Bible Word Definitions: Church

Church 

The New Testament was originally written in Greek. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and translated into Greek. This manuscript is called the Septuagint. The Old Testament of our modern day Bibles were translated to English from the Septuagint. 

The Greek word ekklessia is used in both the Old and New Testaments, and means, "a called out assembly". Ekklessia is translated as church in the New Testament of modern day English Bibles. Ekklessia is also translated as assembly and congregation. Taking this into consideration, if we are going to use the word church in place of ekklessia, by Biblical definition, the word church means, "a called out assembly", "assembly", and "congregation".

The New Testament uses the word ekklessia, translated as church, in three different ways:

1. As the global body of Christ.

2. As a local gathering of Christians 

3. As an individual gathering of Christians 

Some examples are listed below. 

As the global body of Christ:

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. - Ephesians 5:25‭-‬27 

As a local gathering of Christians:

Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, to the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. - I Thessalonians 1:1

As an individual gathering of Christians:

The churches of Asia greet you. Aquila and Priscilla greet you heartily in the Lord, with the church that is in their house. - I Corinthians 16:19 

Biblically, the church is God's people. 

As have so many words in the Bible, the definition of the word church has changed from its original meaning, and the Biblical meaning is rarely used by Christians. Today, most Christians, at least in the west, understand the church to be the building that they go to on Sunday morning to worship God, fellowship with other believers, and listen to a sermon presented by a pastor, priest, or reverend.

The definition of the word church has changed from the Biblical definition of being God's people, to being the place where God’s people meet. My understanding of how this happened is that when King James translated the Bible, he directed the translators to use the word "church" where ekklessia was used in the New Testament. Though the origin of the word is not known, it is believed to have come from the Old English word, circe, which means circle, and which some believe is associated with witchcraft and circles that are drawn around the members of satanic ceremonies. Circe also comes from Greek mythology as the daughter of the sun god.

Even though this may be true, it is not how the word is used today, or what people think of when they hear the word, church. However, it is another example of how words evolve to mean different things, and in this case, it happens to be the same word as the word we are looking at in this article.

Etymology is the study of linguistic forms, their origin, and how they were used from their origin and how they have evolved throughout history. 

According to some articles online, the etymological meaning of the word church is "house of the Lord", which Biblically means the body of the believer, but could also mean the place where Christians gathered. Some believe that when King James translated the Bible, he opted to use the word church in order for man to have control over the gathering, rather than God.

The reasoning is that King James was the ruler of England, and the Church of England was under the king's rule. If the original word ekklessia was used, which means, called out assembly (that is, called out by God), then the name would rightly imply that the gathering would be under the authority of God rather than the king.

By King James using the word church in place of ekklessia, the meaning would change from a called out assembly , to the house of the Lord, or a gathering place, which could then be controlled by the king, and which bishops, pastors and other men could be appointed to be in authority over the gathering for the purpose of control.

Because of the King James translation, most modern Bible translations use the word church in place of ekklessia in the New Testament. 

This definition of the church as being the gathering place of Christians is what is currently being used by American Christians. Christians often say things like, "My church is having a marriage conference that I would like to invite you to"; or "I'm going to church on Sunday"; or "The church needs a new roof". As we've seen, this is a Biblically inaccurate use of the meaning in which God intended for His called out assembly.

To some, this probably doesn't seem important or may seem like I'm splitting hairs, but word meanings are important, especially when it comes to proper Biblical interpretation. It is also important because of the consequences that have resulted from the church being defined as a gathering place rather than God's people. I will explain those later, but first I need to explain how the ekklesia did not originate in the New Testament, but it actually existed in the Old Testament as well. 

Israel the Ekklesia 

The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and was later translated to Greek by a group of scholars in the third century. This Greek translation of the Old Testament is called the Septuagint, also called the LXX. The LXX is important to help us understand that the ekklesia was present in the Old Testament. 

Throughout the LXX, scholars translated the Hebrew word qahal (kahal), as ekklessia, and into English as multitude, assembly, congregation, and company. In the Old Testament these words are used for God's promise to Jacob (Israel) that He would make him a multitude of people, and He often called Israel the congregation and the assembly, and the assembly of the congregation. Ekklessia is the same word translated as church in the New Testament, and is the same word to translate the Hebrew word qahal in the Septuagint.

Therefore, God used the same title for both the Israel of the Old Testament and the believers of the New Testament. Both are included as one people, the ekklessia, or as modern day Bibles translate it, the church. 

Ekklessia means,"called out assembly". In this case, the assembly is called out by God. Another way to say it is, "God’s called out assembly". "Assembly " means, "a group of people gathered together". Israel of the Old Testament were a group of people who were literally called out of Egypt by God, and who were also called out of the world by God, to be His own special people. They were God's called out assembly. This is also exactly what Christians are today. God has called them out of the world to be His own special people, just as ancient Israel was.

Jesus called twelve Jewish men to follow Him. These twelve, as well as Jesus's mother, Mary, His earthly father, Joseph, Anna and Simeon, and probably a few others whom we read of in the New Testament, were of the remnant of Israel because they were watching and awaiting the arrival of the Messiah. They recognized Him when He came. They believed and were committed to Him.

Today, Christians would label them as Messianic Jews because they are Jews who believe in Jesus. The term "Messianic Jew" is not found in the Bible even though most of the early church was comprised of Jews who believed in Jesus, because the church originated among Jewish people. Jesus had instructed His disciples to go to the lost sheep of Israel, who were the Jews, so they, Jesus and later the apostles, went to the temple to preach because Jews were there and they could teach them about Jesus there. Many Jews came to believe in Jesus as the Messiah and as the Son of God. 

The writers of the New Testament labeled Jewish believers not as Messianic Jews, but as disciples. We read in Acts 11:26 that "the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch". The importance of this is to show that there was and is no difference between a Jew who believes in Jesus and a Gentile who believes in Jesus - they are both Christians and they are both the ekklesia, God's called out assembly, and belief in Jesus is required by both for salvation. God does not grant one group special privileges and a free pass to heaven because of their ethnicity or nationality, while the other group is required to be faithful to Him in order to obtain these things. 

When Stephen was being challenged by men from the Synagogue of the Freedmen, speaking of Moses he said, "This is he who was with the congregation [ekklessia] in the wilderness with the Angel who spoke with him on Mount Sanai" (Acts 7:38). 

There was no difference between Israel of the Old Testament and Christians of the New Testament and the present day. They are both God's called out assembly, one people and one body (Ephesians 4:4; Romans 12:5). 

Why It Matters 

Defining the church as a gathering place rather than as the body of Christ may not seem like it really matters in the grand scheme of things, but it does. 

First of all, changing word definitions is not acceptable, especially in the Bible. The American culture feels that it is necessary to change word definitions, but the church are not of the worldly culture and should not do the same things that it does. The Bible is the inspired word of God, and man does not have the authority to change it. Changing one word can change the entire meaning of the passage. 

Defining church as a gathering place has caused Christians throughout history to divide rather than to love one another so that the world would know that they are Jesus's disciples. They go to "their church" to serve, to listen to and learn from "their" pastor, to support and pray for other members of "their" church, and to get involved in the outreach programs and missionaries that are supported by "their" church. They isolate themselves from other Christians in the community and in the world, and oftentimes refuse to gather or unite with other Christians and organizations who do not go to "their" church and who differ from their doctrinal and political views. They do not view other Christians as their spiritual family, but in a way they view them as their enemies because of their differences.

This division causes a lack of working with one another to make Jesus known throughout the world as Jesus commands His disciples to do. This is disobedience to Jesus by way of not loving one another so that the world would know that they are Jesus's disciples and that God sent Jesus; by not uniting with the other members of His body and becoming one body; and by not working together with the other members of His body to make Jesus's name known throughout the world.

Their division works against and prolongs God's kingdom coming to earth and causes the family of God to be a dysfunctional family. This is not only problematic, but it is unbiblical and I believe that their disobedience grieves and displeases God. 

Dispensationalism 

I typically don't meddle with what Biblical doctrines people believe because there are oftentimes more than one interpretation of the doctrine's Scripture references, and legitimate arguments that individuals have for believing the way that they do. But I find dispensationalism so problematic in regards to the church and American Christianity that I feel the need to discuss it here. 

Another consequence of Christians defining church as a place rather than the people of God, is that doctrines such as dispensationalism has led many American Christians to believe that God has two people, not one, and that He favors one over the other.

As we have seen above, God has only one people, but if the church is defined as a gathering place rather than God's called out assembly, one can argue that God in fact has two people, favoring the one over the other. The fact that both Israel and the church are God's called out assembly is clear, in my mind anyways. God has only one people, and considers all who believe in Jesus as equal because God favors neither Jew nor Gentile because there is no Jew or Gentile in Christ Jesus. 

The doctrine that God has two people has caused a lot of controversy and division among Christians over the past 200 years, when it was introduced and became the primary, popular teaching in the American church. Prior to that time, there were a few within the church who held beliefs that were similar to dispensationalism, but most of the church believed that God had one people, not two. The actual system or doctrine of dispensationalism did not exist until the 1800's.

Of course we need to look to the authority of the Scriptures for our doctrines and not the church fathers, however I think it is significant that the early church did not have this view of Israel, and that it did not come into existence until the 1800's.

Interestingly, dispensationalism came into existence at the same time as Mormonism which was founded by Joseph Smith in the United States. Both were stated by the founders to be "new revelations". I am always leary of "new revelations" when it comes to the Scriptures. It is a red flag. Just look at Mormonism. It is a false teaching that has led many away from the Truth of Jesus Christ. 

I don't know if the fact that both were founded in the 1800's by members of the western church on different continents means anything or not, but I find it interesting, especially given how divisive dispensationalism is among Christians. 

Dispensationalism was established in England and is a western church doctrine. It is not the prevalent belief held by Christians outside of the United States or England, unless it was introduced to them by western Christians. 

Because dispensationalism is the primary view of American Christians today, Christians who do not hold the view are viewed as being heretics and antisemitic by other Christians. If this is the case, then most of the church prior to the 1800's were heretics and antisemitic, because they did not have dispensational views.

The definition of an antisemite is someone who hates Jews. I do not know any Christians who do not hold the dispensational view, that hate Jews. I suppose there are some out there, but the typical Christian loves them and prays for their salvation just as they do any other lost person. 

This shows how divisive and problematic this doctrine is. For a Christian to accuse their brother in Christ of not holding to the truth of the Scriptures and worse, hating Jews, because they do not hold to this doctrine is a terrible tragedy for the church. 

Furthermore, many American Christians are not even aware that there are Christians who live in Palestine, and if they are aware of them, they may view them as their enemy rather than their brother, because dispensational American churches, government and news media has portrayed Palestinians as being America's enemies due to the nation of Israel being an ally to the United States, and the illusion that the nation of Israel is God's chosen people. 

Because of dispensationalism, American Christians have aligned themselves with a people who reject Jesus, and regard those who accept Jesus as Lord as their enemies. This is extremely problematic. 

I think this is rooted in superstition because they believe that God will curse them and their nation if they speak against the Jews based on the covenant that God made with Abraham. Therefore, the Jews can literally get away with murder, and not be held accountable. If the superstition were true, then Jesus Himself would have been cursed by God for the many things He said against them. But Jesus only said and did what the Father told Him to say and do. 

Many Christians are unknowingly accomplices to the atrocities of the Jews against Palestinians, because they support Israel without really know what's going on there. All they know is what their dispensational pastor, their government and the new media is telling them. 

Most people already understand that government and news cannot be trusted. However, when it comes to an issue that they support, they trust that what the news is saying is true. 

As for a dispensational pastor, he will teach what he was taught to teach as Biblical truth, or what he has come to believe as Biblical truth, but he will still rely on news media and government for his information regarding Israel and world events.

But not many American Christians are aware that the nation of Israel is being accused of apartheid against Palestinians by human rights organizations such as, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. Christians, Jews, and Muslims who have been working together for peace in the region have brought the issue to the attention of global human rights organizations. Christians who live in the region do not support the doctrine of dispensationalism, and they are first hand witnesses of the atrocities that are taking place there. 

It is an issue that is intentionally not being reported in the mainstream news because Israeli and U.S. leaders do not want the American people to know about it because of the costly loss of support for Israel that could occur. It could be devastating for Israel. 

When the United States gives Israel millions of dollars a day, and Israel is in cahoots with our government and feeds the American news media what it wants Americans to know, I can only speculate that not much tuth is reported.

Even if dispensationalism were true, Israel still would not have the right to do what they are doing to Palestinians, and Christians should be concerned. What is sad and disheartening is that most of the people who read this won't believe me and that this is really happening, and will still label me as being a heretic and antisemitic. Worse, they will continue to support Israel and refuse support to Palestinian Christians. So please don't take my word for it, the internet contains a lot of information on the issue. 

The point is, this is all hugely problematic within American Christianity and to the church. 

The Bride of Christ 

The ekklessia is described in the Bible as being the bride of Jesus who is the Bridegroom. The analogy of marriage is used to show that God's people are in a marriage relationship with Jesus. Jesus is the husband, who is the Head of the church, who is the wife. The church is required to submit to Jesus as its authority. 

There needs to be oneness between a husband and wife in order for a marriage to function as God designed it. That means that the husband and wife need to agree with each other on issues, and if they don't, they need to seek God's authority in the matter. 

In the case of the marriage between Jesus and the ekklesia, Jesus has been given all authority, therefore the ekklesia as the wife has to submit to Jesus's, the Husband's, authority. If it doesn't, then it is not a Christian church. It might call itself a church, but if its authority is anyone or anything other than Jesus, then it is not a true Christian church (remember that a Christian is a disciple/follower of Jesus, and therefore they obey Him and look to His authority of the Scriptures as well as His authority over the church, over their lives, and His overall authority).

What's more, Jesus loves the ekklesia and gave Himself for her. He instructed husbands to do the same for their wives. He modeled it to the church, and the church is supposed to model it to the world, not only through human marriage relationships between husbands and wives, but also by the church giving herself for Jesus and for one another. 

A Holy Nation, Set Apart for God 

God said to His people Israel (the ekklesia) through Moses that if they obeyed Him and kept His covenant, then they would be a special treasure to Him above all people, and that they would be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Exodus 19:5-6). 

Later, when the apostles went to the other sheep within Jesus's fold because of Israel’s rejection of Jesus, the apostle Peter used a very similar description when speaking to the ekklesia of the diaspora which consisted of both Jew and Gentile. He described them as "the one who believes".

He said they are being built into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, who once were not a people (including Gentiles), but ARE NOW the people of God (1 Peter 2:4, 9-10).

The spiritual house is the ekklessia, the church, the people of God. It is a royal priesthood because they are the royal subjects of God's royal kingdom, where Jesus is the King. They are royal because they are God’s descendants, His children, created in His image. They follow the King and His royal decrees.

They are a priesthood because they can speak with God and go before Him themselves. They no longer need a priest to be the mediator between them and God. Jesus is the Mediator of the new covenant and He intercedes on their behalf.

They are a chosen generation because they love Jesus and obey His commands. They were not His people at one time, but now God has invited them to be His people, and to be their God. They are His own special people. He has written His laws on their hearts and minds. 

They are a holy nation because they are a nation of people - a kingdom of people - who are set apart for God and His plans and purposes. They are His called out assembly, His ekklessia.

Another problem to examine if the church is defined as being a building, is that there is a misunderstanding by Christians of the people of God being His called out assembly.

The church is the people whom God has called out of the world as His own for His purposes. He also calls them sanctified and holy, meaning they are set apart from the world by Him, for Him. They are His people and He is their God. 

A people who does not understand that they are God’s people and that He is their God, will not understand the cost or the commitment of following Jesus. They might not understand the need for repentance of sin and submitting to Christ's authority, and may even support worldly and cultural ideologies that directly oppose God's law and order.

They are not only a poor witness of the Jesus of the Bible, but they also give Christianity and other Christians a bad reputation because they say they are Christians, but they live no different than anyone else. 

Today's Church Compared to the Early Church 

Churches today look much different than the early church, and what Jesus intended it to be. To have a fuller understanding of what Jesus intended the church to be, there needs to be an understanding of why Jesus came and what the kingdom of God is. For the sake of this article, I will suffice to say that Jesus came to establish the kingdom of God, which is comprised of a people who look to Him as their God and whom He calls His own - a people He has called out of the world - an ekklessia.

The church has evolved from being the people of God (ekklessia), to being the place where the people of God meet. This has caused the institutionalization of the church, where special buildings are required for the meeting and where special, "ordained" people are required to lead it and administer communion, baptism, the teaching, etc.

This started to happen shortly after the apostles were killed. One of the earliest surviving records of the church after the apostles were gone, is from Ignatius who was a bishop of the church of Antioch early in the second century, which was one of the churches the apostle Paul founded.

Ignatius is believed to be the second or third bishop of the church. He wrote seven letters on his way to Rome where he was martyred, in which he instructed the churches to submit to the bishop, who was at that time already, a man who was placed in an office of authority over the other members of the church.

Having a man in authority over the assembly was something that did not exist when the apostles oversaw them. Even the apostles themselves did not instruct the other members to submit to them as their leader, but to submit to Jesus because He is the head of the church. New Testament churches were not controlled by kings or governments, nor was a single man appointed to be in charge of the gathering. The apostles who founded the churches and elders whom they appointed oversaw them to teach and disciple them, to apply discipline, and to protect them from false teaching. The group was not dependent upon one person to lead the meeting, but the entire assembly used their spiritual gifts within the gathering for the edification of one another. 

Paul appointed elders in many of the churches which he oversaw, but possibly not in every church. There is no Biblical evidence of there being elders in the church of the Thessalonians or the church of Corinth. We don't know if the other apostles appointed elders within the churches they oversaw, or not. The apostle John names himself, "the elder" in some of his letters to the churches which he founded. 

The churches which the apostles founded and oversaw operated more like a family unit, as God intended it to be. The language woven throughout the New Testament is that of family when speaking about the church and God's people.

Jesus referred to God as the Father, and He instructed His disciples to pray to their Father. Jesus said to His disciples of the larger crowd of disciples, that they were their brothers, and sisters and mothers. The apostle John similarly uses language of family throughout his writings, and he even records Jesus speaking about being born again in order to enter the kingdom of God. One who is born again is born into the kingdom of God, which is a family. It is through this family who has love for one another that the world will know that we are Jesus's disciples and that Jesus is from God.

The Acts of the apostles provides a picture of what the earliest church gatherings looked like. They continued "steadfastly" or " were persevering" in: 

1. The apostle's teachings

2. In fellowship 

3. In the breaking of bread 

4. In prayers (Acts 2:42)

It sounds to me like because the church was gathering in this way, "fear came upon every soul, and many signs and wonders were happening through the apostles" (Acts 2:43). 

I think that fear came upon every soul because the believers were one, and therefore those who were bystanders believed that God had sent Jesus and that God had loved them as He had loved Jesus (John 17:20-23).

Acts 2:44 supports this by saying that "all who believed were in the same mind and had all things in common". 

Note that it says "ALL WHO BELIEVED were in the same mind and had all things in common." Those who believed were not divided into different groups or denominations based on different doctrinal beliefs. There was one church that all who believed were a part of. It comprised several individual gatherings of believers who met in their homes.

In order for believers to be "in the same mind and have everything in common", there must be complete submission to Christ and His authority over the Scriptures and over our lives, otherwise it won't happen. When the church submits to its own ideologies that are based on what their own personal opinions of matters are, rather than on what God's order of creation is, then there can never be the "same mind" between two groups, because both groups have their own opinion and therefore cannot align with one another in truth. In order for there to be the same mind, every group needs to cast out their own personal opinions and submit to what God says, because He is Truth.

The reason the early church had all things in common is because they all believed, and they all had the same mind, and because of those things, they all had the same purpose and mission, which was to glorify God.

When they gathered together, they had the things of God to talk about. They had the apostles's teachings to talk about and to share with one another as they learned them. They had reports of how God was working in their lives and in their communities and how the Holy Spirit was making believers. They had reports of leading others to believe in Jesus. They encouraged one another in good works and to persevere in faith. They encouraged one another as they were persecuted for their belief. 

Because they had these things in common, their gatherings were genuine, meaningful, and joyful. They were true, genuine fellowship with other believers, and when you have true, genuine fellowship, you are naturally joyful, and the gatherings are deeply meaningful. 

I believe they needed one another, and that they needed to meet daily because of the persecution. They needed the encouragement to persevere in faith and to not lose heart. 

I believe that they wanted to meet because the Holy Spirit of God was moving in them, and when that happens, the only thing that you want to do is be with God and His people. There is a supernatural connection that occurs between believers that can only be the unity of the Spirit. 

The believers sold their possessions and divided them among all and gave to anyone who had need (Acts 2:45). When people are filled with the Holy Spirit, they realize that their possessions are not their own, but they belong to God. They sell, divide and give their possessions because they want to, not because they have to. It is natural for them to want to do it because they love and fear God and they want to please and glorify God. They see that a brother is in need or that a neighbor is in need, so they take out of their plenty to provide for the one who has less. 

Or they realize that something they own, such as property or houses, can be used for God's people or to expand His kingdom, so they give it back to God so that He can use it for His purposes. God might have the giver personally steward it, or He might have someone else be the steward of it.

The early church gathered together every day, united as one body. They met in the temple, probably to teach Jews who were coming to the temple about Jesus. They ate and took communion with one another in homes. They were glad and joyful, and with simplicity of heart, they praised God and had favor towards all the people. Because of these things that the church did, God added saved people to the assembly of believers, every day (Acts 2:46,47). 

Many modern church gatherings bear little to no resemblance to the early church. There is not typically continued "steadfastness" or " perseverance" in all four elements that the early church was being steadfast and persevering in.

The Apostle's Teachings 

Hopefully the teachings that are conducted within the gatherings are the teachings of the apostles, and not the opinions of the teacher. I think that some Christians misunderstand the "apostles's teachings" to mean their pastor's teachings. They tend to apply their pastor as the apostle. That is not what it means. It means that whoever is teaching, is teaching what the apostles taught.

All of the New Testament books were written by an apostle or someone closely associated with an apostle. For example, "Matthew" was written by the apostle Matthew. "Mark", and "Luke" were written by men who were not apostles, but who accompanied the apostles Peter and Paul on their missionary journeys . "James" and "Jude" were written by brothers of Jesus, and the remaining books were written by the apostles John, Peter and Paul, although it is not certain who the writer of Hebrews is. These are the apostles's teachings. 

Jesus and the writers of the New Testament taught from various places in the Old Testament, and therefore these are also included in the apostles's teachings. 

Many modern day pastors will cherry pick a verse that supports their personal ideology and build a sermon around it, completely taking the verse out of context. This is not teaching what the apostles taught. They are using the Bible to make a case that supports their personal opinions and beliefs.

Pastors and Bible teachers will teach what they were trained by their college or seminary to teach, and depending on the college or seminary, what is being taught might not be Biblically accurate and in accordance with what the apostles taught. However, in the minds of most Christians, what their pastor says goes, because he is the one who went to college and holds a degree, and is therefore professionally trained and educated. Many believe that they are under their pastor's authority and must always believe what he teaches.

This is a mistake on behalf of Christians who think this way, because there are 40,000 denominations and therefore there are 40,000 different doctrines. The professional training your pastor attains from college or seminary will conform to one of these schools of doctrines. Can they all be right? Do they all hold to the teachings of the apostles? Most certainly not. 

Christians exalt their pastors because they look to them as being the professional Christian and their spiritual authority. The pastor not only went to college to learn the Bible, but he is the one who does Christianity full time, as a vocation. Being a pastor is his full time job. He might have even started his own church. He is the executive director or manager of the church. They believe that he should be viewed as being more Biblically knowledgeable and spiritual than them and the average Christian lay person. 

But the Bible seems to view pastors differently than the modern day church. In the Bible, pastors are not said to be more spiritual or more Biblically knowledgeable than other Christians. They are not said to be the spiritual authority over other Christians. They are not instructed to go to college or seminary in order to obtain a doctorate in Biblical studies or church planting. They are not commanded to lead an organization.

In fact, pastors are not mentioned very often in the Bible, and when the word is mentioned, it is said to be a gift that is given to some to equip the other Christians for ministry, just as apostles and prophets are to do. A Biblical pastor has the ability to shepherd. A shepherd leads and cares for his flock, protecting it from harm and from wolves. He feeds it and waters it. Someone with the gift of pastor does not hold a higher position than any other Christian. 

Oftentimes, the pastor knows that the people exalt him, but he is not looking to be exalted above everyone else, but the flock that he is shepherding does not understand, and they see him as being a special, superior Christian because he is the pastor.

It doesn't help matters when the pastor is the only one that is encouraged or allowed to use their spiritual gifts in a church gathering. The early church model was not a gathering that was centered around a pastor and his sermons, as the modern day church is. A teacher, which could have included someone with the gift of pastor, but was anyone who had the ability to teach, taught the disciples the apostles's teachings, and that was the limit of what he did. He was not in charge of the gathering or of the Christians who attended the gathering. He taught them so that they could be equipped to teach and disciple others. The Christians who gathered to learn the apostles's teachings each had their own unique gifts which were used within the church gatherings and as they conducted ministry outside of the church. Every Christian was a disciple of Jesus, and therefore they all conducted ministry full time, even if they were working a full time job in the marketplace.

Every Christian was equal as far as position goes. No one was exalted above another. Not even the apostles, and it is evident in their conduct. None of them expected or demanded to be exalted above anyone else because of their position, and if anyone had the right to, they did. But they remained humble and allowed the church to function as equal parts of a body, with Christ as the head, not themselves, not a pastor, or not a man of any kind. 

The Fellowship of Believers 

Fellowship of the modern day church typically means that the church is gathering on Sunday for its weekly worship service, followed by coffee or a potluck meal. Discussion during fellowship revolves around sports, hobbies, kids, our work week, and maybe the health issues of a pet or family member. Rarely is the discussion centered on the apostles's teachings, and even more rarely on what God is doing in our lives and community. And never on encouragement to persevere in faith and good works despite hardship and persecution. Many of the people who attend have other things they would rather be doing, and are bored with church and probably with God. 

Fellowship is shallow and not genuine. It lacks having one mind and having everything in common. If the people were excited about God, they would be excited to gather with other believers and to talk about God. If they were doing things in obedience to God, God would be doing things in their lives. If God was doing things in their lives, they would be excited to share it with others.

But the fact of the matter is, our churches are full of people who believe that going to church is the only thing that a Christian does, and that is what identifies them as being a Christian. Rather than being a Christian, they are really just "church people". They fail to understand that being a Christian is being a follower of Jesus and therefore doing the things that Jesus did and doing all that He commanded His disciples to do.

Jesus did not go to church. He and the men that He discipled and the people who followed Him and obeyed Him were the church. They loved God, they loved one another and they loved their neighbors. They did things for people in obedience to God and therefore God was present in their lives and in their communities. 

Many Christians today are bored with God and church. They say that they are "in a desert" because they are spiritually dry. God is not doing anything in their lives.

It might be because their Christian life is limited to going to church and Bible studies, but not really following Jesus or obeying Jesus or allowing Jesus to disciple them. If they were, their life would be far from boring. God would be doing amazing things in and around them. They might be busy serving God and witnessing and suffering for Christ, but their life wouldn't be boring. They would have something to be excited about and to share at the church potluck on Sunday. Fellowship would be genuine and meaningful and what God intended it to be. 

The Breaking of Bread 

The modern day church seems to do a pretty good job in regards to "the breaking of bread". Whether it means sharing a meal together, communion, or both, the church usually gathers centered around food, except for church services. Communion is practiced somewhat frequently based on my experience. The church is not given a required frequency to practice communion, but according to Acts 2:46, they may have taken it every day as they gathered together. 

It would be tough for a large church institution to have a meal together during its gatherings, especially if it gathered together everyday, however a group that meets in a home can easily do it. 

Prayer 

The modern day church incorporates prayer into the service, and individual Christians pray individually, during their morning devotions or in their prayer closet, but corporate prayer outside of Sunday morning services are lacking. Churches that attempt to hold prayer meetings usually get a few people to come. Because of this, churches will try holding prayer meetings on Sunday before or after the service in order to get more attendance. The idea is that since people are already coming to the building that day, they won't mind coming a bit earlier or staying a bit later to pray. It's logical, but people not wanting to come to a prayer gathering on Wednesday evening, probably do not want to go on Sunday either, especially because the church service is already taking up so much of their day. 

People not wanting to gather together to pray is a heart issue and a priority issue. It may be an inconvenience to drive to the church that is all the way in town, but praying with the church is important and it should be a priority. 

The kids might have basketball practice that night that conflicts with the prayer gathering, but that should have been considered before signing them up for basketball, and if you saw that their was a schedule conflict, then you either not sign them up or find someone else to take them.

Prayer is a priority that the church should be steadfast and persevering in, and yet it is always at the bottom of its priority list. Everything else, and I mean everything, is a bigger concern and priority for the church. Some churches do not even hold corporate prayer gatherings. How they believe that God will continue to work and move among a body that does not seek Him or seek to communicate with Him, I do not know. The same thing goes for Christians who neglect to pray and attend prayer gatherings that are offered. 

Giving Their Possessions 

Modern day churches will often teach that the Bible teaches that 10% of the Christian's income is supposed to go to the church and anything beyond 10% can go to parachurch organizations or whoever else the individual feels inclined to give to. I do not know of any verses or passages in the Bible that teach that.

Obviously, churches need income in order to operate. They need to pay the electric and heating bills, pay for the construction of the building and then the maintenance of the building. They need to pay for the chairs or pews, and supplies, and furniture, and everything that is needed to decorate the inside of the church. They need to pay the pastor and the church staff. They need to pay for the communion wafers and the juice, and the hymnals and the Bibles. 

It takes a lot of money, even for a small church. So, a lot of the money coming into the church by tithes and offerings, goes to pay for these things and very little money goes to do the things that Jesus actually commanded the church to do and that the Holy Spirit leads people to do. Some of these things include helping the poor, helping widows and orphans, giving land and possessions, and giving to missionaries and kingdom building efforts.

When people have a limited budget, and only 5% of Christians give any amount of money to the church or church related causes, that doesn't leave a lot of extra money above and beyond the tithe to do the things that God actually instructs His people to use their money for. 

I understand that churches believe to have Scriptures to support tithing by the church, but I believe they are wrong because the Scriptures they use are taken out of context from the Old Testament, which is the old covenant, not the new.

There are no examples in the Bible of the early church tithing, and no instructions from Jesus or the apostles to tithe. Money and material possessions were used to help those in need and to advance the kingdom of God.

Jesus and His disciples and then the apostles did receive support - at least from what we read where the apostles are receiving a collection from the churches they planted - but it is not said anywhere that it is a tithe or that Christians are required to give a tithe to the church. 

They Gathered Together Everyday 

The last item that I want to mention here regarding the four elements of the early church is the frequency of gathering together. The early church met every day. The modern day church meets once a week, unless inclement weather causes it to cancel, or Covid causes it to shut down, then it doesn't meet at all.

There might be a mid week service and maybe a Bible study, a prayer meeting, and small group. If that is the case, some of them may meet several times a week, which is pretty good, but the majority will not attend all of those things, but will only attend the Sunday service. 

Oftentimes it is very difficult, if not impossible, to get other Christians to gather together outside of the Sunday service. Maybe it's a 21st century issue, where people are just too busy to gather together as the church except for on Sunday. It goes back to priority and how excited the Christian is to serve God and meet with other Christians.

Busyness should not be a factor for a genuine Christian. Anyone will make time for the things he wants to do and for the people he loves. If a Christian does not attend the extracurricular activities that the church offers, or does not want to meet with other Christians to discuss the things of God, it is because he does not want to and he does not see it as a priority. The Christian who does attend does see it as a priority and does want to. That is why he goes. 

The meeting day of the modern day church came to be on Sunday for most Protestant churches, because Sunday is considered to be the sabbath day. Seventh Day Adventists meet on Saturday because they argue that is the true sabbath day.

My opinion is that it is irrelevant which day the true sabbath is in regards to gathering as the church, because the early church met every day, not only on the sabbath day. Meeting on the sabbath day is church tradition that evolved over time. The sabbath day was given in the law to Israel as a day of rest. If it were still relevant today, going to church on the sabbath, and serving the church on the sabbath is not rest, especially when it may be the only day that someone has off of work. For the pastor and other people who serve the church, Sunday may be the busiest day of their week, or similar to working another job.

God allows the church to gather together on days other than Sunday, and I would especially encourage doing so for those people who work six days a week and only have Sundays off, so that they can get some rest. Though the sabbath may have been given to Israel under the old covenant, taking a day to rest is still a good principle to live by.

I would also encourage Christians to gather together more than just once a week at the church service. The church should have frequent fellowship with one another.

And for Christians who do fellowship, but who's fellowship primarily takes place at church functions, I would encourage taking your fellowship outside of the church building. Grab a fellow brother or sister and go prayer walking or sharing Christ with people in your neighborhood or at a restaurant. Take some food or clothing to a neighbor in need.

Get out of the building and be the church. Going to church is not the identifying mark of being a Christian, love is, and following Jesus will show the world that God sent Jesus and that we are Jesus's disciples. 

Other Differences 

Listed below are a few ways that the modern day church has become selfish and inward focused, and has strayed away from the early church. These are things that the modern day church either participates in which the early church did not, or that the modern day church does not participate in, which the early church did.

As I have already discussed at length, today's church bears little resemblance to the church that Jesus sent His apostles to establish. What exists today are individual institutions which have very little concern for those outside of their own walls.

Many Christians outside of the United States live in persecution. The only thing they ask from their Christian family is to be remembered and to be prayed for. Very few Christians within the United States respond to their request because the persecuted believers are either not a part of their own church, or because their church programs do not include supporting persecuted Christians. It may also be because individual Christians may regard the needs of the United States as being more important than the needs of their brothers and sisters outside of the United States. It might also be because they have a prejudice towards people of other nations for some reason or another. 

Many churches in the United States will participate in commemorating the men and women who fought in wars for their nation's freedom. However, most of these same churches do not participate in commemorating the men and women who have fought for God's kingdom and bringing the kingdom of God to earth. 

Many Christians get involved in politics in order to change the nation for the better, but do not go and make disciples of all nations or love one another or love their neighbor or obey various other commands of Jesus which will truly change the world for the better. They do not even pray to ask God for change or for their nation's leaders.

Similarly, many churches are heavily involved in politics and support politicians who support their beliefs, but do not support Christian missionaries or Christians who are going to make disciples of all nations. 

Many churches build more buildings, hire more staff, and provide more programs, but give little to no support to missions or efforts to make disciples of all nations. 

Many churches who have plenty refuse to help other churches who have little, or to partner with other churches in order to build God’s kingdom.

If you think about it, all of the issues that I mentioned above trace back to our own selfish comfort and convenience. 

Few churches pray for the persecuted because they do not live in persecution and are not familiar with it. It's out of sight, out of mind. When the focus is only on yourself, you are blind to the needs around you. Furthermore, today's church has the mindset that it is supposed to be a place of joy, hope, and happiness, not a place of suffering and death. Persecution does not sell very well. 

Many churches participate in commemorating their nation's war veterans because of the personal freedom they have because of them. They tangibly benefit from the wars and the lives lost. They tangibly benefit moreso because of the lives lost for Christ and God's kingdom, but they don't recognize it because their personal freedom and their nation is a priority to them over the kingdom of God. 

Christians get involved in politics and support certain politicians because if they don't, their current rights, comforts and conveniences may be taken away from them. It's not bad to want to fight for what's right and moral, but check your motives to make sure that is the reason you are doing it, and not because you are afraid of losing the things that personally benefit you. Neither Jesus or the apostles were involved in politics, and Jesus said to the Roman governor that He is the king of another kingdom. That is the kingdom that Christians should be focusing on. 

More buildings and more money helps the individual institutional church grow and become a larger kingdom. It focuses on its own health and growth. It partners with parachurch ministries so that it can provide serving opportunities for its members. The early church did not have buildings, staff, budgets, marketing strategies, partner ministries to serve alongside, etc. Money was used to help the needy and to build God’s kingdom. The church was the ministry.

Charging these things against your beloved churches makes me sound cynical and angry. It does make me angry because today's churches and Christianity are not what God intended for them to be, and yet so many good, faithful Christians not only support it, but oppose Christians who try to follow Jesus in ways that do not align with this mainstream idea of Christianity.

When Jesus came and saw the practices of Judaism which His people were participating in, He challenged it by calling them to turn back to God. The result was that they opposed Him, persecuted Him, and killed Him.

What would He say and do about modern day American Christianity, and how would Christians respond?

I think He would challenge it and that He would be opposed and persecuted by some within the religious establishment .

When Martin Luther challenged Catholicism, he was persecuted by them, and when the anabaptists challenged Luther's teachings, he and the reformers persecuted them. 

What we learn from this is that when the status quo of religion is challenged, opposition and possibly even persecution will come from inside the establishment.

The reformation did great things for the church and for Christianity, but it did not fully reform the church or restore it to its original purposes or function. It still operated as a religious institution rather than a family. What I’m saying is the reformation did not complete the task. There is much room for improvement. 

Leadership 

One of the biggest barriers to changing this problem, at least that I see, is the American Christian leadership. It consists of men and women Bible teachers and pastors who have TV, radio, or internet ministries. In other words they are Christian celebrities who have attained leadership status because they have a "successful" media ministry. They are considered successful because they are popular and have a lot of followers. Their success is due to their celebrity status because the American church is filled with consumerists. This definition of success is the world's definition, yet the church defines success in the same way, and therefore these celebrity pastors and Bible teachers are looked to by the average Christian "lay person", cultural Christian, or church people, as being church leaders. Not only leaders of the church they attend, but leaders of the American church as a whole. 

Some of them meet with the nation's presidents and act as their religious council. Some of them determine what religious and political issues American Christians need to fight for or against, and they lead the charge against them. 

Interestingly, even conservative news media personnel and politicians who support Christianity are regarded as Christian leaders by American Christians because of their boldness to publicly speak against those who oppose Christianity, even though some of them are not even Christians!

Some Christian leaders are in the Contemporary Christian music industry and are regarded as Christian leaders because of their success, popularity, and celebrity status. They might not have attended seminary, many of them might not even be Christians and the message of their songs contain bad theology, but because they are celebrities, and are accepted by the church's "leaders", they too are considered to be church leaders by the "laymen", cultural Christians, and church people. 

Many of these American Christian leaders form coalitions and hold conferences throughout the year, across the United States. Their doctrinal teachings dictate the beliefs that American Christians are to hold. Their doctrinal views are derived from a Christian college or university that aligns with their denomination or own personal beliefs.

If a Christian holds a view that differs from popular, mainstream, cultural Christianity, they are shunned and considered heretics by them and other Christians.

Evidence of this is when a celebrity Christian strays from the status quo, the story will be on social media outlets, and they will be accused of having bad theology, or worse, heresy. 

These American church "leaders" set the standards of Christianity and define what Christianity should be, what it should look like, and what it should believe. 

Is that not the definition of indoctrination? Yes it is.

Is their idea of Christianity that they are indoctrinating Christians to hold Biblically accurate? No it's not.

According to many of these American church leaders, a church is a building where people go to worship God or be evangelized to become a Christian. The pastor is the leader and the people coming to the church are the "laymen" who are under the authority of the pastor. The laymen are usually required to be members of the church and financially support the pastor's and staff's salary, as well as building maintenance, projects, and programs, through tithes and offerings.

Church members are encouraged to bring their friends and family to the church so that the they can hear the gospel. After they hear the gospel, they are encouraged to continue to go to the church and become a member so they can learn true, Biblical doctrine, and grow in their faith.

Teachings of following Jesus and all of His commands, and making disciples who do the same are rare and even non existent.

Lay Christians are sometimes discouraged by these church leaders to go out on their own and make disciples, plant churches, and conduct ministry, because they are said to be outside of a pastor's or church's authority. According to them, laymen are required to be under the headship of a church institution and pastor, and are not allowed to conduct ministry on their own. 

Many of these church leaders have never made a disciple and their message is not geared towards encouraging their listeners to do so. Their message is that Jesus saved you because you are the center of the universe and He wants you to become a better person, so we are going to teach you to be just that. Marriage and family are at the center of mainstream church teachings.

Obviously, the way that mainstream American Christianity operates is far from Biblical Christianity, but what is also concerning is who American Christians consider their church leaders to be, and how American Christian leaders become leaders. It has nothing to do with being a Christian or following Jesus, but how big of a celebrity you are and if you are a pastor of a church or work for a parachurch ministry. American Christianity is of the world.

The American church model flows from the top, down. From the national level to the local level. Therefore, the local church operates the very same way as the national church.

Church pastors are gifted speakers who can manage a business, and who often seek to have their own large church someday. Church leaders become church leaders because of their worldly status and vocational position.

Being a gifted speaker or being able to present an inspiring sermon, or having a large ministry has nothing to do with success in God's kingdom. Having the ability to own your own business or manage a company has little to do with being a church elder or church leader. Even having a college education and degree has nothing to do with being a church leader. These are all man made American Christianity / American church requirements. 

Jesus said that the least will be the greatest, and that the last will be first. He also said,"if you love me, you will do what I command."

This is how a Christian leader should be defined. As someone who loves God and therefore they follow Jesus and do what He says.

The greatest leaders of the church are unknown men and women who have committed their lives to Christ. Many have given their lives for Christ's cause. They listen to God and they obey God out of a heart of love. They are not preaching from the pulpit, but are sitting in the pew. They might not be at a church service at all, but they follow Jesus and fellowship with other believers as the church.

Within some locations throughout the world, they may not have other believers to fellowship with, but they continuously pray, listen and follow Jesus.

The world may never even know their name, yet they are the true leaders of the church. 

What is Required for Change

In order for the church to once again be affective, American Christianity needs to be deconstructed and rebuilt. In the construction industry we would call it being "demo'd" (demolished). Tear it down and start over. God did not intend to start a religion, especially what Christianity has become. The church needs to go back to its origins.

Christians need to first see the need for change, and then acknowledge that change is needed. When they realize there is a problem with the status quo, then movements for change will begin. Some of these movements have already begun, but there is opposition from the status quo religious establishment, which create difficult obstacles and challenges to overcome. 

It is to be expected. Jesus faced these same challenges from within. So did the Protestant reformers and the anabaptists. 

I pray for the church - that Christians will realize the need for change and that these challenges will be overcome. I pray that the church it will become exactly what God intended it to be - His holy ekklesia, the radiant bride of Christ who is one in Christ who is one in the Father. And that it will be a people who love God, love others and make disciples.