Ok, well come back to ecclesia again a little bit later, but now let's talk about the origin of the word "church" and how it came to be used in place of ecclesia.
First of all, I wish to express that this discussion pertains to the actual origin of our English term and concept of "church". Our modern word "church" is actually derived from the Middle English word "chirche", which is from the Old English word "cirice". Isn't that special? (grin) Wait there's more to it than that... There is some speculation about how the word originally came into being, but many scholars believe that it comes from (or perhaps I should say "was inspired by") the Greek word "kuriakon", which is a derivative of "kuriakos". Stay with me here (the details are important)...
Kuriakos is used in the New Testament (twice) and means "of, or belonging to a lord, master, etc." In the context of Scripture, it refers more directly to something belonging "to the Lord" (examples of use: 1 Corinthians 11:20; Revelations 1:10). Prior to Christian use of the word, kuriakos was typically used to refer to things belonging to the Roman Emporer.
Kuriakon (the word scholars believe "church" is derived from), literally translated means "the lord or master of a property" and really has no religious connotation by itself; however, it has also been translated to mean "the Lord's house" (hence some scholars are under the presumption that this Greek term inspired the word "church" since church is regarded commonly as being "the Lord's house" - this is likely ascertained from other historical derivatives of the word church, such as the Scottish derivative, "kirk", and the German derivative, "kirche", etc.), but oddly enough, kuriakon is not ever once used at all in the entire New Testament! NOT ONCE! What does this mean? It means that "CHURCH" is not in the Bible (not in the original languages)! Even several dictionaries tell us that the word "church" used in the Bible probably was added because of traditional influence and comes from this Greek word "kuriakon". Then why isn't "kuriakon" in the Bible? Good question!
The words "kuriakon" and "ecclesia" are NOT synonymous! And even though some may want to take the word kuriakon into use metaphorically (i.e. the Lord's House) in reference to believers, the problem is that, not only is kuriakon not used at all in Scripture, but it doesn't mean the same thing as ecclesia so it is completely improper to use it in its place. Simply stated: kuriakon pertains to a building, or to physical property that is in the direct control/possession of some authority figure (in early times, this would be the Roman Emporer and later the Pope - Christian use would later apply this term to their religious buildings and designate them under the Lord's name, but this was not so in the first century - the Bible NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER uses ecclesia to refer to a place of worship).
First of all, I wish to express that this discussion pertains to the actual origin of our English term and concept of "church". Our modern word "church" is actually derived from the Middle English word "chirche", which is from the Old English word "cirice". Isn't that special? (grin) Wait there's more to it than that... There is some speculation about how the word originally came into being, but many scholars believe that it comes from (or perhaps I should say "was inspired by") the Greek word "kuriakon", which is a derivative of "kuriakos". Stay with me here (the details are important)...
Kuriakos is used in the New Testament (twice) and means "of, or belonging to a lord, master, etc." In the context of Scripture, it refers more directly to something belonging "to the Lord" (examples of use: 1 Corinthians 11:20; Revelations 1:10). Prior to Christian use of the word, kuriakos was typically used to refer to things belonging to the Roman Emporer.
Kuriakon (the word scholars believe "church" is derived from), literally translated means "the lord or master of a property" and really has no religious connotation by itself; however, it has also been translated to mean "the Lord's house" (hence some scholars are under the presumption that this Greek term inspired the word "church" since church is regarded commonly as being "the Lord's house" - this is likely ascertained from other historical derivatives of the word church, such as the Scottish derivative, "kirk", and the German derivative, "kirche", etc.), but oddly enough, kuriakon is not ever once used at all in the entire New Testament! NOT ONCE! What does this mean? It means that "CHURCH" is not in the Bible (not in the original languages)! Even several dictionaries tell us that the word "church" used in the Bible probably was added because of traditional influence and comes from this Greek word "kuriakon". Then why isn't "kuriakon" in the Bible? Good question!
The words "kuriakon" and "ecclesia" are NOT synonymous! And even though some may want to take the word kuriakon into use metaphorically (i.e. the Lord's House) in reference to believers, the problem is that, not only is kuriakon not used at all in Scripture, but it doesn't mean the same thing as ecclesia so it is completely improper to use it in its place. Simply stated: kuriakon pertains to a building, or to physical property that is in the direct control/possession of some authority figure (in early times, this would be the Roman Emporer and later the Pope - Christian use would later apply this term to their religious buildings and designate them under the Lord's name, but this was not so in the first century - the Bible NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER uses ecclesia to refer to a place of worship).
Ecclesia, by stark contrast, refers to people assembled. In a biblical context, ecclesia refers to the Lord's people (who are His body) - and bears no connotation whatsoever of an earthy building, temple or shrine. In the 16th Century, men of God like William Tyndale (Greek scholar and translator of the first printed English Bible) knew it and did not translate "ecclesia" as "church"... They (the religious leaders of his day) called him a heretic and burned him at the stake all because he translated the Scriptures from Greek and Hebrew into terms that more closely identified with their original meanings!
For example: instead of using the word "church" in his translation, Tyndale used the word "congregation" to place emphasis upon the Congregation of God who assembles ONLY under the guidance of the Holy Spirit; themselves being "the church." Tyndales emphasis was deliberate and true. It is obvious to see how this offended the religious leaders of his day, just as it probably would many of the religious leaders of our day; because Tyndale's emphasis on people being the Ecclesia of God (united on a spiritually global scale - i.e. the one Body of Christ) distracted readers from seeing organized religion, hierarchical leadership and the buildings dedicated for religious service as pertaining to and even defining the Church.
Tyndale further showed his contempt for the word "church" by using it just one time in Acts 19:37 to describe, not Christian, but pagan temples. This is interesting because the Greek word for "church" in this passage is not "ecclesia", but another Greek word, "hierosulos" (Strong's #2417), which means "a temple despoiler." This is the only occasion in Tyndale's New Testament where "church" appears. It is also the only place in the KJV where "church" is not translated from "ecclesia". This is an important detail that most Christians have no clue about. It appears that Tyndale was making a rather strong (not to mention controversial) emphasis of distinction, but his emphasis was (and is) in complete harmony with the original languages.
He was entirely correct to make this distinction because "churches", historically (from the biblical era forward), were raised up under mostly pagan influence. I say this because the very idea to "build a church" (as in a temple) was regarded wholly as a pagan concept. The early church did not entertain any such concept as building a "church" building or a "temple" for they well understood that they were the Ecclesia of God; His royal assembly. They were the only
This is important to recognize, though I will also admit that many Christians do have "the ecclesia" in mind when they use the modern word "Church". I have the tendency to still use the word myself (generally by capitalizing the term Church) and this is precisely why a clear definition and show of contrast between the traditional use and Scriptural reference are in order. Please make note of this important distinction in this letter, for when I use the term "Church" in application to the body of Christ - I indeed mean "the Ecclesia". All other uses of the word church are in contrast to the teaching of Scripture, for (as stated previously) there are no "churches", per say, in Scripture - not akin to what most designate as "church" today. I hope this truth is becoming much clearer.
In early Christian times, it truly was only pagans who built temples to honor their idols and false gods... In fact, most of the pomp of religious ceremony that so many believe to be essential in church services is derived entirely from pagan concepts that influenced and corrupted the early Church. This is undisputable historical fact! It is clearly evidenced in early Christian writings (which we will observe more closely in a moment). Observe the following two comments from the book Ecclesiastical History:
"The pagans had been accustomed to numerous and splendid ceremonies from their infancy, and they saw the new religion (i.e. Christianity) destitute of temples, altars, victims, priests, and all the pomp which the pagans supposed to be the essence of religion; for the unenlightened persons are prone to estimate religion by what meets the eyes. To silence this accusation, the Christian leaders thought they must introduce some of the rites and ceremonies which would strike the senses of the people. . . .
"Before the second century was half gone, before the last of the apostles had been dead forty years, this apostate, this working of the 'Mystery of Iniquity,' had so largely spread over the East and the West, that it is literally true that a large part of the Christian observances and institutions, even in this century, had the aspect of the pagan mysteries" (Mosheim in Ecclesiastical History, Century 2, part 2, chapter 4, paragraph 1).great data read the entire account my self amazing..
The Christians understood what it meant to "come out from among them and be separate" (2 Corinthians 6:13-18), for this is even the most essential and literal meaning, which the word "ecclesia" is derived from (its root compounds: "ek" meaning: "a calling out from" - "kaleo" meaning "to call aloud"); not only does it refer merely to an assembly of people, but it means "those called out from among."
As Christians we have been called out by God into His Assembly; His family. I personally think it is no coincidence that ecclesia has this very thought in mind. It makes perfect sense! For not only has God, in His Word, shown that we have been called out from among the world, but also the RELIGIOUS world!
No comments:
Post a Comment