Three Reasons I Don’t Believe In Hell

Before beginning, I would like to acknowledge that discussing this particular topic may appear to be controversial and that you, the reader, may not share the views I express. This article is not intended to be offensive or divisive in nature, but rather to open a channel of respectful conversation about a subject that is deeply important to many people.
I have chosen some time ago to abandon a rigid position on issues or topics which are non-essential to the gospel, from which there is no possible room to move or breathe, and allow my questions and convictions to sit in tension with one another while my Christian life continues to grow and deepen.
What this means, in practical terms, is that I’m genuinely interested to hear from you, that I welcome engagement and even difference on many biblical subjects, including this one, and, while I express this to be my currently held position on this topic, I would hope I am still open to learning new things as scripture speaks to me and as I hear from others.
The following thoughts are expressed in that light:

The subject of hell has popped up in a few different conversations recently, and, while I tend to try to avoid speaking from a position of a negative (‘what I don’t believe…’), this doctrine is one that’s never rung true for me.

I genuinely doubt the validity of the doctrine of hell or that it’s an actual teaching of scripture. For many Christians, a requirement to believe in hell has been a deal breaker in their faith and, I think, for good reason. It’s hard to reconcile the many elements of this doctrine with the picture the Bible paints of a good, good God.

In this article, I’d like to share three compelling reasons why I think the doctrine of hell doesn’t biblically add up and why I think it’s actually in opposition to the truth of the gospel narrative.

But Firstly, What Do I Mean By Hell?

Well, I’m referring to the (assumed to be) biblical teaching about the destination of the soul at the moment of death; either to heaven if you’ve ‘done okay’ or, alternatively, to hell, if you ‘haven’t quite measured up’. Saints go up. Sinners go down.

The parameters for ‘not quite measuring up’ can differ greatly depending on who you might be talking to. Some would say that anyone who hasn’t received Jesus as Lord and Saviour is outside God’s salvation. Therefore, either by ignorance or purposed willfulness, they have rejected God and earned themselves a one-way ticket to hell.

This includes, for example, people living deep within the Amazon jungle (who have had limited contact with the outside world and may never have heard the Christian message of Jesus Christ), those who may have been Christian once but have turned their back on Christ, those who have heard the message of Jesus but decided no thanks, as well as those who have engaged in various horrors such as rape, torture and mass murder during their lifetime.

Others are more uncomfortable with the thought of Adolf Hitler rubbing shoulders with good and sincere people (who, while they might not have been Christian, could hardly be described as having lived a ‘wicked life’). Or those who, through no fault of their own, had never even heard of hell, let alone Jesus. It does seem a little heavy-handed a response towards people who were essentially clueless about the rules but were punished anyway. Hell, they therefore conclude, is only for the truly wicked; surely God makes concessions for nice people?.

The traditional teaching of hell is that it’s a place of both psychological and physical torment; an ‘eternal lake of fire’ where the wicked are perpetually burned for all eternity (decide for yourself who qualifies). This imagery was further elaborated on during medieval times by the artists who graphically displayed vile creatures eating flesh and devouring sinners in the place of torment. (These images, together with fragmented texts of the Scriptures, and the circulation of apocryphal books, led the medieval church into some strange and grotesque doctrines).

The period of history known as The Great Awakening (1730-1740) placed particular emphasis, as a method of conversion, on the horror that awaited the unrepentant sinner. Jonathan Edwards, a famous American congregational preacher of the time, described hell as a place where “God holds men over the flames in the way that one holds a loathsome spider over a candle. He speculated on how it would feel to have the searing agony of a burn drawn out through eternity. He told listeners that the ground beneath their feet was a rotten flooring over a blazing pit, ready to give way in seconds.” (Bruce Shelley, Church History In Plain Language)

What Does Scripture Teach?

Psychologists today would no doubt have a field day with the profoundly damaging psychosocial and spiritual effects of this kind of preaching, dubbed ‘fire-and-brimstone’, but, more particularly, what does the Bible preach? Is this kind of reality really found in scripture?

Here are three reasons why I don’t think scripture teaches this at all:

1. Hell Doesn’t Fit The Gospel Narrative

One of the amazing aspects of the Bible is the consistency of its message and theme, from start to finish. It’s remarkable, given the reality of its varying authorships and the different time periods during which it was written, that the major theme of God’s sovereignty, rule, and purpose remains intact. In fact, affirming God’s sovereignty throughout the biblical record gives shape and purpose to the role for which humanity was created.

The gospel narrative is one that tells the story of Jesus, God’s only Son, and announces that he is both Lord and King. In him, God is saving, rescuing, atoning, justifying, ruling, and reconciling people for the glory of His name, all in pursuit of His purpose (Acts 2:36, Romans 8:19-21).

But what is He saving people from?

The first book in the Bible, Genesis, tells us something important about our own history, and it sets the stage for the drama that subsequently unfolds throughout the rest of God’s story.

It tells us, firstly, that we were created with purpose, designed to be like God, to image Him throughout His good world and rule wisely and well on His behalf (Genesis 1:26).

Secondly, it tells us that instead of partnering with God in this purpose, we chose our own will, introducing the evil of sin into God’s good world. The terrible consequence for the first humans, Adam and Eve, is that they were banished from the garden and from God’s presence. Furthermore, humans became ‘dying creatures’, subject to disease, aging, and mortality. Dying became hard-coded into our DNA.

“You will sweat all your life to earn a living; you were made out of soil, and you will once again turn into soil.” | Genesis 3:19, CEV

“Adam sinned, and that sin brought death into the world. Now everyone has sinned, and so everyone must die.” | Romans 5:19, CEV

We are subject to mortality. Death is our great enemy; this is the consequence of disobedience, passed on Adam and Eve and received by all those who came after them.

“So then, as through one trespass there is condemnation for everyone, so also through one righteous act there is justification leading to life for everyone.” | Romans 5:18

The gospel narrative tells of humanity hopelessly enslaved to sin and at the mercy of mortality (Romans 6:15-23). Far from the spiritual life God intended for us, we’re incapable of saving ourselves or of overcoming death (Acts 4:12). The gospel, however, offers good news! : rescue, redemption and eternal life – God’s own life, by the simple act of giving allegiance to His Son, Jesus, as Lord and Saviour (Romans 10:9-10).

The gospel confirms the biblical reality of a just but loving God who is for His creation, who is not willing that any should perish, and who has actively worked to reconcile and transform us so that we can live the life of purpose for which He created us (2 Peter 3:8-10, John 3:16).

Hell – further punishment after death – simply doesn’t fit the gospel narrative.

2. Hell Doesn’t Fit The Character Of God

God is the God of promise, at whose Word the universe came into being and whose Word will never return to Him void, not accomplishing the purpose for which it was sent (Genesis 1:3Isaiah 55:11). His loving devotion endures forever. He is faithful, true, just, and all glorious (Psalm 136:31 Timothy 1:17).

The Psalmist declares the wonder and worthiness of this Eternal God, who is clothed in light,  who stretches out the heavens like a tent, and who walks on the waves of the sea (Psalm 104:2Job 9:8). All of creation bows in obeisance to His majesty, for all things, owe their existence to Him (Psalm 104:30Psalm 6:4Psalm 96:11Luke 19:40).

God proclaimed both His Name and character to Moses, the great deliver of Israel during the Exodus, stating:

“The Lord — the Lord is a compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger and abounding in faithful love and truth, maintaining faithful love to a thousand generations, forgiving iniquity, rebellion, and sin. But he will not leave the guilty unpunished, bringing the consequences of the fathers’ iniquity on the children and grandchildren to the third and fourth generation.” | Exodus 34:5-9, ESV

The Psalmist also writes often and extensively about the innate goodness of God:

“For the LORD is good; His steadfast love endures forever, and his faithfulness to all generations.” | Psalm 100:5, ESV

“The LORD is good and upright; therefore He shows sinners the way.” Psalm 25:8, CSB

“The LORD is good to all; His compassion rests on all He has made.” | Psalm 145:9, BSB

There’s a lot to unpack in all those verses. Yet perhaps the overwhelming take-home point is this: God is just. He’s not vindictive or biased and He doesn’t show favoritism based on our social status, gender, or nationality. In fact, He is generous-hearted and gracious, even to those who are His enemies.

Jesus demonstrates this in His famous sermon on the mount, where he sets out the characteristics of those who would be children of the kingdom. He shows that choosing to behave in this way is simply imitating the characteristics of their Heavenly Father:

“You have heard that it was said, Love your neighbour and hate your enemy. But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven. For He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward will you have? Don’t even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what are you doing out of the ordinary? Don’t even the Gentiles do the same? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” | Matthew 5:45-48, CSB

This aspect of God’s graciousness – His undeserved love and favour to humanity – permeates every aspect of the gospel narrative, giving it weight and power. Because He is just, He wouldn’t overlook the sin of the world. But because He is also gracious and good, God sent His Son into the world, to suffer under the hands of wicked men, so that humanity could be rescued from the curse of sin and death  (Matthew 16:21, Isaiah 53:4-6). In His goodness and in His justice, He made arrangement for sin to be absorbed and absolved, through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

God is not a vindictive sadist. It simply doesn’t fit the character of a good and gracious God to punish people by “holding them, like a loathsome spider, over a flame for all eternity.” I would have serious concerns about other aspects of God’s character if I truly believed He is capable of sustaining such indefinite torture, even to those I might consider deserving of such a fate.

Interestingly, during the time when kings ruled the nation of Israel (926BCE – 586BCE), Israel engaged in the practice of child sacrifice by fire to the pagan god Molech, a practice they had absorbed from the nations they had previously conquered. God considered this to be a great evil; it was completely abhorrent to Him and something which he had expressly forbidden (2 Chronicles 33:6, Jeremiah 32:35, 2 Kings 21:6).

The doctrine of hell, in its many terrifying forms, perhaps tells us more about the capability and cruelty of human imagination than the reality of what occurs at death.

Hell – as a place of fiery, eternal torture for the wicked – simply doesn’t fit the character of God.

3. Hell Isn’t Found In The Bible

Well, it is. But not in the way you think.

While the word hell is certainly found in some of our English translations, it’s usually a translation of the original Hebrew word she’ol (שְׁאוֹל), and on the remaining occasions, three other Greek words (hades (ᾅδης), gehenna (γέεννα) and tartarus (ταρταρόω).

It’s translated by the King James version as hell 54 times, however more accurate translations like the NASB or NIV show the word hell only occurring between 13–14 times, all of which are found in the New Testament. The Hebrew word she’ol is translated in other places as ‘grave’ and ‘the pit’ and the more accurate translations tend to translate it in this way (Genesis 37:351 Kings 2:6Job 17:16Isaiah 14:11, Ecclesiastes 9:10)

The English word hell, comes from ‘helan’, meaning ‘to conceal’. It conveyed no thought of heat or torment but simply of a ‘covered over or concealed place.’ In the old English dialect, the expression “helling potatoes” meant, not to roast them, but simply to place the potatoes in the ground or in a cellar (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged).

Here’s a brief overview of the original words:

She’ol

She’ol was understood, by Jewish writers, as a place of stillness and darkness to which all the dead go, both the righteous and the unrighteous, regardless of the moral choices made in life. In she’ol, one is cut off from life and from God.

“For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward. Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and forever they have no more share in all that is done under the sun” | Ecclesiastes 9:5-6, ESV

“Humans and animals come to the same end—humans die, animals die. We all breathe the same air. So there’s really no advantage in being human. None. Everything’s smoke. We all end up in the same place—we all came from dust, we all end up as dust.” | Ecclesiastes 3:19–20, The Message

She’ol is used throughout the Old Testament and is derived from a word meaning hollow, the place under the earth where all previously living things rest in eternal, silent repose, without knowledge, consciousness, or reward.

“Since she’ol in the Old Testament times referred simply to the abode of the dead and suggested no moral distinctions, the word ‘hell,’ as understood today, is not a happy translation.” – Collier’s Encyclopedia (1986, Vol 12, p.28)

Hades

In the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) and throughout the New Testament, the translators used the Greek word hades (ᾅδης) in place of the Hebrew word she’ol, translating with the Jewish concepts of she’ol in mind – a place where there is no activity – rather than the mythology of Greek concepts. This can be shown to be the case as they expressly use hades as an equivalent for she’ol, both in the Greek translation and also where they are quoting passages from the Old Testament (Hebrew text). One example appears below comparing Psalm 16:10 with Acts 2:27 (where the former is being quoted by Peter the Apostle):

“For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.” – Psalm 16:10, ESV

“For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One see corruption.” – Acts 2:27, ESV

With one exception, mentioned further below, the word hades, in all appearances in the New Testament has little, if any, connection to afterlife rewards or punishments.

The best equivalent understanding, which most modern translations use is ‘the grave‘. The context of the verses in which this word is used support the Jewish understanding of she’ol as a place of silence and inactivity to which all those who die are consigned.

The exception, as noted above, is Luke’s parable of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16:19-31), in which the rich man finds himself, after death, in hades, and “in anguish in this flame”, while in contrast the angels take Lazarus to “the bosom of Abraham”, described as a state of comfort.

A parable is a type of analogy – a  succinct, didactic story written in prose or verse, designed to illustrate one or more instructive lessons or principles, and is never intended to be interpreted literally. Additionally, it would be problematic for an entire theology to be built around one specifically non-literal section of scripture; or even from several parables put together. “Parables should never be used as sources of doctrine, but rather we take doctrine as a norm for interpreting the parables” (Tertullian).

This passage, in my opinion, therefore shouldn’t be considered to be literally describing aspects of an afterlife, including hell: that is, a place of eternal fiery torment because this is not what scripture teaches elsewhere Nevertheless, it is certainly an fascinating passage, intended to illustrate some lesson or principle and therefore requires an interpretation of some sort.

Gehenna

Another Greek word that has been translated as hell in some translations is ‘Gehenna’. It appears twelve times in the New Testament and is actually a Greek compound, derived from the Hebrew words ge and hinnom or the “valley of Hinnom”; a proper name which literally means valley of the son of Hinnom. Gehenna is actually the word that Jesus uses in the New Testament and you can read more about what Jesus really said about heaven and hell here.

The valley of Hinnom is a deep narrow slice of earth just outside the city of Jerusalem. Also called Tophet, or ‘the valley of dead bones’, it already had a long and disturbing history by Jesus’ time. Firstly, as mentioned earlier in this article, in the early days of Israel’s kingdom, it was the place of idolatry and child sacrifice, by burning alive with fire to the pagan god Molech  (2 Kings 23:10).

Later it was used as a place where rubbish, filth, and the carcasses of beast and men alike were disposed of. Fires were kept constantly burning to consume the valley’s refuse and to prevent contamination. In the days of Jesus, the highest mark of ignominy that could be inflicted upon a person was a criminal’s burial in the fires of Gehenna.

Gehenna is a literal place of perpetual burning; but it was in Israel, not in a subterranean underworld. Therefore Jesus’ meaning when warning of Gehenna was quite different to what might be understood by hell today. The theological implication of Jesus’ words is likely this: that the consequences of unrepented sin in our life will lead to the finality of death and, by inference, the complete and utter annihilation of existence.

Just as the fire of Gehenna burned indefinitely, completely obliterating any trace of whatever was cast into it, so is our existence in death, without the salvation that is to be found in Jesus. Extinction of not just of our physical body, but of our life, our soul, our spirit, the very thing that makes us us. All of us.

Again, the theological implications point to the need for and provision of a saviour, the hope of the world; the very core of the gospel narrative.

The translation of Gehenna to hell is actually a mistranslation. More correctly, it should have been transliterated into English (ie it should read ‘Gehenna’ on every occasion) and left in its proper form for the reader to interpret.

Tartarus

Used in 2 Peter 2:4, this Greek word actually occurs nowhere else in scripture.

“For if God did not spare messengers having sinned, but having cast [them] down to Tartarus with chains of deepest gloom, delivered [them], having been reserved to judgment…” 2 Peter 2:4, LSV

Tartarus was considered in Greek mythology to be the great abyss, situated far below hades (the grave). Together with the context of this verse, the use of this word suggests a particular and specific meaning. Some kind of imprisonment is implied, certainly, but no sense at all of fiery torment or torture. In fact, the verse suggests that judgment (of who and what kind isn’t stated) is still yet to come.

Certainly, there are questions raised by these passages – the parable of Lazarus for example. What does it mean? What lesson are we intended to take from it?

And what is Peter referring to in his letter? Who are the messengers He refers to? What was their crime? And why is this Greek word found here, yet used nowhere else in scripture?

It’s not my intention to discuss these at any length in this particular article, only to comment that I don’t believe these single instances are compelling enough evidence for the doctrine of hell, particularly when compared alongside all of scripture as discussed earlier in this article.

Again, as with Gehenna, Tartarus should have been transliterated into English and left in its proper form for the reader to interpret.

What I’ve Concluded

While scripture certainly has much to say about what happens after life and why, it’s a markedly different story than perhaps we’ve been led to believe.

Scripture tells us that we’re all bound by mortality, a one-way, downhill journey from cradle to grave, where life – all aspects of living – cease. This situation is permanent and final (Genesis 3:19, 2 Samuel 14:14, Psalm 103:15-16, Romans 5:12, Romans 8:20-28).

Death is not just the enemy of life itself, but also thwarts the purpose for which humanity was created. Even the noblest of men or women soon pass from the world’s stage, their personalities and achievements more often than not fading from memory.  “No wisdom of man or rebellion can deliver new life out of death.

But the perfect human was promised to come, one who would bear the sin of the world and who would wage war against sin and death in his own body (John 1:29). Through his perfect life, his willing sacrifice, his dishonorable and painful death, and his glorious resurrection, all of humanity were promised that rescue would come and that death would be overturned. Jesus was going to build his church and not even the gates of the grave would prevail against it (Romans 8:3, Matthew 16:18).

“He [God] has revealed this grace through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has abolished death and illuminated the way to life and immortality through the gospel” | 2 Timothy 1:10, BSB

The gospel narrative is the story of God, in Jesus, saving, rescuing, atoning, justifying, ruling, and reconciling people for the glory of His name, all in pursuit of His purpose. Those who believe in Jesus will live, even if they die, for Jesus promises that he is not just the light and life of humanity but the resurrection itself (John 11:25, John 3:16).

The traditional doctrine of hell finds no place in this narrative, nor does it fit the character of a good and gracious God, nor can it actually be found in scripture.

Instead, the final pages of the Bible close with the great conclusion promised as part of Jesus’s reign, once He has put all His enemies under His feet, that the last enemy to be destroyed will be death itself (1 Corinthians 15:26): “Look, God’s dwelling is with humanity, and He will live with them. They will be His people, and God Himself will be with them and will be their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes. Death will be no more; grief, crying, and pain will be no more because the previous things have passed away.” (Revelation 21:3-4, CSB)

“The angel showed me a river that was crystal clear, and its waters gave life. The river came from the throne where God and the Lamb were seated. Then it flowed down the middle of the city’s main street. On each side of the river are trees that grow a different kind of fruit each month of the year. The fruit gives life, and the leaves are used as medicine to heal the nations.

God’s curse will no longer be on the people of that city. He and the Lamb will be seated there on their thrones, and its people will worship God and will see Him face to face. God’s name will be written on the foreheads of the people. Never again will night appear, and no one who lives there will ever need a lamp or the sun. The Lord God will be their light, and they will rule forever.” (Revelation 22:1-5, CEV)




The Church | A Woman Of Valour

(Not a reader? Take a listen instead ⇓)

This article is dedicated to the memory of William Tyndale (c 1490-1536), an active and passionate Christian writer and translator, whose historical influence on the translation of the Bible into English cannot be overstated. Tyndale was convinced that the Bible alone should determine the practices and doctrines of the church and that every believer should be able to read the Bible in his own language “The church of Christ is the multitude of all those who believe in Christ for the remission of sins, and who are thankful for that mercy and who love the law of God purely, and who hate the sin in this world and long for the life to come.” – William Tyndale

In my recent article, ‘The People Of The Kingdom‘, I noted that the church is the tangible evidence of the kingdom of God. Church people are kingdom people, living in a fellowship under King Jesus, with lives that “are literally connected to things before the creation of the world and extending far into eternity” (Ecclesiastes 3:11) (Matter Of The Heart). By looking more closely at how the Bible describes the church, we will also see what the advancement of this kingdom of God looks like, in reality, demonstrated in the lives of those men and women who gather together as the church.

What Does ‘Church’ Mean?

Our English language Bibles were translated from manuscripts written primarily in two languages; Hebrew (in the Old Testament) and Greek (in the New Testament). The translative history of the Bible is a fascinating journey, from an academic and historical perspective, and is well worth exploring. You can read more about the translation process here.

In the New Testament, the word translated into English as church is not actually a translation or even a transliteration of the original Greek word. The translators of the first English language Bibles generally elected to use the English word church (which had emerged first as the word kirk and finally evolved through the centuries into the word church), as an English equivalent of the original Greek word. The first usage of this word ‘church’ in English was as a building in which religious meetings were held, but eventually it came to be used for the people in the building too. By the time translators began translating the Greek manuscripts into English, it had been in accepted use in English for a long time. In all truthfulness, however, it wasn’t an accurate translation of ekklesia, which is the original Greek word.

The original Greek word used in the New Testament – ekklesia – is a compound of “ek” (out of) and “klesis” (calling), a derivation of “kaleo” (call). A literal meaning would be “a calling out” or “the called out.” An ekklesia was originally a select civil body, summoned or convoked for a particular purpose and the word, in and of itself, didn’t have any religious meaning attached. In Acts, the word ekklesia is used of a riotous mob (Acts 19:32 and 41) and also used to refer to a lawful gathering in Acts 19:39.

Ekklesia should perhaps be more accurately translated in English as assembly or congregation. However, the King James Version, the ‘authorised’ (and most commonly read) translation for many years, renders it church some 76 times, churches 36 times, and assembly three times. Most other translations follow the KJV’s example. Essentially, the translators chose to replace ekklesia for another Greek word (kuriakon which, by this time, had already made its way into English as ‘church’).

Despite this, it would be true to say that the word church is now an extremely established and recognisable word in our modern English, and it has been used for centuries as the English equivalent of ekklesia, however erroneous the original translative methods were.

But What Does Church Really Mean?

Today, most people would understand the word church to mean one or all of three things:

1. A place of worship (the original meaning of the word kuriakon (‘belonging to the Lord’)
2. A particular denomination or religious group within Christianity (when attached to a name, for example, an Anglican Church)
3. A body of Christian believers (the church)

The primary goal, when trying to understand the use of the word ekklesia (in the context of the Bible’s original meaning) is not necessarily to reinstate a truthfully accurate translation of the original word (although that would, of course, be a more proper process of translation) but to correctly understand the meaning of the original word. We know that words change meaning over time and also that it’s not the word itself that is important, but how we understand and use that word. Do we talk about and describe the church in the same way, today, that the first-century authors did? (For the sake of continuity, we will discuss the biblical meaning of ekklesia in this article using the established English equivalent church).

The Bible never speaks of the church in the sense of a building or organisation. Neither does it speak of the church in the sense of a particular denomination. The biblical definition of church is actually about the people – those who place their faith in Jesus Christ for salvation (John 3:16; 1 Corinthians 12:13). These people are the global community of believers who gather together in ‘local expressions of church’. The Apostle Paul describes this community like the human body, a living thing – made up of real people (1 Corinthians 12:12). The New Testament authors don’t describe many churches but one, simply expressing that ‘where two or three are gathered in my [Jesus’] name, there am I among them.‘ (Matthew 18:20).

In the early years of the church, these gatherings were known, for example, as the church that met at Corinth (1 Corinthians 1:2), or the church at Ephesus (Ephesians 1:12), communities acknowledged to be the one body of the Lord ‘scattered abroad’ (Acts 8:1-4, 1 Peter 1:1). The church is about people – the people are the church, the ekklesia – called out, connected in relationship by Jesus Christ and assembled together for a purpose.

There’s a very real sense that many Christians are returning to this original meaning behind the word used by the New Testament writers; that is, to view and speak of the church as an organic identity, made up of ‘people who are called and gathered together as a community in Jesus’.

A ‘Called Out’ Community

In the first few chapters of Acts, we read of the birth of the church in a rush of wind and fire; a pivotal moment in history where people begin responding to the call of the gospel and the announcement of Jesus as the risen king and saviour. Peter’s sermon in Acts 2:14-36 ‘cut many of the listeners to the heart’ and his life-changing teaching regarding Jesus caused many to receive his words with gladness, believing that Jesus was both the risen Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36). This belief and repentance of their sin was demonstrated by them being baptised – 3000 people in one day!

Acts 2:42-47 describes how these individuals began gathering themselves together as a community ‘called out to follow and serve King Jesus’. We begin to get a sense of the reason for the use of the word ekklesia by the apostolic writers to describe the formation and purpose of this one body of believers.

Throughout Acts, there are examples of the believers meeting together as a community and the purpose of these gatherings can generally be summarised by five key elements:

To honour God and His Son – ‘worship’
To grow community – ‘fellowship’
To develop personally – ‘discipleship’
To provide service to others – ‘ministry’
To share the Good News – ‘evangelism’

Being ‘called out’ is a common theme in the New Testament:

• Jesus came to call sinners (Matthew 9:13, Mark 2:17, Romans 8:30).
• By God’s grace and mercy, He calls people from among Jews and Gentiles to be His people (Romans 9:24-26).
• The believers in Corinth were called into fellowship with Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 1:9).
• God calls believers to peace (1 Corinthians 7:15).
• The calling is by the grace of Christ (Galatians 1:6).
• The believers in Galatia were called to freedom (Galatians 5:13).
• Paul implored the saints at Ephesus to walk in a manner worthy of their calling (Ephesians 4:1, 1 Thessalonians 2:12).
• The believers at Colossae were called in one body (Colossians 3:15).
• God calls believers into His own kingdom and glory (1 Thessalonians 2:12).
• God calls believers to conduct their lives in holiness (1 Thessalonians 4:7, 2 Timothy 1:9, 1 Peter 1:15).
• God called the believers in Thessalonica by the gospel (2 Thessalonians 2:14).
• God calls believers out of darkness and into His marvellous light (1 Peter 2:9).

These passages all cite the original greek word kaleo (‘to call’ or ‘called’) and have to do with a believer’s relationship with God and their connection to His eternal purpose. We can also see the connection here with the use of the Greek word ekklesia to describe the collective community of ‘called out’ people – believers that assemble together.

Metaphors For The Church

Other metaphors are used throughout the Bible to describe the community of believers, one of which is that believers form a spiritual ‘house’ – living stones to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:5).

Another metaphor is the human body, a living thing – made up of real people (1 Corinthians 12:12). Paul devotes a whole chapter in the book of Corinthians to the principles and purpose of ‘church’ and how each ‘member’ of the body is to be valued for the diversity and contribution they bring to ‘the body’.

This metaphor of a body is further expanded as yet another metaphor, that of a particular kind of body, the body of a bride; the fiancée and intended wife of ‘the lamb’ (John 3:29, Revelation 3:12). We are given to understand from Ephesians 5 that the relationship between Jesus and the church wasn’t modelled on the first marriage but, in fact, it was the other way around. God had the church in mind from the very beginning and our understanding of marriage is therefore modelled on the relationship that would exist between Jesus and his bride. Therefore, if we want to understand how the church, as the bride, relates to Jesus, we are to look to marriage and the examples given in both the record of creation in Genesis and Paul’s writings in the New Testament. Marriage is our human way of experiencing and understanding how we, together as one body, relate to Jesus as his church.

“A wife should put her husband first, as she does the Lord. A husband is the head of his wife, as Christ is the head and the Savior of the church, which is his own body. Wives should always put their husbands first, as the church puts Christ first. A husband should love his wife as much as Christ loved the church and gave his life for it. He made the church holy by the power of his word, and he made it pure by washing it with water. Christ did this, so he would have a glorious and holy church, without faults or spots or wrinkles or any other flaws. In the same way, a husband should love his wife as much as he loves himself. A husband who loves his wife shows he loves himself. None of us hate our own bodies. We provide for them and take good care of them, just as Christ does for the church, because we are each part of his body. As the Scriptures say, “A man leaves his father and mother to get married, and he becomes like one person with his wife.” This is a great mystery, but I understand it to mean Christ and his church.” | Ephesians 5: 22-32, CEV

The Birth Of The Church

We are to think of the church – this community of believers – as a woman, a woman whose very life and existence were framed by the death and resurrection of a man. Through this man’s death and sacrifice, she is created and at his resurrection, she becomes a living creature. We see the obvious echo in the story in Genesis of the creation of Eve from Adam’s side:

“The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a companion for him who corresponds to him.” The Lord God formed out of the ground every living animal of the field and every bird of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them, and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man named all the animals, the birds of the air, and the living creatures of the field, but for Adam no companion who corresponded to him was found. So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep, and while he was asleep, he took part of the man’s side and closed up the place with flesh. Then the Lord God made a woman from the part he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. Then the man said, “This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; this one will be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.”| Genesis 2:20-23, NET

What an eloquent phrase: ‘bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh’! Adam looks at this new creation and exclaims “this is my very own self, from my very own body”. She is man’s counterpart, not merely in feeling and sense – his flesh – but in his solid qualities. We also have another significant phrase – ‘taken out of’ – echoing ‘the call’ that goes out in Acts 2. Here in Acts, we read of people being ‘taken out of the dominion of darkness and transferred into the kingdom of light and life’; visible proof of the power of the Gospel to bring about a new creation. Without the death and resurrection of Jesus, there would be no church, no new creation, no bride. The insistence of the critical reality of the resurrection of Jesus being connected to the fulfillment of the gospel promise was the firm teaching of the first century Apostles and this remains the solid framework of the existence of the church today.

“Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from David. This is my gospel.” | 2 Timothy 2:8, NIV

The woman in Genesis is the man’s possession, not in the sense of ownership, but rather in the sense of belonging. She is from him and of him, they belong together and are as one body. Paul comments on this being ‘profound’ and that ultimately, he is referring to the church’s relationship with Jesus (Ephesians 5:32).

A Woman Of Valour

The word used of Eve at her creation is the Hebrew word ezer, which is translated as ‘helper’ in English. However, our understanding of helper falls far short of the original sense of the word, which is used elsewhere in the Bible to describe God as a helper to His people or of a king to his subjects. The primary idea of the word lies in ‘girding’, ‘surrounding, hence defending‘, to ‘protect or aid‘. The counterpart, therefore, to the man is “a woman of valour, whose worth is incalculable” (Proverbs 31:10).

We have this extraordinary woman of valour fleshed out in more detail in Proverbs 31:10-31; a famous passage celebrating ‘the virtuous woman (or wife)’. We would perhaps understand virtuous to mean ‘having or showing high moral standards‘, but the original Hebrew words eshet and chayil used in these verses don’t convey virtue or virtuousness in the same way we would understand ‘virtuous’ today. The Hebrew word eshet is the construct form of isha (woman) and chayil connotes bravery (Psalm 76:5); capability (Proverbs 12:4); triumph (Psalm 118:16); or strength (Psalm 84:7). In the 17th century (when the first English Bibles were translated) virtuous still suggested the French ‘virtu’, which at the time meant ‘manly’ or ‘brave.’ A better translation of the Hebrew words eshet chayil is ‘woman of valour’ (as translated by the Tanakh Jewish Bible (1917). This virtuous woman is the same woman who is also, in the King James translation, ‘clothed in strength and honour’ (Proverbs 31: 25).

If marriage is modelled on the church and her relationship to Jesus, then it’s not such a stretch to recognise the ideal woman in Proverbs as a detailed portrait of what the well-functioning, organic body of the church looks like.

“She obtains wool and flax, and she is pleased to work with her hands. She is like the merchant ships; she brings her food from afar. She also gets up while it is still night, and provides food for her household and a portion to her female servants. She considers a field and buys it; from her own income, she plants a vineyard. She begins her work vigorously, and she strengthens her arms. She knows that her merchandise is good, and her lamp does not go out in the night. Her hands take hold of the distaff, and her hands grasp the spindle. She extends her hand to the poor and reaches out her hand to the needy. She is not afraid of the snow for her household, for all of her household are clothed with scarlet. She makes for herself coverlets; her clothing is fine linen and purple. She makes linen garments and sells them, and supplies the merchants with sashes. She is clothed with strength and honour, and she can laugh at the time to come. She opens her mouth with wisdom, and loving instruction is on her tongue. She watches over the ways of her household, and does not eat the bread of idleness. Her children rise up and call her blessed, her husband also praises her…” | Proverbs 31: 13-22, 23-28

What a remarkable description of the capable, industrious, joyful reality of the organic church; a living, breathing woman of valour, of which every believer is a member and valued part.

The Bride And The Lamb | The Story’s Resolution

Yes, Christians are stones making up a house (1 Peter 2:5).

Yes, Christians are branches connected to a vine (John 15:1-7).

Yes, Christians are subjects and citizens of a kingdom (Ephesians 2:19).

Yes, Christians are children of a heavenly Father (1 John 3:1).

Christians are all these things. But these are still metaphors for the individual. It’s only when we consider marriage, as a metaphor of the church and the king being brought together, as one, that we understand that the Christian life isn’t intended to be experienced as individuals but as a collective community. The church – the woman of valour – is created from the body of Jesus, who was crucified, buried and raised the third day, just as the first woman was taken from the first man. Together, Jesus Christ and the church are one body. She, the church, is the bride of Jesus and He, Jesus, is the spotless lamb who was slain from the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:22-23, Ephesians 4:4, 2 Corinthians 11:2, Acts 20:28, Colossians 1:24, Revelation 13:8).

The first two chapters of Genesis are where we first discover God’s eternal purpose for humanity. The last two chapters of Revelation tell us of the glorious resolution of God’s story. And Paul’s words in Ephesians assert the “supremacy and centrality of Jesus Christ in all this, together with his counterpart, the church, which should dominate our understanding of everything physical and spiritual.” – Frank Viola

“Christ did not die just to save us from sins, but to bring us together in community. After coming to Christ, our next step is to be involved in community. A church that does not experience community is a parody, a sham. Simply put, the purpose of the church is to stand for God’s eternal purpose. In short, wherever the church gathers together, its guiding and functioning principle is simply to incarnate Christ.” – Frank Viola, Reimaging Church

“Let us rejoice and be glad and give Him the glory. For the marriage of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready.” | Revelation 19:7, BSB

“The heart of her husband has confidence in her, and he has no lack of gain. She brings him good and not evil all the days of her life.” | Proverbs 31:11-12, ESV


Author’s Comment: A Further Brief Note Regarding The Translation Of ‘Church’
The English language was first spoken as a Germanic dialect, known as Old English or Anglo-Saxon, beginning in northern England some years after the Anglo-Saxon conquest (circa 449 AD). The earliest written Old English, however, did not appear until approximately 800 AD. Probably sometime around 500 AD, the people in northern England started referring to a building erected for worship as a cirice, later, chirche, and finally, a church.
By the time William Tyndale translated the New Testament from Greek to English (known as the “Tyndale Translation”, 1525 AD), the word church had been in use for centuries. Throughout these centuries, the state church had maintained its power over the people through bloody crusades against resistance groups for the sake of “doctrinal purity.” It was claimed that the Apostle Peter had started the church (based on Matthew 16:18); and therefore the church should be lead by a clergy and not placed in the hands of any “congregation or assembly.” Not only that, prior to the fourteenth century, a complete Bible in the English language, for the common people, didn’t exist. Even for modestly educated clergy, the Bible was mostly inaccessible – available only in the Latin language and in large folio copies of two or three volumes. These Bibles were ridiculously expensive, limited in number and difficult to access. For the most part, the clergy had to rely on the small portions of scripture that were included in prayer books.
In his translation of Matthew 16:18, Tyndale rightly translates the Greek word ekklesia as congregation, as opposed to the word church, signalling a return to a correct understanding of the organic reality of the church. Tyndale’s accurate translation of this one word threatened the power and control of the entire state church system. Knowing Tyndale’s translation was soon to become public, to be read by the common people in their own language, presented a real threat to the power of the religious institution of the day. Tyndale was told to amend his translation. Despite being threatened by the religious leaders of his day, William Tyndale would not revoke his translation of the word congregation. Ultimately, he was betrayed, sentenced to death, and burned at the stake in 1536.
In 1604, King James of England and Scotland commissioned a new translation in response to perceived problems or flaws with earlier translations which did not “conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs about an ordained clergy“. Instructions were given to the translators that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology of the Church of England (which, by now, had broken with and was directly in opposition to the Roman Catholic Church). As such, certain Greek and Hebrew words were to be translated in a manner that reflected the traditional usage of the church, now long-entrenched and in common use. Ecclesiastical words such as church were to be retained and not to be translated as congregation.
The King James Authorised Version was published in 1611 and quickly grew in popularity. It still remains a significant and popular English translation today. Unfortunately, however, the inaccurate use of the word church to replace the original ekklesia became firmly embedded in most translations with many readers unaware of the problematic nature of its translative history.
Can we unravel and reverse nearly 500 years of linguistic and cultural understanding that now surrounds the word church? Can we edit and reprint millions upon millions of editions of the Bible in English, which, in truthfulness, used a word that was an inaccurate representation of the original? Should we withdraw every copy of errant English Bibles from circulation, simply because it contains the word ‘church’? Is it possible to determine what was genuine translative prerogative or suspect ecclesiastical bias, then or now? The answer is clearly ‘no’ to all these questions.
A better solution, perhaps, and one worthy of investing our energy and resources to, is to rediscover the original meaning that the New Testament writers had in mind – the organic reality of a community of believers – and to speak, think and believe this of the church today, recognising that wherever the church gathers together, its guiding and functioning principle is simply to incarnate Christ.