The Church that never existedDr James Trimm There has been a great deal of confusion over the years over what the "church" is. Some have taught that the Church is a new entity which replaces Israel. Others have taught that the Church is a new body which is totally independent of Israel. Still others have taught that the Church and Israel are two different but overlapping entities. With all of the misconceptions about the identity of the "Church" the time has come to set the story straight and reveal what the "Church" really is. ORIGIN OF THE WORD "CHURCH" The English word "Church" comes originally from the Old English word KIRKE. The Old English word KIRKE was the word the Anglo-Saxons used to refer to their pagan places of worship. When they became Christianized the Anglo-Saxons continued to call their places of worship KIRKES and as the language evolved "Churches". You may have heard that the word "Church" originally referred to the people and later came to refer to the building. This is not true. The word "Church" originally referred to the building and later came to refer to the people. Moreover the word "church" is of pagan origin. MEANING OF THE WORD "CHURCH" Now if you look up the English word "Church" in Webster's dictionary you will find the following meanings:
In short a "church" is either a building or a group of Christians.
Now wherever we see the English word "church" in an English Bible we would expect the underlying Greek word would be a Greek word that also means "a group of Christians". Since the English uses such a technical theological term o要e would expect that the Greek has also used a technical theological term. But the reality is that the Greek word that appears wherever the English has "church" is not a technical theological term and DOES NOT mean "a group of Christians"
The Greek word that appears where our English Bible's have "church" There is therefore no such thing as the "church" because the Greek word translated "church" does not mean "church" at all but "assembly". THE ASSEMBLY WHICH IS MESSIAH'S BODY Now there are some who claim that the "Church" was a new entity born in Acts 2 at Pentecost of 32 C.E. . However if we examine the events of Acts 2 we find that at that event persons were "added to" the "church" (Acts 2:47) which means that the "church" had to have already existed at that time. If we turn to Acts 7:38 we see that it speaks of Moses as "he that was in the church in the wilderness". Certainly this "church" could not have been a new "New Testament" entity. Now while the term "church" is a mistranslation for a word simply meaning "assembly", there is an entity which is commonly referred to as "The Assembly" in the New Testament. Let us examine the Scriptures and determine what the true identity of this "Assembly" is. To begin with we must understand that this Assembly is also known as the "Body of Messiah" as we read:
"And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."
"And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, Which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all." Now o要e may ask what "Assembly" is the allegorical Messiah? To find the answer to that question lets look at Matthew 2:14-15:
"When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt: Now here Matthew is citing a prophecy in Hosea 11:1 and applying it to Messiah. Now let us go back and look at this prophecy in Hosea 11:1 in context:
"When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." Here Hosea is referring to Israel as the son who is called out of Egypt. This points us back to a passage in the Torah:
"And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:
From these two passages we learn that Isreal is the firstborn son of Elohim who is called out of Egypt. However in Matthew it is Yeshua the Messiah who is called up out of Egypt and in Col. 1:18 Messiah is the "firstborn". Moreover Hebrews speaks of the "church of the firstborn" Thus Israel is allagorically equivalent to the Messiah. There are some very important reasons for this allegorical relationship:
Both are the "firstborn Son of Elohim". Thus Israel is the allegorical "Body of Messiah". Moreover in the Tanak, Israel is commonly called "The Assembly of Israel" and wherever the phrase "The Assembly of Israel" appears in the Tanak the Greek LXX has "EKKLESIA of Israel". The so-called "church" which is the "Body of Messiah" is in reality "the Assembly of Israel". Yeshua did not come to create a new religion, but to be Messiah of the old o要e. Wherever your English New Testament refers to a "church" (i.e. a group of Christians) the Greek has "EKKLESIA a term which commonly refers to the "Assembly of Israel". The "Church" as most Christians have understood it never existed. All of the passage people have thought were talking about the "Church" were actually talking about Israel. ARE ALL SAVED PERSONS PART OF THE BODY OF MESSIAH? Now let us look at Exodus 12:43-49: "And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the Passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof:
But every man's servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof.
One law shall be to him that is home born, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you. " Now there are a number of things we can learn from this passage:
From these two facts we may conclude that: If all the Assembly eat the Passover, and if no uncircumcised males eats the Passover, then no uncircumcised males are part of the Assembly. This is an inescapable categorical proposition drawn from the plain statements in Exodus 12:43-49. Now from Acts 15 we also know that o要e does not have to be circumcised to be saved. Thus we can add another fact to our reasoning: Now if no uncircumcised males are part of the Assembly, and if some uncircumcised males are saved, Then some saved persons are not part of the Assembly. Again this is an inescapable categorical proposition draws from the facts plainly laid out in Ex. 12:43-49 and Acts 15. There are in fact some saved persons who are not part of the Body of Messiah, the Assembly of Israel. Now this brings us to the Immersion of the Ruach HaKodesh: Paul writes of this immersion:
"For as the body is o要e, and hath many members, and all the members of that o要e body, being many, are o要e body: so also is Messiah. From this we can determine that all members of the Body of Messiah, the Assembly of Israel have received the immersion of the Ruach HaKodesh. Since we have already determined that some saved persons are not part of the Body of Messiah then it stands to reason that some saved persons who are not part of the Assembly of Israel may not have received the immersion of the Ruach HaKodesh. This is a fact confirmed in Acts 8:15-17 where we read about a group of Samaritans who had been saved, but had not yet received the immersion of the Ruach HaKodesh:
"Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Ruach HaKodesh: Thus also Acts refers to "...the Ruach HaKodesh which Elohim has given to them which OBEY him." (Acts 5:32). |