The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

The Church
User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:22 am

When you think of the word Ecclesiology, do you think of church history or doctrine pertaining to the subject of the church and what the church is (and what the church is about)?

From scripture I think of the words congregation, assembly, church, body of Christ.
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

Post by TheEditor » Tue Sep 08, 2015 10:15 am

Hi Jacob,

Words come larded with meaning for everyone. When I hear the word "ecclesia" I think of a congregation or a small home church. The reason for me is because the early movers in the sect I was raised in (JWs) were called "Bible Students" and they called their home study circles "ecclesias." On the other hand, when I hear derivatives of the word, like "ecclesiology" or "ecclesiastical", I have a negative reaction because I think of high church and clerical vestments and things of that nature. Why do you ask?

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

Re: The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Tue Sep 08, 2015 10:24 am

TheEditor wrote:Hi Jacob,

Words come larded with meaning for everyone. When I hear the word "ecclesia" I think of a congregation or a small home church. The reason for me is because the early movers in the sect I was raised in (JWs) were called "Bible Students" and they called their home study circles "ecclesias." On the other hand, when I hear derivatives of the word, like "ecclesiology" or "ecclesiastical", I have a negative reaction because I think of high church and clerical vestments and things of that nature. Why do you ask?

Regards, Brenden.
I grew up in the assemblies (Plymouth Brethren), so Christian. The word congregation or assembly is used in the Old Testament or Torah/TaNaKh. There was a church in the wilderness. So also we know Christ spoke of His church.

Acts 7:38 KJV - 38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and [with] our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

Matthew 16:18 NASB - 18 "I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.

Hebrews 12:23 NASB - 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect,

But is the word Ecclesiology the study of the church or of church history?
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

Post by Paidion » Tue Sep 08, 2015 12:25 pm

I think "Ecclesiology" is the study of "ecclesia" and not "ecclesia history."

The Greek word "εκκλησια" (ekklāsia) means "assembly." The word "church" is a later development after the great institutional "church" came into being.
Of course no one translates the word as "church" in Acts 19:41, or you would have the town clerk dismissing the "church" (worshippers of Artemis of the Ephesians).

By the way, I also fellowshipped for several years in assemblies of "open brethren". I would have continued, except I moved to a rural area where there are no such assemblies.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

Re: The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Tue Sep 08, 2015 12:59 pm

Paidion wrote:I think "Ecclesiology" is the study of "ecclesia" and not "ecclesia history."

The Greek word "εκκλησια" (ekklāsia) means "assembly." The word "church" is a later development after the great institutional "church" came into being.
Of course no one translates the word as "church" in Acts 19:41, or you would have the town clerk dismissing the "church" (worshippers of Artemis of the Ephesians).

By the way, I also fellowshipped for several years in assemblies of "open brethren". I would have continued, except I moved to a rural area where there are no such assemblies.
Yes, the Plymouth Brethren assembly I attended was open.

Now I know the word congregation in regard to a Messianic Congregation I attend. This is different than people talking about congregational worship in Christianity or the congregation pertaining to Israel.

Both the church I grew up in and the church I attend now have been considered non-denominational. But Plymouth Brethren is an assembly or considered a denomination by many, though the story goes that they began simply by acknowledging each other as either brothers or brethren (in Christ).

I am actually a Christian with an affinity for that which is Jewish, not necessarily Messianic. I see no problem with Judaism, but think it is important to talk about what the church is. That is, I believe Jesus (Yeshua) is the Messiah. And I am speaking of the church Jesus spoke of. Did He found or start it? I contend that Christianity is not a new religion, and that no one was called Christian until a while after Jesus ascended into heaven to the right hand of God. To be a Christian is to believe that Jesus is the Messiah. That is why I have no problem with the term Messianic.

There is Messianic prophecy, and Messianic Judaism or Messianic Jews. Messianic Judaism is different from Messianic prophecy. However, the term Messiah and the term Christ are seen by most to be synonymous.

My dispensational upbringing is quite different from my time as a Messianic. Plus, I see no reason for contention between Jews and Gentiles and Judaism and Christianity. A Christian can be either a Jew or a Gentile/Greek or have neither identity as a member of Christ's church meaning the body of Christ.
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

Post by Paidion » Tue Sep 08, 2015 2:37 pm

Jacob, you wrote:And I am speaking of the church Jesus spoke of. Did He found or start it? I contend that Christianity is not a new religion, and that no one was called Christian until a while after Jesus ascended into heaven to the right hand of God. To be a Christian is to believe that Jesus is the Messiah. That is why I have no problem with the term Messianic.
According to Jesus Himself, He founded His Assembly (the Assembly of Messiah):
When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, "Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?"
So they said, "Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Anointed One, the Son of the living God."
Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. And I also say to you that you are Peter (πετρος), and on this rock (πετρα) I will build My Assembly, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it." (Matt 16:13-18)
My dispensational upbringing is quite different from my time as a Messianic.
My mother taught me dispensationalism as a child. But in my twenties, as I studied the Bible more, I rejected it.
Plus, I see no reason for contention between Jews and Gentiles and Judaism and Christianity.
No. There's no legitimate reason for contention. However, it remains that those embracing Judaism disbelieve that Jesus was the Messiah. They believe that the Messiah is yet to come.
A Christian can be either a Jew or a Gentile/Greek or have neither identity as a member of Christ's church meaning the body of Christ.
A person who is biologically Jewish can certainly become a Christian (as did the apostle Paul of the tribe of Benjamin).
But a Christian cannot subscribe to Judaism. For it denies that Jesus was the Messiah.
Whoever believes that Jesus is the Anointed One (Messiah) is begotten of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him. (1 John 5:1)
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

Re: The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Tue Sep 08, 2015 2:46 pm

Paidion wrote:
Jacob, you wrote:And I am speaking of the church Jesus spoke of. Did He found or start it? I contend that Christianity is not a new religion, and that no one was called Christian until a while after Jesus ascended into heaven to the right hand of God. To be a Christian is to believe that Jesus is the Messiah. That is why I have no problem with the term Messianic.
According to Jesus Himself, He founded His Assembly (the Assembly of Messiah):
When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, "Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?"
So they said, "Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Anointed One, the Son of the living God."
Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. And I also say to you that you are Peter (πετρος), and on this rock (πετρα) I will build My Assembly, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it." (Matt 16:13-18)
My dispensational upbringing is quite different from my time as a Messianic.
My mother taught me dispensationalism as a child. But in my twenties, as I studied the Bible more, I rejected it.
Plus, I see no reason for contention between Jews and Gentiles and Judaism and Christianity.
No. There's no legitimate reason for contention. However, it remains that those embracing Judaism disbelieve that Jesus was the Messiah. They believe that the Messiah is yet to come.
A Christian can be either a Jew or a Gentile/Greek or have neither identity as a member of Christ's church meaning the body of Christ.
A person who is biologically Jewish can certainly become a Christian (as did the apostle Paul of the tribe of Benjamin).
But a Christian cannot subscribe to Judaism. For it denies that Jesus was the Messiah.
Whoever believes that Jesus is the Anointed One (Messiah) is begotten of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him. (1 John 5:1)
I used to be a dispensationalist, by upbringing. At the same time I knew nothing different, and questioned what I heard based on what I read in the Bible. I did hear of covenant theology at some time.

There are Jews who believe Yeshua is the Messiah and Jews who believe Messiah is yet to come. Of course, He will return.

2 Timothy 4:8 NASB - 8 in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing.

I am not a dispensationalist and not a covenant theologian.

When you think of the term Christian do you recognize that the early church was entirely Jewish? Beyond this I support Biblical Judaism, and Messianic Judaism is different from Jews for Jesus. Many Christians believe a Jew must cease to be a Jew in order to become a Christian.
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

Re: The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Tue Sep 08, 2015 3:50 pm

JacobMartinMertens wrote:2 Timothy 4:8 NASB - 8 in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing.
I need to look at this verse again. Is it talking about the second coming, the rapture, the Lord's return, or the last day? Any combination of these if any of these?
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

Re: The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Tue Sep 08, 2015 6:22 pm

Paidion wrote:I think "Ecclesiology" is the study of "ecclesia" and not "ecclesia history."
This site/forum does have Church History under Miscellaneous.
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: The Church: history or doctrine of or about?

Post by Paidion » Tue Sep 08, 2015 8:14 pm

When you think of the term Christian do you recognize that the early church was entirely Jewish?
Of course. How could I help but recognize that the very early "church" was entirely Jewish? But very soon the apostle Paul brought Gentiles into the faith.
Beyond this I support Biblical Judaism, and Messianic Judaism is different from Jews for Jesus.
You have the right to do so.
Many Christians believe a Jew must cease to be a Jew in order to become a Christian.
How can a Jew cease to be a Jew ethnically?

However, a Jew must cease to subscribe to the religion of Judaism, in order to become a disciple of Jesus (Christian). For a disciple of Jesus recognizes Him as the Messiah. This is denied by Judaism.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

Post Reply

Return to “Ecclesiology”