How can there be church autonomy when the church in Jerusalem oversaw many house churches?
Question:
Hello brother,
I have a question about the autonomy of the local church. I understand that there were many house congregations in the first century. So, if there were many house congregations in Jerusalem, how can they be considered the church in Jerusalem?
Also, if there were many congregations in one city, it means the elders of the Jerusalem church were overseeing many congregations rather than just one.
If that is so, then how will that compare to the church autonomy that we preach today?
Can it then be said that elders can oversee many congregations in a city?
Answer:
You made a jump in your argument that has no supporting evidence. It is true that some of the early churches met in homes. The church in Rome met in Aquilla and Priscilla's home (Romans 16:3-5). When they lived in Ephesus, the church met in their home there (I Corinthians 16:19). The church in Hierapolis met in Nymphas' home. The church in Laodicia met in Philemon's home (Philemon 1-2). These places were not in Jerusalem but scattered in various areas of the Roman Empire.
Just because some churches met in homes, it does not mean all churches did so. There is no mention of any church overseeing other churches. There is no mention of house churches in Jerusalem.
