Private Home: Center of Fellowship

A related concern would be the influence of the gossip in the home. Younger widows learn to be idle going around to the houses. This passage takes on a greater significance if we can imagine the houses as a place of fellowship and a young sister comes to the door as a tattler and busybody and “speaks things she ought not” (1 Tim. 5:13). These younger widows should not be taken into the number (5:9) as they provide an occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully. Those taken into the number are those widows who once had a home where she faithfully served and met the needs of those in Christ. She had lodged strangers and washed their feet. Her home for saints was a place of refuge and comfort for fellow-Christians. It was a place to expect prayers, God’s word to be read, and the care that a host would provide. Such a woman of character and proven service would be added to a household were she could minister and have her needs met, also.
Acts 20 is thought to present evidence that counters these conclusions that the house was the center of activity among saints, saying that brethren met in an upper room (verse 8). First of all, those making the argument assume that the upper room is a rented public facility. As already pointed out, upper rooms were just a specified room in a house. The “house” owned and lived in by brethren is a private family setting. Second, even if the upper rooms of these houses were owned by non-Christians, it still was not a public facility. These were private rooms in the upper loft of a house. According to some, a large room in a wealthy home might hold 45 people and to have one that could hold 120 is not a likely possiblilty. Even the guest chamber for Jesus and his disciples was larger than usual (Mark 14:14-15) and it was only a guest chamber that would be crowded with thirteen men by our standards. Jerusalem in the Second Temple period was sort of a “convention town.” Huge crowds required temporary housing during the annual feasts. Recall when in Bethlehem that there was no room in the “inn” for Joseph and Mary in Luke 2:7 during the census? The same Greek term kataluma is translated “inn” while it is translated “guestchamber” in Mark 14:15 and Luke 22:12. In the case of Acts 1:13, a different word for “upper room” is used. It was a structure of two or more stories but still a guest-chamber in the uppermost loft (cf. Acts 7:37; 20:8).
Since they were private quarters designed to accommodate small groups and eating the Lord’s supper is the stated purpose for the meeting (Acts 20:7, cf. Acts 2:42), then the Lord’s supper was a private gathering of saints in a home, whether upstairs or downstairs. So, the thought of an “upper room” does not disprove the pattern of brethren meeting in homes.
Paul’s work among them included teaching in two forums: “publically and from house to house” (Acts 20:20) with the “upper room” still falling under the category of a private setting. The uniqueness of the occasion and cause for meeting in an “upper room” may be explained by the fact that this gathering was believed by many to be the very last time they see Paul’s face. Paul will be leaving this area, and emotions were high as Paul gives his farewell address. Such a place (still private) may be more desirable to give Paul an occasion to give his farewell address with less interruption. Similarly, Jesus prepared an upper room for a special occasion – eating the Passover one last time with his disciples and giving them special instructions concerning his supper.
Other facts that mark the occasion as being unique is the fact that Paul seems to have preached longer than usual as is indicated by a reference to the time and the effect on Eutychus, who fell from the third loft. It states that Paul “preached til midnight” (Acts 20:7). The first day of the week was Saturday evening by Jewish reckoning of a day that starts with the evening. You will notice Luke’s reference to there being many lamps in the room where Paul was teaching. After Eutychus is raised to life and he eats with them, Paul then talks to them until daylight. Pliny supports Luke in describing the activities on this day. He explains that on a fixed day, the Christians met regularly before dawn to chant verses in honor of Christ and that after dispersing, they would reassemble later to to take ordinary food (Eph. 10.11).
Another example of meeting in an upper room (Acts 1:13) was when the 11 apostles were staying just prior to Pentecost. Once again, the upper room arrangement was as a result of Jesus’ instruction to the apostles to tarry in the city of Jerusalem “until they be clothed with power from on high” (Luke 24:49). This is not an ordinary time as they await the promise of the outpouring of the Spirit. This outpouring was another momentous occasion that is descriptive of something different and out of the ordinary. Acts 1:14 reads, “These all with one accord continued stedfastly in prayer, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.” Then, verse 15 prefaces Peter’s explanation of choosing another apostle. It reads,
“And in these days Peter stood up in the midst of the brethren, and said (and there was a multitude of persons gathered together, about a hundred and twenty).”
It’s not clear where they were gathered. The repeated phrase, “they were all with one accord” is in connection with the temple or Solomon’s porch. If verses 13, 14, and 15 are run together, you have the apostles living in the upper room with the women, Mary and her sons, and others that totalled 120 people who are all in the upper room. Yet, time and place elapse between these events. The apostes were listed as composing the ones “staying in the upper room.” It is said of the eleven that they “abode” (Gr. Katameno) or resided there. The fact that they continued steadfastly in prayer with the woman, Mary, and His brethren does not suggest that they continued “in the upper room” with these women who were lodging in the upper room with them. Nor does it require the interpretation that the 120 gathered in the upper room with them for prayer.
The next verse, after chapter one closes, begins the second chapter. It reads, “And when the day of Pentecost was now come, they were all together in one place.” The place where they were gathered is probably the same place the 120 were gathered for prayer as it was the place accustomed for Jewish prayer (3:1). It is very reasonable to think that the place was in the temple “at the porch called Solomons” (Acts 3:11, 5:12). Acts 2:46 may be a commentary on where exactly they were gathered in 2:1. It reads, “…continuing stedfastly with one accord in the temple.” Christians numbered approximately 3,000 people. The occasion was the annual Passover and the temple compound was large enough to accommodate such a gathering. Here’s an example of a public gathering in contrast to the private “upper room” in a house.
In time, as wealth and numbers increased outside of Jerusalem, there is evidence that Christians owned private property that was remodeled for gatherings. Yet, the earliest evidence we have was in the mid-third century, where such property was confiscated by the emperior. These houses were called “domus ecclesiae”. The best known example of a house conversion is the house of Dura-Europos in Syria that was remodeled to accommodate approximately seventy people around 232 AD. It was destroyed around 256. From all accounts, estimating that Dura-Europos would only house seventy is probably low. In a communal society that had no space requirements that we impose, it probably housed a group of 85 to 90. The structures were their private homes remodeled to accommodate greater numbers. Still, individual Christians were the owners of these homes. Unlike the Pagans and Jews, Christians never called these homes “temples” until the fifteenth century with Calvin. Further, there’s no evidence that the property changed ownership from an individual to a church organization.