1002--church, as a one-minute commentary

            I recently found that I never posted a number of transcripts of one-minute Simple Church Minute commentaries.  This is another of those.

1002—church

            This is Simple Church Minute.  To the believers in the days of the New Testament, what did the word translated in English as “church” mean?  In Acts 19, when the guys who made statues for the sex cult started a riot against Paul because people coming to follow Jesus was putting a dent in their sales, the word Luke used to describe the mob was the same one used other places for church.  The word was ekklesia; it meant gathering, assembly, group; it did not have any religious connotation.  As the church was illegal, the group of believers who met together to worship Jesus and build up each other was small enough to meet in a home and for each person to know each other and care about each other.  It was basically devoid of ritual, unlike any belief the world had seen. Oftentimes, possibly in some areas even daily, they ate simple meals together informally. Assuredly, they talked and got to know each other.  Today, in our churches we call this fellowship, which is a synonym with the word communion, which is how they would have understood what, over the centuries, has been made a ritual.  The early believers held to what their society would have seen as a quite irreligious religion.  You can find out more about simple church at www.hrscn.org.

2002--13 definitions of church (revision)

This blog I have redone a number of times.  It’s original title was “8 definitions of church”.  With this update, the number is now 13.  With each update, I feel that I am learning a little bit more of what God has said to us, the church, and a little bit more of how toxic the unscriptural traditions that have morphed into the church over the centuries are. 

2002—13 definitions of church

            My name is Tom; this is Simple Church Minute.  Today a word study on the greek word “ekklessia” and its English equivalent, church.  I, so far, have found 13 distinct definitions.  Six began developing a minimum of two hundred years after the writing of the New Testament, and, therefore, are not anything the writers of Scripture had in mind.  Those are:

1) the Roman Catholic Church, which in the western world was perceived to be a virtual equivalent for over 1200 years,

2) a denomination, of which others came about after the Reformation,

3) a building—buildings were forced into Christianity only after the Roman Empire legalized Christianity, or a general style of building that is exclusively used by institutional churches.

4) a special type of not for profit corporation—a benefit that the Roman Empire had for paganism, and extended to Christianity upon legalization, and

5) the special tax-favored corporation, and

6) the persons who make the policies for the not for profit corporations.

            The following definitions are connected to the word “ekklessia” in the original writings of the New Testament. 

7)  All believers in history.  Hebrews 12 verse 2, even though it doesn’t use the word, described this group.  This is the group that is going to be admitted into heaven. 

8) All believers in a city or area.  We only have one overt mention of a meeting of all believers in a city, in Acts 5 verse 12.  It is easy to picture that some of the early churches Paul describes were small enough that at some point they all met together.  Today, there are so many divisions that it is hard to imagine all believers in a city coming together, but I must mention it as one of the definitions. 

9)  A group of believers that meet together to worship, which is described in Acts 2 verses 42 to 47.  I believe that many do not wish to teach this scripture due to verse 45, where it speaks about sharing everything in common.  We must recognize the context of most of this early church being poor, under persecution from both the Romans, who saw them as a Jewish group, and the Jewish establishment, who had Jesus put to death.  The Non-Jews who had just come to faith in Jesus were travelers, as Jerusalem was on a trade route.  We see later in scripture that the Romans years later force everyone to scatter, and these non-Jews would have spent time growing in faith, and taking faith in Jesus back to their homeland upon that scattering.  This has and continues to happen.

 

10)     1 Thessalonians 5 verse 11 tells us that the church is a group of people that meets to build up each other.  This indicates that a local church is small enough for everyone to know each other, care about each other, and if everyone mentors one another, no one person is dominating all the teaching and mentoring.  Every believer gains wisdom to share as they desire to follow Jesus. 

11) As few as two believers, when meeting in agreement.  Matthew 18:20 says, “For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there in their midst.”  Further Colossians 1:18 tells us Jesus is Head of the Church.  Conversely, Heb. 10:25 tells us not to not forsake gathering together with other believers, but to exhort one another.  One can gather together with as few as two, but if one meets in the hundreds or thousands, but exhorting one another is not allowed or is not expected by others, we need consider the possibility that our traditional large gatherings do not meet the scriptural definition of church.  Also, Jesus was said this in a way that negated to the disciples’ minds the Jewish tradition that it took ten persons to have a congregation.

12)  This is a bizarre reference, but the believer in Jesus knows that God knew what He was doing in commissioning the books of Scripture.  In Acts 19, we have the story of the idol makers of the temple of Diana, a fertility cult, organizing a protest against the work of Paul in leading persons to faith in Jesus.  Apparently, enough persons were coming to faith in Jesus, and abandoning the town worship that was built on sailor’s giving money to the temple in trade for sexual acts, that their bottom line was affected.  In verses 32, 39, and 41 of our English Bibles, this mob is described as a “assembly” or “gathering”, but in the Greek, the word was “ekklesia” the word everywhere else translated “church.”  This tells us that an ekklesia isn’t religious, could be temporary, and the word is quite vague, more like our modern English word, “group,” and not much like the very religious, stiflingly organized meaning most persons in our culture associate with the word “church.” 

13)  To that effect, given that the early church met in meetings where everyone could share what God had done in their lives or taught them, with minimal structure, one scholar says that, if we were translating ekklesia into English for the first time now, the most appropriate way would be the phrase "town meeting".

Therefore, my conclusion is that many of the informal groups of believers meeting in business break rooms, college dorms, and informally in homes, where “two or three are gathered” align more with the biblical concept than our structured rituals, and by rituals, I am as much referring to modern soft-rock praise and worship as to centuries old liturgie. If you or I personally enjoy it does not make it any less a ritual.  How do we worship in Spirit and truth?  It takes work on every believer’s part, and openness on every leader’s part, to allow Jesus to be Head of the Church in reality, and not just a quote from Colossians 1 verse 18.

  You can contact me at simplechurchminute@yahoo.com or by phone at 757-735-3639. To review what I just said, visit my blog, tevyebird.blogspot.com, as this is the entry for June 20, 2012.
 For more information about simple, organic worship in this area, visit www.hrscn.org.
---------
Information for this commentary was obtained from:
Frank Viola and George Barna, Pagan Christianity,
On point 2) Actually, Orthodox and Thoma (in India) predate the Reformation, and a variety of small groups of believers (and also heresies) were in hiding, particularly in mountainous areas of central Europe, before and somewhat after the time of the Reformation.
On point 11) Jon Zens, in The Pastor Has No Clothes, opines that the modern phrase "town meeting" is closest to ekklesia.  In the five minute format that I am working with in this commentary, there wasn't time to more than mention that idea.

2067--What if someone...(five minute version)

            Almost everything I have written for the Simple Church Minute commentaries come from the writings of persons who have written notable things about simple/organic/ simple church.  A couple more have come from my own experiences.  Only one of these commentaries, so far, comes from an idea from a brother who is functioning significantly and creatively inside the institutional system.  This idea comes from Glen Davis, an Assembly of God pastor working on the campus of Stanford University (glenandpaula.com/wordpress).  This came from a talk I heard him give in 1998.  I never heard anyone say this before, I haven’t heard anyone say this afterword, except for my repeating Glen’s idea.  It doesn’t directly have anything to do with organic church, except for it being connected with dealing with real life, as opposed to some dream of how believers should react to the world around us.

2067—What if someone asks you a question that you don’t know the answer to?

            My name is Tom; this is Simple Church Minute.  Let us say you are in a conversation with a person who is not a believer, and that person asks you a question you do not know the answer to.  What should you say?  This is a matter of heart, not knowledge, on both yours and the other person’s part.

First, there are questions of the trivial variety, like “Can God create a stone He cannot lift?”  Philosophers through the ages, and in mathematics, Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem address this, but it isn’t a serious question for someone seeking truth, it’s a parlor game.  That God is in the sentence is irrelevant; it has to do with the use of positive and negative terms in a certain alignment, and that, in turn, differs in different languages.

            Now, for relevant questions.  First, this situation, for you, has to do with obedience to Jesus.  If you don’t know the answer to a question, tell the person, “I don’t know, but I’ll find out.” Now, at this point, you have given your word as a matter of desiring to honor Jesus.  This matter is, for you, even more a matter between you and God than it is between this other person and yourself, or that person and God.  Next, you need to be connected to mature believers who are willing to struggle with the difficult situations of this life, and not give cleaver answers that pass the buck.  What do I mean by this?  Here’s an example.  I’ve indicated in other spots that I have come to see that New Covenant believers are to be generous, but the tithe was in the Old Covenant only.  If I didn’t, then “Should a believer tithe on the net or gross of one’s paycheck?” would be a valid question.  An answer I have heard given by speakers more than once, “Do you want a net blessing or gross blessing?” may be humorous, but it is not an answer, much less an honest, thoughtful answer of a mature believer, which that speaker is implying that he or she is, one that cares to truly see other believers grow in faith.  I do not care what titles or degrees that person has or does not have—avoiding honest questions is irresponsible before Jesus with being in a position of leading others towards maturity of faith.  If possible, and it is in this culture, we all need to be associated with mature believers that will assist us with these honest answers to honest questions, so we all may grow up to do the same, and, no matter how young one is spiritually, one should desire, as part of honoring Jesus with one’s life, to be that mature believer that assists the next generation.  Might I suggest that part of that is being around spiritual leaders that desire and expect each of us to grow to a level of responsibility in living for Jesus and seeing those around us grow in faith that is equal or higher than where that leader is at.  That is far better done in one on one conversations, not generalized lectures.  There are supposed leaders today who do not want that, either because intentionally or subliminally, they are protecting their position or paycheck, or ego or that just possibly they don’t believe that, if God truly created the universe, that everything in the universe does fit together and make sense-- albeit not in a manner that can be explained in 25 words or less--or even 25 minutes or less. 

            Lastly, there are some questions that God has not told us the answer to.  Francis Schaeffer wrote that God has, in giving us the Bible the way He did, communicated to us truly, but not exhaustively.  That means the Bible tells us that God created the heavens and the earth, and that, in turn, means that God understood before creation all the subatomic small to astrophysical large processes it takes to have this universe work.  I believe it takes less faith to believe the God of the Bible than it takes to believe it happened by a one over one times 10 to the one hundred second power chance. On the opposite side, a Bible doesn’t replace a Chilton’s manual if you need to bleed the brakes on your car, although the whole process works on principles God ordained for this universe.   

            At the point that you have found out the answer, or whether there is none, and you have communicated that, you are not responsible for the other person being satisfied with the answer. You are responsible to live to honor Jesus. We must understand that the Holy Spirit works both through our minds and our spirits, and He can and sometimes does speak to a person through the intellectually unsatisfying answer.  All of us believers have wondered why God didn’t tell us something, and then did tell us some of the things He did in the Old Testament. 

             You can communicate with me at simplechurchminute@yahoo.com or 757-735-xxxx.  To read over what I just said, and some additional information on this subject, I have it posted on my blog, tevyebird.blogspot.com, on the post dated September 7, 2011. For more info about organic churches in this area, visit www.hrscn.org

            I have been a believer since 1968, and I feel that I have desired, albeit imperfectly, to serve Jesus with all that is in me, including my mind.  I have spent some of my life as a believer in a Calvinistic tradition, which tends to overemphasize intellectualism. I have spent part of my life in the charismatic-Pentecostal tradition, which in some places does the opposite.  During the winter of 2011, I ran into the fact that the word in Acts 19 that is translated “assembly”, referring to the mob protesting the work of Paul in Ephesus was “ekklesia”, which in all other places in the New Testament is translated “church.”  As the mob was not just non-believers, but was opposed to Paul’s work, and was supporting the idol makers in Ephesus, and the idols were for the temple of Diana, a fertility (i.e. sex) cult, the question occurred to me, “were the idols the idol makers were making what we, in this culture, would call pornographic?”  I looked at a number of books, and couldn’t find any comment on this.  I already knew that to not be surprising, as all kinds of Christian writers over the centuries have been less forthcoming on the subject of sexuality as God is.  I called a man I know in this area that has had seminary training and has been and still is involved in foreign missionary work.  After a few days, he directed me to some resources which, to my surprise, indicate that, as much as one might expect the answer to be “yes,” and in spite of the archeology done in the ancient Greek world, the answer to my specific question, at this time is, we don’t know for certain. 

2094--organic church

           

            For anyone stumbling across this blog for the first time, the original idea of it was to post a group of two minute commentaries about simple worship of Jesus, with most of the commentaries based on the points with regard to this subject made by George Barna and Frank Viola in their book, Pagan Christianity and Wolfgang Simson in his 15 Theses for the Re-Incarnation of Church.  Those appear in a group of blogs I posted in December, 2010.  They were written for radio, but so far, I have not had the money to broadcast them.  Additionally, either one minute or five minutes are time frames more amenable to stations in my area, so I am rewriting some of the major thoughts expressed in the December postings to fit both the smaller and larger time frame.  What is below is part of this project.

2094—organic church

            My name is Tom; this is Simple Church Minute.  What is meant by “organic church”? When we speak of organic gardening, we mean food grown without man-made chemicals or genetic engineering.  Organic healing deals with the use of natural products, as opposed to man-made substances.  Early in the 20^th century, former pastor T. Austin-Sparks coined the term “organic expression of church” or “organic church.”  One statement he made on this idea is (and I quote):

            “God’s way and law of fullness is that organic life.  In the Divine order, life produces its own organism, whether it be vegetable, animal, human, or spiritual.  This means that everything comes from the inside.  Function, order, and fruit issue from this law of life within.  It was solely on this principle that what we have in the New Testament came into being.” (unquote)

            The Koine Greek word “ekklesia” that is translated “church” in our English Bibles was a secular word, meaning close to our current word “group” or “town meeting.”  An example of that is that it also was used by Luke in Acts 19 to describe the mob that protested the work of Paul in Ephasus.  There was not only no religious connotation to it, but also no connotation to a formal organization, official human leadership structures, or any ritual as a right way to worship.  We are told the early church of believers in Jesus met daily, went from house to house, and cared for others spontaneously.

            Therefore, organic church speaks of church as it was lived in the days of the writing of the New Testament, as opposed to adding man-made organizations, programs, and methods.  This, so far in history, seems to be most easily done when there is such overt opposition by a government or social group that we believers cannot add organizations, programs, and methods, but that does not necessarily have to be the case.

            We see in the Gospels that some came to believe on Jesus while He walked the earth. After the Holy Spirit came upon the early believers in Acts chapter 2, many others came to faith in Him.  They became groups of people small enough to know each other, and they met regularly to worship Him and build up each other.  By the way they lived their lives to honor Jesus and care for those around them, others came to faith in Jesus. The churches, that is, these informal groups, grew and reproduced into more groups.  Miracles naturally happened. Some believers felt compelled to take the message to other cultures.  Status quo groups such as the government and Judaism opposed the church, but the church grew in spite of it, and possibly even because of it, because standing for truth in the face of overwhelming opposition, without a monetary or political motive will draw attention because of the seeming courage involved.  Due to the opposition, even though the surrounding people respected the believers, only those who truly came to believe on Jesus joined the church.  Jesus, not any human, was necessary to lead the church’s worship,  which was understood to be how one lived one’s life each moment, not just how one interacted to a religious ritual.

With no organization, there was no need to collect money except when there was an evident need, such as the church in Jerusalem, which had an unusually high number of elderly persons because many elderly Jews who lived outside Israel wished to die in the city, and when they came, some heard the message and believed.

            The church grew naturally.  There was no need for a professional class of ritualists, unlike anything the world had seen.  When the opposition to the church drove believers out of cities, such as the Romans did to the population of Jerusalem in 70 and 130 AD, they wound up scattering and spreading the message of Jesus in all directions, like seeds in the wind.  The church being transient was not a problem, but an opportunity.

              You can contact me by email at simplechurchminute@yahoo.com or by phone at 757-735-xxxx.  To read what I just said, I have it on my blog, tevyebird.blogspot.com, on the blog dated July 28, 2011. You can find out more about simple forms of worship in this area at www.hrscn.org. 

            There is someone working on posting the complete works of T. Austin-Sparks on the internet at www.austin-sparks.net.

            John Zens makes the observation ekklesia meaning “town meeting” in his book, The Pastor Has No Clothes.

            Historical footnotes to many facts that are behind statements made here can be found in George Barna and Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity.

 

group, church, and cultural context

            On the northern edge of the downtown business district of Norfolk, VA, there is a certain office building.  Unlike most of the downtown buildings, it has a small strip of lawn in front of the building, and on that piece of lawn is a sign stating the tenants of it.  One of them is “The Group for Women.”  The name tells one little about the organization.  I have intentionally not done any research about it—the reason why will be obvious in a moment.  Knowing the day and age I live in, I could reasonably guess that it might be a feminist organization, or an organization that concentrates on a physical or psychological problem that is largely a concern of the female gender.  Therefore, I cannot even guess whether it is for profit or not for profit.  In spite of the name, “The” does not imply that it is the largest or most dominant women’s group in the area, or I probably would know something about it.

            The problem is with the word “group.”  Many large Japanese corporations end their name with the word “Group”, but that isn’t common here.  In our culture, a group could be an informal association of people, or an organization of just about any type one can imagine.  It has a specialized meaning in the military.  It can be a synonym for band.  About the only thing specific is that it isn’t referring to an individual.

            The importance to believers in Jesus is that, to the best that I can see, group is the modern English word most similar to the word in Biblical (Koine) Greek that is generally translated “church.”  Yes, I know that it is supposedly most close to “gathering” or “assembly”, but neither of these words are as commonly used as “group.”  The key in my saying this comes from Acts 19.  There appears the story of the idol makers guild protesting the work of Paul.  The idol makers, in spite of the statements of honor to the goddess Diana in this passage, were really motivated by their bottom line being hurt by persons who formerly were involved in the city religion leaving that to follow Jesus.  We must also take note that this town belief gained no small amount of money by travelers, especially sailors, who cared nothing about the belief, but did drop money to the temple to take part in its sexual sacrifices.  Anyway, in Acts 19, the protestors they gathered are described in most English versions of the Bible as an “assembly” or “gathering,” and I’m fully well aware that many institutional church pastors have described this more colorfully, and to our cultural accurately, as a “mob”, but that word, in the Greek, was the same word that in all other places in the New Testament is translated as “church.”  That was why city officials were so concerned, as such dissent was one of the few things that irritated their superiors in Rome, and they, as all politicians, were concerned about their own jobs. 

            This tells us that, to the original writers and hearers of the books of the New Testament, and also to unbelievers who lived in that culture, that word implied something that was not necessarily formally organized, not necessarily permanent or temporary, and not a religious term.  When almost any person in our culture hears or reads the word “church” in our culture today, they will think of something religious, organizational, permanent (as possibly incapable of adjusting quickly to anything), and established.  When we take that attitude to reading that into that word in scripture, we are now reading that passage out of (cultural) context, which can easily lead to interpreting the whole passage in a way that is not at all like it was meant to be understood. 

Church as group

            In Acts 19, we are told the story of the riot of the idol makers guild.  The idol makers were in Ephasus, and the town religion was worship of the goddess Artemis/Diana, a fertility cult.  The temple was very much a financial success by its offering cult prostitution, with the temple being built very close to the portage area.  The sailors left a significant amount of their earnings with the temple, such that the temple opened the town bank, and had opened branch temples around the Mediterranean.

            I had a question, which turned out to be more difficult to find the answer to than I would have first thought, and I wish to thank Don Davis for helping me on this.  The question is:  Would the idols that the idol makers were making be a thing that, in our culture, be considered pornographic?  In many cultures, the formal or informal deification of sexuality has connected to it cartoonish images with oversized sexual parts.  Given the attitude in Ephesus, it would be reasonable that we would find this in this culture.  Archeology, at this time, has not found any examples of these idols. An interesting side note is that a word in Hebrew that sounded similar to a word connected to Artemis worship, and that Hebrew word meant a young, female deer.  A statue of Artemis that has survived and is currently in the Louve in Paris shows a woman standing beside a young deer.  This definitely shows an effect of the Diaspora on Ephesian culture. Therefore, the answer, surprisingly, is that we do not conclusively know one way or the other.

            Now, the normal point the believing church makes from this story concerns the word translated “proconsuls,” which tells us that we can date this incident within an 18 month period of time, from which we can relatively date the timing of much of the New Testament. Many other persons have told that story.  The one I wish to point out is based on the word “assembly” in Acts 19, verses 32, 39, and 41.  The word in Greek is ekklesia, which in other parts of the New Testament is translated, “church.”  Things that need to be pointed out are:

1.  The word means assembly, gathering, or in our common usage, close to our word group.  It had no religious connotation—in Acts 19, it is a mob formed for a thinly veiled protest due to the preaching of the Word hurting some unbelievers economically.  People coming to faith in Jesus no longer purchased nick-nacks benefitting those connected with the fertility cult.

2.  If the word ekklesia meant something as common as assembly, gathering, or group, how did we get the idea of all the things we associate with our modern word “church”?  The early translators of the Bible into English knew it, but they were getting paid and had their positions due to connections with the institutional religious organization of their day, and the word “church” was not necessarily incorrect, but sufficiently vague that those who did not know and did not have access to check these guys’ work could reasonably infer meanings that weren’t there.  As all believers know, sins of omission are easier to miss or self-justify than sins we commit.

3.  Therefore, what we have in the Bible is that church is a group of believers that interact with each other to worship Jesus (Acts 2:41-47) and to build up each other (1 Thessalonians 5:11).  The problem with this otherwise innocuous statement is that most institutional organizations we in western culture call churches don’t allow the second of these, being replaced by one or a very few attempting to do all or most of the building up.   

Some references works for statements, above:

www.vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=2268

www.formerthings.com/dianaephesians.htm

www.biblebb.com/files/mac/sg1928.htm

Simple Church Minute 57--clergy/laity divide

57—clergy/laity divide

My name is Tom; this is Simple Church Minute.

            At the time Jesus walked the earth, all beliefs had priests, laypeople, temples, and sacrifices, and many countries and occupational skills actually acted as a belief.  An example is Paul and the riot of the idol makers guild in Acts 19.  When Jesus died, arose, ascended to heaven, and sent the Holy Spirit to dwell in the people of his New Covenant, He made a chosen people with characteristics unlike anything seen before on earth.  He introduced to his followers spontaneity, worship, and honor of God without structure and ritual, but within each believer, male or female, Jew or Gentile, the desire to honor Jesus with all that was in them.  Leadership was informal, by experience and gifting, character, and obedience to the Holy Spirit. 

            How then did the church wind up with a structure like other beliefs?  The apostles opposed it.  Third John verses 9 and 10 speak against a man who liked to have the preeminence.  Revelation 2 verse 6 may also be a warning of such a division.  Our wanting official human leaders seems to be a human temptation.  In the Old Covenant, God set up judges, but one sees in First Samuel chapter 8 verse 19, the people wanted a king.

            There were elders, people of experience, but no one was over another.  Apostles started churches, and on occasion revisited churches, had others visit, and Peter, Paul, and John sent letters, which are examples of apostolic oversight.  Notably, they weren’t sent to the head person, they were sent to all the church.  The leaders were not necessarily male.  In Romans 16, Phoebe is mentioned in verse 1, Priscilla in verse 3, and Junia in verse 7.  Within a couple hundred years, Cyprian of Carthage taught clergy was needed to intercede, even though the Bible teaches we no longer need an intercessor.

            You can email me at simplechurchminute@gmail.com.  For more info on organic church*, visit http://www.simplechurch.com/ or locally at (local website).

On the recording, at this time, it says, “house churches.”  While that phrasing is OK, to say “organic church” is better.  I comment on that in blip 94.