Private In-Home Churches

The Inaccurate and Harmful Rendering of Ecclesia as Church 

By Desmond Allen, PhD, ThM, MDiv

Introduction 

It is commonly understood that “church” has been accepted as an inaccurate but innocuous translation of the Greek ἐκκλησία (ekklēsía), the English ecclesia. This notion is partly true and partly false. It is true that “church” does not capture the original meaning of ecclesia, but it is not innocuous. From the 6th century, when West Germanic speakers began applying the term “cirice” (pronounced church) to Christian assemblies and their buildings, until today, this confused understanding has quietly hindered the spiritual life of many souls. However, before we get to that issue, we must go back in history, long before the 6th century AD, to the 6th century BC, to understand the use and meaning of the Greek ecclesia. 

Ecclesia in Ancient Greece 

Hundreds of years before the New Testament (NT) was written, ancient Greeks used ecclesia to signify citizen assemblies in a free city-state. The compound word is derived from the preposition ἐκ (ek), “from, out of,” and the verb καλέω (kaléō), “to call, to bid.” The town herald would “call out” citizens to discuss civic business. Today, we might recognize this as a Town Hall Meeting.

The Septuagint (LXX), the Greek translation of the Old Testament (OT) compiled from the 3rd century BC to the 1st century BC, was widely used during Christ’s time. About two-thirds of the NT quotations from the OT are taken directly from the LXX, in which ecclesia appears some 77 times to translate the Hebrew קָהָל (qâhâl), meaning assembly, company, congregation, or multitude. For example: 

Moses spoke in the ears of all the congregation (ecclesia) of Israel the words of this song, until they were ended (De 31:30). 

The chief of all the people, even of all the tribes of Israel, presented themselves in the assembly (ecclesia) of the people of God (Jg 20:2). 

Like the LXX, Jesus also employed ecclesia to refer to the people of God. He told Peter, “Upon this rock, I will build my Ecclesia” (Mt 16:18); wherein He, as the mediator of the new covenant (Heb 12:24), spoke of those He would call into His fellowship (1Co 1:9). The disciples continued the use of ecclesia, sometimes referring to the universal body of Christ, as Jesus had, and sometimes referring to a local congregation of believers. Luke said Paul and Barnabas returned to every ecclesia they had established on their missionary journey and ordained elders (Ac 14:33). As a reference to the universal body of Christ, husbands are exhorted to love their wives even as Christ loved the Ecclesia and gave Himself for it (Eph 5:25-27). Ecclesia appears 118 times in the New Testament.

The Imperial Influence over Christendom 

From the onset, Christians had no cathedrals, no houses of worship, for wherever two or three were gathered together, Jesus was in their midst as they worshipped in spirit and truth (Mt 18:20; Jn 4:23). For hundreds of years, Christians had carried on the tradition of gathering in private homes or other secluded places; but this began to change in the 4th century.

Just before the Battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312, Constantine the Great said he saw a cross of light in the sky, which he interpreted as a sign of victory. He was indeed victorious, and afterward he began favoring Christianity. In 313, he signed the Edict of Milan, which ended some 250 years of persecution by a succession of Roman Emperors. Although he apparently converted to Christianity, he was not baptized until his deathbed, while still retaining the pagan title of Pontifex Maximus—the high priest of the ancient polytheistic Roman state religion that worshipped gods such as Jupiter, Juno, Minerva, and Mars.

Being the high priest of Roman paganism but with a new affinity for Christianity, Constantine built ornate, monumental basilicas for “Christian worship” to rival those of the pagans. Up to this point, such cathedrals had not been a part of Christendom; as Paul reminded the Corinthians who had come out of paganism, Christians themselves are the temple of God, for the Spirit of God dwells within each believer (1Co 3:16). At Mars Hill, Paul explained to the Athenians that the Creator of the world does not dwell in manmade temples (Ac 17:24).

After the 380 Edict of Thessalonica established Christianity as the state religion, and a series of edicts issued by Theodosius I from 391 to 392 outlawed paganism altogether, hordes of pagans feigned Christianity for social and political expediency, as the imperial influence on Christendom fundamentally changed traditional biblical Christendom in three ways.

The outlawed pagan temples became “Christian temples” or “houses of worship,” supplanting the biblical teaching that each believer is the temple of God (1Co 3:16).

The pagan priest became “Christian priests,” and the office of priesthood was established to intercede for the laity in the new state-sanctioned version of Christendom; thereby superseding the biblical teaching that Christians are a kingdom of priests with each believer having direct access to the Lord (Re 1:6; Heb 4:14-16).

Various pagan customs and rituals were reinvented as Christian customs and rituals, thereby transforming worship into something tangible and displacing the biblical teaching of spiritual worship. For example, the pagan ritual of burning candles to honor spirits and deities became a symbol of Jesus as the light of the world, and candles were placed before icons of saints as visible offerings of prayer, asking the saint to intercede on behalf of the “worshiper.” The December 25th pagan celebration of the winter solstice, known as the “Birthday of the Unconquered Sun,” became the birthday of Jesus, etc.

Although Constantine and Theodosius I believed they were doing good for Christianity, they opened a floodgate of confusion and pagan infiltration that lasts to this day.

The Theological Significance of Ekklēsía and Church 

Jerome understood the theological significance of the Greek ekklēsía. The Latin Vulgate, which he finished in 404, used the direct transliteration ecclesia rather than a Latin term. Although Latin terms such as contio and comitia had similar meanings, they had slightly different connotations than ecclesia, as Jesus used it. Contio spoke of a public meeting called by a magistrate to hear speeches; and comitia was an assembly of citizens gathered to vote or pass laws. Jesus had employed ecclesia to identify the assembly of saints to whom He Himself gives life and calls to His fellowship. Jesus spoke of something more than mere political or civic meetings.

By the 6th century, Christianity had spread throughout the empire, reaching England and the Germanic societies, and the contrived houses of worship had multiplied. West Germanic speakers had begun calling the Christian assemblies and their houses of worship “church,” pronounced “church.” Linguists believe the West Germanic term “cirice” comes from the Germanic “kirche,” which is derived from the ancient Greek “kuriakós,” “of or belonging to the Lord,” as Paul used it in “the Lord’s supper” (1Co 11:20).

A few years after the Anglo-Saxon king of Kent, King Æthelberht, converted to Christianity, he established the “Laws of King Æthelberht” sometime between 600 and 604, in which the protection of churches (i.e., Christian’s and their properties) would be enforced within the newly converted kingdom. As Christianity continued to spread, so too did the term church, along with its West Germanic application to both a congregation and its temple of worship, consistent with Constantine’s faulty notion that his basilicas were holy temples of Christian worship.

By the end of the 14th century, when John Wycliffe compiled his Middle English Bible translation, the term church, which he too employed, was widely used. However, like Jerome, William Tyndale recognized the significance of ecclesia as a reference to believers themselves being the living holy temple of God, and he adamantly rejected the term church. While Jerome had merely transliterated ekklēsía as ecclesia, Tyndale’s 1526 English translation rendered ekklēsía as congregation.

Unfortunately, by the 16th century, as the Great Reformers began leaving Roman Catholicism, the term church was so ingrained in society that many failed to reject or even challenge it as Jerome and Tyndale had. When the authorized biblical text (commissioned by King James to unify English Protestants) was published in 1611, it also contained the inadequate “church,” which basically put the matter to rest, as the KJV quickly became the standard.    

The Potential Spiritual Harm 

King Æthelberht’s use of church as a legal reference that wrapped the Christian congregation and their holy building together as a single entity soon became a theological statement. From that day to this, church speaks of both the building of worship and the people gathered within; but this is not the ecclesia of the Lord. This seemingly innocuous false teaching that identified the building along with the congregation has hindered the spiritual growth of untold millions. Both Jerome and Tyndale recognized the erroneous theological association and refused to use the term; but sadly, their concern went unheard. The misleading concept is harmful in the following way.

Church buildings are generally thought of as something sacred, revered as holy temples of worship, complete with a sanctuary, an altar, and religious artifacts; all of which displaces the reality that the believer’s heart is the sanctuary where true worship takes place in spirit and truth. Yet, the notion of a specific location for worship is so embedded in our culture that we often hear unbelievers say, “The outdoors, nature, is my church?”

By continuing to foster this view of a holy temple or sanctuary where one comes to worship, Christians are depriving themselves of the daily worship that ought to be taking place within their hearts, and they are depriving the world of knowing that God can be reached from anywhere at any time; He is not confined to some supposed holy temple made of wood and stone by human hands (Ac 17:24-25).

Two more egregious concerns arise from the open-door policy in these churches. The first is the sanctity of the Christian congregation, which is hindered due to believers commingling in worship with the hypocrite, the immoral, or the purveyor of false doctrine. This decidedly unbiblical practice invites heresy and restricts the leadership’s ability to contain it. Time and again, we are warned about associating with those professed believers who teach false doctrine, live ungodly lives, or are merely argumentative troublemakers. They are to be excommunicated, which cannot happen with the open-door policy.

Put away from among yourselves that wicked person (1Co 5:13).

Mark them who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned; and avoid them; for they that are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the innocent (Ro 16:17-18).

Reject a man that is divisive after the first and second admonition; knowing that he that is such is perverted, and sins, being condemned of himself (Ti 3:9-11).

If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; do not eat with such a one; for what have I to do to judge them also that are outside? Do you not judge them that are within? (1Co 5:11-12).

Withdraw yourselves from every brother that walks disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received from us (2Th 3:6).

The second concern arising from the open-door policy is the continued biblical ignorance among the ecclesia. In many churches, because unbelievers are welcomed and assumed to be in attendance, many preachers never get past salvation sermons; they function as evangelists rather than teachers, and therefore, the saints never learn the deeper biblical doctrines. The author of Hebrews reprimanded his readers for this very thing, telling them they ought to be teachers by now, but they had not gotten past the foundational truths of the faith. They were still drinking milk like babies (Heb 5:12-14). Therefore, he continued,  

Leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto maturity; not laying the foundation of repentance from dead works again, and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment (Heb 6:1-2ebH). 

Admittedly, evangelism is important, but the doctrinal education and spiritual growth of the ecclesia is also important. Evangelism has a place, but it is not toward the ecclesia, which has already placed its trust in Christ; thus, the adage, “preaching to the choir.” The ecclesia needs the solid food of maturity, not the milk of babes. 

The open-door policy was not an issue during the first 250 years of Christendom, when Christians met in private homes or in secluded places surreptitiously identified by the symbol of a fish scratched in the soil or on a wall. The first letters of the term, ΙΧΘΥΣ (I CH TH Y S, fish), stood for the acronym of Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς Θεοῦ Υἱὸς Σωτήρ (Jesus Christ God’s Son Savior). 

From the first time King Æthelberht applied “church” to Christianity till now, the term has commonly been used to speak of the holy house of worship, the temple where one meets God; but the church, the white building with stained glass and a steeple pointing to heaven, is not the ecclesia, the Lord’s chosen assembly, a living organism consisting of true believers.

Yet another sad result of the “church” format is that every week the ecclesia sits quietly, side by side, in the “church sanctuary,” basically neglecting one another, with seldom a word spoken as they watch the weekly production without any meaningful or personal investment. Then, they disappear to their respective lives until the next week, when they gather again to fulfill their holy sacrificial duty. As these “churches” grow ever larger (an apparent sign of success), their dysfunction also grows. Fortunately, the early ecclesia was hindered by these holy houses of worship.

Another notable detriment is the unnecessary financial burden placed on the ecclesia. Resources that could be used for ministry and missionary support are spent on a mortgage, maintenance, and insurance.

The final glaring injury created by the church building is that, inevitably, it is a source of much conflict and division within the ecclesia. Sinful behavior enters the congregation, and disputes arise concerning the material facilities, and soon the spiritual ecclesia splits over the false temporal temple. 

Conclusion 

Perhaps the local ecclesia would be far better served if it returned to the roots and rid itself of the lavish, burdensome churches, the supposed holy houses of worship that are little more than a source of internal conflict and financial drain. They could return to intimate in-home assemblies where they pray together, fellowship as family, and learn sound doctrine firsthand from experienced teachers who are ever training new leaders. As the in-house assemblies grow, they could divide cordially, in a planned and purposefully manner, with a newly trained teacher leading an assembly in another home. Periodically, the numerous small assemblies could meet together for a unified fellowship and worship. Here, they might have the coveted evangelical sermon for their non-Christian friends whom they have invited. Such an organization would forever rid the notion of a holy sanctuary or temple of worship, solidifying the reality that the believers themselves are the temple of God.