Many of us are aware of the great work Dr. Tom Wadsworth is doing. His popular YouTube videos, podcasts, and writings have made a significant impact on those seeking a better way to do life together. While his 300-page PhD dissertation may be more than most of us are ready to tackle, we are looking forward to seeing his research adapted into a book for a broader audience in early 2027.
Below is an excerpt from The Origin of the Christian Assembly. In this article, adapted from the author’s 2022 doctoral dissertation, Dr. Wadsworth examines the origins of the structure of the ekklesia. All of Tom’s writings are available free of charge on his website tomwadsworth.com.
In summary, scholars have suggested several different sources that may have served as the origin(s) of the early (first-century) Christian assembly. The primary proposal with a long history of support is the synagogue. A few scholars reject the idea, but since Christianity emerged from Judaism, and early Christians were certainly familiar with synagogue meetings, most scholars believe that the synagogue is a credible source, even if it is only “an influence.” A small number of scholars have suggested the temple as the origin, but this proposal is plagued with significant problems that are related to the temple’s sacrificial cult and the Christians’ lack thereof.
In the last thirty years, two other theories have gained some support: voluntary associations and the banquet/symposium. If the temple and synagogue might be described as “religious” sources, these latest proposals might be described as “non-religious” sources that mirror some of the secular qualities of the early Christian assemblies. Associations and the banquet/symposium proposals have provided much food for thought, but at best, they merely offer interesting similarities to the Christian meeting.
Would the early Christians have relied on a secular or “worldly” convention as the definitive model for their meetings? Jesus said that He, His kingdom, and His disciples were “not of this world” (John 17:16; 18:36). Paul urged Christians to “not be conformed to this world” (Rom 12:2). James said that pure religion is “to keep oneself unstained by the world” (Jas 1:27) and that “friendship with the world is hostility toward God” (Jas 4:4). And John urged the faithful to “not love the world nor the things in the world” (1 John 2:15). Given these fundamental teachings from nascent Christianity, it is hard to conceive that the early church would have adopted a Graeco-Roman social convention as the model for the perpetual assembly of the faithful.
Whatever origins might be proposed, it is difficult, if not impossible, to identify a certain source that gave birth to the Christian gathering. Since the NT itself never speaks of a model assembly upon which the church gathering was based, scholars are left to speculate. And their speculation inevitably focuses on meetings that are “similar.” But as Ken Neller aptly noted, similarities do not necessarily indicate influence.
While scholars have intently searched for the origins of the Christian meeting, is it possible that there is no origin? Brunner sees the Christian assembly as “manifestly something radically new,” and Dunn says that the early home churches must have seemed “very odd” to the surrounding culture. Since Christianity was known for its new wine that needed fresh wineskins (Mark 2:22), its new covenant (Heb 9:15; 12:24), its new and living way (Heb 10:20), its new teaching (Acts 17:19), and its new song (Rev 5:9; 14:3), it is not a far-fetched idea that its gatherings might also be “new.” After all, the God who “makes all things new” (Rev 21:5) does not need to recycle and revamp some existing meeting tradition, whether from Jews or Greeks. The “newness” of Christianity does not negate the possibility that its meetings are patterned after some other meeting. But the “fresh wineskins” of the gospel should prompt – at least – the possibility that Christianity required no model.
Free resource material from Dr. Tom Wadsworth at https://www.tomwadsworth.com/the-christian-assembly.
Sign up for my bi-monthly newsletter here. Thank you.
3 replies on “A Very Odd Discovery”
We should get some hint by the Word “Ecclesia” itself.
Ecclesia does not, should not have been translated Church !
There’s another word for church.
Ecclesia was actually the name given to civil gatherings of a town to deal with local issues.
Originated from Greek culture, not other religious methods.
An Ecclesia met in a “ sit around the room” setting a was open to the attendees to ask questions, share ideas and viewpoints to address that local towns needs and problems !
A good biblical example would be Acts 15 to settle the Ecclesias questions and needs.
Also the various gatherings of Jesus with the disciples and also the multitude that gathered around him.
These meetings were at many different locations depending on the needs of the people and Jesus’s desire to teach His Life giving words.
There’s many examples in the New Testament , of how they gathered, some for teaching and discussion, but also for times of prayer and healing by Jesus .
It appears that all leadership in the New Testament was PLURAL !
Jesus was the only one that should be looked to as an HEAD or HUSBAND of any expression of Ecclesia !!!
Most interesting indeed!
Where believers meet is more for pragmatic reasons. That should not necessarily be the issue. The more important matter to address is in regard to what takes place, how and why, when they do meet. That’s all covered by the epistles of the apostles.