Close Your Church for Good, Chap. 4, Part 3.  In the previous post, we looked at the radical concept from Paul that the church is connected to each other in ways never before imagined. We now conclude our briefly look at First Corinthians and the church as “The Body of Christ.”

* * * * *

So when Paul begins to really emphasize in chapter 12 the image of the church as the Body of Christ, his readers will have understood that they are all in this together. What one person does spiritually or physically, is done to all. If an action spiritually or physically harms one, it harms all. If it benefits one, it benefits all. Paul’s emphasis in First Corinthians 12 is that as members of the Body, we are connected to each other. Each person has a unique purpose and function within the Body to fulfill, which, if carried out, benefits the individual and the rest of the Body.

This idea continues on through chapters 13 and 14, and is climaxed in chapter 15 with Paul’s discussion of the resurrection. Paul’s point in this entire section is that the church is a unified whole, which he calls the Body of Christ. The Body is a community of people in Jesus Christ. “The Body of Christ is precisely the Church in which Christ moves out into the world.” In the words of K. L. Schmidt, “Christ is the church itself, for this is the Body of Christ.”

Such an understanding is surprisingly similar to what was seen in the discussion of ekklēsia above. The church consists of those who have been gathered by God into Jesus Christ. Therefore, the church—Body of Christ—is Jesus Christ to the world. All who are gathered into Jesus are part of Jesus, and participate with Jesus in what He does in the world.

So the church as a Body is not a tradition to be followed or an office to be filled, but is rather the total, unified whole of all who are in Christ. Everyone is equal within the Body, and everyone has a part to play. At the same time, all actions, behaviors, and beliefs of one part affect every other part. Though the Body is not an individual person, each individual within the Body must understand that their actions have consequences, not just for themselves, but for the entire church. This is the point Paul seeks to drive home here in First Corinthians, and in other letters as well (cf. Rom 12:4-8; Eph 4:12-16).

So the picture of the church as the Body of Christ is an excellent image, and is probably the most common image in the mind of most Christians even though the concept is found in only a few places within the writings of Paul. So although it is a good image, it is not the only image for the church, nor is it the most common. Therefore, another image should be used.

Close Your Church for Good. Chap 4, Part 2. After introducing the popular image of “The Body of Christ” for the church, we now look briefly at the only place in Scripture where this exact term is used. This will be covered in two blog posts.

* * * * *

The primary passage from Paul that talks about the gifts of the Holy Spirit is First Corinthians 12. In this chapter Paul compares the church to a body, and just as each part of a body has its own unique function, so also our gifting by the Holy Spirit provides each of us a unique purpose within the church, which is the Body of Christ (12:27). To understand Paul’s idea in First Corinthians 12, some background is necessary. As noted above, the vast majority of the uses of the word “body” (Gk. sōma) in the New Testament are by Paul. Of these, he uses it most frequently in the letter of First Corinthians. Why?

The Corinthian Christians saw themselves as spiritually elite. They were super spiritual. For them, everything was about the Holy Spirit, and their own spiritual life. Many of them were beginning to neglect the physical reality around them, and even deny that what was done in the flesh had any serious ramifications upon their spirit. In their minds, the flesh and the spirit were separate. This error of dualism has its origins in the philosophical ideas of Plato. Much of Paul’s letter to the Corinthians is focused on correcting this hyper-spiritual outlook on life. He attempts to show that what is done in the flesh has serious ramifications for life in the Spirit.

This is part of the reason Paul emphasizes the image of “body” so much in his letter to the Corinthians. He wants to show that what is done in the body affects not only the spirit, but also the body, including the entire Body of Christ, the church. The earth-shattering concept that Paul emphasizes to the Corinthians is not only that the physical and spiritual side of a person are connected in one unified body, but also that each and every person within the Body of Christ is connected to each other. When we sin in our own flesh, we drag the entire Body of Christ with us.

One example is sufficient to show Paul’s thought. After an extended discussion of why the Corinthians should glorify God with both body and our spirit, Paul tells the Corinthians in 6:15-20 that having sex with a prostitute is not simply a sin of the flesh, but also engages the spirit. Beyond this, it is not just their own body and spirit that are united to the prostitute, but the Body of Christ and the Holy Spirit as well! Paul argues that such an idea should be enough to keep us from sin.

Do I need to say it? A lot has been going on. But it’s all Peanuts in China. Hopefully I can get back to regular posting soon, but no promises. Below is the next installment of the book I am writing.

Close Your Church for Good, Chap 4, Sec 1. I am beginning to defend and clarify my definition for “church.”

* * * * *

When people think of biblical imagery for the church, the most common picture that comes to mind is the Body of Christ. However, this exact phrase is only found a few times in Scripture (e.g., Rom 7:4; 1 Cor 10:16; 12:27; Eph 4:12). All of these are from Paul, and all except one do not refer to the church, but to the actual body of Jesus. Only one text, 1 Corinthians 12:27, refers to the church specifically as the Body of Christ. This text will be discussed below. Other passages hint at the church being the Body of Christ, but do not contain the exact phrase (e.g. Rom 12:5; Eph 1:22-23; 5:23; Col 1:24; 2:17).

Paul may have selected body imagery for the church due to the similarities between the Greek concepts of body (Gk. sōma) and the church (Gk. ekklēsia). For example, sōma is a word which represents a person in their totality. It is understood that the sōma has parts, some physical (bones, flesh, blood), some spiritual (soul, spirit), and some psychological (emotions, intellect, will, personality), but the word does not refer to just one of these parts, such as the physical, but to the entire person. This is like the church, the ekklēsia. The church is a unified whole, and while it is made of numerous members, does not refer to only one member.

Nevertheless, although the image is a good one, it is used only by Paul, and even then, less frequently then other imagery. Since this is so, how is it that the idea of the church being a Body became so prominent if it is not found throughout the New Testament, but only rarely in Paul’s letters? How did it become the most popular and widely known image for the church? It is probably a result of the dual emphasis in many churches on the teachings of Paul and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. These twin factors converge in passages that picture the church as a Body, and so in the minds of many, the Body is the main image for the church. One of the most common passages which supports this image is First Corinthians 12, which we turn to next.

Close Your Church for Good, Chap. 3, Part 4. Having introduced the definition of the church, I now attempt to clairfy some misconceptions of the church. I begin with the Greek word ekklēsia.

* * * * *

First, it is true, as mentioned above, that the Greek word used for “church” is ekklēsia, which means “gathering” or “assembly.” The term could be used of any type of gathering, whether social, political, or religious, and even of groups of people that never actually “gather.”

It is important to note that “church” is not exactly a translation of the Greek ekklēsia. The term “church” actually is derived from the German Kirche, which in turn comes from the Greek adjective kuriakos, “belonging to the Lord” (cf. 1 Cor 11:20) or possibly the Latin circus. In the early history of the church, when the New Testament was getting translated from Greek into Latin, there was no clear equivalent in Latin for ekklēsia, and so various terms were proposed. Tertullian used curia (“court”) while Augustine famously wrote of the Civitas Dei (“City of God”). One surprisingly common term used by various Greek writers was thiasos (“party”), which generally referred to a troop of revelers marching through the city streets with dance and song, often in honor of Bacchus, the god of drunkenness. The point is that many early writers did not know how to translate or describe the term ekklēsia, but the terms they proposed offer tantalizing clues as to how the church functioned and was viewed during its early years.

Some help on translating ekklēsia may come from recognizing that it is derived from the word kaleō, “to call.” Some who have understood this refer to the church as “the called out ones.” But it must be pointed out that the emphasis in such a usage is not on the people who gather, or where they gather, but rather, who or what does the gathering. To put it another way, the most important factor in an ekklēsia is who causes and calls the assembly. When compared with the Scriptural usage of the term, it quickly becomes obvious that it is God who calls the assembly, and forms the gathering. Therefore, whenever the term “church” is used, it is either stated or implied that it is a gathering of (or by) God.

It is likely that the New Testament writers borrowed the term from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) where the people of Israel are often referred to as the ekklēsia of God. They were called and gathered by God from the world to accomplish a specific purpose and task. In the New Testament, the emphasis is that when God gathers, He does so not by gathering people together as a nation, but by gathering people together into a person, namely, Jesus Christ. 

This is the first misconception about the church that must be unraveled. It is not a place or a building (more on this in chapter 8). Church is not something you go to. Nor is it an event. It is not something you can do. It cannot be scheduled. Instead, the church is people whom God has gathered into Jesus Christ.

Close Your Church for Good. Chap. 3, Sec 3. Since I had already posted the intro to chapter 3 on July 18 (it was chapter 2 at the time) , I decided I better post something new. So here is my working definition for church.

What is the bare bones basic understanding of church? What did Jesus try to teach His disciples about what He was forming them to be? What did Paul and the other writers of the New Testament try to impress upon the readers of their letters? What is common to nearly every spiritual renewal movement in history?

In this book, church is being defined as the people of God who follow Jesus into the world. To arrive at this simple understanding of the church, it is necessary to unpack and unwind some of the complex misunderstandings that have been constructed around the church.

Close Your Church for Good. Chap. 3, Sec 1. To talk about the church, or to live and operate as the church, you must have a definition of “church.” What is yours? In this chapter, I will introduce mine.

* * * * *

Have you ever wondered why your church does certain things a certain way, while the church across town does everything so different? Churches have wide diversity, from music and preaching styles, to building construction and leadership approaches. Why is this? Some of it has to do with traditions and customs, but even these are often guided by something much more basic: the definition of the church. What is the church supposed to be and do? It depends on how you define “church.”

But getting a definition is not as simple as looking up a verse in the Bible, asking your pastor for his, or looking one up in a theological dictionary. Even where church is defined, such definitions tend to be full of complex ideas and theological jargon which require further explanation. For example, a typical definition of “church” reads something like this:

Church (Gk. ekklēsia) is the universal body of believers that functions under the headship of Jesus Christ and meets regularly in local assemblies to carry out the Great Commission through observing the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper and listening to the preaching of the Word of God, all for the edification of the believer and the evangelism of the world.

It is difficult to disagree with such a definition. However, disagreement begins when you start to discuss what the various terms and words mean. How can the church be both universal and local? Who is a believer? What do they have to believe and who gets to decide?  What does it mean for Jesus Christ to be the head? Should we have pastors and priests or not? Why are baptism and the Lord’s Supper called ordinances? What kind of baptism is required? How and when should people be baptized? What exactly constitutes “the Lord’s Supper”? How often should it be observed? Who gets to do the preaching? How long should the preaching be? What does it mean to preach “the Word of God”? Also, this specific definition says nothing about leadership, organization, church government, denominations, our role in politics, and many other issues that are important to the average church.

The theology books generally attempt to answer these sorts of questions. And before you know it, an attempt to understand what the church is and what the church does requires detailed knowledge of dozens of books and an advanced educational degree or two. The “basics” of church seem to require a lot of advanced study and research. Apparently, the basics are not so basic after all.