Israel Is The Church

[Dennis1209]

Don’t you think we are comparing apples with apples when calling the assembly or congregation church?

Most people call the harpazo (forcefully snatching away) the Rapture. Some claim they do not believe in the Rapture because the word is not in the Bible. Technically, it is in the Bible, the Latin Vulgate.

Speaking of translations, Jerome translated the Greek into Latin [L. raptus, rapio.] Rapture in English.

How and when it was Universal before church and how it was perverted is what bothers me.

 

[Mr. M]

8 minutes ago, Michael37 said:

That should be mistranslated.

Wycliff went with congregation for ekklesia, and when summoned to explain why he didn't conform to papal pressure and go with church he said to many that meant the hierarchy of clergy.

I have always preferred congregation. The point of discussion is whether or not Ecclesia, as a spiritual gathering would rightly be considered Israel, as distinguished from Paul's reference to Israel "after the flesh". Repeatedly in Isaiah and the Psalms we find Israel used to identify the Lord's Elect or Chosen, which Paul uses for the Ecclesia, without regard to Jew or Gentile. Those who belong to Christ. I find this to be an OT testimony to what the apostolic doctrine presents for His Body.

LXX uses eklektos [G1588], and eklegomai [G1586]=chosen

Matching the NT doctrine of The Election-ekloge [G1589]

What matters is what people understand when they hear

the word "Church"; is it the Body of Christ, or what they do

i.e. "go to church", certainly not the building. I also would

prefer to not use the words Sunday, Monday, etc...such is

that state of what is embedded into the English language.

 

 

[Mr. M]

3 minutes ago, Dennis1209 said:

Don’t you think we are comparing apples with apples when calling the assembly or congregation church?

Most people call the harpazo (forcefully snatching away) the Rapture. Some claim they do not believe in the Rapture because the word is not in the Bible. Technically, it is in the Bible, the Latin Vulgate.

Speaking of translations, Jerome translated the Greek into Latin [L. raptus, rapio.] Rapture in English.

How and when it was Universal before church and how it was perverted is what bothers me.

 

A good illustration, as long as you really weren't intending to deflect 

the discussion to that topic.   

[Mr. M]

5 minutes ago, Dennis1209 said:

Don’t you think we are comparing apples with apples when calling the assembly or congregation church?

Technically, to assemble is synago, from which we get

synagogue and means to gather together.

You are a member of your Congregation, or Ecclesia, 

regardless of whether or not you are presently gathered.

Of course, you are registered in heaven, as a part of Mt. Zion,

and the Ecclesia of the firstborn.

[Dennis1209]

2 minutes ago, Mr. M said:

A good illustration, as long as you really weren't intending to deflect 

the discussion to that topic.   

Nope. The topic is church and replacement theology. 

[Michael37]

3 minutes ago, Dennis1209 said:

Don’t you think we are comparing apples with apples when calling the assembly or congregation church?

Upsetting a theological applecart perhaps!

[Marathoner]

3 hours ago, Michael37 said:

Upsetting a theological applecart perhaps!

A pie in the face of tradition, mayhap. 

[AdHoc]

On 12/6/2023 at 11:43 PM, Dennis1209 said:

Don’t you think we are comparing apples with apples when calling the assembly or congregation church?

Most people call the harpazo (forcefully snatching away) the Rapture. Some claim they do not believe in the Rapture because the word is not in the Bible. Technically, it is in the Bible, the Latin Vulgate.

Speaking of translations, Jerome translated the Greek into Latin [L. raptus, rapio.] Rapture in English.

How and when it was Universal before church and how it was perverted is what bothers me.

 

 

On 12/6/2023 at 11:47 PM, Mr. M said:

A good illustration, as long as you really weren't intending to deflect 

the discussion to that topic.   

 

On 12/6/2023 at 11:57 PM, Michael37 said:

Upsetting a theological applecart perhaps!

I'll concur with @Michael37 - nice word study. I think that if the Title (or the Topic) uses the word Church so provocatively, then we should define what is written. I can live with "Church" when all participants know what were talking about. But in this thread our brother did not say Israel is a Congregation. He said Israel is THE Church.. The reason I addressed this is because a factor in the discussion would very soon be that Israel is called a "Church" (once). But Acts 7:38 does not mean that Israel is what Christ promised to build in Matthew 16 any more than the elected heathen leaders of Ephesus.

It is rather noteworthy that Israel was only called the "Ekklesia" in the Wilderness because they "gathered" around the "Tent of meeting". But once they had conquered Canaan "every man went to his inheritance" and Israel was only an Ekklesia 3 times a year at Jerusalem.

Of course, what we Christians have become is far from an Ekklesia too. In my nearest big city there are over 200 Assemblies - divided not geographically, but due to doctrine. This, the Holy Spirit vehemently condemns in 1st Corinthians 1 and 3 and calls it the work of the flesh. There the Roman Church beats us hands down with one diocese in one city. O.K. don't fire at me yet. I know that the first Ekklesia met "from house to house" but there should be a display of unity now and again where "ye come together" (1st Cor.5:4, 14:23). Our Lord prayed for this unity in John's gospel and it is the foundation of spiritual growth according to Ephesians 4.