The "Other"

[alon]

Here is a teaching straight from Rabbi Stanley, from Synagogue Beit Aveinu where I attend:

There was (a) Rabbi of the first generation of the Tannaim I’d like to introduce you to. Elisha Ben Abuyah. Born before the destruction of the Temple and lived even into the second century. He was the son of a rich and well-respected citizen of Jerusalem, and was trained for the career of a scholar. In his earlier days, the Pharisees were very proud of him but something happened later that angered some of the Pharisees. They wouldn’t even call him by name. From then on he is called “The Other”.

Some historians think he became a Gnostic some think he became a follower of Philo. But there are others who think he became a Believer in Yeshua. We don’t know for sure but we do know he was caught having “forbidden writings in his coat”, which could’ve been writings from the Saducees or… writings from Messianic Jews.

A teacher in the bet ha-midrash in the Temple, the famous Rabbi Meir was his student. They remained friends long after Elisha was labeled a heretic. One thing for sure though, if Elisha was a true heretic Rabbi Meir would never have been friends with him. Many of the terrible things attributed to R. Elisha in the Talmud are unreliable due to the hatred towards him from the later Rabbis. And the reason most Jews today want to make him out to be a heretic rather than a "Christian" is because they don’t want to have to face the possibility that they may have lost yet another “once great rabbi” to the Messianics.

The interesting thing to note is that as you study Talmud you begin to see just how widespread Messianic Judaism was in the first century. The Church has tried to make it into a small rebel/radical uprising. It’s like saying the Republican Party is an isolated group in Georgia and not half of the country which often dictates federal policy! Information helps us find the truth!

Rav S.

So once again, the church and the Jews agree, for different yet similar reasons. Why vilify this man long after his death unless you want to hide the truth? "He couldn't have become Messianic" and "He was only part of a small minority of believers" both are lies, told to obfuscate the fact in the first cen. CE the Nots'rim may have been the largest sect of Judaism, and Christians were almost non-existant- not even "existant" until very late in the first cen. And then only as prosylites to Messianic Judaism (the Nots'rim).

Acts 11: 19 Now those who were scattered because of the persecution that arose over Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to no one except Jews. 20 But there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who on coming to Antioch spoke to the Hellenists also, preaching the Lord Jesus. 21 And the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number who believed turned to the Lord. 22 The report of this came to the ears of the church in Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch. 23 When he came and saw the grace of God, he was glad, and he exhorted them all to remain faithful to the Lord with steadfast purpose, 24 for he was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith. And a great many people were added to the Lord. 25 So Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, 26 and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For a whole year they met with the church and taught a great many people. And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians.

So this is the first time we see large numbers of Gentiles being converted; and who was it that was converting them? Jews who believed in Yeshua. Who was it that was sent to teach them? Barnabas and Rav Sha'ul, also Jews. Who witnessed to them in the first place? Jews scattered because of the persecution of Steven. And that should have been translated (in a world where translators were honest) as the synagogue in Jerusalem, not the church. We may have just witnessed the first "church" ever in Antioch. Then again, if they didn't become apostate later and turn to the teachings of the "Church Fathers", maybe not. Regardless, it was the first assembly which was Gentile and not Jewish.

Dan C

Note: some asked earlier if I could post some of Rav S. teachings. I can't really post much because they are his teachings, not mine. But I quote him often, and every once in a while a short gem pops out and I like to put it up.

[rabbistanley]

Shalom beYeshua HaMeshiach,
There has been even more evidence lately of a large scale population of Jewish Believers in Yeshua in ancient Israel. Even clear down to the 3rd and 4th centuries we find entire villages made up of followers of The Nazarene. It was much more then just "a small rebel/radical uprising"(as I state in my teaching). Here's a video of one such village. It's in Hebrew but there are English subtitles for English speakers. It's very exciting to hear these kinds of stories as it will hopefully one day open the eyes of the world to this massive sect that evolved in Israel due to the Meshiach.... www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6Y23FT-Gd4#t=19

[garrett]

alon and rabbistanley,

This is some very interesting stuff. The video too. It would be great if some author and/or archaeologists would put together a concise history of what has been discovered, what has been written about and things that have been seen regarding the first assemblies of the Nots'rim.

[alon]

Mar 4, 2015 18:11:02 GMT -8 garrett said:

It would be great if some author and/or archaeologists would put together a concise history of what has been discovered, what has been written about and things that have been seen regarding the first assemblies of the Nots'rim.

Well, there is ... of sorts. If read correctly, it's called by some "The New Testament." The more astute call it the Kethuvai Shelachim, or Apostolic Writings.

Hint: start by replacing the word "church" with synagogue wherever you find it. From there study it critically and you'll find the apostles and the first cen. believers kept Shabbat, they kept the feasts, and were a sect of Judaism; and Rav Sha'ul was their ringleader! All kinds of things come to light the more you read it critically and Hebraically, getting past just what you were taught in Sunday School.

Dan C

[Elizabeth]

Kethuvai Shelachim; a new word for our little vocabulary. I am being challenged as my kids learn more and more. It is harder for me to be brave as I see them grow and start to run with what they learn.  

It's nice to be inspired by the brave people who lived here. It encourages me. We don't know their names. That really resonated with me. That's just one more reason to be grateful for a G-d who never forgets and to be more vocal on their behalf. The more the world tries to hide them, the more they must know there is something worth hiding.

It's nice to see the world reveals the G-d of Israel in spite of itself.

[jimmie]

[quote author="alon" source="/post/18579/thread" timestamp="1425529019Hint: start by replacing the word "church" with synagogue wherever you find it.
Dan C
[/font][/quote]

alon,
While I don’t have a problem using “church” and “synagogue” interchangeably, they are not used to translate the same Greek word. The Greek words synagoge (or synagogue) and ekklesia (often translated as congregation or church) have very similar meanings. Synagogue means a gathering (syn = together, and ago = bring, or, bring together), while ekklesia (ek = out of, klesia = call) means a calling out of. So, ekklesia doesn’t just mean called together, gathering, or church; it also implies a calling out… as from ‘the world,’ and limiting the translated words “congregation” to gathering or “church” to the gathered or the building of worship does violence to the words.

Therefore, we must be careful whenever we come upon the word congregation/church in the Bible, because the specific reference may imply either those who gather in a place, or those who are called by God. For notice the following group of scriptures to see what such a calling implies:
Matthew 22:14: ‘For many are called, but few are chosen.’
Romans 1:6: ‘from which you’ve also become called ones who belong to Jesus the Anointed’
Romans 1:7: ‘God’s loved ones who were called to be holy.’
Romans 8:28: ‘Now, we know that God makes everything work together for the good of those who love Him (those who have been called to do His Will).’
Romans 8:30: ‘He calls all those whom He selects, then He makes all those whom He calls righteous, and He glorifies all those whom He makes righteous.’
1 Corinthians 1:2: ‘To you who have been made holy in the Anointed One Jesus, who are called to be Holy Ones.’
1 Corinthians 1:9: ‘God who called you to have a share with His Son (our Lord Jesus the Anointed One) is faithful.’
2 Corinthians 5:20: ‘So, God is calling [people] through us. We are begging on behalf of the Anointed One, Come back to a relationship with God.’
Galatians 5:13: ‘You were called to be free, brothers.’
Ephesians 1:18: ‘so you can know the glorious richness of the hope that He has called you for and which He holds as an inheritance for the Holy Ones.’
Philippians 3:14: ‘I’m running toward the goal, the prize of the upward calling from God.’
Colossians 3:15, ‘Let the peace of the Anointed One serve as the referee in your hearts, because it called [all of] you into one body.
1 Thessalonians 2:12: ‘[We did this] so that you would keep on walking in a way that’s worthy of The God who’s calling you to His Kingdom and glory.’
1 Thessalonians 4:7: ‘For, God didn’t call us to uncleanness, but to holiness.’
2 Thessalonians 2:14: ‘This is why He called you through the good news we brought: So you would receive the glory of our Lord Jesus, the Anointed.’
1 Timothy 6:12: ‘Put on the age-long life that you were called to, and about which you offered such a fine confession in front of so many witnesses.’
2 Timothy 1:9: ‘He saved us and called us to holiness, not because of anything we’ve done, but because of His Will and the caring that He felt for us (through Jesus the Anointed One), in the times before the ages.’
Hebrews 3:1: ‘Therefore, holy brothers who share in the heavenly calling; let’s think about this Apostle and High Priest whom we confess, Jesus.’
1 Peter 1:15, 16: ‘But, like the Holy One who called you, become holy in all your ways. For it’s written; You must be holy, because I am holy.’
1 Peter 2:9: ‘However, you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people who were specially selected to announce the virtues of the one who called you out of darkness and into his wonderful light.’
2 Peter 1:10: ‘Brothers, this is why it’s so urgent for you to make your calling and choosing firm.’
Revelation 17:14: ‘But, because he's the Lord of lords and King of kings, the Lamb and those who are with him (the called, elected, and faithful) will conquer them.’

[Miykhael]

B”H

This might help?
k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/pj9fqvwe3z/churchorsynagogue.mp3

[jimmie]

Why stop at Old English “circe” when researching the word “church”? Why not take it all the way back to its’ Greek root of “kuiakos” – of the lord? The speaker points out that “church” is used only in the NT but fails to point out that synagogue is only used once in the OT. Thus both words are essentially a NT convention. He also points out that “church” is used to describe the Great sleeper in Revelation but fails to mention the “synagogue of satan” in Revelations 2:9 and 3:9. The speaker condemns the translators for trying to draw a distinction between church and synagogue and elevating church over synagogue then draws a distinction between synagogue and church and elevates synagogue over church. Thus both would be sowing discord among brethren.
Think of synagogue and church as the heads and tails on a coin. The synagogue are those in fellowship with God and the church are those being called out of the world into fellowship with God. Neither group should think of themselves as being better than the other for they are one body.

[alon]

jimmie-“The synagogue are those in fellowship with God and the church are those being called out of the world into fellowship with God. Neither group should think of themselves as being better than the other for they are one body.”

They are most decidedly NOT one body, and this has been discussed and proven on this forum many times. The early church fathers almost to a man hated the Jews, they hated the synagogue and everything taught there. They separated themselves and their “church” from anyting Jewish, going so far as to remake Jesus as a Gentile in spirit, if not in fact. The church was NOT those called out of the world, it was the work of the enemy to keep even believers bound TO the world!

Jimmie, your problem is you have not come out of the church and its heretical teachings. Another problem I have here specifically is you deal perfidiously with everything anyone said, you obfuscate the truth and you try to lead us on a red herring trail in your first post, which was a snow job. You quote a lot of scripture, none of which was about church vs. synagogue. Ex 35:1 uses the term kahal- a called out assembly, used as the called out assy of Israel. The Gk equivalent is eclesia- a called out assy. So the question then becomes, if in the Septuagent the term is used as a called out assembly for Israel, why isn’t it the same in the Gk New Testament? Why completely separate everything in the New Testament from anything Jewish and make it about a new church?

As has been discussed on this forum many times, THERE WAS NO “CHURCH” UNTIL VERY LATE IN THE 1ST CEN CE AT THE EARLIEST- and actually not until the 2nd cen did it really take on form! The Notsarim worshiped in synagogues, and to say they worshiped in churches is a lie of the enemy. Or as R. Reuel put it, “The New Testament renders this with loaded term church, which is used as a distinct term antagonistic to Judaism.” The Notsarim were Jews and proselytes to Judaism.

You ask “Why stop at Old English “circe” when researching the word “church”?” This is misleading as “the speaker” you mention, (who happens to be R. Reuel) did no such thing. Cirque was only one aspect of his d’rash, and he did far more than just research that word. However your attempt to discredit this part of the d’rash is understandable if you want to divert attention from a particularly damning part of his talk. The fact is, the English term “church” has its roots in paganism. Why stop there? Because we read English translations, obviously. I’m sure if we all spoke Chinese his evolutional study of the translated term would have been different.

As R. Reuel points out, cirque is a Celtic term meaning circle, a pagan form of assembly. It is also a magic term, and the term for a nymph, a minor goddess. It is from this we get the word church, and is alluded to in Rev 17:4. She used herbs, and makes us drunk as we sip from her golden cup. Church is a completely pagan term denoting a pagan form of worship.

Again he points out the terms synagogue and church are pregnant with meaning- one followed Yeshua, the other remade Yeshua in its immage. One Teaches , one fell away. The New Testament always renders this with loaded term church, which is used as a distinct term antagonistic to Judaism. Church has worldview of a life which is not observant, and that you cannot argue because everyone here grew up in the culture; we know what it means, its connotations in common use.

Again R. Reuel points out that from Acts 15 on believers in Yeshua were expected to meet in synagogues and learn and grow. Acts 17.20-21 required 4 things of Gentile converts to separate themselves initially from their pagan practices, and then they met in synagogue every Shabbat to learn more, NOT in church “circles.” And, by the way, we still commonly use this term today. I grew up hearing of how things were thought of or done “in church circles.”

The church from the 2nd to 3rd cen on (which was its inception, it didn’t exist as an entity before this) taught against . They teach a doctrine which has put them in a drunken stupor; just like the Pharmacia of Cirque, the mythological goddess who was famous for her intoxicating herbal drinks which put men into a stupor.

You also say “He also points out that “church” is used to describe the Great sleeper in Revelation but fails to mention the “synagogue of satan” in Revelations 2:9 and 3:9. The speaker condemns the translators for trying to draw a distinction between church and synagogue and elevating church over synagogue then draws a distinction between synagogue and church and elevates synagogue over church. Thus both would be sowing discord among brethren.”

This shows two things, the first being that the translators were in fact LIARS! From the first who translated from the original Hebrew to the pagan Greek to our modern translators who fall back on their church teahing instead of faithfully translating what is said, they have lied to us. They could, when they wanted use the term synagogue instead of church. Second they, like the “church fathers” they venerate, were rabid anti-Semites. Couldn’t very well compare their church to anything satanic, even as a passing reference. But they could lay this off on those pesky Jews, especially the Notsarim- you know, the ones who kept the . THIS is where discord is sewn, NOT in R. Reuels d’rash. This and in your misrepresentation of that d’rash.

I would submit that if “violence” has been done here, it is your mainstream apology for the term “church” which has done it.

Dan C

[Deleted]

Dan,

You stated, "Hint: start by replacing the word "church" with synagogue wherever you find it."

I had started going to this one congregation in December of last year only because that is where the Lord had led me to. However I found out why. Because the pastor had put someone in a position where he is now finding out the purpose of this person's heart. Lets say it is only to make themselves look good. Until I talked with him one day and I had brought something to his attention. So he kept watch over this person and found out that I was right. And than others started coming to him with complaints about this person. So he immediately stopped this person from doing anything in the group.

After all of this he is now looking to me for support and many a time he will come to me with questions. Yet several weeks ago he posed this one question to me. What was the true meaning of church? Than he told me that he was going to teach on the true meaning of church. So I went into deep study and found out that the "church" was never found in the early churches vocabulary. The word that was used was Ekklasia, which is in the Greek. Not sure what it would be in Hebrew. They used the words assembly, congregation or body of believers.

The word that most mainstream Christians use is this Greek word "KURIAKOS". The meaning of "ku-ri-á-kos" is understood by its root: "kú-ri-os," which means "lord." Thus, "kuriakos" (i.e., "church") means "pertaining to the lord." It refers to something that pertains to, or belongs to, a lord. The Greek "kuriakos" eventually came to be used in Old English form as "cirice" (kee-ree-ké), then "churche" (kerké), and eventually "church" in its traditional pronunciation. A church, then, is correctly something that "pertains to, or belongs to, a lord." The actual word "kirk" comes from the Scottish word. Than it was translated into English.

At the time that the KJV was put together they used the word "kirk" And at the time King James himself wanted the church to rule the people, to lord it over them which the very thing that Yeshua stated NOT to do. He told His disciples not to lord it over others.

The true meaning is Ekklesia or ecclesia, whichever way one wants to spell it, is "called out ones". Yeshua called us out. He never told us to make a building made with hands. We are the church as a body of believers.

I could go on with this further, however I need to get ready for work. I will check back later this evening.

If anyone wants to discuss this more in detail please feel free to, however I think starting a separate thread would be wise.

Blessings to all.
Moriah Ruth

[Miykhael]

B”H

I believe the word “church” was inserted as part of the doctrine of demons (part of the Replacement Theology). In the Club volume 2 First Fruits of Zion says, “The “church” translation of “ekklesia” misled us. Because of the double standard in translation, it appears to most readers that “the church” is an exclusive New Testament phenomenon disconnected with the Old Testament. The word never appears before the book of Matthew.The truth is, the word church does not appear in the Bible at all. By translating “ekklesia” as “church”, in our English Bibles have made us think that some how “the church” is different and distinct from Judaism.” Same thing when they call themselves christians, They were only known as Believers. Example was Avraham a christian or a believer? I don’t trust most of the english translation of the Bible.

[alon]

James 2:2 Young's Literal Translation (YLT) for if there may come into your synagogue a man with gold ring, in gay raiment, and there may come in also a poor man in vile raiment,

James 2:2 (ESV) For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in,

G4864 συναγωγή sunagōgē soon-ag-o-gay' From (the reduplicated form of) G4863; an assemblage of persons; specifically a Jewish “synagogue” (the meeting or the place); by analogy a Christian church: - assembly, congregation, synagogue.

So we see that even when the obvious “sunagōgē” is used, it is sometimes rendered “assembly” so as not to appear too Jewish. However many times the fact scripture means synagogue cannot be hidden. In Acts alone we see that Rav Sha’ul and the apostles, as well as early believers worshiped in synagogues, not “churches.”

Acts 6:9-10 (ESV) Then some of those who belonged to the synagogue of the Freedmen (as it was called), and of the Cyrenians, and of the Alexandrians, and of those from Cilicia and Asia, rose up and disputed with Stephen. But they could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking.

Acts 9:20-22 (ESV) And immediately he proclaimed Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.” 21 And all who heard him were amazed and said, “Is not this the man who made havoc in Jerusalem of those who called upon this name? And has he not come here for this purpose, to bring them bound before the chief priests?” 22 But Saul increased all the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who lived in Damascus by proving that Jesus was the Christ.

Acts 13:13-15 English Standard Version (ESV) Now Paul and his companions set sail from Paphos and came to Perga in Pamphylia. And John left them and returned to Jerusalem, but they went on from Perga and came to Antioch in Pisidia. And on the Sabbath day they went into the synagogue and sat down. After the reading from the Law and the Prophets, the rulers of the synagogue sent a message to them, saying, “Brothers, if you have any word of encouragement for the people, say it.” 16 So Paul stood up, and motioning with his hand said:

Acts 13:42-44 (ESV) As they went out, the people begged that these things might be told them the next Sabbath. And after the meeting of the synagogue broke up, many Jews and devout converts to Judaism followed Paul and Barnabas, who, as they spoke with them, urged them to continue in the grace of God.

Acts 15:21 (ESV) For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”

Acts 17:1-2 (ESV) Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures,

Acts 17:10 (ESV) The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue.

Acts 18:26 (ESV) He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately.

Acts 19:8 (ESV) And he entered the synagogue and for three months spoke boldly, reasoning and persuading them about the kingdom of God.

[alon]

And here is a sampling of quotes which have already been established in other threads here, saying that the Natsarim were Jews and were distinctly different from Christianity for centuries, both before and after the "church" was formed; and that the church fathers hated anything "Jewish":

Acts 24: 5 For we have found this man a plague, one who stirs up riots among all the Jews throughout the world and is a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.

2nd cen. church father Jerome, in a letter to Augustine, said: “The adherents to this sect are known commonly as Nazarenes; they believe in Christ the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary; and they say that He who suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again, is the same as the one in whom we believe. But while they desire to be both Jews and Christians, they are neither the one nor the other. … If, however, there is for us no alternative but to receive the Jews into the Church, along with the usages prescribed by their law; if, in short, it shall be declared lawful for them to continue in the Churches of Christ what they have been accustomed to practice in the synagogues of Satan, I will tell you my opinion of the matter: they will not become Christians, but they will make us Jews. “

Fourth century church father Epiphanius: "We shall now especially consider heretics who... call themselves Nazarenes; they are mainly Jews and nothing else. They make use not only of the New Testament, but they also use in a way the Old Testament of the Jews; for they do not forbid the books of the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings..., and they profess all the dogmas pertaining to the prescriptions of the Law and to the customs of the Jews, except they believe in [Messiah] ... They differ from the Jews because they believe in Messiah, and from the Christians in that they are to this day bound to the Jewish rites, such as circumcision, the Sabbath, and other ceremonies."

So, the Natsarim sect was different, they were Jewish believers (and Gentile proselytes), did keep , and Rav Sha’ul was their ringleader- and the “church fathers” did NOT like them!

Ignatius Bishop of Antioch (98-117A.D.) For if we are still practicing Judaism, we admit that we have not received God’s favor…it is wrong to talk about Jesus Christ and live like Jews. For Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity.

"Epistle of Barnabas" Chapter 4vs 6-7 (between 130A.D. and 138 A.D.) Take heed to yourselves and be not like some piling up you sins and saying that the covenant is theirs as well as ours. It is ours, but they lost it completely just after Moses received it.

Justin Martyr - Dialogue with Trypho (Between 138A.D. and 161 A.D.) We too, would observe your circumcision of the flesh, your Sabbath days, and in a word, all you festivals, if we were not aware of the reason why they were imposed upon you, namely, because of your sins and the hardness of heart. The custom of circumcising the flesh, handed down from Abraham, was given to you as a distinguishing mark, to set you off from other nations and from us Christians. The purpose of this was that you and only you might suffer the afflictions that are now justly yours; that only your land be desolated, and you cities ruined by fire, that the fruits of you land be eaten by strangers before your very eyes; that not one of you be permitted to enter your city of Jerusalem. Your circumcision of the flesh is the only mark by which you can certainly be distinguished from other men…as I stated before it was by reason of your sins and the sins of your fathers that, among other precepts, God imposed upon you the observence of the sabbath as a mark.

Origen of Alexandria (185-254 A.D.) We may thus assert in utter confidence that the Jews will not return to their earlier situation, for they have committed the most abominable of crimes, in forming this conspiracy against the Savior of the human race…hence the city where Jesus suffered was necessarily destroyed, the Jewish nation was driven from its country, and another people was called by God to the blessed election.

John Chrysostom (344-407 A.D.) The synagogue is worse than a brothel…it is the den of scoundrels and the repair of wild beasts…the temple of demons devoted to idolatrous cults…the refuge of brigands and dabauchees, and the cavern of devils. It is a criminal assembly of Jews…a place of meeting for the assassins of Christ… a house worse than a drinking shop…a den of thieves, a house of ill fame, a dwelling of iniquity, the refuge of devils, a gulf and a abyss of perdition."…"I would say the same things about their souls… As for me, I hate the synagogue…I hate the Jews for the same reason.

Augustine, Confessions, 12.14 (c. 354-430 A.D.) How hateful to me are the enemies of your Scripture! How I wish that you would slay them (the Jews) with your two-edged sword, so that there should be none to oppose your word! Gladly would I have them die to themselves and live to you!

So this being the case, that the Natsarim are the true believers and they were Jews and worshiped like Jews for centuries, I'd say translating anything to do with an assembly of believers as anything other than a synagogue is an attempt to mislead us. The church was and is distinctly different and opposed to the teachings of Yeshua and the apostles. The church rewrote scripture and intentionally misinterpreted scripture so as to remove anything Jewish from their new religion.

[alon]

G1577 ἐκκλησία ekklēsia ek-klay-see'-ah From a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564; a calling out, that is, (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both): - assembly, church.

Despite all the evidence that the early believers, and the later true believers were Jewish (and proselytes), wherever the word "ekklēsia" appears it is translated as "church." Church, as in the universal (catholic) church, an idea that was gaining popularity in pagan circles in the mid 2nd cen CE. How is this perceived?

Allow me to quote from todays sermon at the AoG church (where I still go with my wife): "Jesus came and started the church age." So we have something new, something different. OK ... he continued to talk about how "Various people along the line said 'I am the one to say what church looks like.'" He spoke about different denominations starting up, each having their own beliefs. His point about working together instead of all the infighting was actually pretty good. But still, here we have a statement of belief from the pulpit that Jesus came to start a new religion and man messed things up. I'd say man messed things up when WE started a new religion, not Yeshua! And part of that mess was to translate the idea of something new, churches and not synagogues.

Translations that say church are intentionally misleading.

Dan C

[Deleted]

Thank you Miykhael and Alon for your info. I just finished work so I will check more into reading this and search it out more.

Moriah Ruth