House Church Talk - agenda

[David Anderson]

No agenda, huh? Nothing to do .... just be. Is that it?

It's never occurred to some that the weary theory of "no agenda - just be 
the church" was previously unknown to the saints prior to this ignorant 
generation. Jesus, however, prophesied of these folks via a parable in 
Luke 12. Those who did not perform the Master's agenda were to be sorely 
punished in the end. 

Instead of being saved by grace "unto good works," these are saved unto 
"no works," I suppose. (Slight tinge of friendly sarcasm.)

Matt. 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the 
kingdom of heaven, but only he who DOES the will of my Father who is in 
heaven. 

Matt. 12:50 For whoever DOES the will of my Father in heaven is my 
brother and sister and mother.

I wish that by "agenda," the proponents of such meant "hidden agenda" but 
I happen to know otherwise. One woman I recall used to ask: "See, we're 
the fruit. Does fruit really DO anything?"

And the ironic thing is that those who claim to have "no agenda" usually 
have one as extensive as any other group. I noticed this with great 
disbelief several years ago when a person named Jeff spoke of his 
enjoyment of a weekly day of rest, which he did not impose upon others. 
One self-righteous person after another began to attack him with some of 
the most vicious language I had ever encountered. For them, Christian 
"liberty" and "freedom" was a one way street - their way.

As for the Conference, I do NOT believe it has been demonstrated that the 
3 Planners are control freaks or money grubbers. Nor do they claim to 
have exhaustive agreement among themselves or the speakers they invite.

Nor can it be shown, imo, that every gathering of Christians must conform 
to the format of the regular church meetings of the apostolic age. 
Believe it or not, there are examples in Scripture of meetings in which a 
single person was the "main speaker," in todays language. I never noticed 
that the planners referred to the conference as a church meeting, anyway.

Furthermore, I doubt that any sub-group in the house church circle has, 
at this time, enough unanimity of opinion to sponsor a conference which 
would satisfy every attendee. Hopefully, over time, this will change. In 
the meantime, how many planners would invite those of opposing views to 
speak as did Steve Atkerson?

Since changing my own position on the silent women's issue, I have 
continued to study it and shall do so. I have some more info to share 
sometime soon. (Some good experiences, too, such as the one last week at 
the home of Rick Johnson.) Others may post also, regardless of their 
belief - as always. If we were in total agreement, would there really be 
anything to discuss? 

As to the requirement of homeschooled church leaders, I will check into 
it further though it appears to be extra-biblical and without historical 
precedent. Thanks to Claire for calling it to our attention. Teachers and 
tutors are always mentioned in a positive light in the NT. Paul even 
named his teacher. The Jewish parents sent their little ones off to the 
synagogue schools at age 6. There were hundreds of these schools and I am 
not suggesting that prior to age 6 children didn't receive some training 
at home. Remember that elder men and women were to teach. I'll post on 
this issue later as it also sheds light on the age-segregated Sunday 
school.

     David Anderson