Why most translations of the New Testament erroneously use the word church for the Greek word EKKLESIA The word “church” comes from the Old English and German word pronounced "kirche." In Scotland, it was pronounced "kirk." In Koine Greek, it was pronounced "KURIAKOS.” It is obvious that this word in no way resembles the Greek word EKKLESIA. The meaning of the word KURIAKOS refers to something that belongs to a lord or master (found in 1 Cor. 11:20; Rev. 1:10). Over time, this Greek word evolved into the Old English as “cirice” then “chirche”, then “churche”, and finally “church.” When translators inserted the word “church” in the English translation of the Bible they did not TRANSLATE the word EKKLESIA as we would have expected them to do. Rather, they substituted an entirely different Greek word KURIAKOS and TRANSLITERATED this word (i.e. changed it to correspond to characters of the English language) to create the word “church.” This new transliterated word “church” was found in the John Wycliffe Bible (1382; “chirche”), the Geneva Bible (1560; “Church”), the Bishop’s Bible (1568; “Churche”), and then the King James Version (1611; “church”). Why did the translators insert the word church? Why were they not faithful to translate the word EKKLESIA into its English equivalent? We can know why this occurred by looking to what took place in “Christianity” throughout history. A Brief Timeline In the 1st century, Christians submitted to the rule of Christ as the Head of His assembly which is His body (Eph. 1:22-23). Assemblies of Christ met in the homes of fellow Christians (e.g. Rom. 16:3-5, 23; Col. 4:15) not in special “church buildings” or “Christian temples.” Christians understood that they were the temple or house of God (Eph. 2:19-22). Every Christian shared in the responsibility to edify (build up) the body of Christ (Eph. 4:16). There was no ruling hierarchy among them, for they were all servants of one another (Mat. 20:25-28). They had elders that provided oversight and shepherding (Acts 20:28), but they did not lord it over others (1 Peter 5:3). There was no council or religious institution that decided doctrine. Rather, the Lord’s assembly, all of God’s people, had a responsibility to stand for the Truth and support it (1 Tim. 3:15), to study and understand the will of the Lord (2 Tim. 2:15; Eph. 5:17), and keep all teachers accountable to the Truth (1 John 4:1-6). 1 In the 2nd century, there was a desire by some to fill the unique leadership role of the apostles after their death. Ignatius of Antioch (35-107) took it upon himself to elevate one elder in every locality to be “bishop” to rule over each assembly. Each bishop would be exalted as the one who speaks for Christ and therefore to be obeyed absolutely. This practice became so widespread, that by the end of the 3rd century, the majority of assemblies had embraced “the one-bishop rule.” The bishop came to be the chief spokesman for the assembly - the one who not only determined doctrine, but also how the collection would be used or spent. During this era, an “ecclesiastical” form of government was well underway, making a distinction in religious and social status of those in leadership (“the clergy”) versus those who were not (“the laity”) (See Clement & Tertullian). In addition, pagan beliefs were adopted, such as viewing the burial places of saints as “sacred places” which led to their building monuments over the sites. Such sacred places would later on be used as the foundation for building new “church buildings” or cathedrals in the Roman Empire. By the 4th century, this clergy-laity hierarchy was well-established: Each “church” having a head bishop presiding over a “presbytery” council, which ruled over the deacons who ruled over the rest (the laity). In the year 313 AD, the Roman emperor Constantine, who claimed the title of “High Priest” of overseeing religion in the empire, granted “Christianity” legal status. In 325 AD, Constantine called the Council of Nicaea to establish the official beliefs of the “Church.” During this time, Constantine oversaw the construction of “churches” or special buildings for church meetings, such as “the Church of the Apostles” in Constantinople where he designated himself as the thirteenth apostle. He built numerous “churches” like the pagans who had constructed temples to honor their gods. He named them after dead saints, building over cemeteries considered to be “holy ground.” In many ways, the extravagance of each “church” built imitated the architecture of the pagan temples, including pagan art and furniture. Specifically, the “churches” built were made according to the pattern of the basilica – pagan temples that were also used for governmental purposes. This auditorium design provided seating for the people to sit back and watch “the performance” of the clergy conduct “the worship service.” In 380 AD, emperor Theodosius issued a decree (“the Edict of Thessalonica”) that established “Nicene Christianity” (according to the Nicaea council) as the official religion of the Roman Empire. Any other version of Christianity (especially the biblical kind!) was declared to be heretical and illegal. By the 5th century, the Roman Catholic Church had established a hierarchy with men appointed to various offices to rule over the people: From deacons, priests, and bishops all the way up to archbishops, cardinals, and the pope. No longer was the Truth taught that all Christians are priests (1 Peter 2:4-10) or that 2 communion with God is through Christ alone (Heb. 7:25). Instead, it was taught that only the “Church” (the ruling hierarchy) could provide access to God. Well into the 15th century, the dominance of the Roman Catholic Church continued to have a direct impact on the people’s concept of “Church”. When King Henry VIII broke from the Catholic Church, he made himself head over the Church in England giving him the power to appoint bishops and change doctrine, effectively merging church and state into one. Translators of the Bible were influenced greatly by this history of “Church” and these religious organizations of power. When scholars approached the Bible to translate the word EKKLESIA, a translation of the word to assembly or congregation simply would not do. A new transliterated word CHURCH would allow the existing hierarchy to remain in power in contrast to the word “assembly” which would have restored the emphasis on all the Lord’s people as being the representatives of Christ. By inserting the word church, the ruling hierarchical organization and institutionalized form of religion already in place would be given the Scriptural support needed to maintain the status quo. The Geneva Bible, for example, gave a special emphasis of this notion by capitalizing church throughout the New Testament (e.g. “Unto the Church of God, which is at Corinth…” – 1 Cor. 1:2; “…the Churches of Christ salute you” – Rom. 16:16). The King James Version (KJV): During the reign of King James I, the Bishops of the Church of England were “Erastian” (they accepted the State as being over the Church and the King being sovereign over both). Just below the king in power was the Archbishop of Canterbury: Richard Bancroft. Therefore, when King James desired a new translation of the Bible, he assigned this task to Bancroft who would then enlist nearly fifty scholars to translate the Hebrew and Greek words of the Bible into English (Note: They would look to the Bishop’s Bible and Geneva Bible as major resources for their translation). Bancroft ordered the translators to follow his “15 principles of translation” that would be sure to support the ecclesiastical system, most especially the third principle which states: “The Old Ecclesiastical Words to be kept, viz. the Word Church not to be translated Congregation.” (Note: Just 40 years earlier, William Tyndale was burned at the stake for translating the Bible into English which included His translation of EKKLESIA to the word congregation, i.e. assembly!). In the preface to the King James Version (1611), the translators paid tribute to Bancroft as the “chief overseer and task-master under his Majesty, to who were not only we, but also our whole Church, much bound.” Indeed, Archbishop Bancroft was the one ultimately responsible for making sure everyone, including the translators of the Bible, conformed and submitted to the State Church which was the Church of England. 3 Note: Despite Bancroft’s influence, the King James Version as a whole is a superior translation. The KJV has a proven track record of being faithful to the literal meaning of the original Hebrew and Greek text. Even though it contains a few ecclesiastical, transliterated terms (e.g. church, apostle, bishop, presbytery, deacon, evangelist, baptism) this does not diminish its record as a solid translation that can be relied upon as the revelation of Truth. As diligent students of God’s word, let us examine the meaning of biblical words and hold all translations accountable to the standard of TRUTH. EKKLESIA in Acts 19: It is an interesting fact that in three places in the New Testament, translators felt obligated to translate the word EKKLESIA correctly, setting aside their made up word church when translating Acts chapter 19. v. 32 Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly (EKKLESIA ) was confused; and the more part knew not wherefore they were come together… v. 39 But if ye inquire any thing concerning other matters, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly (EKKLESIA). v. 41 And when he had thus spoken, he dismissed the assembly (EKKLESIA).