Acts 3-5
This week in considering Acts 3-5 with the church group, the phrase from Psalm 118; “the stone the builders rejected” as used by Peter before the Sanhedrin in chapter 4 verse 11 was considered. It was pointed out that in Jewish interpretation this phrase is understood to relate to King David. Like a stone that is considered unworthy or unfit to be used as a capstone in an archway, David too, at first was not considered a worthy candidate for King of Israel. Even his own father Jesse neglected to present him before Samuel the prophet for consideration. Once David was identified as HaShem’s choice for King of Israel, he became the greatest king the people had ever known, the capstone and pinnacle that fit perfectly into this role. In like fashion, Peter uses this phrase to indicate that Yeshua, though rejected and discarded by the leaders, having risen from the dead, has proven himself to be the perfect king and Messiah of Israel.
In the Talmud the term “the builders” is used to refer to the Sages and their offspring. Therefore, the point was made that just as Jesse, his family, and the nation of Israel, came to recognize David as the greatest of kings, so too, will the Sages of Israel and the Jewish nation come to recognize Yeshua as Messiah in times to come. This is related by Paul in Romans 11 and the “grafted in” analogy. “All Israel will be saved” and the unbelieving branches that have been broken off, will be grafted in again.
All in attendance found this topic to be very interesting and the Jewish interpretation to be satisfying. In completing the questions related to this topic the pastor hand drew an archway as an illustration. The capstone at the top of the arch, in the load-bearing position, was larger than the rest of the stones and etched with a cross upon it. The pastor passed this illustration around the group for all to see.
The second topic of the night was consideration of the Greek word ecclesia, used for the first time in Acts 5:11 and translated as “church”. It was pointed out that ecclesia means “assembly” and is used in the LXX to indicate the assembly of Israel. By translating ecclesia as church in the vast majority of instances in the Apostolic Writings, the English translators do their readers a disservice. The church in this way seems to be an institution unique to the New Testament having nothing to do with the Old Testament. It is something that is disconnected from and in opposition to Judaism. When, in the literal sense, ecclesia is indicating that the believers in Yeshua were part of the “assembly of Israel” or a sect of Judaism.
Although the group in general could appreciate the confusion and lack of clarity in translating ecclesia as church, the comments of the pastor began with some rough criticism toward Messianic Jews in general. The written resources on this topic of ecclesia referred to Christians being “duped” for “centuries” by the mistranslation of this word as “church”. I was aware from my past HaYesod experience with the pastor that whenever the term “Christians” is used in a broad sense with any hint of criticism, he will quickly go on the defensive.
The pastor began his comments regarding the ecclesia topic by verbalizing his lack of appreciation for (what seemed in his opinion to be) a tone against Christians in the written commentary. He considered it “unfair” to lump “all Christians together into one lump”. He added that although the “Messianic Jews” want to help others understand the ancient and Hebraic interpretation of the Bible, in order to dispel prejudice and anti-Semitism, it is wrong to use “prejudism” to get rid of “prejudism”.
The pastor then continued by saying that “the church is an assembly”; it is an “ecclesia” being the body of Christ. The church is a “many member assembly of those who believe”. I then asked if “church” is equal to “ecclesia” in the Greek. Using his handy Logos software with tablet PC the pastor looked up the word “church”. He read aloud that “church” is from the Old English word circe which is equivalent to the Greek kuriakon. The root word of kuriakon is kurios which means “lord”. Therefore, church in its literal meaning is defined as; “pertaining to the “lord”. So, I questioned; “church” is not equivalent to ecclesia in the Greek? He agreed that it would seem that “church” is equivalent to kurios in the Greek, but added that perhaps in “later translations” a connection to ecclesia could be made.
Certainly no one could disagree that the “church” is an ecclesia in the sense that it is an assembly of believers in Yeshua. However, in its usage in the Apostolic Writings to describe the early congregation of believers, ecclesia would have been very much related to the assembly of Israel, or the synagogue, for this was its usage in the Hebrew Scriptures. The pastor questioned this, relating that in Acts we see the Sanhedrin coming against the Apostles. Were the early Jewish believers really considered a sect of Judaism or a “bunch of rebels”? I reminded the group of our lesson last week, that in Acts 2:47 the early believers “enjoyed the favor of all the people” (i.e. all the fellow Jews in Jerusalem). If the Apostles and the early believers were seen as rebels against Judaism, surely this would not have been the case.
As an example of the bias in translating ecclesia as church in the Apostolic Writings I asked the group to turn to Acts 7:38, a portion of Stephen’s speech prior to his stoning. In this verse Stephen is referring to Moses among the people of Israel in the Wilderness. Reading around in four different translations, Stephen’s words were variously translated as “the congregation in the Wilderness”, “the assembly in the Wilderness”, and “the people of Israel assembled in the desert”. The underlying Greek word in this verse is ecclesia, therefore why isn’t it translated as church here? With quizzical looks on their faces the participants thought this question to be ridiculously easy; “it’s because this passage is speaking about the Jews and not believers in Yeshua”. Exactly! That’s why ecclesia is used here, because that is the original meaning of the word, as it is used in the Old Testament. “Church” carries with it a bias and meaning that doesn’t fit the Greek ecclesia. Otherwise why would Luke use a Greek word that means “assembly of Yeshua believers” to describe Israel in the desert? It took a little while for this fact to sink in among the participants, but I think eventually it did.
As the group pondered our little exercise, the pastor spontaneously began to read Acts 7:38 in Greek. I’m not sure what prompted this, but of course he read quite well. “Thank you pastor” I said “by reading the Greek we could all hear ecclesia in the middle of the verse without a doubt”. In his closing comments the pastor said that the practice of Judaism is a beautiful thing for Messianic Jews. Yet, “this doesn’t mean that everyone must go in that direction and that you are wrong if you don’t do it”. Reflecting a moment he added that the early believers, so close to Judaism, even as a sect of Judaism, “kept worship embedded within them” to which he felt a sense of jealousy because their religion and worship was “their life”.
I couldn’t help but think that the pastor summed up a lot in his final words, truly more than he realized. As far as we can tell, from the most literal rendering of the AS, Gentiles are “not wrong” if they “don’t do” Torah in the sense of ritual worship, if they forgo the ancient paths given to Israel on Sinai. Yet, apart from this G-d ordained system of faith and worship, designed for Israel and those who sojourn with her, “spirituality” is often hollow and shallow, incapable of truly being embedded within the very life and lifestyle of the individual and the community.
G-d willing, this study will help the pastor and the participants to see that although it is “not wrong not to do Torah” per se, it is a blessing “to do” it.
[Next week the group will consider Acts 6-7 and the priests who became believers, as well as the six allegations against Stephen. ]
