What does God want in Christian churches?

In Albuquerque, there are over 500 churches not counting home groups, but I have found any which are anywhere like Philippians 2:1-5 and Ephesians 4:11-15. So currently in most of the weekend I listen to Christian worship music, usually about 10 sermons, do Bible study tool developing (which is not work for me, just enjoyment), and ministering (face to face or vai the Internet), I am not sinning for doing such. Most other people just go to church for 1-2 hours for selfish reasons. I was even recent forbidden from attending a church by its 2 pastors because I would not condemn the Evangelist Billy Graham and in another church for mentioning to a pastor in a phone text that he didn't keep his promise about visiting me and that one statement in his most recent sermon was wrong (when Abraham was to sacrifice his son Isaac, a ram not a lamb was the replacement to be sacrificed).

***I have not done any of such.

***The source is from a cult that is run like an army and many have to sleep on the floor. It was in California and I visited it there with my family, then they moved to Oregon, and then to New Mexico. I tried the e-mail address and it said the mailbox was full. One of my friends in Seattle said that a man who led a street preaching ministry she was part of quit and went to them in New Mexico and she has not heard from him for about two years. Did you go to the website? The contact page is what informed me.

Nor have I.
I think a really good question would be, why do some people hold malice for that information that informs the difference between the Ekklesia and the "church" ?

How do you define Ekklesia and church?
I think we may have a difference in definitions here.

Well yes, I would think that would have been apparent some time ago when the differences were shown in articles with sustaining scriptures.

Well yes, I would think that would have been apparent some time ago when the differences were shown in articles with sustaining scriptures.

What site did you go to? The contact page at http://www.aggressivechristianity.net/articles/revolutn.htm told me that was the group my family and I had visited near Sacramento in the 1980s. I met the top General too. The Holy Spirit told me not to have anything more to do with them. I had read some of its writings and goals. How does Luke 18 relate?

Nor have I.
I think a really good question would be, why do some people hold malice for that information that informs the difference between the Ekklesia and the "church" ?

My suggestion is to refrain from throwing condescending remarks when you first enter into them by admitting you're not able to discern what is clearly designated as copy and paste from original thoughts written by a member. In relation to your target of contention, me. To later try to advise I shouldn't "pontificate" about things I know nothing about makes your attempt at berating me a joke on you. It also makes you presumptuous in your zeal to attack thinking I did not garner the article(s) I share on this forum from my own personal library of saves. And after careful consideration of the research and sources contained therein.

Your failed tactics also demonstrate per your scope of implied critical thought that you're shall we say not one that actually knows what they claim to know about Greek language.
For members consideration. The second excerpted text below this one fully revokes Angela's claim about Koine Greek as she intended to berate the information in the link I shared that compared Ekklesia and church language origins.


What Was Koine Greek?
Dr. Orville Boyd Jenkins
Question:
Was Koine Greek just a dialect of Classical Greek, or was Classical Greek already dead?


I have heard that the Koine Greek was the perfect language for the New Testament, because at the time of the N. T. writings, Koine was "static" and precise in its vocabulary and structures, with no exact synonyms, but did have some close synonyms that had distinct nuances in meaning, and could therefore be distinguished; it was considered "static" (I don't remember if that is the exact term) because, not long after that, it died as a spoken language, so its meanings were "sure" (?) (the form that was spoken after that was considered "pre-modern Greek" (not the term they used, I'm sure).

Answer:
"Koine" (Greek for "common") is a term that came to designate that broad, common form of mostly non-literary Greek used by Greeks in common speech among themselves and with other ethnicities, and used by various ethnicities in their communication with other ethnicities. I find it commonly used as a technical term for a period in history roughly designating the 1st century BCE and CE (BC and AD). But it covers the early centuries of Christian development.

"Classical" Greek is a designation given to the writings of a particular period in the history of early Greek literature, including writing by Plato and other philosophers. "Classical" Greek also consisted of a variety of forms, that we could call dialects, with differences noted between the writings from different cities and regions.

Classical Greek did not die out – it just continued to change as every other language. Various Greek dialects from the ancient times continued to be used in various areas of the ancient world, from Hispania to China, from Central Asia to the Arabian peninsula.

Yes, in one sense, Koine can be considered a dialect of Classical Greek. But not in the normal sense of "dialect." Koine was not contemporary with the language of the "Classical" period, so was more like a descendant of the same clan as classical Greek, a distant younger cousin.

Keep in mind also that "Classical Greek" wasn't "classical" at the time it was spoken. It was just "Greek," or actually they called it Elenika. We refer to it now as classical only in light of the literature we have from that period and our knowledge of the language and its culture milieu. Greek was just Greek, with its variations from region to region, class to class and age to age.

The formal written forms we now call "classical" Greek were still the reference standard for written Greek in the first century AD, so written styles existed on a continuum between that older standard – set several hundred years before – and the current actual Greek language heard and used at that time in history. Virtually the full continuum of style appears in the New Testament texts.




Koine to Modern Greek
In general summary, Koine became the BASE for all modern Greek, superseding the classical forms, which already by the first century were being considered separate languages, and by the 3rd century were considered foreign languages.

Koine consolidated in the Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire), centered in Constantinople, in the early Middle Ages. Even modern Cypriots tell me the Biblical Greek is like a foreign language to them, which terribly surprised me, since I can read both, and they seem very similar to me!

(Greek has actually changed less since the first century than virtually any other European language. English speakers can hardly understand something written 400 years ago, like Shakespeare and the King James version of the Bible. Two thousand years ago, there was no such thing as an English language.)

The Common Greek language was a set of varieties, and, of course, continued to change. I did some study on this by visiting museums to read Byzantine manuscripts, like church edicts, ordination announcements, etc., but could not do a good scholarly job with the time I had.

You can see the gradual changes in grammatical and phonetic form over the centuries, just like in Spanish, French and English. The patterns of sound change, as well as grammar, are very similar to Latin.

In Greek, we see the common pattern of language change – things simplified. The current patterns of grammar and pronunciation in modern Greek have all developed systematically from the Koine forms, just as our modern languages have from their older forms.

The peripheral forms (dialects) died out, and major regional usages were absorbed into the general Greek language just as English dialectic forms have been accreted into the "standard" forms of English, giving us many forms of the same word with similar or different meanings. There are several dialects today, with some differences. Cypriot Greek is today the most like the first-century forms of Greek.

Robertson and other linguists of Greek give the same type of analysis of Greek as others did for all known modern languages with a literate history. Words overlapped in meaning and usage. Those who make the romantic claims of perfection for Greek appear to be unaware of the language itself and must make their claims up out of whole cloth, cut with crooked lines by dull scissors.

It is totally unbelievable to think that any human language is ever so precise as to defy human usage! A very characteristic of human speech is creativity and variety. Conformity also is a common feature of language, but innovation and conformity, or regularization, are both always going on at the same time, on different features of each language.

Shifts in Pronunciation
Thus pronunciation was shifting and uncertain in Koine Greek, indicated by the variety of spellings in borrowings in Aramaic, Latin, Egyptian, etc. Most notable is one of Jesus’ sayings on the cross, Eli, lama sabachthani, spelled by another gospel writer as Eloi. Eli and Eloi represent the same word, pronounced as in modern Greek “Eh-lee.” Which was the "correct" way to spell it? How do the Platonist Romantic spiritualizers answer that? Robertson has an amazingly detailed discussion of pronunciations, syntax and meanings which bring out the dynamic, living character of Koine Greek.









[Full Article LINKED HERE ]

And when we see what Vincent said about Patristic writings, we can see that "from the beginning it was not so," and it is a tradition of the elders that the word "church" has been retained. When you look in all of the word studies on the word "church", they put in there "the assembly," as if they were one and the same. But when you go to their own definitions, such as Elwells Evangelical Dictionary, it says the English word church "derives from the late Greek word kurioton, which means "the lord's house," a Church building. In the King James New Testament, the word translates from the Greek word ekklesia.

Notice this says "Church" is from a "late Greek word," so it's not a word that's used in the original Koine Greek, it's a modern word. So you see the problem. Also, kurioton, means "the lord's house." In the Old Testament, the phrase "the lord's house" is used three times, and it has to do with a secular lord every time (Genesis 40:7; 44:8, Isaiah 22:18). So, who is the lord we're talking about? The secular lord always had jurisdiction of the Church because it was their realm to begin with!

Will you give me your definitions for ekklesia and church?

In Albuquerque, there are over 500 churches not counting home groups, but I have found any which are anywhere like Philippians 2:1-5 and Ephesians 4:11-15. So currently in most of the weekend I listen to Christian worship music, usually about 10 sermons, do Bible study tool developing (which is not work for me, just enjoyment), and ministering (face to face or vai the Internet), I am not sinning for doing such. Most other people just go to church for 1-2 hours for selfish reasons. I was even recent forbidden from attending a church by its 2 pastors because I would not condemn the Evangelist Billy Graham and in another church for mentioning to a pastor in a phone text that he didn't keep his promise about visiting me and that one statement in his most recent sermon was wrong (when Abraham was to sacrifice his son Isaac, a ram not a lamb was the replacement to be sacrificed).

Thank you for posting this, which agrees with what I said!

""Classical" Greek is a designation given to the writings of a particular period in the history of early Greek literature,"

Your original article said that Classical Greek was LATER than Koine! And of course, there was a certain amount of Classical in the Bible. The language wasn't changed that much. The optative case was dying out, and the diagramma was no longer in use. There are also differences in the use of prepositions like en and eis, as technically, the language was "in transition" from Classical.

Your original article said Classical Greek was later. It was Byzantium Greek that came after Koine. And yes, an overlap there, on that end, no one is denying that.

So, perhaps you need to work on English language reading skills and forget about Greek for now! And the point is, that an ekklesia is a church, is an eglise is a Kirche, and so on. You have pulled these definitions out of thin air, and now you are raging mad because you have been proved wrong.

Definitions should arise from Scripture. Ekklesia = called out ones = assembly = church.

The Body of Christ is also called the Church, which is *the GENERAL ASSEMBLY and CHURCH of the firstborn* (Heb 12:23).

You sound exactly like SpoonJuly when they're having a fit. They too go to the same lengths, hoping to assail someone's intellect. While not realizing that go-to impugns their own. Just like yours does.
I'm raging mad because.... No you're looking in the mirror. See, I refuse to accept your emotional baggage being you were proven wrong. Now you're trying to claim my resource sustains what you claimed.
You can also take your personal attack mode that thinks to assail my intellect and English acumen and return to your dark place. Dish your hate elsewhere. Your sour soul will find no purchase nor shall that toxicity affect my peace of mind in the least.

You need prayer! You don't need attention. I've witnessed the other members you've assailed with your vitriol. You are not highly intelligent , nor are you versed in languages, nor are you, as you'd like to think, superior to anyone here. You're just very sad.

I pity you. I will not feed what ails you.

You sound exactly like SpoonJuly when they're having a fit. They too go to the same lengths, hoping to assail someone's intellect. While not realizing that go-to impugns their own. Just like yours does.
I'm raging mad because.... No you're looking in the mirror. See, I refuse to accept your emotional baggage being you were proven wrong. Now you're trying to claim my resource sustains what you claimed.
You can also take your personal attack mode that thinks to assail my intellect and English acumen and return to your dark place. Dish your hate elsewhere. Your sour soul will find no purchase nor shall that toxicity affect my peace of mind in the least.

You need prayer! You don't need attention. I've witnessed the other members you've assailed with your vitriol. You are not highly intelligent , nor are you versed in languages, nor are you, as you'd like to think, superior to anyone here. You're just very sad.

I pity you. I will not feed what ails you.

How does Luke 18:9-14 relate? Did you read it Bill? It sums up the attitude of a cultic mindset imo.

The ugliness within certainly came out in the above! What a hate filled rant, filled with false witness! SHAMEFUL!