What is... the "church"?

[Hekuran]

Sure. But what do you call the actual assembly of people who gathered in Jesus name?

 

[Brother-Paul]

Sure. But what do you call the actual assembly of people who gathered in Jesus name?

A congregation of called out souls.

If there are others there they are unsaved therefore belong to the devil.

The assembly of Jews in the OT was an assembly of God's chosen people.

A congregation of Christian's in the NT, are the called out ones, the born again ones, God's chosen people, our Lord's church, the ekklesia.

Unsaved souls are exactly that, so cannot be part of the ekklesia, their father is the devil. Our Lord's words brother.

We must see things from God's prospective, from The Word, not from what happens today, not from things or ways inherited through history and the RCC, not because we see unsaved souls who appear to be nice people and help fill the pews.

When you actually see what happens today, what as developed over the years, we see Christian's (born again there are no others) worshipping behind closed doors, waiting for lost souls to come through the door so they can convert them, often to the denominations ways and practices. What did Jesus do? The exact opposite! He went our preaching the Good News, preaching forgiveness of sin.

Getting people to go to church the way it is today was introduced years ago by the RCC, encouraged by Constantine and James 1, a means of teaching people good morals, it helped with law and order. Worldly people, lost souls think they go to heaven when they die because... they have Christian values.

The places of worship are so full of worldly values. Pastors learning worldly ways or dealing with money, counselling and more. So many do not know what a church is, the middle ages watered things down even more creating more confusion.

But scripture is clear, the 125 verses of church, ekklesia, called out ones is consistent in it's definition. The church, the ekklesia, is the called out ones, then again believers, the saved souls. In a similar way in the OT the assembly was God's children, the Jews.

In both cases, as stated already. they are God's children.

Jews OT God's chosen ones.
Christian's, NT Called out ones, born again from above believers are our Lord's church, the ekklesia.

 

[Brother-Paul]

Dear brother, we say the Truth is in The Word, but translations can be so misleading, even more so with key words it seems.

I include these past quotes fro past quotes as I have found further information that would go against what was previously shared, they are important because yet again they are down to translated text.

Parts of the following are taken from Home Page | Bein' a Berean | Steven: bij de Leij. others are from my own studies

From the above link, I posted the following...

NOTE ALSO: The King's influence is also seen where the names of the apostle and brother for Jesus were translated as "James" rather than Jacob (Iakobos)

I shared this last night with a dear brother from a CofE denomination. He immediately referred it to their study group, who also passed to to their vicar. A reply was received which the minister stated....


On the James question, I put it out to Geoff (Vicar) who says, “James is mentioned in Acts 15 and was actually the man leading the council of Jerusalem. Josephus the famous Jewish roman historian from the 1st C AD wrote in his work Antiquities that James was the brother of Jesus called the Anointed.” Hope this is helpful!

So this raised questions regarding the statement in beinaberean.org So I looked further into this and found the following.

I find here a longer description.

James or Jacob in the Bible?

Jacob is the proper translation, not James. But to correct modern Bibles so the Book of James would become the Book of Jacob would not be easy

www.biblicalarchaeology.org

It is worth reading, it is a translation issue, but is not due to King James 1 as was stated from the original post.

So was the brother of Jesus, James, or Jacob? It is revealed in the link biblicalarchaeology.org

 

[Brother-Paul]

I got the following reply from my brother who raised the James is actually Jacob poorly translated into English with his CofE vicar.

I remain humble servant sharing The Word with my brothers and sisters where ever in the world we are.

Here is the reply I received today.

Coming back to Jacob, I pass the article on to Geoff (His vicar) earlier and he has just replied as follows:
Very interesting. It would appear that your friend is right. James is a westernised Jacob.

We have anglicised a number of names just as I said. Jesus can be Yeshua and Joshua.

John Wycliffe was the first to translate Latin into English in 14thC. He used the name James not Jacob. As King James sponsered his bible he obviously would have liked his name in the N. T.

It could also be a sign of anti semitism as the Jews were not popular.
Hope that helps

It always helps to get another confirmation. I am referring here only to Jame's the brother of Jesus who is actually Jacob.

I certainly don't agree with everything said in the reply, particularly this statement: As King James sponsored his bible he obviously would have liked his name in the N. T.

No one has a right to change one dot or title in The Word of God.

Shalom