J.R. GRAVES Life, times and Teachings 11

METHODISM IN TENNESSEE

Nashville was then and, indeed, is still the center and stronghold of Methodism in the South. They had there their great book concern in which every Methodist preacher was said to have a pecuniary as well as a denominational interest. Their one paper published in the Southwest was there. They had other important and thriving business establishments. They outnumbered the Baptists in Nashville at that time five to one and they really claimed this territory as peculiarly belonging to them, resenting the activities of the Baptists as invading a territory which should have been left alone. Above all, they had as the editor of their paper, The Christian Advocate, a man of varied attainments, one of surpassing ability and fierce prejudices. He was regarded as unscrupulous as he was talented; and he was a cordial hater of all the peculiarities that distinguish Baptists. That this practical polemic should at once turn his guns on the young editor was to be expected, and the manner in which he would do so might have been foreseen by his attacks on the dignified Dr. Howell:

“The inflated bird of Nashville, bigoted, presumptuous enough for anything; lacking only the power to be come a pope; in a state of putridity, i.e., that in morals we understand that Brother Howell is in a state of putridity.”

This reflection was passed upon Dr. Howell just after he had delivered a masterly address at the annual commencement of the Nashville University in which he greatly enhanced his already growing popularity.

Again:

“We (McFerrin) understood him (Dr. Howell) to say that he does not consider it a matter of importance always to state the plain truth.”

Once more:

“To deny that Baptists have asserted that they believe that there are children in hell is more than madness, if lying is worse.”

We here give only one response from Dr. Howell, to show his estimate of the man and also his manner of making reply:

“What we have said is enough to prove beyond question all that we propose, and that is that Mr. McFerrin will and does adopt any expedient, however repugnant to moral principles, if he thinks he can by such means do any injury to the Baptist denomination.”

DR. GRAVES GETTING HIS STRIDE

In the course of his editorial work, Dr. Graves, having become editor of The Baptist, set forth the Baptist view of baptism, insisting upon its meaning in the original Greek. In order to enforce his argument, he quited from namy authors. Among these were John Wesley and Adam Clark.

The editor of The Christian Advocate upbraided him as ignorant and as publishing “lies” in order to mislead his readers concerning “well known and fully accepted teaching.” Then the doughty editor of the Methodist organ challenged the editor of The Baptist to show his authority, and added: “If he failed, he would denounce him as an ignoramus and a liar and prosecute him for libel.”

Many people have been led to believe that Dr. Graves deliberately and wantonly attacked other denominations, thus seeking to draw them into debate, either oral or written. This was far from the truth and the above and the above experience indicates the ordinary course. But a challenge like that, followed by such a threat, was not the sort of dare that Dr. Graves would decline to accept. He replied, giving from Mr. Wesley’s writings and from Dr. Clark’s Commentaries their own language, making the statements which he had credited to them. He gave the volume and page from the authentic works of these great Methodist leaders and copied the quotations accurately. It was thus that the conflict with Methodism began. Dr. Graves was not the aggressor, but responded to the most vicious attacks. The same is practically true concerning Dr. Graves’ decision with respect to all denominational leaders, Baptists and others, who complained so loudly at him.

DR. McFERRIN’S LIEUTENANTS

Then there was in the state the notorious Parson Brownlow, of whom little need to be said here, a desperado in politics as in religion. This turbulent man was a heart foe of Baptists and their principles. He attacked them constantly in his political organ, The Knoxville Whig. Then throughout Tennessee and Mississippi wnt two traveling lecturers and disputers whode manin work was to attack and misrepresent Baptists. One of them was named Chapman, an Irishman, who was the bitterest and most unscrupulous man who at that time wore the ministerial garb. These were the men whom Graves, the newly elected editor, had to meet in the defense of himself and the principles which he intensely loved, and he had to meet them almost alone, as his was the only Baptist paper being published in the Southwest, for John l. Waller, of Kentucky, had retired from the Baptist Banner and Pioneer and its publication was then suspended. The Christian Advocate had been transferred by Dr. Mercer to the Georgia State Convention and was merely a medium of denominational news. The Biblical Recorder, of North Carolina, had been suspended for want of patronage and was struggling to renew its existence. It will help to understand the situation if it is remembered that there was no Baptist paper being published at that time in Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, or Texas. The whole Southwet was dependent upon The Baptist as a denominational exponent.

THE GLOOM AND DOOM PEOPLE

Psalm 42:5 Why art thou cast down, O my soul? and why art thou disquieted in me? hope thou in God: for I shall yet praise him for the help of his countenance.

We have many people that predict gloom and doom today. They always speak of the rush to ruin. They search for hope in history and find no hope. Through education they attempt to find and answer to the corruption and immorality that has over taken our land. They have not found any answer in civilization which they had hoped in. They cast an eye to other nations, hoping that dialogue and interaction would be the answer they were seeking but found wrecked cathedrals and destroyed homes that had been built without a solid foundation. How shallow the hopes and dreams of so many seekers in this world today. The answer is the creator of the world. God has the answer written in the Book of books. Our hope is in the creator that laid the foundation for this world. This Book says, “My soul, hope thou in God. Our hope is based on the fact that He is reigning and moving on in His eternal purposes to an end that shall be fair as a perfect day.

There may be some few years ahead. For some the prospect is dark and frightening. There will be many questions that cannot be answered about the future. Will your health hold out? Will your abilities and powers to hold a job hold out or will that day come when you can no longer provide for wife and children? When our hope is in our own selves we have a weak foundation. This world may not get better but the assurance we have is the Lord will return. We will have a new heaven and a new earth that is righteously ruled by Jesus. That is why we look to God for our Joy and Hope.

BLESSED ASSURANCE

“Blessed assurance, Jesus is mine. O what a foretaste of Glory divine.”

We have sang this hymn many times and on this the first day of the year, I have this assurance that has been given me through Jesus Christ my LORD.

Heb 10:22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.

We are assured when we have pure heart cleansed by the blood of the Lamb. A pure heart will draw us closer to our Savior and we will strive to please Him. My new year has led me to change some study habits and practices and with the strength and help of the LORD I am assured that achievement is possible.

Act 17:31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

I am assured that injustice will not go unpunished. There is a day of judgment that has been appointed. I must teach and preach against wickedness but not all wicked will be judged during my time on earth. There is a day where judgment comes on the wicked that have rejected the crucified Savior.

Col 2:1 For I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you, and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh;
2 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;
3 In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.
4 And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words.

I have an assurance of understanding. Now I know in part and have wonderful discussions with many different people about scripture. Some I may know here but one day I will sit at the feet of the Master Teacher and learn all and praise His name and glorify Him.

With the assurance of God through His Son, I know I am saved and secure and death will transport me into the presence of my Redeemer.

Where Is The Line To See Jesus – Becky Kelley

333 – Nov. 29 – THIS DAY IN BAPTIST HISTORY PAST

“A bold patient Sufferer for ye Lord Jesus”
November 29, 1685 – George Fownes died in the Gloucester, England jail. The faithful clerk of the Broadmead Church in Bristol inserted the event into the records of the church in the following words, “…having been kept there for Two years and about 9 months a Prisoner, unjustly and maliciously, for ye Testimony of Jesus and preaching ye Gospel, Fownes dyed. He was a man of great learning, of  a sound Judgment, an able Preacher, having great knowledge in Divinity, Law, Physic, & c.; a bold patient Sufferer for ye Lord Jesus, and ye Gospel he preacht.” From the Broadmead records we discover that Pastors Thomas Ewins, Tomas Hardcastle, and George Fownes were all imprisoned unjustly for the cause of Christ. But many other Baptist ministers endured imprisonments, and some died in jail merely because of their convictions. Francis Bamfield suffered for eight years in Dorchester jail. Thomas Delaune suffered in Newgate prison. John Miller was a prisoner for ten years in Newgate. Henry Forty was incarcerated for twelve years at Exeter. Joseph Wright, a man of great piety and learning, pastored at Maidstone but was imprisoned in the common jail there for twenty years. Thomas Helwys fled to Amsterdam but in time became convinced that he and the others had been wrong to flee persecution. Believing it was his duty to return to England and witness of the truth, he went to London in 1611 with 12 of his followers and settled at Spitalfields. He appealed to the King to grant liberty of conscience and for his convictions “Newgate Prison” became his home. He died in Newgate, barely forty years of age. The Broadmead church was founded by John Canne. He was the first to prepare and publish the English Bible with marginal references.
Dr. Greg J. Dixon from: This Day in Baptist History Vol. I: Cummins /Thompson/, pp. 497-98.

Bible Analysis Two Rules

TWO PRIMARY RULES FOR RIGHTLY UNDERSTANDING THE BIBLE.

This is the most important chapter of this book. To learn the two primary rules here presented is absolutely necessary in order for one to be able to understand the Bible, and be able to teach it without shame.

The late Ben M. Bogard said:

“Perhaps the most misleading idea people have is to think that when they open the Bible, no matter what passage they may read, that the passage applies to them, for they think all the Bible applies to them, but it is not true . . . The student may be startled to learn that much of what we know as the Bible does not apply to us in this age” (The Golden Key, p. 5).

The writer’s personal experiences verify the truths stated in the above quitation. When either a saved or unsaved person reads the Bible with the idea in mind that God does all the talking, everything in the Bible is to be practiced by the reader, the Bible seems to be a confused, nonsensical, out-dated book.

I.TWO PRIMARY RULES

There are two primary rules by which one may learn to arrive at the particular meaning of any passage in the Bible. These rules are both scriptural and scientific. The two rules are

1.the five point question rule, and
2.the proper application rule.

1.The Five Point Question Rule
This rule must be applied by anyone reading the Bible in order to interpret any passage intelligently. One does not have to study this book or this system of study in order to do this. But a study of this rule, as illustrated, will help one to be able to learn the particular teachings of the Bible much more rapidly. One may apply some ponts of the following rule, without knowing such a rule exists. But one who knows the five point rule is enabled to learn the actual meaning of a passage much more quickly than one who does not know such a scientific, scriptural system or rule for analysis of written or spoken matter exists. In reading the Bible one should find out the following five things about every passage:

1.Who is speaking or writing?
2.To whom or about whom is he speaking or writing?
3.“About what subject is he speaking or writing?
4.When or about what time is he speaking or writing?
5.What is the occasion for the speaking or writing?

2.The Proper Application Rule.

This rule is designed to teach one how to apply a given Bible truth, after the truth is determined. This concerns the “how” of applying known Bible truths. Since it has been pointed out that the New Testament and the Psalms are God’s rule and guide for man’s faith in practice today, this proper application rule enables one to know how to determine what doctrinal teachings of the Psalms and new Testament he is to practice today. This proper application rule for understanding the Scriptures has two parts:

1.The general application of a truth or deed to every person.
2.The particular application of a truth or deed to an individual or particular group.

For instance, some Scriptures are written describing the condition of all the unsaved. Other Scroptures describe the condition of particular unsaved individuals or groups. That men who are lost, wicked, shall all be cast into hell is a general application of the Bible’s teaching on the future punishment of the wicked – Psalm 9:17. That some lost people shall suffer more in hell than others is a particular truth, requires a particular application of some passages of Scriptures that tell how and to what extent some shall suffer in hell – Matt. 10:15; 11:24; 23:14-15; Luke 10:12′

II.FIVE POINT RULE ILLUSTRATED

A. One should always, upon reading any passage in the Bible, first ask himself, “Who is doing this speaking or writing?” There are at least seven classes of speakers in the Bible.

1. Sometimes God is speaking.
a. God spike to Adam and Eve, Gen. 3:9.
b. God spike to Noah, Gen. 9:8
c. God spoke to Abraham, Gen. 12:7; 22:1,3.
d. God spoke to Moses, Exodus 3:4, 14.
e. God spoke to all present, Matt. 3:17, 17:5.
f. God spoke to Saul, Acts 9:5

2.Sometimes angels are speaking.
a. An angel spoke to Hagar, Gen. 16:7-11.
b. An angel spoke to Abraham, Gen. 22:11.
c. An angel of the lord spoke to Balaam, num. 22:31.
d. An angel of the Lord spoke to Manoah, Judges 13:13-14.
e. An angel spoke to Elijah, I Kings 19:5; II Kings 1:3.
f. An angel of the Lord spike to Haggai, hag. 1:9, 12.
g. An angel spoke to Joseph, Matt. 1:20; to Zacharias, Luke 1:11-20; to Mary, Luke 1:26-37; to the Marys, Matt. 28:2-8; to the shepherds, Luke 2:9-14; to the apostles, Acts 5:9-10; to Paul, Acts 27;23-34

3.Sometimes the Devil is speaking.

It is true that both God and good angels are sometimes speaking as one reads portions of the Bible. But it is also true that sometimes the Devil is speaking. Whatever truth the Devil might relate, that is put in the Bible, was spoken by the Devil as a means of ensnaring men. The Defvil never told the truth or any truth for any good or holy purpose. The first conversation in which Satan ever engaged with man was hel to deceive man. And before he finished he lied to Eve, saying, “Thou shalt not surely die.” One should not use the Devil’s language and apply it to the Lord. In the following passages of the Bible the Devil spoke in person:

a. To Eve, Gen. 3:1-4.
b. To God, Job 1:7, 9-11; Job 2:2, 4-5.
c. To Jesus, Luke 4:3, 6, 7, 9, 10.
d. Devils (demon spirits) spoke, Luke 4:41.

4.Sometimes prophets are speaking.
From Aaron and Moses (Ex. 3:10; 7:1; Deut. 18:14) to Malachi (Mal. 1:1), every prophet of God sought to reveal God’s will. They were true prophets.

But there were also false prophets, whose words are recorded in the Old Testament. Should their words be taken for practice? (See Jer. 14:13, 14; 23:21-32; 27:8-15; Luke 6:26; Matt. 24:24-26; Acts 13:6-10.)

5.Sometimes wicked men are speaking.

Should one accept what a wicked man says at face value, as a matter to be practiced? And when the Bible quotes what wicked men have said, one should not take the words of some wicked man for his personal practice. Wicked men, or unsaved men, spoke in the following recorded passages:

a. The fool, psalm 14:1; Luke 12:16-20.
b. The harlot, prov. 7:13-20; John 4:19, 20.
c. Pilate, Matt. 27:24.
d. Man born blind, unsaved, John 9:31, 35, 36. Some use the words of this unsaved man to try to prove that God will not hear a sinner pray. Such is an abuse of intelligent interpretation of the Bible.
e. Examples in Acts 3:5-7; 6:11; 18:12-16; 24:1-9.

THE LOCAL VISIBLE CHURCH ONLY LESSON 5

THE LOCAL VISIBLE CHURCH

I.STATEMENT OF FACTS.
A.The word “ecclesia” is used 115 time in the Greek N.T.
B.The ways it is translated:
1.Church – 112 times.
2.Assembly – 3 times.
3.The word “church” in I Peter 5:13 is supplied by the translators, and is not in the original Greek.
C.Of the 112 times the word ecclesia is translated ‘church or “churches” it definitely applies to the N.T. Organization, except in one case – Acts 7:38, Here the reference is to Israel assembled in the wilderness.
D.The following breakdown will prove:
1.That 93 of the 111 times ecclesia definitely refers to local congregations.
2.That the remaining 18 times ecclesia refers to the Lord’s church in the institutiona, generic, or abstract sense (lesson 6).

II.SURVEY OF THE REFERENCE TO LOCAL CHURCHES.
A.The Church at Jerusalem”
1.Acts 8:1; Acts 11:22; Acts 15:4
2.Acts 12:1; Acts 15:22 – proved by the passage.
B.The Church at Antioch (Syria):
1.Acts 11:26; Acts 13:1; Acts 14:27
2.Acts 15:3 – by context.
C.The Church at Cenchrea – Romans 16:1
D.The Church at Corinth:
1.I Cor. 1:2; II Cor. 1:1;
2.Romans 16:23 – written from Corinth.
E.The Curch at Laodicea – Col. 4:16; Revelation 3:14
F.The Church at Thessalonica – I Thess. 1:1; II Thess. 1:1
G.The Church at Ephesus – Revelation 2:1; Acts 20:17
H.The Church at Smyrna – Revelation 2:8
I.The Church at Pergamos – Revelation 2:12
J.The Church at Thyatira – Revelation 2:18
K.The Church at Sardis – Revelation 3:1
L.The Church at Philadelphia – Revelation 3:7
M.Churches in houses – Romans 16:5; I Cor. 16:19; Philemon 2; Col. 4:15
N.Plural usages:
1.In Syria and Cilicia – Acts 15:41
2.In Galatia – I Cor. 16:1; Galatians 1:2
3.In Asia – I Cor. 16:19; Rev. 1:4; Rev. 1:11; Rev. 1:20 (twice); Rev. 2:7; Rev. 2:11; Rev. 2:17; Rev. 2:23; Rev. 2:29; Rev. 3:6; “Rev. 3:13; Rev. 3:22.
4.In Macedonia – II Cor. 8:1
5.In Judea – Gal. 1:22
6.In Judea, Galilee, Samaria – Acts 9:31
7.In Lystra, Iconium, Antioch – Acts 14:23
8.Of the Gentiles – Rom. 16:4
O.Proof by context:
1.Jerusalem – Acts 2:47; Acts 5:11; Acts 8:3; Acts 12:5; Acts 18:22 (not at Caesarea); I Cor. 15:9; Gal. 1:13; Phil. 3:6.
2.Corinth – I Cor. 11:18; I Cor. 11:22; I Cor 14:4; I Cor. 14:5; I Cor. 14:19; I Cor. 14:23; I Cor. 14:28; I Cor. 14:35; I Cor. 6:4; I Cor. 14:12.
3.Asia – Acts 16:5; Rev. 22:16
4.Judea – II Cor. 8:19; II Cor. 8:23; II Cor. 8:24; I Thes. 2:14.
5.Macedonia – II Cor. 11:8
P.Churches at any given place:
1.I Cor. 4:17; Phil. 4:15; James 5:14; II Cor. 8:18; III John 6; III John 9; III John 10; Matt. 18:17 (twice); Romans 16:16; I Cor. 7:17; I Cor. 14:33; II Cor. 11:28; II Cor. 12:13; II Thess. 1:4; I Tim. 3:5; I Tim. 5:16; I Cor. 11:16; I Cor. 14:34.

III.QUOTATIONS BY SCHOLARS.
A.These previous parts have covered 97 (4 plus 93) of the 115 times ecclesia is used in the Greek N.T. (the remaining 18 will be covered in the next lesson – the generic use of ekklesia).
B.Overbey says, “Every time ekklesia appears in the New Testament it makes sense translated according to its common menaing of assembly” (The Meaning of Ecclesia in the N.T., Overbey, p. 44).
C.Again he says, “In approaching the N.T. We see that the word is admitted by all to have this mianing (assembly) in about ninety places. The other times it is used there is a difference of opinion. Some contend for assembly, others for a new meaning best described as the universal invisible church. How can we tell which is correct? The principle is used that says the common meaning will not make sense if we are permitted to assume it has a new meaning. Following this principle we find that the word assembly makes sense in every contested passage so that any new sense must be rejected” (Ibid, pl 46).
D.I. K. Cross says, “We here charge that there is no such thing known in the New Testament as a church that includes every saved man on earth. This is the family of God, but never the church of the New Testament” (Canadian Baptists, Cross, p. 5).
E.A. C. Dayton declares, “Each church was complete within itself – independent of all earthly control, and subject only to the law of Christ” (Theodosia Earnest, Vo. II, p. 116).
F.J. R. Graves said, “The proof given that the very work Ekklesia (an assembly) denotes a complete church, equally implies its independency, i.e., that it is dependent upon no other body for its existence or self-perpetuation, or the discharge of all the functions and trusts of a Church of Christ” (The New Great iron Wheel, Graves, p. 134).
G.Graves again, “I have shown that the idea of a great Universal Invisible Church , or a Visible Universal Church composed of all the visible churches, or, as some claim of all baptized, independent of local churches, can not, by any fair exegesis, be found” (Seven Questions and Answers to Church Authority, Baptist Examiner, p. 37).
H.S. H. Ford asserts, “It should be remembered that by church, Baptists mean what the New Testament teaches – a local, real congregation of baptized believers united together for God’s service” (Ibid).

I.H. E. Dana says, “This matter of qualification for citizenship was quite important, for many residents of such a city had no place in the Ekklesia … The term referred to a body of persons having definite qualifications, assembled to carry out certain organized aims on democratic principles. So there wre elements pertinent to its (Ekklesia) New Teatament meaning.
1.The assembly was local;
2.it was autonomous;
3.it presupposed definite qualifications;
4.it was conducted on democratic principles” (The Church, L. L. Clover, p. 94).
J.Overbey says, “Jesus used the word ‘church’ twenty-three times, twenty times in Revelation, and three times in Matthew. Twenty-two times there is agreement among all that the word means assembly. It is either plural or the context is very clear so that there can be no doubt in any mind that he is speaking of a local, visible body. Matthew 16:18 is the only place where some think it has a new meaning. But if Jesus used the word twenty-two times and there is no question concerning its meaning then it seems that we must believe that the one remaining place has the same meaning” (Brief History of the Baptists, Overbey, p. 26).
K.Boyce Taylor asserts, “ . . . The Etymology of the word ekklesia makes it of necessity a local churhc” (Why Be a Baptist, Taylor, p. 47).
L.Armitage concurs, “In the apostolic age the church was a local body, and each church was independent of evgery other church. The simple term ecclesia designates one congregation, or organization assembly, this being its literal and primal meaning . . . It follows, then, that the New Testament nowere speaks of the ‘Universal, Catholic, or Invisible Church,’ as indicating a merely ideal existence separate from a real and local body . . . A local churhc fully expresses the meaning of the word ‘ecclesia’ wherever it is found in Holy Writ” (History of the Baptists, Armitage, pp. 118-120).

IV.SUGGESTED READING.
A.Ecclesia – the Church – B. H. Carroll
B.Why Be a Baptist – Boyce Taylor
C.Ekklesia – the Church – Bob Ross
D.Meaning of Ecclesia in the N.T. – Overbey
E.Seven Questions and Answerw as to Church Authority – Baptist Examiner
F.The Church – L. L. Clover
G.The Origin of Baptists – S. H. Ford
H.Theodosia Earnest, Vol. II – A. C. Dayton.

SUMMATION: The various verses used to try and prove a universal invisible church keeps changing as the correct usage is shown to be always local and visible. Each verse has been addressed and shown the proper usage. There is not, with proper usage and context, any where a universal invisible church can be found in scripture. A hard heart and will-ful desire will resist the truth and destroy even more doctrine in their error.

Just a note that should follow Lesson 1

NOTE: The Scriptures state that Satan will use whatever means he can to confuse and undermine God’s Word and work. He has been very effect by playing upon men and womens natural, carnal, fleshly desires. One does not have to know Greek or Hebrew to understand the truth. The problem to-day is that few know how to study the Bible and we are called to “Study to show thyself approved before God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”

The implications of the above passage is as plain as the sun in the sky. The statement, “rightly dividing” indicates there is a wrong way to divide. Those that wrongly divide, if they have been born again will stand before the Lord one day and give account. There IS no excuse for being wrong.

Most people are wrong because they reject truth with-out study, therefore falling under the influence of Satan and his demons by believing a lie that Satan has made available and appeals to the flesh. Read John 6:53 -66 which tells of the disciples that heard some things that did not appeal to their flesh and they found abhorrent, they turned and walked with Jesus no more.

There are many well intentioned people that have been born again and going to glory that have not found the exquisite beauty that the Word holds for those that ‘study’ to show themselves approved. The interrelationship of the Old Testament and the New Testament is astounding.

This leads us to the study in front of us. If we are wrong on the doctrine of the Church, we will be wrong on many other doctrines and not understand the blood that Jesus shed. Then we will stand before the Lord and have to give account for our lack and for misleading others.

ECCLESIOLOGY (A Study Of The Church) Lesson 3

LESSON 3
THE MEANING OF ECCLESIA IN THE CLASSICAL GREEK

I.DEFINITION OF TERMS.
A.The New Testament was written in the koine or “common” Greek.
B.The Koine differs in many respects to the modern or classical Greek.
C.Classical Greek refers basically to the ancient Greek tongue which found its roots in the Indo-Germanic family of languages.
D.The Koine age is approximately 300 B.C. To 500 A.D. Classical Greek is thought of as preceding the Koine; modern Greek is thought of as succeeding the Koine.

II.TESTIMONY OF SCHOLARS.
A.Dana says, – “In classical use ekklesia meant ‘an assembly.” It was derived from a combination of Greek root and prefixed preposition, the resultant meaning of which was ‘to call out.’ It was commonly used in reference to bodies of qualified representatives ‘called out’ for legislative functions” (Meaning of Ecclesia in the N.T., Overbey, p. 10).
B.Ewing writes, – “In every case, the word means an organized body, in opposition to a casual meeting…” (Ibid).
C.Liddell and Scott – “An assembly of the citizens summoned by the crier, the legislative assembly” (Ibid).
D.Seyffert’s Dictionary: – “The assembly of the people, which in Greek cities had the power of final decision in public affairs” (Ibid).
E.Thomas – “It was the organized assembly of the authorized voters of the local community met to transact business of common concern. It corresponded to the town-meeting of New England of later days” (Ibid).
F.Overbey says, “A distinction should be maintained between the etymology of a word and its meaning at some particular time in history. Sometimes the two are the same; many times they are quite different. ‘Hussy’ came from ‘huswife’ which means housewife; today it means a worthless woman or girl, or a pert girl. ‘Constable’ came from ‘comes stabuli’ which means attendant of the stable; today it means a peace officer. ‘Ekklesia’ came from ‘ekkletos’ which means called out but in the times prior to the New Testament it meant assembly or called out assembly. To say it means the called out is not correct” (Ibid p. 11).
G.Broadus writes, – “The Greek word ekklesia signified primarily the assembly of citizens in a self-governed state, being derived from ekkaleo to call out; i.e., from their homes or places of business, to summon, as we speak of calling out the militia. The popular notion that it meant to call out in the sense of separation from others is a mistake” (Ibid).
H.F. J. A. Hort says, – “There is no foundation for the widely spread notion that ekklesia means a people or a number of individual men called out of the world of mankind” (Ibid p. 11).
I.Prof. Royal of Wake Fores College said, – “I do not know of any passage in classical Greek, where ekklesia is used of unassembled or unassembling persons: (Why Be a Baptist, Taylor, p. 45).

III.SUGGESTED READING.
A.Ecclesia – the Church by B. H. Carroll
B.Meaning of Ecclesia in the N. T. by Overbey

ECCLESIOLOGY (Study of the Church) Lesson 2

LESSON 2
THE MEANING OF ECCLESIA

I.DEFINITION OF TERMS.
A.As previously stated, most scholars agree that the English word “church” comes from a Greek word (kuriakos) which means “the Lord’s” and joined with day (hemera) or supper (deipnon) describe exactly what is refered to as being the Lord’s.
B.When the Greek kuriakos (church) is used to replace ecclesia (assembly), it is used to define what assembly. It is not simply any assembly, It is the LORD’S.
C.I. K. Cross says, “In Acts 19:39-41 the term is used twice. Once to refer to the ‘lawful assembly’ which was called out of the citizens of Ephesus to handle legal matters in the city. The other to refer to the assembly that had been called together to run Paul and his companions out of town. In either case the assembly, or ecclesia (for this is the word used here), was a called out group, called together for a specific purpose, and local in nature. This was the common usage of the term and always the proper definition of an ecclesia. THIS IS WHAT OUR LORD SAID HE WOULD BE BUILDING.”
D.Cross continues, “If Jesus Christ had intended to build another kind of company there were other words in the language He could have used. He could have used the word ‘Synagoga,” a term without such limitations and yet designating an assembly. It would certainly have been more fitting for a ‘universal company.’ He could have also used the word ‘panagris’ if he had a solemn assembly in mind of a massive and festal nature. But these were rejected in favor of the most limiting term in the Greek language with reference to an assembly; a term that can only be properly interpreted as an assembly local in nature” (Ibid).
E.Cross in another place says, “The word ‘ecclesia’ is more than a mere assembly. The word is really a compounding of two words. ‘Kaleo,’ to call; and ‘ek,’ meaning out, or literally ‘to call out.’ Thus, an ‘ekklesia’ is a Called out assembly, implying some conditions. The Lord did not call all Christians in the area that cared to assemble into His ‘ekklesia,’ but he was very selective about it in Matthew 4:17-22; Matthew 9:9; John 1:43,44 and on until he had 120 in that assembly by the time he went back to the Father. I Cor. 12:28 says that ‘God hath set some in the church (ekklesia)…,’ not all. The same passage states that He set the apostles in the ‘ekklesia,’ and on the occasion when the apostles were chosen there was quite a congregation of disciples present of whom he chose the apostles – and Paul says the apostles, not the crowd, were set in the ‘ekklesia’” (Landmarkism on Trial, Cross, p. 7).
F.Overby concurs, “To change the meaning of a word you must have good evidence that the speaker or writer of that word intended it that way. A basic principle that all scholars recognize is that a word must retain its usual meaning as long as the word used makes good sense that way. Only when it will not make good sense are we allowed to give it a new or rare meaning. If we apply this principle in this passage (Matthew 16:18), we will see that ‘assembly’ makes good sense so we cannot agree with those who would try to change the meaning here” (Brief History of the Baptists, Overbey, pp. 26,27).
G.Roy Mason asserts, …I submit the proposition that the church that Jesus founded was the local assembly, and that to use the word ecclesia to designate a ‘universal,’ or ‘invisible’ church is to pervert its meaning, and to fall into serious error” (The Church That Jesus Built, Mason, p. 26).
H.Mason also says, “The word ecclesia rendered ‘church’ in English translations, was not a new word coined by Jesus, but a word already in current use at that time and moreover a word the meaning of which had become definitely fixed and established” (Ibid, p. 27).
I.A. C. Dayton said, “The Greek ‘ekklesia’ consisted of certain individuals who, when assembled and organized, constituted an official body for the transaction of such business as might come before them. It was not merely an assembly, but an official assembly, consisting of persons specifically qualified, and who had each his specific rights and duties as a member of the ekklesia. It was not every resident in the city who was, strictly speaking, a citizen; nor was it every citizen who was a member of the ekklesia to which was intrusted the management of public business; but the ekklesia were called out from the mass… Every assembly was not an ekklesia, nor was every ekklesia an ekklesia of Christ” (Theodosia Earnest, pp. 72, 73).
J.Again, “The Greek ‘ekklesia’ was an assembly of called and qualified citizens, invested with certain rights, and registered in the city records” (Ibid, p. 129).

II.IMPROPER MEANINGS ATTACHED TO ECCLESIA.
A.The worship service (in contrast to Sunday School).
B.The clerical profession (so used in most modern terminology).
C.Building in which Christian assemblies meet:
1.Dayton says, “…history informs us that the Chrisitans had no such buildings (church-houses) for some two hundred years after this, (the time of the apostles), but continued to meet from house to house, or in the Jewish synagogues, or wherever they might. And the word (ekklesia) is never used in the New Testament, or any other Greek book written before or during the time of the apostles, to signify a house or building” (Ibid, p. 81).
2.This usage, so common even among those who know the truth, has come about by an original misconception of the word ekklesia.
D.All of One denomination:
1.That each denomination is a “branch” off the one big church.
2.Thus, the “Methodist Church,” the “Presbyterian Church,” etcl
E.Historical sense – the whole field of ecclestiastical activity in history since the days of Jesus here on earth – “the church in history.”
F.Modal sense:
1.Terms like “a scriptural church” “church of the N.T.,” etc.
2.These terms are not unscriptural as far as teaching, but the terms themselves are found nowhere in the Bible.
G.Universal, invisible sense:
1.That all the saved are in the mystical body, the church.
2.This theory is dealt with thoroughly in a further lesson.
H.From the modern usage of “church” one can easily see that the vast majority of those who use the word are totally ignorant of the Greek ekklesia.

III.QUOTES FROM RECOGNIZED SCHOLARS.
A.Liddell and Scott (Lexicon) – “An assembly of people called together; an assembly called out.”
B.Dean Trench – “Ekklesia, as all know, was the lawful assembly in a free Greek city of all those possessed of the rights of citizenship, for the transaction of public affairs” (Synonyms of the N.T., p. 17).
C.Edward Robinson – “Ekklesia, a convocation, assembly, congregation. In the literal sense a popular, or rather assembly, composed of persons legally summoned” (Lexicon).

D.A. H. Strong – “Ekklesia signified merely an assembly, however gathered or summoned. The church was never so large that it could not assemble” (Systematic Theology).
E.Vincent – “Originally an assembly of citizens, regularly summoned” (Word Studies in the N.T.)
F.Thayer – “Take the entire range of Greek literature in all its dialects, secular and sacred, and there is not one passage in which ecclesia means an invisible and universal spiritual assembly” (Lexicon).
G.Alexander Campbell – “Ekklesia literally signifies an assembly called out from others and is used among the Greeks, particularly the Athenians, for their popular assemblies, summoned by their chief magistrates and in which none but citizens had a right to sit. By inherent power it may be applied to any body of men called out and assembled in one place. If it ever loses the idea of calling out and assembling, it loses its principal features and its primitive use” (Ekklesia – The Church. Ross, p. 7).LESSON 2
THE MEANING OF ECCLESIA

I.DEFINITION OF TERMS.
A.As previously stated, most scholars agree that the English word “church” comes from a Greek word (kuriakos) which means “the Lord’s” and joined with day (hemera) or supper (deipnon) describe exactly what is refered to as being the Lord’s.
B.When the Greek kuriakos (church) is used to replace ecclesia (assembly), it is used to define what assembly. It is not simply any assembly, It is the LORD’S.
C.I. K. Cross says, “In Acts 19:39-41 the term is used twice. Once to refer to the ‘lawful assembly’ which was called out of the citizens of Ephesus to handle legal matters in the city. The other to refer to the assembly that had been called together to run Paul and his companions out of town. In either case the assembly, or ecclesia (for this is the word used here), was a called out group, called together for a specific purpose, and local in nature. This was the common usage of the term and always the proper definition of an ecclesia. THIS IS WHAT OUR LORD SAID HE WOULD BE BUILDING.”
D.Cross continues, “If Jesus Christ had intended to build another kind of company there were other words in the language He could have used. He could have used the word ‘Synagoga,” a term without such limitations and yet designating an assembly. It would certainly have been more fitting for a ‘universal company.’ He could have also used the word ‘panagris’ if he had a solemn assembly in mind of a massive and festal nature. But these were rejected in favor of the most limiting term in the Greek language with reference to an assembly; a term that can only be properly interpreted as an assembly local in nature” (Ibid).
E.Cross in another place says, “The word ‘ecclesia’ is more than a mere assembly. The word is really a compounding of two words. ‘Kaleo,’ to call; and ‘ek,’ meaning out, or literally ‘to call out.’ Thus, an ‘ekklesia’ is a Called out assembly, implying some conditions. The Lord did not call all Christians in the area that cared to assemble into His ‘ekklesia,’ but he was very selective about it in Matthew 4:17-22; Matthew 9:9; John 1:43,44 and on until he had 120 in that assembly by the time he went back to the Father. I Cor. 12:28 says that ‘God hath set some in the church (ekklesia)…,’ not all. The same passage states that He set the apostles in the ‘ekklesia,’ and on the occasion when the apostles were chosen there was quite a congregation of disciples present of whom he chose the apostles – and Paul says the apostles, not the crowd, were set in the ‘ekklesia’” (Landmarkism on Trial, Cross, p. 7).
F.Overby concurs, “To change the meaning of a word you must have good evidence that the speaker or writer of that word intended it that way. A basic principle that all scholars recognize is that a word must retain its usual meaning as long as the word used makes good sense that way. Only when it will not make good sense are we allowed to give it a new or rare meaning. If we apply this principle in this passage (Matthew 16:18), we will see that ‘assembly’ makes good sense so we cannot agree with those who would try to change the meaning here” (Brief History of the Baptists, Overbey, pp. 26,27).
G.Roy Mason asserts, …I submit the proposition that the church that Jesus founded was the local assembly, and that to use the word ecclesia to designate a ‘universal,’ or ‘invisible’ church is to pervert its meaning, and to fall into serious error” (The Church That Jesus Built, Mason, p. 26).
H.Mason also says, “The word ecclesia rendered ‘church’ in English translations, was not a new word coined by Jesus, but a word already in current use at that time and moreover a word the meaning of which had become definitely fixed and established” (Ibid, p. 27).
I.A. C. Dayton said, “The Greek ‘ekklesia’ consisted of certain individuals who, when assembled and organized, constituted an official body for the transaction of such business as might come before them. It was not merely an assembly, but an official assembly, consisting of persons specifically qualified, and who had each his specific rights and duties as a member of the ekklesia. It was not every resident in the city who was, strictly speaking, a citizen; nor was it every citizen who was a member of the ekklesia to which was intrusted the management of public business; but the ekklesia were called out from the mass… Every assembly was not an ekklesia, nor was every ekklesia an ekklesia of Christ” (Theodosia Earnest, pp. 72, 73).
J.Again, “The Greek ‘ekklesia’ was an assembly of called and qualified citizens, invested with certain rights, and registered in the city records” (Ibid, p. 129).

II.IMPROPER MEANINGS ATTACHED TO ECCLESIA.
A.The worship service (in contrast to Sunday School).
B.The clerical profession (so used in most modern terminology).
C.Building in which Christian assemblies meet:
1.Dayton says, “…history informs us that the Chrisitans had no such buildings (church-houses) for some two hundred years after this, (the time of the apostles), but continued to meet from house to house, or in the Jewish synagogues, or wherever they might. And the word (ekklesia) is never used in the New Testament, or any other Greek book written before or during the time of the apostles, to signify a house or building” (Ibid, p. 81).
2.This usage, so common even among those who know the truth, has come about by an original misconception of the word ekklesia.
D.All of One denomination:
1.That each denomination is a “branch” off the one big church.
2.Thus, the “Methodist Church,” the “Presbyterian Church,” etcl
E.Historical sense – the whole field of ecclestiastical activity in history since the days of Jesus here on earth – “the church in history.”
F.Modal sense:
1.Terms like “a scriptural church” “church of the N.T.,” etc.
2.These terms are not unscriptural as far as teaching, but the terms themselves are found nowhere in the Bible.
G.Universal, invisible sense:
1.That all the saved are in the mystical body, the church.
2.This theory is dealt with thoroughly in a further lesson.
H.From the modern usage of “church” one can easily see that the vast majority of those who use the word are totally ignorant of the Greek ekklesia.

III.QUOTES FROM RECOGNIZED SCHOLARS.
A.Liddell and Scott (Lexicon) – “An assembly of people called together; an assembly called out.”
B.Dean Trench – “Ekklesia, as all know, was the lawful assembly in a free Greek city of all those possessed of the rights of citizenship, for the transaction of public affairs” (Synonyms of the N.T., p. 17).
C.Edward Robinson – “Ekklesia, a convocation, assembly, congregation. In the literal sense a popular, or rather assembly, composed of persons legally summoned” (Lexicon).

D.A. H. Strong – “Ekklesia signified merely an assembly, however gathered or summoned. The church was never so large that it could not assemble” (Systematic Theology).
E.Vincent – “Originally an assembly of citizens, regularly summoned” (Word Studies in the N.T.)
F.Thayer – “Take the entire range of Greek literature in all its dialects, secular and sacred, and there is not one passage in which ecclesia means an invisible and universal spiritual assembly” (Lexicon).
G.Alexander Campbell – “Ekklesia literally signifies an assembly called out from others and is used among the Greeks, particularly the Athenians, for their popular assemblies, summoned by their chief magistrates and in which none but citizens had a right to sit. By inherent power it may be applied to any body of men called out and assembled in one place. If it ever loses the idea of calling out and assembling, it loses its principal features and its primitive use” (Ekklesia – The Church. Ross, p. 7).