Church... A word of pagan origin -

[MoreCoffee]

ok so i see you simply wish to ignore the historical point -gee no surprise .

they removed the original word from the text ,, then they inserted another greek word ,then they translated "that" word into english and it has different meaning,differing connotation ,differing emphases

why did they do that ?

[MENTION=61]Alithis[/MENTION], The word ecclesia is present in the Greek text. It has never been removed. The translation of ecclesia as church is not translating another word. church is what ecclesia means. ecclesia is Greek & Latin while church is English. Of course church is borrowed from Greek indirectly. It first went from Greek to the Germanic languages and to Dutch and then to English; kuriakon > kieche > kirk > church. If church bothers you then don't use it. change your bible to one that uses 'congregation' or 'assembly' if you like. In times past some of the puritans used 'congregation' and today Jehovah's witnesses use 'congregation' in the place of church. I do not think anybody will care very much one way or the other if you decide to use congregation instead of church.

 

[tango]

Definition from the Urban Dictionary of:

"So What?"

A phrase used to describe complete lack of interest in what another person is saying, considered rude or necessary, depending on the conversation.




Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

You could always be reckless and read what I wrote, instead of using someone else's definition.

But once again the irony meter goes off the scale as you use someone else's definition instead of reading my own explanations of what the "so what?" question is intended to accomplish, when that other definition you used implies a lack of interest.

If you really want to take a question that I've said (a few times now) is intended to request further information and turn it into an expression of utter disinterest based on reading someone else's post instead of my own post, I'm really not sure why you bother to discuss anything. Most things can be twisted around if you choose to ignore the context of a post and ignore a clearly stated purpose in favor of some other meaning you can find.

If you told someone you were going to pay some money in and they should meet you at the bank would you be impressed if they didn't show up, insisting they had waited for an hour at the bank and presenting you with little more than:

bank : sloped patch of land beside a river

 

[Josiah]

lets be straight .. you dont like me

Even if that were true, so what? How would that make what you claim true?

you dont look at things objectively

Again, PERSONAL ATTACKS with nothing whatsoever to document as true.... But I DO see the word "ecclesia." And we all know the meaning of that koine Greek word.

You have ignored EVERY post directed to you concerning that word, including all of mine.

Are you SURE that every word you post was first used and invented by a Christian rather than a pagan? And again, why does it matter? So what?

the article

I read it. It is entirely, wholly uncredited. I disagree that because something is found on the internet, ergo it is equal to Scripture and authoritative.

And I never posted "it is interesting" as your state I did.







.

 

[Alithis]

[MENTION=61]Alithis[/MENTION], The word ecclesia is present in the Greek text. It has never been removed. The translation of ecclesia as church is not translating another word. church is what ecclesia means. ecclesia is Greek & Latin while church is English. Of course church is borrowed from Greek indirectly. It first went from Greek to the Germanic languages and to Dutch and then to English; kuriakon > kieche > kirk > church. If church bothers you then don't use it. change your bible to one that uses 'congregation' or 'assembly' if you like. In times past some of the puritans used 'congregation' and today Jehovah's witnesses use 'congregation' in the place of church. I do not think anybody will care very much one way or the other if you decide to use congregation instead of church.

ok ,obviously you didn't read the article . off you go with your blinders on .

 

[Alithis]

Even if that were true, so what? How would that make what you claim true?




Again, PERSONAL ATTACKS with nothing whatsoever to document as true.... But I DO see the word "ecclesia." And we all know the meaning of that koine Greek word.

You have ignored EVERY post directed to you concerning that word, including all of mine.

Are you SURE that every word you post was first used and invented by a Christian rather than a pagan? And again, why does it matter? So what?







I read it. It is entirely, wholly uncredited. I disagree that because something is found on the internet, ergo it is equal to Scripture and authoritative.

And I never posted "it is interesting" as your state I did.







.

the article ,, which is being discussed is written by an historian who specialised in the history of Christianity ... the info he offers is well documented .
yours is just an opinion adverse to the documented facts presented .. i'm not interested in your opinion over his historical facts thanks .

see ya

 

[MoreCoffee]

ok ,obviously you didn't read the article . off you go with your blinders on .

What difference does it make who reads some blog article? The facts are as I summarised them. The blog cannot change them. Blogs are not holy scripture.

 

[Alithis]

What difference does it make who reads some blog article? The facts are as I summarised them. The blog cannot change them. Blogs are not holy scripture.

Well your consistant in ignoring the point. But at least its a consistency.

It just historic fact that the word church is not tranlated from the greek word ecclesia. Of cours. You wont like it. You base your salvation on belonging to one particular church lol.

 

[Josiah]

It just historic fact that the word church is not tranlated from the greek word ecclesia.

Document that. Begin with the KJV and move forward with every English translation, proving that the MANY times the word "ecclesia" appears in the Koine Greek text, it is NOT translated into English as "church." You made a bold claim (to make what point, I have NO IDEA) but it's not worth replying to until you show that it's correct.





.

 

[Josiah]

the article ,, which is being discussed is written by an historian who specialised in the history of Christianity ... the info he offers is well documented .
yours is just an opinion adverse to the documented facts presented .. i'm not interested in your opinion over his historical facts thanks .

See post 103.


The "article" on the internet is entirely uncredited; the author wishes to not associate himself or his name with the article. It offers NOTHING to support anything and merely agrees that the Koine Greek word "ecclesia" means "assembly" as everyone knows. Whoever the author is (who wishes to distance himself/herself from this) seems to use his enchyclopedia as his/her main authority (pretty Elementary School'ish, ugh?) to note that everyone is right: the Greek word means "assembly" But he/she provides NOTHING to indicate that the word "church" is pagan in origin whereas "ecclesia" is not, nothing WHATSOEVER to REMOTELY support the weird theorizations he/she later makes (all without ANY attempt to provide ANYTHING to support such as true).


No, it is not true that just because someone (who wishes to remain unknown and disconnected from the words) says something on his/her own webpage does NOT make it true. Or even worthy of consideration.


AGAIN: Prove that the modern ENGLISH word "church" has a "pagan" origin (because that IS the issue of this thread), then please, tell us why that matters - since so is the word "ecclesia" and every single word you posted in your post above.




:dunno:







.

 

[Alithis]

See post 103.


The "article" on the internet is entirely uncredited; the author wishes to not associate himself or his name with the article. It offers NOTHING to support anything and merely agrees that the Koine Greek word "ecclesia" means "assembly" as everyone knows. Whoever the author is (who wishes to distance himself/herself from this) seems to use his enchyclopedia as his/her main authority (pretty Elementary School'ish, ugh?) to note that everyone is right: the Greek word means "assembly" But he/she provides NOTHING to indicate that the word "church" is pagan in origin whereas "ecclesia" is not, nothing WHATSOEVER to REMOTELY support the weird theorizations he/she later makes (all without ANY attempt to provide ANYTHING to support such as true).


No, it is not true that just because someone (who wishes to remain unknown and disconnected from the words) says something on his/her own webpage does NOT make it true. Or even worthy of consideration.


AGAIN: Prove that the modern ENGLISH word "church" has a "pagan" origin (because that IS the issue of this thread), then please, tell us why that matters - since so is the word "ecclesia" and every single word you posted in your post above.




:dunno:







.

Who said it matters... ?
What is of interest is your reaction

You and your close rcc cousins appear somewhat threatened by it. Going on your response.

 

[Josiah]

You and your close rcc cousins appear somewhat threatened by it. Going on your response.

My response is: so what? A question you persistently refuse to answer. I'm not threatened AT ALL, just entirely bewildered trying to figure out what your point is: Okay, perhaps the word "church" is pagan in its origin.... so is the word "ecclesia" and so likely is every word in every one of your posts here....again.... yet again...... SO WHAT? What, pray tell, please, is your point? Why does that matter? Can we not use words first employed by non-Christians - in which case, why do you? Yes, we all know - and we all knew LONG before you joined this site - the Koine Greek work "ecclesia" means assembly, gathering, corpus of people. NO ONE HERE has EVER denied or debated that so if THAT is your point, then your point is not debated.

You have persistently refused to address any of the questions I (and others) have asked of you, simply directing us to some uncredited webpage that doesn't prove that "church" is pagan in origin or why it would matter if it was, nothing to show that we're all wrong and the word "ecclesia" does not mean assembly.

So I ask yet again: SO WHAT?

It just historic fact that the word church is not tranlated from the greek word ecclesia.

Document that. Begin with the KJV and move forward with every English translation, proving that the MANY times the word "ecclesia" appears in the Koine Greek text, it is NOT translated into English as "church." You made a bold claim (to make what point, I have NO IDEA) but it's not worth replying to until you show that it's correct.





.

 

[Alithis]

My response is: so what? A question you persistently refuse to answer. I'm not threatened AT ALL, just entirely bewildered trying to figure out what your point is: Okay, perhaps the word "church" is pagan in its origin.... so is the word "ecclesia" and so likely is every word in every one of your posts here....again.... yet again...... SO WHAT? What, pray tell, please, is your point? Why does that matter? Can we not use words first employed by non-Christians - in which case, why do you? Yes, we all know - and we all knew LONG before you joined this site - the Koine Greek work "ecclesia" means assembly, gathering, corpus of people. NO ONE HERE has EVER denied or debated that so if THAT is your point, then your point is not debated.

You have persistently refused to address any of the questions I (and others) have asked of you, simply directing us to some uncredited webpage that doesn't prove that "church" is pagan in origin or why it would matter if it was, nothing to show that we're all wrong and the word "ecclesia" does not mean assembly.

So I ask yet again: SO WHAT?






Document that. Begin with the KJV and move forward with every English translation, proving that the MANY times the word "ecclesia" appears in the Koine Greek text, it is NOT translated into English as "church." You made a bold claim (to make what point, I have NO IDEA) but it's not worth replying to until you show that it's correct.





.

Are you alright? You seem lost ..

 

[amadeois]

One last comment:

I am sad what I see here.
I don't see the love that Jesus told us to practice.

The discussions are going crazy.
Are the gloves off?

Are we making any sense?
I see persons here too PROUD of what they know and God does not like a PROUD HEART.

If they know more than what we know, show us the way, with the truth, and make us better lovers of Jesus and what He represents.

Many things that what Christianity has taught over 2,000 years are not correct. Others are correct, but like the world changes, Christianity should change and should correct their errors and not be hard headed as other organized religions are.

In another thread, it was proved that some beliefs need to be changed but the problem is that humans are AFRAID of change so then nothing happens.

I PRAY TO GOD THAT ALL OF UD READING THIS, TAKE A MORE CHRISTIAN STTITUDR


Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

 

[amadeois]

Continue:

ALL OF US PARTICIPATING HERE DO IT IN A MORE LOVING WAY.

FOR THE LOVE OF JESUS.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

 

[Josiah]

Many things that what Christianity has taught over 2,000 years are not correct.

Christianity has NEVER taught that God invented the modern English word "church" (or even the ancient Greek word "ecclesia").
Christianity has NEVER taught that it is forbidden to use words that might have first been used by a non-Christian.
Christianity has NEVER taught that the word "ecclesia" must be translated into the word "church" and that EVERY POSSIBLE modern meaning of that ENGLISH word MUST be dogmatically accepted.




.

 

[amadeois]

Swosh, over your head.

My point was not taken.

So sad.

Peace and love brothers.

TOADS INSIDE THE WARMING POT????

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

 

[amadeois]

The WORD was in the beginning before Christianity.

DO WE UNDERSTAND THE WORD?

A LOVING WORD THAT DIED TO SAVE US.

LOVE NOT HATE.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

 

[Josiah]

The WORD was in the beginning before Christianity.

Not the word "church". That's an ENGLISH word. The word "ecclesia" of course predates Christianity and thus is "pagan" in the sense of not first being used by Christians. What you've not shown is why it matters that the words "church" and "ecclesia" are likely "pagan" words.

Yes, we all know (and have known) that the Greek word "ecclesia" is often translated into modern English by the English word "church" and that the modern English word "church" has additional meanings that the word "ecclesia" does not. No one has debated that because all know that and agree. What is yet unclear is why it matters so much that the words "ecclesia" and "church" (and probably every word in every post of yours) is likely pagan in orgin - not first used by Christians. Again, so what? Do you have a point stemming from the pagan origin of the words "church" and "ecclesia" and likely every word you use? Or not? You've been asked over and over and over - but refuse to answer.



[ Noting your post #117 and several others of yours...... In debate, there is a technique called "the shall game." If a debater has lost, is trapped, cannot get out - the "shell game" is used. It means to change the subject, to move the subject to something else which the debater feels can be won. It's the final act of desperation and while it's allowed in debate rules, it usually gets a laugh in the room and doesn't work. The problem when used in discussion forums is that it's hijacking, often a rule violation. The topic here is the modern English word "church" and the claim that it is non-Christian in its origin; over 100 posts later we are STILL trying - desperately - to find out why you think that matters. What we're getting is a debate technique, one used in desperation as a last resort.... a technique that isn't working ]




.

 

[amadeois]

5051
Over and Out.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

 

[Josiah]

Not the word "church". That's an ENGLISH word. The word "ecclesia" of course predates Christianity and thus is "pagan" in the sense of not first being used by Christians. What you've not shown is why it matters that the words "church" and "ecclesia" are likely "pagan" words.

Yes, we all know (and have known) that the Greek word "ecclesia" is often translated into modern English by the English word "church" and that the modern English word "church" has additional meanings that the word "ecclesia" does not. No one has debated that because all know that and agree. What is yet unclear is why it matters so much that the words "ecclesia" and "church" (and probably every word in every post of yours) is likely pagan in orgin - not first used by Christians. Again, so what? Do you have a point stemming from the pagan origin of the words "church" and "ecclesia" and likely every word you use? Or not? You've been asked over and over and over, for 11 pages of posts - but you refuse to answer.

[ Noting your post #117 and several others of yours...... In debate, there is a technique called "the shall game." If a debater has lost, is trapped, cannot get out - the "shell game" is used. It means to change the subject, to move the subject to something else which the debater feels can be won. It's the final act of desperation and while it's allowed in debate rules, it usually gets a laugh in the room and doesn't work. The problem when used in discussion forums is that it's hijacking, often a rule violation. The topic here is the modern English word "church" and the claim that it is non-Christian in its origin; over 100 posts later we are STILL trying - desperately - to find out why you think that matters. What we're getting is a debate technique, one used in desperation as a last resort.... a technique that isn't working ]



.

Over and Out.

A wiser approach than "the shell game"


Perhaps Staff should close the thread?