P12: Ekklēsia

“I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; …” – Matthew 16:18a. This is the first occurrence of the English word “church” in scripture. At one point I imagined that when Jesus said this all the disciples gazed in wonder on the fabulous new word Christ used to describe what He was doing. Not satisfied with that image, I did the research, and in a lot of ways, I feel we as the American church has been hoodwinked.

The actual word that was used in Matthew 16:18, and used throughout the New Testament, is the Greek word “ekklēsia“. It is translated “church” 115 times, but it is actually translated “assembly” 3 times in Acts 19 referring to the “mob” that was surrounding Paul. That gave me a clue that, in the words of Inigo Montoya of Princess Bride, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means”. The Greek translation of the Old Testament also used that word for every time it mentioned the “assembly” of Israel or Judah. That word is used in many other Greek writings, and was the word that described the town meetings, or assembly of the political meetings, of the local governments. That being said, “ekklēsia” is by no means connected to religion in general, nor does it describe or imply a building or place (although there was a Greek place called “The ekklēsia” that was part of the early Greek government in Sparta, not connected to any religious ties)

Well then, if “ekklēsia” does not actually mean “church” but “assembly”, or “congregation” (or more closely to the idea of an assembly of people under one purpose or banner) where did that word come from and why is it being translated that way? Well, our modern word “church ” has a complicated history, the funny thing is there is no connection. There is a dispute on either it comes from the Old English “cirice” that is from German “kirka” that came from “Greek “kuriakos” meaning “the Lords Day” (As in Revelation 1:10). OR from the Anglo-Saxon word “kirke” that comes from the Greek word “circus” where we get our word “circus” from (in Greek that is what arenas where called). In either case, neither of those show the word “church” coming from the actual Greek meaning. So, again, why the translation?

Well we have to go back to the first translation to English, and moreover to the third (First was the Wycliffe Bible in 1409, then the Tyndale Bible in 1539.  Tyndale translated it correctly as “congregation”), that would be known as “King James Version” that was ordered by King James VI and I in 1604, and we have that letter and it states that the new version must be translated in such a way to limit Puritan influence and support the Church of England. Short of it, it’s a bias translation. Read about it here. But I will save you the time and just give you the quote –

“Further, the King gave the translators instructions designed to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology of the Church of England. Certain Greek and Hebrew words were to be translated in a manner that reflected the traditional usage of the church. For example, old ecclesiastical words such as the word “church” were to be retained and not to be translated as “congregation”. The new translation would reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and traditional beliefs about ordained clergy.

Well, I personally have a issue with that. So they basically said the tradition overrides the original meaning. So where did the tradition come from? Remember this was in 1604, and even in 1409, long after Christ was around, and none of the “traditions” are actually directly mentioned in the New Testament. No buildings (the Bible has a word for buildings, its called a temple), no pastors (nope, go the Greek, it’s not there), no pews, no worship teams, the only thing that is mentioned is an assembly. Paul goes over what a meeting looked like in 1 Corinthians 14 during his time, and that does not resemble anything like what we call “church”. A assembly of believers encouraging each other with the gifts we have been given lead by the Spirit. So, where did things get off track?

Constantine around 300AD. Up until that point there have been no “church” buildings found. Does not take much looking to find that when he legalized being a Christian he also established what we know as “church”, the buildings, clergy, pews, worship, holidays, etc… that was 300 years after Christ, after Scripture was written. Where did he get all the structure? His former pagan roots he did not want to completely give up, the structure of the “church”, pews, bishops, priests, and even the holidays resemble the same thing the pagans did, just “Christianized”. Is any of that in Scripture? Nope.

Well, what do we do then? Scrap the whole church thing, say God is not working because we adopted pagan rituals? No, that is not what I am saying at all or implying. This is actually not new, we know that God meets people where they are at. Nearly every story in Scripture is God meeting a person where they are and working with them. We see this exact thing happen to Israel. God wanted to be their king, but they wanted a earthly king. So God adapted and told them it’s not ideal but, ok. What would the Old Testament look like without David? God met them where they where at and gave them kings, but as prophesized, it was not that great. It was not God’s ideal, but He still worked and moved with it. Same with Christianity. Christians have abandoned living by the Spirit’s leading to living by the pastors leading, following rituals instead of seeking the Spirit. Is it wrong? Not necessarily wrong as it’s giving up your freedom in Christ and limiting your effectiveness as a Christian.

So, what do you do about it? Seek the Spirit’s leading and act on it. Does not mean leave the church, unless the Spirit is making you feel uncomfortable in it. The issue with learning is once you learn something it usually demands action, so staying in the same place usually does not happen. Just like when you come into the relationship with Christ as we have been talking about, the places you go and people around you may jus t not seem the same as the Spirit works in your life convicting you of behavior and lifestyles. As I looked into Acts and actually paid attention to how the Acts churches worked, and discovered where all our church rituals came from, for me, American / European churches seem so fake and ritualistic. But that is me, you may have a different leading from the Spirit and that is perfectly fine. As I mentioned, we all have a different calling, we all have a different relationship, and are all at different levels. Just as Paul in 1 Corinthians 8 talked about eating meat sacrificed to idols, we limit our freedom to help those who have less faith and freedom not to stumble. If that means it takes rituals and structure, then that is what it takes. Paul himself followed the rituals of the Jews to reach them, not because he needed to – 1 Corinthians 9:19. Even when things are not ideal, God still can work, but those that have the faith and can embrace the actual freedom we have and live by the leading of the Spirit, well, they are a valuable tool for God to use.


Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *