to find a giant directory of "church planters" broken down by city and state, eager to find them working in our area. Instead, I found one (1) link to one (1) coach - the one who charges $50 per half-hour phone session.
quote: So, I went with haste to John's site and then to his blog expecting to find a giant directory of "church planters" broken down by city and state, eager to find them working in our area. Instead, I found one (1) link to one (1) coach - the one who charges $50 per half-hour phone session.
Sounds like a pyramid scheme to me. With one man in charge and getting all the profits.
posted
The jury is still out on the Barna numbers, btw. According to a recent blog (And I really don't believe everything I read in blogs. LOL.) Barna, at the National House Church Conference, just downgraded the 20 million number to 5 million. I'll just wait until I read it from Barna, himself, assuming he will make the retraction via his internet site, barna.org.
I do know that if someone in the secular world carelessly published faulty data of this magnitude, they would immediately be looking for a new career in a different field. So much for "accuracy in media."
Topic Closed
Email this page to someone.
