1 See BDAG, 303–4.

2 See Hengel, M., Between Jesus and Paul: Studies in the Earliest History of Christianity (London: SCM, 1983) 4–18Google Scholar; Koch, D.-A., ‘Crossing the Border: The “Hellenists” and their Way to the Gentiles’, Neotestamentica 39 (2005) 292–3Google Scholar; Dunn, J. D. G., Beginning From Jerusalem: Christianity in the Making, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009) 246–7Google Scholar. Given that Greek was quite commonly used in Jerusalem, it is unlikely that the Hebrews did not know any Greek. See also Acts 9.29 where the reference is to Greek-speaking Jews; in 11.20 the reference is to Greek-speaking Gentiles; on the textual issue there see Barrett, C. K., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Acts of the Apostles, vol. 1 (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1994) 550–1Google Scholar.

3 See also Acts 8.1; 11.19–21.

4 See Dunn, Beginning, 243–4; see also p. 256.

5 Dunn, Beginning, 244; with regard to vocabulary, for example, the only time the apostles are called ‘the twelve’ in Acts is in 6.2, ‘full of the Spirit’ is only found in this material (6.3, 5; 11.24) and χάρις is characteristic of it (6.8; 7.10, 46; 11.23). See also Barrett, Acts, 1.305, who notes that Luke here follows a ‘fresh tradition’ and concludes that Luke ‘did not invent the fact that in the early years in Jerusalem there were Greek-speaking Jews who became Christians’.

6 Catto, S. K., Reconstructing the First-Century Synagogue: A Critical Analysis of Current Research (LNTS 363; London: T&T Clark International, 2007) 165–6Google Scholar and Runesson, A., Binder, D. D., and Olsson, B., The Ancient Synagogue from its Origins to 200 C.E.: A Sourcebook (AJEC 72; Leiden: Brill, 2008) 45Google Scholar discuss whether this verse refers to one or more ‘synagogues’.

7 In support of the historicity of the Hellenists in Jerusalem see Lüdemann, G., Early Christianity according to the Traditions in Acts: A Commentary (London: SCM, 1989) 74–9Google Scholar; Seland, T., ‘Once More—The Hellenists, Hebrews, and Stephen: Conflicts and Conflict-Management in Acts 6–7', Recruitment, Conquest, and Conflict: Strategies in Judaism, Early Christianity, and the Greco-Roman World (ed. Borgen, P., Robbins, V. K., and Gowler, D. B.; Atlanta: Scholars, 1998) 195–200Google Scholar; Schnelle, U., Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009) 193–5Google Scholar; Dunn, Beginnings, 247–54. On Penner's, T. view (In Praise of Christian Origins: Stephen and the Hellenists in Lukan Apologetic Historiography [New York: T&T Clark International, 2004] 276Google Scholar, see further 262–87) that ‘there are serious difficulties in attempting to reconstruct any type of original situation’ behind Acts 6, see Dunn, Beginnings, 245 n. 18 and Koch, ‘Crossing the Border’, 292 n. 4. Hill, C. C., Hellenists and Hebrews: Reappraising Division within the Earliest Church (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992)Google Scholar downplays the degree of factionalism between Hebrews and Hellenists, but on his work see Dunn, Beginnings, 253–4; Elmer, I. J., Paul, Jerusalem and the Judaisers: The Galatian Crisis in Its Broadest Historical Context (WUNT 2/258; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009) 61–4Google Scholar.

8 Roloff, J., ‘ἐκκλησία’, Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (ed. Balz, H. and Schneider, G.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 1.412Google Scholar.

9 See Schmidt in TDNT 3.516; Hainz, J., EKKLESIA. Strukturen paulinischer Gemeinde-Theologie und Gemeinde-Ordnung (Biblische Untersuchungen 9; Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1972) 236, 251Google Scholar; Merklein, H., ‘Die Ekklesia Gottes. Der Kirchenbegriff bei Paulus und in Jerusalem’, Studien zu Jesus und Paulus (WUNT 43; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1987) 301–2Google Scholar; Krauss, W., Das Volk Gottes. Zur Grundlegung der Ekklesiologie bei Paulus (WUNT 85; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1996) 112Google Scholar; Hengel, M. and Schwemer, A. M., Paul between Damascus and Antioch: The Unknown Years (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997) 83Google Scholar; Stegemann, E. W. and Stegemann, W., The Jesus Movement: A Social History of its First Century (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1999) 262Google Scholar; Toit, A. du, ‘Paulus Oecumenicus: Interculturality in the Shaping of Paul's Theology’, NTS 55 (2009) 133Google Scholar. Schnelle, U., Apostle Paul: His Life and Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005) 84, 114Google Scholar does not think that the pre-Christian Paul persecuted Jewish Christian Hellenists in Jerusalem and so Paul's use of ἐκκλησία of those he persecuted would not be evidence for the use of the term in Jerusalem. Schnelle argues for this primarily on the basis of Gal 1.22: ‘I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea’. However, Gal 1.22 may indicate that Paul only persecuted Hellenists who then fled beyond Judea (Dunn, Beginning, 275), or it may be that there was ‘a persecution within Judea, directed by Saul/Paul but involving minimal face-to-face contact with those affected’ (Dunn, Beginning, 275; see also 276–8; Hengel, M., The Pre-Christian Paul [London: SCM, 1991] 72–9Google Scholar; Hengel and Schwemer, Paul, 35–8). Hence Paul could say he was unknown by sight there. We have no reason then to doubt that Paul persecuted Hellenists in Jerusalem.

10 Schnelle, Apostle Paul, 560 n. 4 notes that ἐκκλησία τοῦ θɛοῦ ‘is only found in Paul…and in literature dependent on him’ (with references); but my argument does not depend on the exact phrase ἐκκλησία τοῦ θɛοῦ being used by the Hellenists.

11 Dunn, Beginning, 600. Note also 1 Thess 2.14.

12 Pervo, R. I., Acts (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2009)Google Scholar 134 n. 83 thinks this with regard to Acts 5.11.

13 That Luke does not use ‘the assembly’ until Acts 5, and really only regularly from Acts 8 onwards, suggests it was not used in the very earliest days, but that after the passage of some time it was used in Jerusalem (as confirmed by Paul's usage) and then elsewhere; see Fitzmyer, J. A., ‘The Designations of Christians in Acts and their Significance’, Unité et diversité dans l'Église. Texte officiel de la Commission Biblique Pontificale et travaux personnels des Membres (ed. Commission Biblique Pontificale; Città del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1989) 231Google Scholar.

14 Du Toit, ‘Paulus’, 133 argues that ‘the ἐκκλησία title originated within Greek-speaking early Christian circles in Jerusalem, spreading from there to Antioch’. See also Campbell, J. Y., ‘The Origin and Meaning of the Christian Use of the Word EKKΛHΣIA’, Three New Testament Studies (Leiden: Brill, 1965) 42Google Scholar; Klauck, H.-J., ‘Volk Gottes und Leib Christi, oder: Von der kommunikativen Kraft der Bilder. Neutestamentliche Vorgaben für die Kirche von heute’, Alte Welt und neuer Glaube. Beiträge zur Religionsgeschichte, Forschungsgeschichte und Theologie des Neuen Testaments (NTOA 29/publisher-loc>; Freiburg: Universitätsverlag, 1994) 289CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 See Dunn, Beginning, 274–8.

16 See du Toit, ‘Paulus’, 139 n. 100.

17 Dunn, J. D. G., The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) 539Google Scholar.

18 Roloff, ‘ἐκκλησία’, 411. He understands קהל אל as a terminus technicus based on Qumran usage, but this seems very unlikely. See also Donfried, K. P., ‘The Assembly of the Thessalonians: Reflections on the Ecclesiology of the Earliest Christian Letter’, Ekklesiologie des Neuen Testaments: Für Karl Kertelge (ed. Kampling, R. and Söding, T.; Freiburg/Basel/Wien: Herder, 1996) 405Google Scholar. Fitzmyer, ‘Designations’, 231 similarly notes the use of קהל אל in 1QM 4.10 and comments: ‘A Palestinian Jewish religious use of qahal, even implying a relation to the OT expression of “the congregation of the people of God” (Judg 20.2), is thus seen as the background to the Christian use of the Greek ekklēsia’. However, although the use of qahal and then ἐκκλησία in the lxx is very important, there is no reason to argue for the influence of usage at Qumran here.

19 See Dunn, Theology, 244–52 with usage on 244 n. 47.

20 See Dunn, Theology, 538.

21 See for example Rom 16.16; Gal 1.22; 1 Thess 1.1; 2.14.

22 Schrage, W., ‘“Ekklesia” und “Synagoge”. Zum Ursprung des urchristlichen Kirchenbegriffs’, ZTK 60 (1963) 185Google Scholar.

23 See Mitchell, S., Anatolia: Land, Men, and Gods in Asia Minor (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993) 1.201–3Google Scholar; McCready, W. O., ‘EKKLĒSIA and Voluntary Associations’, Voluntary Associations in the Graeco-Roman World (ed. Kloppenborg, J. S. and Wilson, S. G.; London: Routledge, 1996) 60–1Google Scholar; Clarke, A. D., Serve the Community of the Church: Christians as Leaders and Ministers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000) 11–33Google Scholar.

24 See Kloppenborg, J. S., ‘Edwin Hatch, Churches and Collegia’, Origins and Method: Towards a New Understanding of Judaism and Christianity. Essays in Honour of John C. Hurd (ed. McLean, B. H.; JSNTSup 86; Sheffield: JSOT, 1993) 231Google Scholar.

25 Becker, J., Paul, Apostle to the Gentiles (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993) 427Google Scholar.

26 See also Dunn, Theology, 537.

27 For discussion see Schürer, E., The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, vol. 2 (rev. G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Black; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1979) 183, 197–8, 204–6Google Scholar.

28 See Schrage in TDNT 7.802–5.

29 Marshall, I. H., ‘New Wine in Old Wine-Skins: V. The Biblical Use of the Word ‘Ekklēsia’, ExpT 84 (1972–73) 359Google Scholar. For example, Exod 16.1; 17.1; Num 1.2, 18.

30 An exception is found, for example, in Judg 14.8, where עֵדָה is translated by συστροϕή.

31 Marshall, ‘New Wine’, 359; see also Campbell, ‘Origin’, 44–5; Schrage in TDNT 7.802.

32 See Schrage, ‘Ekklesia’, 184–5; Binder, D. D., Into the Temple Courts: The Place of the Synagogue in the Second Temple Period (SBLDS 169; Atlanta: SBL, 1999) 499 n. 44Google Scholar. Both קָהָל and עֵדָה are also found in Exod 12.6.

33 ἐκκλησία and συνάγω are also found together in Did 9.4; see also Berger, K., ‘Volksversammlung und Gemeinde Gottes. Zu den Anfängen der christlichen Verwendung von “ekklesia”’, ZTC 73 (1976) 203Google Scholar.

34 Marshall, ‘New Wine’, 359; see also TDNT 7.802.

35 Its usage across the lxx is as follows: Deuteronomy: 9; Joshua: 1; Judges: 3; 1 Samuel: 2; 1 Kings: 4; 1 Chronicles: 8; 2 Chronicles: 24; Ezra: 5; Nehemiah: 6; Judith: 4; 1 Maccabees: 5; Psalms: 10; Proverbs: 1; Job: 1; Sirach: 13; Psalms of Solomon: 1; Micah: 1; Joel: 1; Lamentations: 1.

36 See also Deut 18.16; there is doubt about the text in Deut 9.10 and the Göttingen edition omits ‘ἡμέρᾳ ἐκκλησίας’ at the end of the verse.

37 In Neh 13.1 mss S and L read κυρίου against the other manuscripts, so there is some doubt about the phrase ἐκκλησία τοῦ θɛοῦ here; see Fitzmyer, ‘Designations’, 230.

38 ‘Assembly of holy ones (ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ ἁγίων)’, where ἅγιοι means angels, is found in Ps 88.6 (lxx); ἐκκλησία is used of an assembly for worship in Ps 21.23, 26.

39 See Deut 31.30; Josh 8.35; 1 Kings 8.14, 22, 55; 1 Chron 13.2; 2 Chron 6.3 (×2), 12, 13; 10.3; 1 Macc 4.59; Sir 50.13.

40 See Judg 21.5, 8; 1 Sam 17.47; 2 Chron 1.5; 29.23, 31, 32; 30.4, 17, 23; Neh 8.2; Jdt 6.16, 21; 7.29. The phrase ‘all the assembly’ is found in 1 Chron 13.4; 29.1, 10, 20 (×2); 2 Chron 1.3; 28.14; 29.28; 30.25; Ezra 2.64; 10.12, 14; Neh 5.13; 7.66; 8.17 and ‘in the assembly’ in 2 Chron 20.14; 1 Macc 2.56; Job 30.28; Sir 38.33.

41 See Conf. 144 (×2), Deus 111; Ebr. 213 (×2); Leg. 3.8, 81 (×2); Migr. 69; Mut. 204; Post. 177; Somn. 2.184, 187; Spec. 1.325; Virt. 108; Five of these are direct quotations of Deut 23: Ebr. 213 (×2); Leg 3.81; Post. 177; Somn. 2.184.

42 See Du Toit, ‘Paulus’, 137.

43 See du Toit, ‘Paulus’, 136–7; see also Berger, ‘Volksversammlung’, 190.

44 See du Toit, ‘Paulus’, 137.

45 See Ant. 13.114, 216; 14.150; 16.135, 393; J.W. 4.162, 255. It can also be used of unofficial assemblies in J.W. 1.550, 666; 4.159.

46 See Ant. 12.164; see also 3.84, 300; 4.63, 142; 7.370; 9.8; 13.216. The only comparable expression in the lxx is found in Jdt 6.16.

47 Cf. Num 10.2 and Ant. 3.292; Num 16.2 and Ant. 4.22; Lev 8.3 and Ant. 3.188.

48 Many texts could be cited; see for example Exod 12.3, 6; 16.1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 22; Lev 4.13, 14, 15, 21; Num 1.2, 16, 18; 14.1, 2, 5, 7, 10, 27, 35–36; Deut 5.22; Isa 56.7–8; Ezek 37.10.

49 Cadbury, H. J., ‘Note XXX: Names for Christians and Christianity in Acts’, The Beginnings of Christianity Part 1. The Acts of the Apostles. Vol V Additional Notes to the Commentary (ed. Lake, K. and Cadbury, H. J.; London: Macmillan & Co., 1933) 387–8Google Scholar suggests with regard to ἐκκλησία that it was ‘its lxx associations of dignity and of intimate relation with God rather than the usages of secular Greek, or any memory of etymology, that gave the term its appropriateness’. But this does not explain the use of ἐκκλησία over συναγωγή, since both terms had associations of ‘intimate relation[s] with God’, and if anything, since συναγωγή was used from Genesis–Deut 5.22, it was stronger in this regard.

50 See Schrage, ‘Ekklesia’, 183.

51 Du Toit, ‘Paulus’, 139.

52 See Schrage, ‘Ekklesia’, 196–8; see also TDNT 7.829.

53 See Berger, ‘Volksversammlung’, 184 and n. 92. See also Philo Post. 143; Her. 251; Decal. 32 (where ἐκκλησία is associated with Torah by Philo); Josephus Ant. 4.176–183, 309.

54 Strecker, G., Theology of the New Testament (New York/Berlin: de Gruyter; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2000) 181 n. 8CrossRefGoogle Scholar comments with regard to the use of συναγωγὴ κυρίου: ‘Since, however, at the time of Paul this expression had already been practically monopolized by Hellenistic Judaism, the Christian community had to use the less precise ekklesia’. However, I do not think that ἐκκλησία was any ‘less precise’. Note also Stendahl, K., ‘The Church in Early Christianity’, Meanings: The Bible as Document and as Guide (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 167Google Scholar with regard to the use of ἐκκλησία: ‘And, after all, the alternative synagoge was otherwise occupied’. See also McCready, ‘EKKLĒSIA’, 63.

55 See Schrage, ‘Ekklesia’, 185–6.

56 See also Isa 56.8; Jer 38.4, 13; Ezek 38.4, 15; Ps. Sol. 17.43–44. Schrage, ‘Ekklesia’, 186 notes that the lack of use of συναγωγή in the NT is made even more surprising by the fact that some of these verses, which use συναγωγή in an eschatological context, are actually quoted in the NT; thus Ezek 37.10 is quoted in Rev 11.11 and Isa 56.7 in Mark 11.17.

57 In the Prophets, ἐκκλησία is only found in Joel 2.16, Mic 2.5, and Lam 1.10. There are other uses of συναγωγή that may well have made the word very attractive to someone like Paul; see, for example, the phrase ‘συναγωγὴ ἐθνῶν’ in Gen 28.3; 35.11; 48.4; cf. Rom 16.4; see also Schrage, ‘Ekklesia’, 184. However, that Paul does not use the term, despite such promising usage in the lxx, can be explained by its contemporary use by Jewish communities, as I will argue below.

58 On the origin of the ‘synagogue’ see Binder, Temple Courts; Runesson, A., The Origins of the Synagogue: A Socio-Historical Study (ConBNT 37; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2001)Google Scholar; Olsson, B. and Zetterholm, M., eds. The Ancient Synagogue from its Origins until 200 C.E (CBNT 39; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2003)Google Scholar; Catto, Reconstructing. προσɛυχή was the earliest term used for ‘the building’, and hence for a physical ‘synagogue’, in the third century bce in Egypt; see JIGRE 22.117 (246–221 bce). On the range of terms used for the ‘synagogue’ building see Binder, Temple Courts, 91–154.

59 On συναγωγή see Schrage in TDNT 7.798–841; Binder, Temple Courts, 92–111.

60 Josephus writes of a ‘συναγωγή’ of books in Ant. 1.10 and of water in Ant. 15.346. He also uses the term of buildings as we will shortly see.

61 See IJO 1. BS 18 (52 ce); IJO 1. BS 5 (81 ce); IJO 1. BS 6 (late first–early second century ce [?]); IJO 1. BS 7 (first–second century ce); see Noy, D., Panayotov, A., and Bloedhorn, H., Inscriptiones Judaicae Orientis. Vol. 1. Eastern Europe (TSAJ 101; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004) 299–301, 269–83Google Scholar; BS 18 is from Phanagoria and BS 5–7 from Panticapaeum.

62 Prob. 81; see also Binder, Temple Courts, 454; Kloppenborg, J. S., ‘The Theodotos Synagogue Inscription and the Problem of First-Century Synagogue Buildings’, Jesus and Archaeology (ed. Charlesworth, J. H.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006) 246–8Google Scholar. Philo also uses προσɛυχή; see for example Flacc. 45, 47–48. In Somn. 2.127 and Leg. 311–13 Philo uses συναγώγιον; see Binder, Temple Courts, 118–21 who argues that it was a term used of the Jewish meeting place by outsiders.

63 See CD 12.1; Philo Prob. 76; Hypoth. 11.1; Bauckham, R. J., ‘The Early Jerusalem Church, Qumran, and the Essenes’, The Dead Sea Scrolls as Background to Postbiblical Judaism and Early Christianity. Papers from an International Conference at St. Andrews in 2001 (ed. Davila, J. R.; STDJ 46; Leiden: Brill, 2003) 69Google Scholar notes: ‘I think it likely that there was an Essene locality in the southwest corner of Jerusalem’, which explains the name ‘Gate of the Essenes’ in Josephus B.J. 5.145; he gives a full discussion of the debate on pp. 66–74. For other evidence for Essenes in Jerusalem see Philo apud Eusebius PE 8.1; Josephus Ant. 13.311–33; B.J. 2.124.

64 Kee, H. C., ‘Defining the First-Century ce Synagogue: Problems and Progress’, NTS 41 (1995) 499CrossRefGoogle Scholar; on Kee's work see Kloppenborg, ‘Theodotos’, 236–82.

65 See Kloppenborg, ‘Theodotos’, 251–79. His case is cumulative and involves the provenance of the inscription, references to datable people, and palaeography. He notes (p. 263): ‘The nature of the archaeological evidence makes it extremely difficult to imagine the presence of a building on the south end of the eastern ridge of the Ophel [where the inscription was discovered] at any time after 70 C.E.’. See also Binder, Temple Courts, 104–9; Runesson, Binder, and Olsson, Ancient Synagogue, 52–4. On the debate about whether pre-70 public assembly halls in Judea and Galilee are ‘synagogue’ buildings see Kloppenborg, ‘Theodotos’, 248–51; Runesson, Binder, and Olsson, Ancient Synagogue, 20–78. Note that the first century bce or ce buildings which were probably ‘synagogues’ at Modi'in and Qiryat Sefer (Runesson, Binder, and Olsson, Ancient Synagogue, 57–8, 65–6) are reasonably close to Jerusalem. On the debate between White and Runesson about the dating of the important Ostia synagogue see Catto, Reconstructing, 52–61 and the literature cited there; the building was probably originally constructed as a synagogue in the second half of the first century ce.

66 See Kloppenborg, ‘Theodotos’, 253 and n. 57.

67 Kloppenborg, ‘Theodotos’, 278.

68 See Kloppenborg, ‘Theodotos’, 244–6.

69 On these see Binder, Temple Courts, 99–103, who argues that they reflect the situation pre-70 ce. C. Claussen, ‘Meeting, Community, Synagogue—Different Frameworks of Ancient Jewish Congregations in the Diaspora’, The Ancient Synagogue from its Origins until 200 C.E. (ed. Olsson and Zetterholm) 151 n. 35 points out: ‘It is worth noticing that Josephus nearly always uses συναγωγή when he refers to synagogues in Israel. The only exception is the προσɛυχή in Tiberias (Vita 277, 280, 293)’. Bellum Judaicum was written in the mid-70s, Antiquitates in the mid-90s (see Kloppenborg, ‘Theodotos’, 253). Note that B.J. 7.44 refers to the second century bce.

70 See Kee, H. C., ‘The Transformation of the Synagogue after 70 C.E.: Its Import for Early Christianity’, NTS 36 (1990) 18CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

71 See Binder, Temple Courts, 97–9; Claussen, ‘Meeting’, 151–2; Catto, Reconstructing, 152–98. J. D. G. Dunn, ‘Did Jesus Attend the Synagogue?’, Jesus and Archaeology (ed. Charlesworth) 220.

72 Mark 12.39; Luke 7.5; 11.43; 20.46.

73 Binder, Temple Courts, 110–11. See also Runesson, Binder, and Olsson, Ancient Synagogue, 54 who note that συναγωγή (when compared to προσɛυχή) ‘appears to have held the widest currency inside Palestine during the Second Temple period’. Note that συναγωγή is very rarely used for Christian communities; see T. Benj. 11.2–3; Ign. Pol. 4.2; Justin Dial. 63.5; see J. Lieu, ‘The Synagogue and the Separation of the Christians’, The Ancient Synagogue from its Origins until 200 C.E. (ed. Olsson and Zetterholm) 193.

74 The argument of Schrage, ‘Ekklesia’, 178–202 that the influence of the lxx was minor, and that ἐκκλησία τοῦ θɛοῦ was primarily a Christian creation (rather than being based on the lxx) has not proved convincing; see for example du Toit, ‘Paulus’, 134–42.

75 See Lampe, P., From Paul to Valentinus: Christians at Rome in the First Two Centuries (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003) 432 and n. 20Google Scholar; the other three were of the Augustenses, the Aprippenses, and the Volumnenses.

76 Note the very limited use of συναγωγή in the Apostolic Fathers; see Ign. Pol. 4.2; Herm. Mand. 11.9, 13, 14; see also Irenaeus Haer. 4.31.1–2.

77 Translation from Kloppenborg, ‘Theodotos’, 252–3.

78 Kloppenborg, ‘Theodotos’, 253 n. 57.

79 Not all Jewish communities seem to have used συναγωγή since other terms were used too; but that συναγωγή was used in such a public way, including in Jerusalem, is our concern here.

80 Even if (as seems unlikely) Acts 6.9 refers only to a community and not a building (see TDNT 7.837; Catto, Reconstructing, 166–7 for discussion of this), it is still relevant here since the location is clearly Jerusalem and ‘the synagogue of…’ seems to be a known title. Note that Acts 24.12 and 26.9–11 show that Luke clearly thought that in Paul's time there were several ‘synagogue’ buildings in Jerusalem.

81 In the Greco-Roman world συναγωγή was used by groups other than Jews; see Liddell & Scott, 1692; Schrage in TDNT 7.800–1; New Docs 3, p. 43; New Docs 4, p. 202. But this wider use would be much less significant in Jerusalem than the Jewish use of συναγωγή.

82 ἐκκλησία does not feature among the terms used by Jewish communities for themselves and their buildings discussed by Binder, Temple Courts, 91–154. With reference to the present, Josephus uses ἐκκλησία of ad hoc ‘assemblies’ rather than as a name for ‘the community’, in the way that συναγωγή was used; see Ant. 19.332; B.J. 1.550, 654, 666; 4.159, 162, 255; 7.412; Vita 268.

83 Another option here may have been λαός, but it did not have the sense of a ‘gathering’ or ‘assembly’ that was present with both ἐκκλησία and συναγωγή, so may have been discounted because of this.

84 That ἐκκλησία was known in the Greco-Roman world and so was a familiar term to new Gentile converts (see Klauck, ‘Volk Gottes’, 290; Stegemann and Stegemann, Jesus Movement, 263) may have facilitated its use in the Pauline mission, and elsewhere, but I have argued above that because the term was adopted in Jerusalem by the Hellenists, the lxx is the most important background. But this very familiarity in the Greco-Roman world could lead to confusion (which ‘assembly’ are you talking about?) and Paul's usage of the term in the address of his letters can be seen to be implicitly addressing this at times; see further Donfried, ‘Assembly’, 395.

85 See du Toit, ‘Paulus’, 139.

86 See Seccombe, D., ‘Luke's Vision for the Church’, A Vision for the Church: Studies in Early Christian Ecclesiology in Honour of J. P. M. Sweet (ed. Bockmuehl, M. N. A. and Thompson, M. B.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1997) 54–5Google Scholar.

87 Schrage in TDNT 7.829 n. 199 hints at this: ‘It is of interest that though ἐκκλήσια is not used in Ex.-Nu. the wilderness community is ἐκκλήσια in Ac 7.38’. I suggest this reflects Luke's deliberate choice against the term συναγωγή. See also Seccombe, D., ‘The New People of God’, Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts (ed. Marshall, I. H. and Peterson, D.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) 358Google Scholar.

88 Marshall, I. H., The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary (TNTC; Leicester: IVP, 1980) 334Google Scholar; see also Barrett, C. K., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Acts of the Apostles, vol. 2 (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1998) 976Google Scholar.

89 See Binder, Temple Courts, 499 n. 44; see also Schrage in TDNT 7.829 n. 199.

90 Josephus' use of ἐκκλησία and συναγωγή may be relevant here. Josephus uses ἐκκλησία 48 times, and συναγωγή only eight times (six times with reference to a building [Ant. 19.300, 305 (×2); B.J. 2.285, 289; 7.44], once of a collection of water [Ant. 15.346], and once of books [Ant. 1.10]); by contrast lxx usage is 100 and 221 respectively. Further, Josephus consistently uses ἐκκλησία in contexts where the lxx has συναγωγή, completely avoiding the use of συναγωγή of the people in the OT despite its popularity in the lxx (compare Num 10.2 and Ant. 3.292; Num 16.2 and Ant. 4.22; Lev 8.3 and Ant. 3.188; in Num 16.1–40, the lxx uses συναγωγή 17 times, but in retelling this story in Ant. 4.14–58 Josephus uses ἐκκλησία four times, and συναγωγή not at all). It may be that one reason for Josephus' usage is that συναγωγή was already in use in a specialised sense for contemporary Jewish ‘gathering places’, ‘synagogues’, and so he does not want to confuse his readers by using συναγωγή in conjunction with his accounts of Moses and the wilderness generation (for example), even though the lxx consistently does so. He thus generally reserves συναγωγή for use with the technical sense of ‘building’ and regularly replaces the lxx's συναγωγή with ἐκκλησία. The Hellenists would then be doing the same thing as Josephus—avoiding συναγωγή and using ἐκκλησία—and for a very similar reason—because of the way συναγωγή was currently in use among Jewish communities. However, two other reasons can be given for Josephus' usage. First, ἐκκλησία was well known and so Josephus may prefer to use a term which was very familiar to his readers (as noted in n. 81 above, συναγωγή was also known beyond Jewish circles, but ἐκκλησία was better known). Secondly, Mason has shown that Josephus has a keen interest in the πολιτɛία of Israel in the Antiquities, where he regularly uses political language for Israel and her constitution; see Mason, S., ‘Should Any Wish to Enquire Further (Ant. 1.25): The Aim and Audience of Josephus's Judean Antiquities/Life’, Understanding Josephus: Seven Perspectives (ed. Mason, S.; JSPSup 32; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1998) 80–7Google Scholar. It would be logical for Josephus to use the political term ἐκκλησία of Israel then and to avoid using συναγωγή which was not used for a political assembly. Thus Josephus' usage may not be comparable to that of the Hellenists.

91 Cf. Lohfink, G., Jesus and Community: The Social Dimension of the Christian Faith (London: SPCK, 1985) 77Google Scholar.

92 See Dunn, Theology, 538; Cadbury, ‘Names’, 387. Schrage, ‘Ekklesia’, 186–7 notes that the only OT passage containing ἐκκλησία that is used in the NT is Ps 22.22 (lxx 21.23) quoted in Heb 2.12, and there the emphasis is not on ἐκκλησία but on ‘τοῖς ἀδɛλϕοῖς μου’.

93 Rom 9–11 indicates this most clearly, where Paul shows that he still sees himself as part of ‘Israel’ (the designation he uses most often in the passage, e.g. 9.4, 6, 27, 31; 10.19, 21; 11.2, 7, 11, 23, 25, 26), whilst clearly belonging to the ‘Christian group’. In 1 Cor 9.20–22 he also shows that he continues to see himself as ‘a Jew’; 2 Cor 11.24 with its mention of the 39 lashes from the Jewish συναγωγή also indicates this. One could also imagine that Paul might have hoped a whole συναγωγή would accept his message, at which point they could be called both συναγωγή and ἐκκλησία; see Seccombe, ‘New People’, 364.

94 Du Toit, ‘Paulus’, 138.