The Contrast of DMM

We are moving our primary blog / content activity to Substack! Check it out here...

https://genmission.substack.com/​

The Difference Between DMM Ekklesia and the Western Idea of "Church": A Case for Ecclesiological Reformation

I recently was encouraged by a discussion with Yuri Binder and Chris Halverson about the difference between Ekklesia and Church.

Below is a summary of notes from that essential discussion. But first this quote from Chris Halverson's father:

“In the beginning the church was a fellowship of men and women centering on the living Christ. Then the church moved to Greece, where it became a philosophy. Then it moved to Rome, where it became an institution. Next, it moved to Europe, where it became a culture. And, finally, it moved to America, where it became an enterprise.”
                                                                                       — Richard Halverson, former Chaplain of the United States Senate

1. Linguistic and Historical Distinction

The Greek term ekklesia (ἐκκλησία), used in the New Testament, derives from ek ("out of") and kaleo ("to call"), meaning "the called-out ones" or "assembly." In its original context, ekklesia referred to a gathering of people called out for a specific purpose, whether civic (as in Acts 19:39) or spiritual (as in Matthew 16:18). It emphasized a dynamic, relational community of believers united by faith in Christ, not a physical structure or hierarchical institution.

In contrast, the English word "church" originates from the Old English cirice, derived from the Greek kyriakon (κυριακόν), meaning "belonging to the Lord." This term was used to describe buildings or places of worship, particularly in post-Constantinian Christianity, when the faith became institutionalized under Roman influence. The shift from ekklesia to "church" reflects a move from a people-centered, organic community to an institution often associated with buildings, clergy, and rigid structures.

Key Difference: Ekklesia denotes a living, called-out community of believers, while "church" has come to signify a place, institution, or organized religion, often divorced from the relational and missional essence of the New Testament.

2. Theological Inaccuracy of "Church" in the West

The term "church" carries theological inaccuracies that distort the biblical concept of ekklesia:

Institutionalization: The word "church" often implies a hierarchical, clergy-led institution, which contrasts with the New Testament’s portrayal of ekklesia as a participatory, Spirit-led community where all believers are priests (1 Peter 2:9). The institutional model, rooted in Constantine’s fusion of Christianity with Roman governance, prioritizes control and tradition over the organic, decentralized nature of ekklesia.

Physicality Over Community: "Church" frequently evokes images of buildings or denominations, reducing the concept to a location or organization. The New Testament ekklesia, however, is a spiritual body (1 Corinthians 12:12-27), transcending physical spaces and human constructs.

Passivity vs. Active Mission: The modern "church" often fosters a consumerist mentality, where attendees passively receive teaching or services. In contrast, ekklesia implies an active, missional community, called out to embody Christ’s presence and mission in the world (Matthew 28:19-20).

Western Cultural Baggage: The term "church" has been shaped by Western Christianity’s historical alignment with power structures, colonialism, and cultural hegemony. This has led to a perception of "church" as an exclusive, often oppressive institution, alienating many from the inclusive, relational vision of ekklesia.

Theological Critique: The term "church" often misrepresents the New Testament’s vision by emphasizing form over function, institution over community, and cultural tradition over biblical fidelity. This misrepresentation constitutes a "Western heresy" because it perpetuates a distorted ecclesiology that undermines the transformative, communal, and missional nature of God’s people.

3. The Ecclesiological Reformation: Reclaiming Ekklesia

An ecclesiological reformation is emerging globally, seeking to restore the New Testament vision of ekklesia by distancing itself from the Western heresy of "church." This reformation is characterized by:

Return to Relational Community: The reformation emphasizes ekklesia as a living body of believers, not a building or institution. House churches, organic gatherings, and missional communities are reclaiming the participatory, family-like dynamic of the early church (Acts 2:42-47).

Decentralization and Empowerment: Rejecting hierarchical structures, the reformation empowers all believers to function as priests, prophets, and ministers (Ephesians 4:11-12). This aligns with the ekklesia’s call to mutual edification and shared mission.

Missional Focus: The reformation reorients the ekklesia toward its calling to be "called out" for God’s purposes, engaging the world with the gospel rather than retreating into insulated institutions.

Cultural Liberation: By abandoning the term "church" and its Western connotations, the reformation frees the ekklesia from cultural baggage, allowing it to take root in diverse global contexts without the taint of colonialism or institutionalism.

Case for Reformation: The Western concept of "church" has entrenched a heretical ecclesiology that prioritizes buildings, hierarchies, and cultural traditions over the biblical vision of a called-out, relational, and missional community. Reclaiming ekklesia is essential to restoring the church’s identity and purpose, aligning it with God’s intent for His people to be a dynamic, Spirit-led body that transforms the world.

Conclusion:

The distinction between ekklesia and "church" is not merely semantic but theological and practical. The term "church" carries a legacy of institutionalization and cultural distortion that obscures the New Testament’s vision of a vibrant, called-out community. The ecclesiological reformation underway seeks to distance itself from this Western heresy by rediscovering ekklesia as a relational, decentralized, and missional body. This shift is not only biblically faithful but also essential for the global church to fulfill its calling in the 21st century.
​