When Jesus met with his disciples near Caesarea-Philippi, he inquired concerning how others were identifying him. Several opinions were proffered. He then pressed for their view. In the New Testament context , the word is employed in four senses:.
For years gospel preachers have called attention to the etymology of ekklesia. For a good while some scholars have disputed this. A few recent voices within the church echo this sentiment. Supposedly, they argued for a meaning of ekklesia that is not consistent with the New Testament use. An article appearing in the Gospel Advocate vigorously pressed for this conclusion.
Others, including me, disagree with loading the word with such theological meaning based upon etymology. For these, etymology plays no role in determining the meaning of ekklesia in the New Testament. The writer then calls attention from a number of scholarly sources to the danger of going overboard in the matter of etymology, which most serious Bible students recognize.
What the writer failed to mention, however, is that there is a considerable body of evidence directly antagonistic to the premise of his article regarding the term ekklesia. It is their inflexible view , one that ridicules a considerable body of scholarship that conflicts with their personal perspective that I feel is misguided. Either they are unaware of the wider range of scholars who dispute their theory or else they have fixated on a position and are not open to any other possibility.
In the third edition of his Historical Grammar , A. Roberts argued the assembly-only theory in , as did Everett Ferguson two decades later , ff. Respectfully, I would like to offer the following response. The single term can embrace both ideas. Throughout the Greek world and right down to NT times cf. The citizens [in Greek society] are the ekklesia , i.
This teaches us something concerning the biblical and Christian usage, namely, that God in Christ calls men out of the world , The founding of the ekklesia by Jesus at Mt. Lenski contended that the etymological sense of ekklesia still lingered in New Testament literature. The meaning of the word ekklesia would thus seem to be, in the N. In his discussion of Matthew , D. It has not in it that exclusive sense.
The universal church is never assembled. It is not an unassembled assembly. The teaching that Christians have been called from the world into a relationship with Christ is profuse in New Testament literature Acts ; 1 Cor. It is quite possible that some who have fallen under the influence of a few scholars who have a restricted view of the Greek term ekklesia need some moderation and balance in their discussions of this important biblical word.
Respectable scholarship does not rule out viable options that may vary from their preference. Jackson, Wayne. Access date: November 13, Topical Index. About Contact. What Is the Meaning of Ekklesia?
By Wayne Jackson. This truth will answer many questions you've had about churches, and the kingdom. It is found once in I Corinthians where it refers to "the Lord's supper," and once again in Revelation where it refers to "the Lord's day. Nonetheless, this is the unlikely and strange history of the word "church" as it came to the English language.
Eventually, through the manipulation of organized religion "church" came to replace "ecclesia" by popular acceptance. Again, we must emphasize the importance of knowing word meanings in order to know the intent of those who wrote the Scriptures.
Now, let's look at the word, "ecclesia". This Greek word appears in the New Testament approximately times. That's just in this one grammatical form. It appears also in other forms. And in every instance, except three, it is wrongly translated as "church" in the King James Version. Those three exceptions are found in Acts , 39, In these instances the translators rendered it "assembly" instead of "church. In Acts 19, "ecclesia" is a town council: a civil body in Ephesus.
Thus, the translators were forced to abandon their fake translation in these three instances. Nonetheless, times they changed it to "church. Thus, you can see how this word was used to indicate a civil body of select called, elected people. In the New Testament, "ecclesia" signifying convocation is the only single word used for church. It ecclesia was the name given to the governmental assembly of the city of Athens, duly convoked called out by proper officers and possessing all political power including even juridical functions.
Obviously, in Greece an ecclesia had no resemblance to a church. An "ecclesia" was a civil assembly in Athens even before the writing of the New Testament. In the Oxford Universal English Dictionary considered the standard for the English language the word "ecclesia" is listed in its English form as used by our English forefathers.
Nowadays, only forms of the word appear - like, "ecclesiastical". Later, the regular word for church. Thus, two of the most prestigious word resources in the English language confirm the fact that an "ecclesia" was originally a select civil body, summoned or convoked for a particular purpose.
What, then, did the writers of the New Testament mean when they used the word "ecclesia" to describe a Christian body of people? We can assume that they intended to convey the original Greek meaning of the word: a body of Christians called out of the Roman and Judean system to come together into a separate civil community.
It meant a politically autonomous body of Christians under no king but Jesus; under no other jurisdiction but that of Jesus. No man ruled them! Only Christ. And that was the reason these same Christians ran into trouble with kings and rulers; were arrested, crucified and martyred. They dropped Caesar as their King and took up Christ. In Acts 17, verses we see that Paul and Silas had a reputation that preceded them. They were "turning the world system upside down.
Were they telling the people to find a minister and support him; go to church every weekend; be nice to their neighbors? Could this have been the message that set the city fathers against them?
Or maybe they were asking people to send their tithes to them so they could build a nice church or develop a Christian recreation center? What then? What were these guys doing that was "turning the world system upside down"? The answer is found in verse Now is that clear? Do you see what they were doing?
Not Caesar! This was a king who was bigger than Caesar. They were forming civil bodies that no longer looked to Caesar as their king. They were forming civil outposts for Christ's conquering army! They were at war! Paul and Silas weren't "church builders" like preachers today claim.
They weren't proselytizing people from one church or synagogue to another. They were kingdom builders! They were dethroning rulers in the minds of the people and alienating them from the mental hold Caesar had upon them through heathenistic central government.
They were teaching the principles of Christian government. They were putting forth the call of God to whomever would hear and obey, and those whose hearts responded to the call became citizens of Christ's kingdom and joined themselves to the ecclesia, or community of believers. Tyndale was willing to die for God's word and truth.
0コメント