Because we connected emotional responses to movement caused by the Holy Ghost.
Yeah. Sadly, we do.
On page 10 his argument concerning the word "church" is caused by translation. Even the writer says that if an early greek christian was talking about the physical building we call a church they would say kuriakon see page 12. Where as the people who are called out to follow Christ are called the Ekklesia.
Two different words in greek that when translated are given the same word in english. The word church in english has more than one meaning
Is that really what the writers said? That's not what I got from p12. I understood them to be saying that the English word for "church" came from the Greek word "kuriakon." That doesn't mean that the early Christians would have referred to our assembly buildings as kuriakons. Am I missing something?
Concerning Constantine
Yeah he may or may not have been the perfect Christan ... but who am I to judge a man who live thousands of years ago to say if he was a righteous and upright leader.
I kinda agree. But
if he was worshipping or even paying tribute to other gods, then he was more than just an imperfect Christian.
Now concerning building churches/temples/cathedrals. There is a simple reason why the early christians met in homes and caves and what not. If they had a church it would be easy to round up Christians and kill them!
Its not that they felt having one central location to gather was wrong. (clearly they did this even if it was just meeting at the same house where they tore down a wall to fit everyone).
How do you know that? I mean, it makes sense to me, but do you have a source? For the record, I don't have a problem with church buildings. Jesus went to synagogue, so I'm fine with going to a church building. I just don't think we should spend as much money on them as we should, and that we need to do a better job at knocking down the 4 walls that separate us from our communities and the unsaved.
Okay finally talking about buildings 
If you can't tell, I don't really care for everything the author is saying ... maybe I'll change later but there are just too many holes in what he is saying. (me arguing brings up his point concerning Greek rhetoric that comes later).
1. Every building before it is built is built with a purpose in mind.
Why do you think the dining room is by the kitchen?
why are there bathrooms inside movie theaters so large?
Why are bedrooms on the second floor of a house many times and not on the first floor?
if you were to take the author's preferred model for how Christians should assemble what would the building look like?
It would feature a large open space, that protects the area from the weather. There would be small circular (oh by the way circles are pagan too just look at Stonehenge) tables that would seat a handful of people who may be eating a meal together. In short it would look like a convention center set up to host a luncheon. On top of that what would happen if in this group of people a short person wanted to talk. Would someone lift that person onto their shoulder so everyone can see them? or would that stand on a chair or even the table so their voice can project. I would say that this author if he had a group large enough would set up a stage area or a podium so someone could stand and say something.
I wouldn't say circles are pagan. God created the earth, right? The earth is a circular shape. As are the sun, moon, other planets in our galaxy, etc...
I must admit though, the other objects inside the church, such as the special seat for the speaker of the hour, which we give special meaning. I see his point there is no reason we should give so much credit to those objects....I'm not going to be able to look at the building I worship in the same ever again.
_______________________________________ _______________________________
wow ... it happened then and it is still happening today...
I think that's the one thing that hit me the hardest in this chapter. Seeing all the correlations between what was then, and what is still taking place today. That was heavy. We are STILL compromising our core values by accepting secular practices and customs. Wow.
Evolution of the architecture
So... whats your point? all buildings are built with a purpose in mind. The churches of today are designed so that one person can teach a vast multitude of people at the same time. There is nothing wrong with that.
Concerning pews... Has the author ever tried to build a single chair? It takes a long time and they are expensive. A pew is easy in comparison.
Have you ever had multiple people attempt to stand up from a pew at once that isn't bolted down? There is the chance that upon standing they would either push the pew back or it could tip over. So bolt them down simple. If you don't believe me sit in a office chair that has wheels (it makes it easier to see) and stand up without holding on to anything. Does the chair move?
I agree with you in general. But their overall point seems to be that in order to accomplish the original function of the Christian assembly, we need to construct our places of worship - be they houses or church buildings - in a fashion that promotes interaction and mutual ministry rather than one head person addressing a body. (I'm not saying I agree, just trying to clarify what I think he's saying). On p37, they assert that Christian architecture has hindered the function of Christians. That's an interesting assertion. We
do have a bunch of spectators and inactive members in church. In fact, there's an 80/20 rule commonly known in church leadership (20% of the people do 80% of the work). Would people be more active and involved if the sanctuaries were arranged differently?? Granted, such a change - if even possible - would take decades to stick. But would it make a difference? I wonder...
High Cost of Overhead
it would still exist it just wouldn't be as apparent.
As others had already said. True some of the costs can be consolidated. But look at your own personal budget I'm pretty sure we still pay those same expenses and it adds up to 30-60% of our budget.
No, the "high cost" wouldn't exist at all. Overhead would be much lower with more modest places to meet. I'm not even talking about house churches, but we already know that would be a lot cheaper.
