Life Study of Revelation Misses Mark RE: "First Love"

[aron]

Originally Posted by JJ

Here is a simple list of the positive differences between the seven churches according to the Lord’s own words about them (from Berean Literal Bible):

Ephesus: you are not able to tolerate evil ones. And you have tested those claiming to be apostles and are not, and you have found them false, and you have perseverance, and have endured for the sake of My name, and have not grown weary. But you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Smyrna: I know your tribulation and poverty—but you are rich

Pergamos: I know where you dwell, where the throne of Satan is; and you hold fast to My name, and you have not denied My faith, even in the days of Antipas My witness, My faithful one, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells.

Thyatira: I know your works, and your love and faith and service and perseverance; and your latter works are greater than the first.

Sardis: But you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their garments, and they will walk with Me in white, because they are worthy.

Philadelphia: you have little power, and yet you have kept My word and have not denied My name. You have kept the word of My patient endurance.

Laodicea: nothing

The Irish Catholics have a place at the table. The Roman Catholics have a place, as do the French. The Greek Orthodox have a place at the table. And the Russian, Syrian, and Ethiopian Orthodox. The German Protestants, Dutch Reformed, Southern Baptists have a place, too, along with Jewish Messianists. (Not equating all these with the 7 churches above, but stretching to a larger, but related, point)

All of these can trace their lineage back to Jesus and the Twelve. As such they have a place at the banquet table. But those who insist on primacy at the table will be sent down lower - the Lord made this clear. With what you judge, you will be judged. And those who insist their church is unaffected by human culture, whilst others are Babylon, remain most infected. And so forth.

I say that Baptists, Orthodox, Messianics etc are opportunity for us to find and exercise the first love. Angry and disaffected atheists and anti-theists even more so.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by aron

The Irish Catholics have a place at the table. The Roman Catholics have a place, as do the French. The Greek Orthodox have a place at the table. And the Russian, Syrian, and Ethiopian Orthodox. The German Protestants, Dutch Reformed, Southern Baptists have a place, too, along with Jewish Messianists. (Not equating all these with the 7 churches above, but stretching to a larger, but related, point)

All of these can trace their lineage back to Jesus and the Twelve. As such they have a place at the banquet table. But those who insist on primacy at the table will be sent down lower - the Lord made this clear. With what you judge, you will be judged. And those who insist their church is unaffected by human culture, whilst others are Babylon, remain most infected. And so forth.

I say that Baptists, Orthodox, Messianics etc are opportunity for us to find and exercise the first love. Angry and disaffected atheists and anti-theists even more so.

One could make the case that Nicolaitions are those who insist on primacy, having a doctrine that they are the strong (Nico) while others are the weak (lait) and the Lord says he hates that and such a teaching and practice is inconsistent with Romans 14:1 https://biblehub.com/romans/14-1.htm and so many other sections of scripture.

Blessed are those washing their robes, that their right will be to the tree of life, and they shall enter into the city by the gates.

And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And the one hearing, let him say, “Come!” And the one thirsting let him come; the one desiring, let him take freely the water of life.

[OBW]

I think that the popular (in this forum and in the LC) interpretation of Nicolaitans as just being about the sum of two greek words (some kind of strength overpowering everyone else) is too simplistic. There are other explanations for errors unrelated to the name that likely date back far enough to possibly have some hint at what was behind it.

And since no one is without some kind of hierarchy in the church, no matter how slight, then simply saying it is about hierarchies seems excessively simplistic. If the word ultimately translated as elder and even bishop means (in more descriptive terms) "overseer," then there is an aspect of hierarchy that does not have to include "lording it over." How do I say that? Because an overseer is someone who bears a responsibility to direct the church. And Paul suggested they should be "apt to teach." So they are often part of the source of teaching for the flock/assembly. This can all be done without lording it over. So just saying that there is "clergy" and "laity" is not, by itself, something evil.

Maybe this particular error (or class of error) was left vague because in a system (the church) that was supposed to have some amount of inner speaking from the Lord and Spirit, things should "bother" you when they are going wrong. Some should actually speak up and say "but Bro. Lee, this is not right." Of course, despite Lee making statements just like that at the time that he ousted Max, there was never a time when anyone would be allowed to actually make such a statement to him.

And maybe the general spiritual mayhem that Lee put on the LCs should have stood out as a modern form of Nicolatianism. Not saying there is some evidence that this is true. But shrinking it down to something as singular as "clergy-laity" while hiding it behind a curtain of a name (that had other historical significance) seems no more certain.

[JJ]

Ohio,

Thanks for your thoughts on Nicolaitans. This term has been as source of much debate in Christendom and pressing a particular interpretation one way or the other isn’t worth arguing over for sure.

There does seem to be a kinship between Balaam’s error and Nicolaitanism in Revelation.

https://www.biblestudytools.com/comm...colaitans.html

[JJ]

And with Witness Lee’s fixation on the golden lampstands themselves “gold signifies the divine nature” for example, did he miss the obvious: the lampstand’s main job is to hold up the light of Christ and shine it to fill a room with light so the priest can see and use the other things in the room (show bread table, incense altar, viels) can be clearly seen and used?

[OBW]

That is what you get when you think the purpose of the Bible is to reveal hidden nuggets in every word without reference to any, or only a few, of the words around them.

I have come to call it the fortune cookie view of the Bible. All those pages and books are to bring us lots of little chopped-up fortune cookies to analyze one-by-one without reference to each other. It really started in earnest when they chopped it up into chapters and verses without any real reference to the sentences and paragraphs. Just roughly a similar number of syllables (or something like that).

[JJ]

Originally Posted by OBW

That is what you get when you think the purpose of the Bible is to reveal hidden nuggets in every word without reference to any, or only a few, of the words around them.

I have come to call it the fortune cookie view of the Bible. All those pages and books are to bring us lots of little chopped-up fortune cookies to analyze one-by-one without reference to each other. It really started in earnest when they chopped it up into chapters and verses without any real reference to the sentences and paragraphs. Just roughly a similar number of syllables (or something like that).

I love this term "fortune cookie view of the Bible", and certainly see Nee and Lee as having this view . I still tend to think of the Bible that way myself

Gene Edwards (seed sowers.com sells his books), a former local church brother, shares that view about the problem added chapters and verses presents to the reader. He freely admits that he has a reading disorder (Attention Deficit?) that makes it really hard for him to not be distracted by the chapters and verses. To make his point he published a Bible without added chapter and verses and suggests Christians read it to get a feel for what the original recipients of those writings would have been reading and how it makes truth hit home easier.

How about adding section headers, cross references, and footnotes to the equation.... quite an assault on the reader with attention deficit at a minimum!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by JJ

Ohio,

Thanks for your thoughts on Nicolaitans. This term has been as source of much debate in Christendom and pressing a particular interpretation one way or the other isn’t worth arguing over for sure.

There does seem to be a kinship between Balaam’s error and Nicolaitanism in Revelation.

https://www.biblestudytools.com/comm...colaitans.html

Does not LC history suggest that MOTA (minister of the age) teachings and practices are far closer to the admonitions of the Son of Man concerning the Nicolaitans, than the Recovery assertion that every Christian pastor (so-called clergy) is a Nicolaitan? You decide.

What's worse? Ministers speaking to their congregations 30 minutes a week following worship and communion, or these exalted book editors in Anaheim ruling over all the LC's? What could be more "Nicolaitan" than to blacklist cetain ministers, turn their saints one against the other, and then train dissidents in every church to file lawsuits to seize church property?

Can anything be more "Balaam-like" or "Nicolaitan" than that? By what authority did they ascribe? Scripture? Absolutely not! Their authority was the MOTA. WL, apparently from his grave, gave these Nicolaitan Blendeds the authority to rule over ministers, churches, and the saints.

Some here regularly assert that forced book sales, i.e. filthy lucre, drives these Blended Nicolaitans. I have always been convinced that the lust for power and vain-glory drives them. Of course money is needed to fuel them, and I remember a gathering in Taipei in May of 1987 where AY told LC leaders that, "all of the saints' offering is ours, not yours." That was not biblical stewardship. That was a money grab by the power hungry. Sounded awfully Nicolaitan.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Does not LC history suggest that MOTA (minister of the age) teachings and practices are far closer to the admonitions of the Son of Man concerning the Nicolaitans, than the Recovery assertion that every Christian pastor (so-called clergy) is a Nicolaitan? You decide.

What's worse? Ministers speaking to their congregations 30 minutes a week following worship and communion, or these exalted book editors in Anaheim ruling over all the LC's? What could be more "Nicolaitan" than to blacklist cetain ministers, turn their saints one against the other, and then train dissidents in every church to file lawsuits to seize church property?

Can anything be more "Balaam-like" or "Nicolaitan" than that? By what authority did they ascribe? Scripture? Absolutely not! Their authority was the MOTA. WL, apparently from his grave, gave these Nicolaitan Blendeds the authority to rule over ministers, churches, and the saints.

Some here regularly assert that forced book sales, i.e. filthy lucre, drives these Blended Nicolaitans. I have always been convinced that the lust for power and vain-glory drives them. Of course money is needed to fuel them, and I remember a gathering in Taipei in May of 1987 where AY told LC leaders that, "all of the saints' offering is ours, not yours." That was not biblical stewardship. That was a money grab by the power hungry. Sounded awfully Nicolaitan.

When I review all biblical references to Nicolaitans and Balaam (see links below) preaching and practicing idol worship and sexual sins are part of the equation too.

Revelation 2:6
https://biblehub.com/revelation/2-6.htm
The church in Ephesus hated and the Lord hates the evil deeds of the Nicolaitans

Revelation 2:15
https://biblehub.com/revelation/2-15.htm

The Lord rebuked the church in Pergamum:
“You have there some holding the teaching of Balaam, who would teach Balak to cast a snare before the sons of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual immorality. So likewise you also have some holding the teaching of the Nicolaitans. Therefore repent! But if not, I am coming to you quickly, and I will make war against them with the sword of My mouth.

2 Peter 2 https://biblehub.com/blb/2_peter/2.htm
describes false prophets that preach and practice immortality for base gain and says “they have forsaken the straight way, they have gone astray, having followed in the way of Balaam son of Bosor, who loved the wage of unrighteousness. But he had reproof for his own transgression by a mute donkey; having spoken in a man’s voice, it restrained the madness of the prophet.” And it goes on to describe them and their fate.

Numbers 22-25 tells the story of Balaam
https://biblehub.com/bsb/numbers/22.htm

[JJ]

Back to our discussion of what "you have forsaken your first love" means:

I wanted to add that we have another clue in the apostle Paul's last address to the elders he called when he wrote to Ephesus (Acts 20:17-26)https://biblehub.com/blb/acts/20.htm

"Recall the words of our Lord Jesus when he said "It is more blessed to give than to receive". Paul also made the point that he coveted no ones money and had served them without receiving their support

When I visited the site of ancient Ephesus in 2014 it was stunning to see that no remnant of the Christian church remains in that area. The sea moved a few miles away from the former busy sea port and erosion buried a lot of the city essentially terminating its commerce. So, the city died altogether. Today you can go see ruins that Roman Catholics claim are remnants of the apostle John and Mary (Jesus' mother)'s house and a baptistry. I wasnt' convinced they were genuine.

JJ