[OBW]

One additional comment on ekklesia. There has been much made in the word studies about the root parts including "out of" but little about the actual understanding of the word at the time as being simply "assembly." That is being pushed by those of us who either sort of like Lee's teaching on this subject (with or without liking the link to Lee). But if the purpose was to press the "out of" part of the roots, why does it, buried in a study of the past roots of the word, stand in opposition to the directly-stated directive that we be in the world — just not of it?

I think if you simply go through a dictionary and look at the part where they show the pieces of root Anglo-Saxon, German, Latin, French, etc., words that are thought (or known) to have been pieced-together in our modern word that you will find many in which some aspect of at least part of the root creates a "huh?" or may just an "interesting; but it doesn't appear in the meaning today unless you go 9 definitions into it."

The church is not of the world, but it is in it. The letters to the various churches were about the things that damaged the testimony of God's righteousness — both to other Christians and to the world. Jesus prayed that we would be one as the Father and Son are one so that the world would see. Can't see much of what is not in its vision. And a church that is only about what happens in its "out of the world" meetings isn't much of a church. And it is not coming in contact with the gates of Hell.

Yeah. We like to think about the gates of Hell in terms of intercessory prayer for a person dying of cancer. Or someone that we think really needs to come to Christ. What about that driver that cut you off and is inviting you to toss your testimony aside and shout and give them a one finger salute? Or cut them off in return. (While not in every way, this is one of the places that I fall down at times.) As just another individual, my "testimony" as being part of the body of Christ might be invisible. And when I fall prey to my more base instincts, there is no testimony. I am presumed to be just one of them. But when I respond differently, they may just think I am a wimp. Or "learned my place." Or they may wonder how it is that someone could let that go so easily. If they ask, the answer is Christ. And when a church full of such people invades the space around them, some will take note. (And I don't just mean a single assembly of them, but the body of Christ.)

Besides, what does adding "out of " do for us or instruct us about the church that is important to our living and not just more head knowledge (that is of uncertain importance or benefit)? Is our Christian living really impacted by the uplifting of thinking that we have been "called out of" the world? We are what we are. It is because of Christ. And he left us in the world. Rather than looking for more reasons to be "up" about everything, we probably should be more sober as we engage in the world. The sober person is probably better equipped to deal with the guy who cut them off on the road. Emotional states are easily shattered because they are based upon stimuli and your interpretation of them.

As I recall, the things that were identified as things to "think on" did not include the special status of the church. There could be some truth in it. But if it is true, then it is true. What does it do for you that it does not do without you knowing it? But where your mind is relative to the things you are currently facing is very important. Pursue righteousness, not better theology. Walk according to the Spirit, not have a higher thought about what the church is.