Revelation 2

Revelation — Steve Gregg

Next in this series

Revelation 3

00:00

Revelation 2

RevelationSteve Gregg

In "Revelation 2", Steve Gregg discusses the seven brief epistles in the book of Revelation addressed to the seven churches of Asia. He explains that the letters contain both praise and criticism for each church, and suggests that they are not direct messages from Jesus, but rather portray traits of the churches. He also notes how different Christian denominations interpret the letters, with the historicist viewpoint considering them as a panorama of the entire church age, and dispensational churches seeing them as marking the end of the church age. Overall, Gregg presents a detailed analysis of the letters and their significance in the context of Christianity.

Transcript

All right, we're turning to Revelation chapter 2, and this chapter and the following chapter are, they contain nothing except seven brief epistles, one right after the other, to the seven churches which were in Asia. And once again, the word Asia does not mean in scripture what it means to us. To us, Asia is a continent.

To them, Asia was a province in the Roman Empire. It was essentially the same landmass that we today refer to as Turkey. So all seven of these churches were in the province of Asia, and their ruins, insofar as they can be seen today, are seen in the modern land of Turkey.

These churches were named for us back in chapter 1, verse 11, saying, Jesus said, I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, and what you see, John was told, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia, to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea. As I mentioned in an earlier lecture, there really were more than seven churches in Asia at this time. The book of Acts and the writings of Paul testify to at least three other churches in Asia that existed at this time.

There was a church in Troas, there was a church in Hierapolis, and of course we all know there was a church in Colossae to whom Paul wrote an epistle, Colossians. Those churches were also in Asia Minor, or Asia, but they are not included here. But that seems to be artificial.

Revelation is committed, it would seem, to a series of sevens. There are seven churches, there are seven seals, there are seven trumpets, there are seven vials, there are seven thunders, there are seven of almost everything that there is anything of. Seven is the number woven through the book, and seven is the number in the Jewish, and apparently the early Christian mind, of perfection and completeness.

So to say the seven churches is no doubt conveying the idea of the whole church, just as when it says that the lamb has seven eyes, it means he sees all things, completeness, perfection. He knows and sees all things. He had seven horns, he has all power.

The number seven functions in this kind of literature not as a statistic or a numerical unit so much as a symbolic code. That means completeness or perfection. So to say seven churches would suggest that the whole church is in view.

Now that would perhaps translate into a suggestion like the following. Most churches, if not all churches of all time, have issues within them that resemble the issues in one or more of these churches. The church of Ephesus is not there anymore today, but there are churches like it to whom Christ's instructions would be as relevant as they were to the original church of Ephesus.

Likewise, the church of Smyrna, the church of Pergamos, the church of Thyatira, and so forth. As you go through these churches, each one has its own issues, problems. Some of the problems are their own fault, and they're called to repent.

Christ raises these things as a complaint against them. Others, their problems are not their fault. They're persecuted for righteousness.

This is true of the church of Smyrna and the church of Philadelphia. So in some cases, the problem is something for the church to repent of. In other cases, their problems are simply circumstances in which Christ intends to encourage them to hang tough and endure to the end and be an overcomer.

Some of these churches are so compromised that we might say they hardly would seem to be churches anymore. Indeed, Christ actually threatens some of them with extinction if they don't shape up. But each of the churches, Christ suggests, may have a remnant within them who are capable of being, as he calls them, overcomers.

To him who overcomes, in each church there are some who overcome or could overcome, and there are promises made to them that even if the whole church around them is morally caving in, compromising, perhaps going to vanish, yet they will have a share in that which is more lasting, that which is eternal, that which is described later in the book of Revelation as the new heavens and the new earth and the new Jerusalem. Most of the promises he makes to the overcomers, well, at least many of them, are borrowed from the imagery of that city, the new Jerusalem at the end of the book of Revelation. These letters are the only letters in the Bible that are dictated by Jesus.

The New Testament contains many epistles to churches. None of them are dictated by Jesus. The apostle Paul never speaks in his letters as if he is Jesus speaking, except in one brief instance at the end of 2 Corinthians 6, where he actually gives in the space of two or three verses what appears to be an oracle.

He lapsed into giving a prophecy as he's writing and does speak as if he is God, the way a prophet speaks, thus saith the Lord, essentially, is what he says. But most of Paul's letters have nothing of that. It's just I, Paul, an apostle, have these things to say to the church, or Peter or James or John, the writers of the epistles.

But in this case it's I, Jesus. John is just taking dictation for me. John is just my secretary.

I'm Jesus giving you these messages. This is what Jesus thinks. This is a letter from the head of the church, directly.

And while we accept all the letters of the apostles, Paul, Peter, James, John, etc., we accept them all as authoritative and apostolic and certainly worthy of inclusion in our scriptures and authoritative for our faith and practice. Yet they are not, and do not claim to be, direct messages from the brain of Jesus and the mouth of Jesus to the churches as directly as these ones are. This is a unique set of epistles.

They occupy chapters 2 and 3 and thereby they complete the section, which could be, if we're dividing Revelation into sections, the first section would be chapters 1 through 3. Chapters 1 through 3 is concerned about the seven letters of the seven churches. Once you get past chapter 3, there's no more mention of the seven churches. There's something else in mind.

There's a seven-sealed book that has to be broken. The seals have to be broken. The book has to be opened.

And so chapters 4 through 8, essentially, the first verse of chapter 8, are concerned with that. And then from the rest of chapter 8 through chapter 10 or even into 11, we have seven trumpets. And so the book divides into discrete segments in some cases, sections with seven subdivisions.

In this case, it's the seven letters. Each section has sort of an introductory vision, as John gave us an introductory vision in chapter 1. Actually, Jesus gave it to John and he shared it with us. He saw Jesus.

Jesus was stylistically portrayed as having eyes of a flame of fire, feet of bronze, a sword coming out of his mouth, his face shining like the sun, his hair as white as wool, wearing a long robe down to his ankles, and a golden sash or girdle around his chest. And his voice sounded like the voice of many waters. This imagery, as we pointed out last time, was taken almost word for word from Daniel chapter 10.

A divine messenger who came to Daniel looked like this messenger. This messenger, however, speaks as though he is Jesus, and I think we probably should conclude that he is. He says things that only Jesus could say.

And, therefore, Jesus is appearing and he is walking in the vision in chapter 1 among seven golden lampstands. And he's holding in his hands seven stars. And at the very end of chapter 1, he says, I'll explain the mystery for you.

The seven lampstands are the seven churches. The seven stars are the seven angels of the seven churches. And I mentioned that there's almost as much mystery in the explanation as there is before it's explained, because nobody really knows for sure who the seven angels of the seven churches are.

You could have easily just left it at seven stars and we would know as much. But the point here is that the stars and lampstands are both light bearers. Lampstands bear light on earth.

Stars bear light in heaven. And whoever the seven angels of the seven churches are may be a mystery we'll never solve. But on earth, the church is the lamp of God.

The church is the light of the world. And these seven churches, in order that their light might not go out, need some encouragement or some adjustment. That Jesus has a long robe means he's dressed like a priest.

And in the tabernacle or the temple later, the priest would go in and they would attend to the lamps. There was one candelabra with seven lamps on it, a menorah inside the holy place of the temple. And obviously these oil lamps had to be tended.

The oil had to be replaced as it burned. They had to trim the wicks and so forth, make sure the light was not going out. And so Jesus seems to be depicted as a priest in his own house, in his own temple, tending the individual lamps.

And he would the lights that he has lit and maintains on earth. Some of these lights are about to go out and he threatens at least in one case to remove the lamp stand altogether. And so we now have in chapters two and three, what he has to say to each of these churches.

Now, before we look at any of them, and I do not intend to take more than chapter two tonight. So I'll just let you know that we will be fortunate if we get through the first four, which are in chapter two. The other three are in chapter three.

But there's some overall things we might observe. One is that the characteristics of these churches have encouraged some interpreters to see them as a predictive prophecy of the whole age of the church. Now, I'm not going to encourage this interpretation.

I was taught it when I was young and it made sense to me at the time. I was taught Futurism. I was taught Dispensationalism and my Dispensational teachers taught what I'm about to share with you.

I didn't know though that these ideas that I'm about to share originated in a different camp. It originated in the Historicist camp, which almost gives it a little more credibility because the Historicist camp was the majority view of the Protestant church from the time of the Reformation until Dispensationalism came along. And still well after Dispensationalism arose in 1830, the Historicist view continued to be very prominent among Protestants up until probably the early 20th century.

Now, I'm not a Historicist in my viewpoint, but if you'll recall, the Historicist view holds that the book of Revelation is a panorama of the entirety of the age of the church from John's time until the second coming of Christ. With the successive events unfolding with the successive chapters, you're moving forward from John's time through church history over a period of 2,000 years to the end when Jesus will come back. So this is what the Historicist view held.

Unlike the Preterist view that thinks the book is mainly about past events or the Futurist view that thinks the book is about future events, the Historicist view kind of stretches it out over the entire age of the church. And it was among the Historicists that this concept first arose, and that was that not only does the book of Revelation as a whole give you a panorama of the whole age of the church, but the seven letters in chapters two and three as a separate unit also give a panorama of the whole age of the church. This view plays well for Dispensational Futurists as well for reasons that we'll see when we get to chapter four, but we'll wait on that.

What this concept is is that these seven letters actually describe the church as a whole at seven different seasons of the age of the church. That is, the Ephesian letter describes the church in the Apostolic Age, roughly until the death of the last apostle around the end of the first century. So that from John's time, whenever he may have been writing, till about 100 AD, of course many people think he was writing in 96 AD so it's not very long, but the Apostolic Period, the church in the Apostolic Age from Pentecost really till the end of the first century, that that church is compared to the church of Ephesus.

A good church in general, but it's waning in its first love. The original revival at Pentecost was a revival of a kingdom of love, but of course as institutions began to set in near the end of the first century, much of which was testified to in the writings of Ignatius and also of the Didache, they got to be more structured and legalistic and not so much characterized just by love. That's the argument.

Then the church of Smyrna, which is described as suffering, persecution, they say, represents the church from about 100 AD to about 313 AD. Of course, 313 is the conversion of Constantine and with the conversion of Constantine, official Roman persecution of the church ended. And they say that from about the first century, about 100 or actually just before that, from the reign of Domitian, severe imperial persecutions characterized the church up until Constantine's conversion basically and his edict of toleration in about 313.

So for almost two centuries, or a little over two centuries really, the church was a suffering church and the church of Smyrna then is likened to the suffering church in the second two centuries. So you've got the church of Ephesus as a church in apostolic times in the first century. The church of Smyrna, the suffering church, represents the church during the imperial persecutions until about the beginning of the fourth century, until 313.

Then the church of Pergamos represents the church after Constantine's conversion, but prior to the rise of the papacy. So that from about 313 until some would say 500, some would say 600 AD, with the rise of the papacy, that was a gradual thing. It's hard to really nail down when the papacy really begins, the pope system, but I think most historians would say around 600 with Pope Gregory the Great is the beginning of the papacy as an institution as we have come to know it and as it was known in the medieval church.

So from about 313 until about 600, another three centuries, we have the church of Pergamos. Now Pergamos is a church of the papacy, but said to be a compromised church. We don't see compromise with the world in Smyrna, but we see compromise with the world, some idolatry, some immorality being tolerated, some heresy being tolerated in the church.

And therefore as the church from Constantine on is said to have had more and more wedding of itself to the world in its ways, we see the church in compromise and that's the church of Pergamos. The church of Thyatira then is said to be the papal church from the rise of the papacy to about the Reformation really. So from about 600 to about 1500, we have the church under the popes, the medieval church, the Roman Catholic church of course, when it was the only game in town in the Western Europe.

That's the church of Thyatira. As the story goes, Sardis then is the Reformation church. The Reformation church, there's not much said about the church of Sardis except that it had a remnant of faithful people in it, but the church as a whole had a name that it was alive but it was not really alive, it was really dead.

By the way, Reformed people don't necessarily appreciate this characterization, but basically the churches of the Reformation had some signs of life, enough to look like something was really happening, but they were really not spiritually alive according to this view. That's Sardis. Then we have Philadelphia and Laodicea and on some views these kind of overlap each other.

Philadelphia, beginning in maybe about 1700 to the present time is the missionary church, the church of the open door so to speak. There are actually some churches that name themselves that, the church of the open door. Probably they are dispensational churches that are influenced by this idea.

Jesus says to this church, I have set before you an open door. This is understood to be an open door of evangelism and outreach and missions. From 1700 approximately on, we see the church focusing more on the missionary effort up to this day.

The church of Philadelphia is said to come up to our own time, but Laodicea is also thought to be kind of overlapping in our own time. Laodicea, as you may have heard, is thought to be, well, it's the lukewarm church. It's the church that Christ complained is their lukewarm and they don't know it.

They're poor and blind and naked and they don't know it. It's a church that's become complacent and comfortable and so forth, but it thinks it's rich and healthy and all that. Therefore, this church, Laodicea, is usually, at least by dispensationalists and evangelicals of a conservative sort, equated with the liberal churches or they might say the apostate churches.

They would point out, no doubt, that almost every denomination that was once evangelical now has a liberal wing. You still have evangelical Lutherans, but you have liberal Lutherans. You have evangelical Presbyterians, but you have liberal Presbyterians.

You have evangelical, more or less, Episcopalians, and you have liberal ones, too. The Methodist church has its conservative wing and its liberal wing. Baptists, some Baptist denominations are liberal, some are conservative.

Even Mennonites now have their liberal wings in contrast to the conservative. Almost every church that exists as an evangelical church also has a branch that's gone off into liberalism where they deny the essential inspiration of Scripture, the miracles, even the virgin birth and the resurrection of Christ is sometimes called in question. They would say that's the apostate church, that's the church of Laodicea.

They see Philadelphia and Laodicea side by side in the end times. When you get to the end of chapter three, they say you're at the end of the church age. The historicist view would say when you get to the end of the church age at the end of chapter three, you just kind of start at the beginning of the church age and go through it again through the rest of the book of Revelation.

The dispensationist would say you get to the end of the church age, you've got the rapture. Therefore, chapter four, verse one is thought to be the rapture of the church in the futurist view. Everything after chapter four, verse one is thought to be a future tribulation that will not occur until the church is gone.

So this is a way of looking at things that I personally was taught. If you know anything about church history and you know anything about these letters, you realize it's kind of interesting. There are some interesting parallels.

If you actually read the commentators who believe this, they bring out much more detail than I just did in this overview. They bring out specifics that seem to them to correspond with the church at those ages. Now, it's tempting to believe this, but I'm going to have to discourage belief in it.

I mean, you can believe it if you want to, but I'm not going to try to encourage that. I, first of all, would say there's absolutely nothing in the book of Revelation to indicate that these churches represent anything other than what they were, seven churches at that time. Now, of course, the number seven might mean the whole church and someone might extrapolate the whole church age.

Well, I could see maybe someone doing that, but we're never told that these letters represent different successive eras of the church history at all. This is simply something that someone has put together by recognizing similarities here. And maybe somebody was inspired and they got this notion, but John didn't say it.

John didn't let us know. The Holy Spirit didn't tell us. And therefore, I'm not going to say that I believe it because I don't think I do.

One of the problems with it is it suggests that the whole church worldwide was a certain way during a period of time. Then the whole church worldwide was a different way at another period of time. Then at another time, the whole church worldwide.

And you realize that when we think of church history, when we in the West study church history, we're mainly thinking of Western church history. I mean, the papal church, if that's what Thyatira represents, is only the Western church. The Eastern Orthodox Church was not papal.

I mean, it was for a while, but they split. The Church of the East in Syria and Babylon and further east into India and China, that was a very thriving church. It never had any dealings with the Pope at all.

The Coptic Church in Egypt and Africa was not papal. So, in other words, to suggest that Jesus is only interested in the Western church strikes me as rather provincial. And of course, it's Western theologians that have come up with this scheme.

The Reformation, likewise, which they equate with Sardis, that only happened in the West. There was no Reformation in the Eastern Orthodox Church or the Church of the East or the Coptic Church. That's just Western church history.

It's acting like we in the West are the only Christians there ever really were, or at least the only ones Jesus is paying attention to. And we think we're significant. I mean, what could be more significant than us? But, in fact, the Western church does represent the minority of Christians in the world at any given time.

And we study Western church history partly because almost all of us are products of the Reformation, which was a product of Roman Catholicism, which was a product of developments in the Western church. So, in other words, it strikes me as this scheme is very provincial. It's very Western, confined to Western church interests.

The Eastern church is, you know, this view acts like there is no church except the Church of the West. Like, what was Jesus thought about the Coptic Christians or the Eastern Christians during this time? Well, he didn't care about them. He's just looking at the West like we do.

He's like us, in other words, obsessed with our own area and our own fortunes. But that isn't necessarily something that strikes me as likely. Furthermore, it is certainly artificial to suggest that the whole church at any time was a certain way, when, in fact, for example, in John's day there were seven churches, each of them one of these ways.

In other words, the church is not a monolithic thing worldwide where all the Christians at one time were being persecuted, all the Christians at one time are lukewarm, all the Christians at one time have left their first love. I mean, all these seven churches existed simultaneously and had these traits that are here. So, as appealing as this view of the letters is, I don't know that I could, I don't think it could be correct.

Well, it could be correct, but I don't think it is. I don't know. I mean, so I'm not going to take that approach, although it is an approach I was taught and which actually is embraced by two of the four views of Revelation.

The Preterists don't believe this and the Idealists don't, but the Historicists and some Dispensationalists do. So, you can just realize about half, half of the views, of the four views have suggested this approach to these letters. Now, one thing that everyone can agree about is that these letters do have some things in common.

They're very symmetrical in their design. Not perfectly so, but amazingly so. They all have, with some notable exceptions, but in general the pattern is there are eight features of each letter.

The first feature is the line, To the angel of the church of, and then a city is named. The church in that city is being addressed, but not just the church, but the angel of that church is being addressed. Why it would be that the angel would be addressed instead of the church itself is not known, except many people believe that the word angel, angelos, should mean messenger, and therefore it's somebody who might have been a reader in the church.

Someone who officially read documents and epistles and so forth that were sent to the church, who read them out loud to the church, so that might be what the angel of the church is, the angelos, the messenger of the church. But, in any case, each letter is addressed to the angel or the messenger of the church of. That's how each letter begins.

The second thing in every letter is the line, These things says, and then Jesus identifies himself differently in each case. Many times he describes himself with terminology from chapter one, the vision that John saw. These things says the one who has eyes like a flame of fire, and feet like burnished bronze.

Or these things says the one who has a sharp two-edged sword coming out of his mouth. Or these things says the one who stands among the seven lampstands. In other words, Jesus, at least in the initial stages of addressing these churches, describes himself in language that is brought to our attention from the vision in the first chapter.

This ceases to be so much the case as you get to some of the later letters. He doesn't borrow as heavily from that language from the first chapter in some of the later letters, but it suggests that there are certain things about that vision of Jesus. Some aspects pertain more to what he has to say to this church, and some things pertain more to what he has to say to another church.

He says the things about himself that are going to be pertinent to what he has to say about them, which is interesting because it means that Jesus, of course, is multifaceted, and some facet of Jesus may in fact provide the basis for his message to one particular church because they are in violation of that particular facet of his personality or his character. In a sense, he might reveal himself to different churches somewhat differently according to the needs of the church at different times. This doesn't mean that Jesus is amorphous and that he doesn't have any actual objective being and he can just be whatever you perceive him to be, but it does mean that Jesus is so multifaceted that some facet of him may be the thing that he needs to really impress upon a congregation at a certain point because of a deficiency in their life as a congregation, and that seems to be the case in these letters.

So he says to the angel of the church of, that's the first line in every letter. The second thing is these things says then some description of Jesus. It's always Jesus, but only once does he actually use his actual name in one of them.

Most of the time it's he who has such and such traits. The third thing in every letter is the statement after he's identified himself, he says, I know your works. Now sometimes this is encouraging and sometimes this is ominous depending on what kind of works have been going on in that church.

If the church is very badly compromised, I know your works is more or less makes them shiver, I'm sure. I'm watching you. I know what you're doing and it isn't a good thing.

But in a few cases, I know your works and all he has to say are good things. So the one thing that can be said about this line is whatever the church is doing, Jesus knows it. In some cases he is displeased with the church and has no good works to commend them for.

That's true in two churches, the church of and no criticism. That's true of the church of Smyrna and the church of Philadelphia. Apart from these exceptions, he usually has something good and something bad.

I've got good news and I've got bad news for you. I know some of your works are good. But in the cases where, other than Smyrna and Philadelphia, where there was apparently nothing wrong with them that he wanted to bring up, he then follows the I know your works.

He first commends them and then the next thing he does is says, but I have something against you. And he doesn't leave them in suspense as to what it may be. He tells them.

So here we have the normal paradigm for the letter. He says, I know your works. That's the third element of each letter.

The fourth would be his commendation of whatever is good about them. And the fifth would be his criticism of whatever it is is bad about them. But since there are four churches out of the seven that either that are lacking one of these things, there's really only three churches that have both things, a commendation and a criticism.

But Jesus always gives the commendation first, which is probably a good policy. If you're going to criticize someone and if there's anything you can say affirming first, you might grease the skids a little bit for your criticism to be more well received. Just they see you're not just being critical.

But a couple of churches, he couldn't think of anything good to say about it. And a couple of them, he couldn't think of anything bad to say about it. But if there was both something good and something bad, he commended them first and then he criticized what was wrong.

And then the sixth element would be a call to repentance. And this is present in five of the churches. Of course, the two that he had no criticism of were not called to repent.

I mean, why would he call them to repent when he hadn't told them anything they're doing wrong? So Smyrna and Philadelphia are the only churches that are not called upon to repent. The other five are told at this point in the letter to repent. Then there are two features that close every letter.

In the first three letters, they're in one order. In the other four letters, they're in the opposite order. The reason for this shift is a mystery.

There's absolutely nothing I can think of that would explain why the order is reversed, especially in view of the otherwise tremendous symmetry of the letters. Why gratuitously? The order of the last two items would be reversed in the last four letters. I have no idea.

I've never found a commentator who could say. Of approximately 50 that I've read, no one seems to have any answer to this. It's just the way it is.

And these two features are, in the first three letters, He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. Followed by, To him who overcomes, and then there's a promise. But in the last four letters of the seven, it's the promise to the overcomers comes first.

And the letter ends with the exhortation, He that has ears to hear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. So that's how the churches are laid out. I mean, the letters to the churches.

And we will only look at the first several tonight, because there's too much to say to hope to get through all of them. As Art found out, he couldn't really say all he wanted to say about all seven of them, so he had to abbreviate his talk. So also, I will not try to bite off more than I can chew in one lecture.

Let's look at the first of these letters. It's the Church of Ephesus. The region where Ephesus was a city at one time is called Ayyaisalik, or something like that.

It's Turkish. I don't speak Turkish. But this city of Ephesus is no longer there.

It was a very important city, not only secularly, but also in the Bible, it's very important. It was not the political capital of that province, but it was the biggest city. It was the most important city of the province in many ways.

In the days of John, its population is thought to have been about a quarter of a million. And it was the most populous and the most important city, just like New York City would be in America. It's not the capital of the country, but it's in many respects the most important city economically, and it's got the biggest population of any city and so forth.

When people from other countries think of America, there's a good chance they think of New York, because America is New York to some people. When I was in Germany as a teenager, talking to Christians there, and the subject of Revelation came up, and we were talking about who do you think Babylon is in Revelation, it seems like most of the German evangelicals I talked to thought it was New York City. They didn't say America, they said New York City, which is interesting, because obviously if it is New York City, it probably would be America too.

But in any case, people think of New York City when they think of America. People thought of Ephesus probably first when they thought of the province of Asia, because that was a thriving metropolis and large and populated. But Christian-wise, it was a very important city too.

The Church of Ephesus was founded by the Apostle Paul on his second missionary journey, and he didn't stay there very long initially. He seems to have left his co-workers, Priscilla and Aquila, in charge of the church, because he was in a hurry to get back to Jerusalem to keep one of the Jewish festivals there, which he did not because he felt compelled by conscience, but because he wanted to, as much as possible, heal the wounds between the Jewish and the Gentile mission. The Jewish mission was very suspicious of Paul and his Gentile mission, and so he liked, as often as possible, to show his solidarity with the church in Jerusalem.

And so if he could, he liked to get back at the festivals and celebrate there with them. And he came to Ephesus on his way back to Jerusalem on his second missionary journey, and he did not stay there long. But he left, apparently, Priscilla and Aquila, his co-workers, there, and he moved on, went on to Jerusalem.

After he was gone, another powerful preacher named Apollos came to Ephesus, and he was a pretty good preacher, but he needed some correction in his theology, but Priscilla and Aquila took care of that and sent him on his way. Later, Paul came back and ministered in Ephesus for the better part of three years, apparently. And while he was in Ephesus, the Bible says in the book of Acts, all of Asia, all of Turkey, heard the word of God.

It would seem that many of the churches we're reading about here in this book were evangelized either by Paul or persons that he sent out while he was spending time in Ephesus. Ephesus was the hub of his outreach to this subcontinent or whatever it would be, this province. Now, later, Timothy was a church leader in Ephesus, and apparently, later still, the apostle John was.

So this was a very privileged church. They had been founded by Paul himself. They had benefited from the ministries, the local residential ministries of Priscilla and Aquila.

They'd been visited by Apollos. Paul ministered there for many years. Timothy, Paul's protege after that.

And then the apostle John spent his final years there. And at the time that John wrote this, it is probable that Ephesus was his home church. And as he was banished to Patmos, he was probably homesick.

And we saw in chapter 1 that he said he was in the spirit on the Lord's Day. If he's referring there to Sunday, which at least later, the Christians called the Lord's Day and may have called it that in his day as well, then it may have been Sunday morning and he was probably missing his home church in Ephesus. And then the voice behind him says, Take a letter to Ephesus and these other churches.

And so the first letter is to Ephesus, his own home church. And the letter goes like this. To the angel of the church of Ephesus write, These things says he who holds the seven stars in his right hand, who walks in the midst of the seven golden lampstands.

I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not and have found them liars. And you have persevered and have patience and have labored for my namesake and have not become weary.

Nevertheless, I have this against you that you have left your first love. Remember, therefore, from where you have fallen, repent and do the first works or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place unless you repent. But this you have, one final commendation for them, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

He that has an ear to hear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God. So the way that Jesus introduces himself is from chapter one.

And the way he promises good things to the overcomers is from the final chapter of Revelation, chapter 22, which describes the tree of life being in the New Jerusalem. And so, in a sense, the letter itself calls to mind really the whole book of Revelation in some respects. And this is one of the churches that Jesus has good things to say about and some criticism as well.

He actually thinks of another good thing to say after he's made his criticism. So he tags that in as almost an appendix. Oh, yeah, you've got this other thing going for you that I like.

You hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans. I do too, he says. Well, now we're going to have to ask who the Nicolaitans are.

But first, let's get to the earlier material. Now, Jesus says he is the one who is walking in the midst of the seven golden lampstands. The threat he makes to them if they do not repent is that he will remove their lampstand from that place, which means they will no longer have him walking among them.

If the lampstand is removed, the light has gone out. The church exists no more. And Jesus no longer walks among them.

So this is a serious threat. He says, I know your works. And he says a number of things that are really quite good.

He says, I know your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. This church was somewhat intolerant of evil. Now, tolerance today is considered to be a virtue.

And therefore, if we found a group of Christians intolerant of evil, we might not consider that a virtue. Jesus, however, has not begun to criticize. He's still saying what can be said positively about the church here.

It was good that they could not tolerate evil. Now, this doesn't mean that they didn't love evil people. Well, maybe it does.

But they should have loved them. Remember, they've left their first love. So it may be that they are an unloving, intolerant church.

But even a church that has its first love should have the ability to discern between good and evil and to hold the standard high and say, we are going to stand for the good, and we're not going to tolerate sin and evil. Now, tolerate evil, we have to remember that if you're going to tolerate Christians, you're going to have to tolerate a certain amount of sin because Christians sin too. But Christians don't want to sin, and Christians repent when they sin.

Unfortunately, churches often are infiltrated by people who are not Christians, who live in sin and don't repent of sin, so that the church becomes corrupted and the standards of the church and its testimony is brought down. And it's good for the church to be intolerant of that. Paul, when he was writing to the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 5, said he was very critical of the Corinthian church because they tolerated a man who was living in incestuous fornication.

And he said, you people are proud of yourselves. You should be grieving because you have not kicked this man out. You've not exercised proper church discipline.

And Paul said, I've already judged him. He says, when you all come together, you need to turn that man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh so that his spirit might be saved in the day of Christ Jesus. This is a loving thing to seek his salvation in the end, but it's severe.

You kick him out. You don't tolerate evil. The Corinthian church had this as a weakness.

They did tolerate evil. And so did some of the churches. John's writing to here, Dictation from Christ.

This church was good about that. They were good about not tolerating sin and evil in the church. And he says, you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not and have found them liars.

There are false apostles. Now, in our day, there are churches that are founded by men who call themselves apostles or their followers call their leaders apostles. And in some cases, there's no reason whatsoever to accept their claim.

In fact, I have to say that in the 40 something years I've been a minister, I've met many people who either called themselves apostles or someone called them apostles. I've never found any of them yet to really be men that I would find any compelling reason to accept them as apostles. Maybe a few could almost qualify.

But if you criticize such men, many times they don't like being judged. They say, don't touch the Lord's anointed. How dare you criticize? How dare you raise questions about the Lord's anointed? Well, that's exactly what the church of Ephesus did.

And Jesus thought that was good. They tested the people who claimed to be apostles. Found out some of them were not the real deal.

Some of them were false apostles. And Jesus says, good, good. You checked them out.

Good, you found them to be liars. You tested them. This testing of the false apostles probably was an attitude the church had picked up from Paul.

Because in Acts chapter 20, essentially the final words that Paul had with the church of Ephesus or with their elders, was when he called them to Miletus to have a final conference as he was on his way to Jerusalem. And in Acts chapter 20, he was talking to the elders of the church of Ephesus, this same church. Although probably an earlier generation of leaders than the one that John is writing to.

Maybe not though. And Paul said in Acts 20, 29, For I know this, that after my departure, savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock, also from among yourselves, that is among the eldership themselves, the leaders of the church, among them, men will rise up, speaking perverse things, and draw away the disciples after themselves. Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone, night and day, with tears.

So he's telling these leaders to watch out for false leaders, wolves, even men in the eldership who might get a little too ambitious and want to start a movement of their own and draw away disciples just after themselves. And the church apparently took Paul seriously, so that when Jesus now sends a letter to them, probably maybe a decade or more later, it could be the same leaders that Paul addressed for that matter, he says, you've been doing the right thing. You've not been tolerating the false leaders that come through.

You've been exposing them, like Paul told them to do. Actually in the second century, the letters of Ignatius include a letter that Ignatius wrote to Ephesus. He wrote them around 115 AD.

So depending on when Revelation was written, this was anywhere between 20 and maybe 40 years after the writing of the book of Revelation. And Ignatius commended this church also for being intolerant of false teaching. This was a church that really held the standard high for orthodoxy, for genuineness of the ministry.

They didn't tolerate evil. They were a very uncompromising church in that respect. But as often happens, when churches are committed to judging, proper judgment, there's that tendency to become less charitable.

And they had left their first love. Jesus said that was their problem. I have this against you, you've left your first love.

Now, he said this is bad enough that you're going to have to repent of that or else I'm going to remove your church. I'm going to remove your lampstand. It's not okay.

Not okay to leave your first love, no matter how many other good things can be said about you. Remember what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 13? The first three verses, if I speak with the tongues of men or even the tongues of angels and don't have love, I'm just making a whole lot of noise. And he said if I understand all mysteries and have all knowledge, I mean I've got perfect doctrine, but I don't have love, I'm nothing.

Even if I give my body to be burned and give all my goods to feed the poor, if I don't have love, it profits me nothing, he said. In other words, no matter how many other good things can be said about a Christian or a church, if they don't have love, they're not okay. Jesus isn't going to keep them around.

It's important. You see, Jesus said, A new commandment I give to you that you love one another, as I have loved you. He said, By this all men will know that you're my disciples, if you have love one for another, in John 13, 34 and 35.

Love is the one thing that defines a church. Love is the one thing that defines a disciple. The other things are important in their own place, but none of them are important enough to outweigh the deficit in the area of loving.

And yet, it is in the very act of being careful and discerning and judging, as we are required to do, that we may lose sight of charity toward people. There is such a thing as having charitable judgment. You can judge people as charitably as the facts may allow.

You don't have to be harsh in your judgment. In fact, you shouldn't be. Paul said in Galatians 6, 1, Brethren, if any of you are overtaken in a fault, you who are spiritual, restore such one in the spirit of meekness, considering yourselves, lest you also be tempted.

You don't come harshly at a person who has fallen and damage them more by the way that you criticize them. You seek to restore them in the spirit of meekness, in a loving way. You don't see the person as an embarrassment that you're trying to sweep under the rug or kick out.

You see that person as somebody who needs to be restored and that you hope you'll lay your life down for them, if necessary, to get them back into the fold. But a lot of times, a church becomes obsessed with what they might call sound doctrine. And when they do, then people who don't have what they call sound doctrine are considered to be maybe not even brethren.

Or if they are brethren, then they're brethren that are not someone they want to sidle up next to and fellowship with. And so they lose their first love. Okay, and then he says, But this you have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, verse 6, which I also hate.

Now, who then are the Nicolaitans? And they are mentioned twice in the seven letters. They're mentioned also in the letter to the church of Pergamos, where it says in verse 15 of this same chapter, to a different church, to Pergamos, it says, Thus you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. Now, in both cases, when the Nicolaitans are mentioned, Jesus says, I hate that.

In the church of Ephesus, it was the deeds of the Nicolaitans. In the church of Pergamos, it was the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. And obviously, what people do and what they believe define their religious distinctives.

And the Nicolaitans must have been hateful to Christ in every aspect of their religious life. And yet, they were in the church, or tried to be. They tried to get into the Ephesian church, but the church was too tight and too discerning, and they threw them out.

Church of Pergamos, a little more loosey-goosey. They let them stay in there. And Jesus said, this is a problem.

You've got people in your church who hold to the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. And where the doctrine is, the deeds can't be far behind, because people will live out their beliefs. And so, Jesus said, I hate them.

Not the Nicolaitans. I hate their deeds. I hate their doctrines.

So, who are the Nicolaitans? Well, in certain circles, you'll hear a standard explanation of who the Nicolaitans were. And those who give it, give it because they heard someone else give it. And the person they heard, heard it from someone else.

Where the idea originated that's being passed along from person to person, generation to generation, I do not know. I don't know where the original mistake was made. But it has become orthodoxy in certain circles, say the Nicolaitans.

What that means is this. It comes from two words, Nikos and Laos. Nikos means conquest.

And Laos means the people. These are Greek words. And they say, therefore, Nicolaitans are people who are somehow, their name comes from their conquest of the people.

Now, from this, they extrapolate. In the church, this could be. In fact, they stop saying could be and say it was those who divided the church into clergy and laity.

The clergy becoming dominant in the church and the laity being the common people. Obviously, the people who make this point, they're probably Plymouth Brethren, really. I hear it mainly among dispensationalists.

And Plymouth Brethren don't believe in clergy. And I'm not saying I do. But I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised if this explanation originated among people who don't believe in the clergy, which would have to be either Plymouth Brethren or some other small group that's sort of anti-institutional.

I'm pretty anti-institutional, as everybody knows. But not so much that I want to make up doctrines to support things. There's no evidence, apparently, from the early church that the Nicolaitans were people who divided the church into clergy and laity.

It's a theory that someone came up with. And since very few people knew any other theory, they thought, well, let's go with that. However, the early church did talk about the Nicolaitans, the early church fathers.

In the 2nd century. Now, their view is very interesting, if you haven't heard it. Much more interesting than the other one, it seems to me.

Their view was the Nicolaitans was a movement named after a man named Nicholas. More or less Gnostic in their teachings. And especially that branch of Gnosticism that was antinomian.

You know what that word means? Antinomian means against law. Anti... Namos. Namos is the Greek word for law.

So antinomian means against law. And there were different kinds of Gnostics, but principally Gnostics were of the view that it doesn't really matter how you live, so long as what you know is intact. That's what Gnostics mean, people who know.

If you knew the mysteries that the Gnostics taught, you could pretty much ignore morals. Because you were saved by your knowledge, by your superior knowledge, not by how you behaved. And so many Gnostics were antinomians.

And many of them were in the church. According to some of the church fathers, there was apparently a Gnostic or a proto-Gnostic antinomian movement that followed a man named Nicholas. And they were called the Nicolaitans, named after him.

What I find most interesting is who they say this Nicholas was. They say it was a man mentioned in the book of Acts, in chapter 6. In Acts chapter 6, there were seven men chosen to help distribute the relief to the poor in the church. And their names are given in verse 5, Acts 6, 5. It says, they chose Stephen, a man full of faith, and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, also Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicholas, a proselyte from Antioch.

This Nicholas, a proselyte from Antioch, was originally chosen because he met the qualifications, which we read in verse 3. The apostle said, Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. So they did, and Nicholas was chosen. Out of a congregation that had well over 5,000 men, he was in the short list of trusted men who were regarded to have the Holy Spirit and wisdom and reliable guide.

But according to church fathers, he eventually was led astray into a Gnostic sort of a heresy, and people followed him, and they were called the Nicolaitans. Now, we don't have the Bible telling us whether this is true or not. It's kind of an awful thing to think about a man who might otherwise be a good brother and never did anything wrong and bad rumors spread about him.

But we don't have any alternative view about the Nicolaitans from the church fathers, and more than one of them confirmed this story. So the Nicolaitans, named very possibly after this man Nicholas, who had veered off from the Orthodox mainstream apostolic church and started his own maybe heresy or cult, they were in the church too in some cases, and they were probably teaching an antinomian heresy, which we do read many of these churches had problems with antinomianism. In fact, the church of Pergamos, which also has Nicolaitans in it, has got some problems with morality going on.

We'll talk about that when we get to it. In any case, the deeds of the Nicolaitans are among the things that Jesus said he hates, and the church of Ephesus commendably doesn't tolerate them. They hate them too.

Trouble is, they hate them without loving them. They've left their first love. You know, you can love people and still hate what is destroying them.

You can hate the deeds that someone is doing because you know it's destroying them. The reason you hate the deeds is because you love the people. That's why you hate a cancer in your child, because you love your child.

If you couldn't care less about your child, you couldn't care less about the cancer. What is destroying your child, you will hate because you love the child. What deeds are going on in a brother's life that are destroying him spiritually is something you'll have to hate.

You'll have to hate it if you love your brother. And so, it's good to hate the deeds that are destroying the church or destroying your brothers, but you've got to not stop loving them. And that's what this church had failed in.

And so Jesus calls them to repent or else have their lampstand removed. This is, you notice he says in verse 5, or else I will come to you quickly. I mean, taken out of this context, in the book of Revelation, wouldn't I will come to you quickly, sound to you like he's talking about the second coming of Christ? Behold, I come quickly, it says in Revelation 22.

Well, there's several churches that Jesus says to them he will come to them quickly. In this case, he's talking about coming to them quickly and removing their lampstand. This has happened.

Their lampstand isn't in Ephesus anymore. So it would appear some temporal judgment has come upon them. Art was just telling me before class that most of the church was wiped out by malaria back, I think, in the early 4th century.

And there's a church kind of nearby on higher ground. There was, I guess, a mudslide covered up the old site. But old Ephesus isn't there anymore except as ruins.

You can go see them. They're ruins. But it would appear that the church in that original site isn't there unless they've just moved up to higher ground.

In any case, his coming to them and removing their lampstand does not appear to be a reference to the second coming of Christ at the end of the world. And he also tells other churches he'll come to them. Notice the church of Pergamos in verse 16 of the same chapter says repent or else I will come to you quickly.

The same words. But this time he says I will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. Now it's interesting because he had introduced himself to that church as the one who has the sharp two-edged sword out of his mouth.

So he had introduced himself in words that became sort of informed the threat he made to them just like he did with Ephesus. He's the one who walks among the lampstands. If they don't repent, he'll come to them and remove their lampstand.

So he's the one with the sharp sword out of his mouth in Pergamos. If they don't repent, he's going to come fight with them with the sword out of his mouth. If you look further over, the church of Thyatira is told in verse 25 hold fast what you have until I come.

They're not there today either. In chapter 3 and verse 3 he says to the church of Sardis at the end of there therefore if you do not watch I will come upon you as a thief. And in verse 11 speaking to the Philadelphia church he says behold I come quickly.

A lot of references to coming and also quickly. And coming to them, to the church. The lukewarm church in verse 20 is told behold I stand at the door and knock.

If anyone hears my voice and opens the door I will come into him. Now how many times Jesus says he's going to come in one sense or another to the church. He's going to come fight against them, come remove them, come into their hearts, come whatever.

His coming in these cases is not referenced to the second coming. Certainly no one ever took Revelation 3.20 I will come into him and sup with him as a reference to the second coming. I think not.

Maybe they have. Not where I come from. But anyway, the churches are often told more often than not that Jesus is going to come to each of them and do something to them.

But most of those churches are just not there now. The church of Smyrna is still there. But these churches and in many cases the cities themselves are just ruins.

So it looks like he came and did what he said he was going to do which would underscore the fact that the coming of Jesus in Revelation isn't always referenced to the second coming. And we need to be careful about that because we assume in many cases the book of Revelation is about the end times and so when we hear him say I will come we're thinking well that's the second coming. In some cases in scripture it is.

But we have to take it case by case. In this case it certainly does not appear to be. I will come to you quickly and remove the lampstand.

Now he said that those who overcome he'll give to eat of the tree of life which is in the paradise in the midst of the paradise of God. The tree of life no doubt just represents eternal life. Because you remember in the Garden of Eden Adam and Eve after they sinned were deprived of access to the tree of life lest they should eat it and live forever.

Apparently eating it is that which allows persons to live forever. So to say I'll let you eat of the tree of life in the paradise of God is a way of saying I'll let you live forever. You'll have eternal life if you overcome.

Now that's important because overcoming in Revelation means being faithful until death. That's what overcoming means. He specifically says to the next church be faithful until death.

In chapter 2 and verse 10. But in Revelation chapter 12 and verse 11 the overcomers so to speak are mentioned. Revelation 12, 11 it says and they overcame him.

That is the church overcame Satan. They are overcomers. They overcame him by the blood of the lamb and by the word of their testimony and they did not love their lives to the death.

They overcame him by staying faithful until they died. And even dying as martyrs apparently in some cases. Being an overcomer means that.

So if you overcome that means you stay faithful to Jesus till life, till death that is. He says I'll let you eat in the paradise of God on the other side I'll let you have eternal life. You'll eat of the tree of life in the paradise of God.

That means though you you may surrender your life in this world through your faithfulness to Christ well there's more where that came from on the other side. There's that tree of life over there. I'll let you eat from that he says if you're an overcomer here.

Now verse 8 we have the next letter. To the angel of the church of Smyrna write these things says the first and the last who was dead and came to life. I know your works, tribulation and poverty but you are rich.

And I know the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews and are not but are the synagogue of Satan. Do not fear any of those things which you are about to suffer. Indeed the devil is about to throw some of you into prison that you may be tested and you will have tribulation ten days.

Be faithful unto death and I will give you the crown of life. He who has an ear let him hear what the spirit says to the churches. To he who overcomes shall not be hurt by the second death.

Now notice overcoming is being faithful unto your first death. Be faithful unto death and I'll give you the crown of life. Again the crown of life is like the tree of life.

You'll be crowned with life, eternal life if you're faithful unto death. If you surrender your life in this world you'll find it to life everlasting as Jesus said. Remember Jesus said that in Matthew 16 he says he that seeks to save his life will lose it but he that loses his life for my sake will find it.

Meaning you'll find eternal life. You have to be prepared to give up your life in this world though if you want to qualify. And so to be faithful unto death you'll get a crown of life.

And whoever overcomes that is whoever is faithful to death will not at least be subject to the second death. At least you won't have to die again like some will. Many people as we shall see in Revelation 20 will be cast into the lake of fire and it says in Revelation 20 verse 15 this is the second death.

Or verse 14 I think it is. So you won't be cast into the lake of fire. You won't have the second death if you at least undergo the first death out of faithfulness to me.

Now notice when Jesus introduces himself to them he says I'm the first and the last who was dead and came to life. He's reminding them I died I'm going to be asking you to die. I'm going to ask you at least to be willing to die.

Be faithful unto death. I was and look it I'm alive. So I can make good on this promise.

If you die for me I can raise you. I can give you a crown of life. I can keep you alive beyond the time when others are experiencing the second death.

And I'm credible because I was dead and I'm alive now. That's what he says. So the way he introduces himself is clearly related to the message he has for them.

Smyrna by the way receives the shortest letter. And one of the reasons it's a short letter is there's no criticism of Smyrna. They are suffering for Christ.

They are the suffering church. His message is I see you're suffering at the hands of people who are saying they are Jews. But in fact they're not.

Not as far as Jesus is concerned. Now by the way these would be people who are ethnic Jews of course. There's not people running around saying they're Jews who are not ethnic Jews.

What he's saying is really the same thing that John records Jesus saying elsewhere. Now this is John recording Jesus here. John wrote it.

Jesus is speaking. John wrote John chapter 8. And Jesus is speaking there also. In John 8, 44 Jesus said to certain Jews you are of your father the devil.

Earlier they said we're of our we're the children of Abraham. He said if you're the children of Abraham you do the deeds of Abraham but you're of your father the devil. You're doing what he wants.

So for Jesus here to say these people are really a synagogue of Satan. Just like the church is the synagogue or the temple or the tabernacle of God. So these anti-Christian Jewish people apparently and not all Jews are anti-Christian but there were some in Smyrna that were.

These people are a synagogue of Satan. They're persecuting the church. They're blasphemers against God.

And against the gospel that these people were probably preaching to them. By the way, Smyrna had the largest Jewish population of any of the other cities of Asia. And later on when Polycarp in the early 2nd century who was a bishop of Smyrna it's very tempting to think Polycarp might have been the messenger the angel to the church of Smyrna at this time but not likely.

He would have been too young when the book of Revelation was written if he was even born yet. So he's not the guy probably. But Polycarp is very famous for his martyrdom in Smyrna.

He was the bishop of Smyrna and he was arrested for his faith and he was burned at the stake. Initially the fires wouldn't burn him. There's a whole document from the early church called the Martyrdom of Polycarp and the church of Smyrna preserved it.

They wrote about his martyrdom. The details and they said that the fire was put by a stake and the fire was lit and the fires came up around him but they wouldn't touch him for apparently a long time. He just stood there singing.

He was a very old man. In his 90s probably at the time. And so a soldier stabbed him and his blood poured out and extinguished some of the flames at least but he died of bleeding.

The interesting thing is in the account of the Martyrdom of Polycarp which was saved by the 2nd century Smyrna church. They indicated that the Jews of that town played a very active role in encouraging the Romans to kill Polycarp and in helping to gather the wood. It actually says the Jews of the town went and they gathered wood to bring to they were so eager to burn him.

Apparently even a generation later than the book of Revelation the Jews of that particular town were very hostile toward the Christians. Although they didn't have the power like Rome did to actually make martyrs Christians they could participate enthusiastically and they did apparently. This reference to those who say they are Jews and are not but are a synagogue of Satan has an echo in a letter to the church of Philadelphia in chapter 3 in verse 9. Apparently the Jews of that city were causing trouble to the church as well.

Chapter 3 verse 9 Jesus says indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say they are Jews and are not but indeed they're lying I will make them come and worship before your feet and to know that I have loved you. Apparently the Jews of that town were saying that the church is not loved by God. He says well they'll change their tune someday.

I'm going to make that happen. But you see both places these are the two churches that receive no criticism. Smyrna and Philadelphia.

They're the only two churches that don't receive criticism and they both happen to be suffering some kind of persecution of sorts from the Jewish element in their town. Now the other five churches we don't read there was any conflict with the Jews in their town. They had problems with the Romans or someone else or with heretics.

But Christians have suffered at the hands of various hostile parties and in those cases apparently Jewish parties. And so he tells them they're going to suffer but they should not be afraid of that. He said the devil's going to throw some of you into prison and you'll be tested.

That's what trials are for. They're to test you. Jesus knew it was going to happen.

He didn't promise to protect them from it. He just said I'm going to subject you to some testing here. The devil's going to do it.

He's going to throw you in prison. But it's not the devil who's interested in testing you. It's God who's interested in testing you.

God tests us by allowing us to be tempted and persecuted at times. Jesus of course could have said but don't worry I'll stop him. I'll deliver you.

I'll protect you. None of that was promised. Jesus could do that but he said no you're going to be tested.

That's a good thing. You need to be tested and if you pass the test you'll be glad. You'll be an overcomer.

He said you're going to experience tribulation for 10 days. Now nobody I know believes that's a literal 10 day period. Some preachers thought this is a reference to 10 emperors that persecuted the church traditionally.

Others feel that 10 days just means a short time but a time that if you're in prison it's an uncomfortable time. To be 10 days in prison is not maybe going to ruin your whole life but it's certainly going to ruin your whole day. It's going to ruin your whole week.

It's going to be unpleasant but short lived this persecution that's coming through town. What I find fascinating here is the promise he makes where he said be faithful until death and I'll give you the crown of life. Now this promise I will give you the crown of life seems to be echoed in James as if James had read Revelation.

Now the reason that's intriguing to me is that if James read Revelation Revelation must have been written very early because most scholars place James pretty early. Some of them think it was the earliest book of the New Testament to be written. If as I'm suggesting it may be that James was familiar with the book of Revelation then of course James was not the earliest book but still no doubt early enough to mean that Revelation had to be earlier still and in James chapter 1 and verse 12 where Christians are encouraged to endure trials like the church of Smyrna was encouraged to do.

James said blessed is the man who endures temptation or trial the word temptation and trial are the same word in the Greek for when he has been proved remember Jesus said you'll be tested proved same word this almost sounds like a line out of Jesus letter to the church of Smyrna blessed is the man who endures testing or trial for when he has been tested or proved he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love him the Lord being Jesus when did Jesus ever promise a crown of life to anybody not in the gospels certainly we don't have any record of Jesus making a promise like that anywhere in the gospels where do you find a promise from Jesus to give the crown of life to anybody there's only one other reference in the whole bible besides this place in James to a crown of life and that is in the promise Jesus made to the church of Smyrna be faithful unto death Revelation 2.10 and I will give you the crown of life James seems to be familiar with that promise he's talked about you'll receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised if they had read Revelation at this time then they'd know exactly what promise James is referring to and we would also know how James came to think that the Lord had made such a promise he would have read it in Revelation if Revelation wasn't written before James though of course then James just coincidentally talks about a situation very parallel to what is in Jesus letter to the church of Smyrna and you know comes up with the same phrase as Jesus did just by coincidence I'm thinking the likelihood is greater that James has read the book of Revelation making Revelation a rather early book earlier than the traditional popular date today now let's look at the compromising church here verse 12 the church of Pergamos now the city of Pergamos was the provincial capital that is the political capital of the province of Asia so as we said Ephesus was like the New York City of Asia Pergamos would be like the Washington D.C. of Asia the political quarters of power for the province were in this town and this town had a lot of Roman pagan influence that could really put the church under a lot of pressure there the Roman sword of course associated with the Roman government remember Paul said about the rulers they don't bear the sword in vain the Roman sword so to speak was centered in this province in this town maybe that's why Jesus describes himself as the one who has a sharp two edged sword maybe it's why he says if you don't shape up I will fight with you with the sword that comes out of my mouth are you afraid of the Roman sword you haven't seen nothing yet and in Pergamos there was a lot of different kinds of satanic influence and Jesus actually refers to Pergamos as where Satan's throne is now there's several things that were in Pergamos that could be referred to as Satan's throne or maybe none of them are and Satan's throne is simply a term used in addition to any of these things the city was the first city to build a temple to Caesar Augustus and therefore although Caesar worship was not mandatory or instituted throughout the Roman Empire at any time yet this town voluntarily worshipped the Caesar they built a temple to Caesar Augustus they also built a temple to Zeus there and a temple to Asclepius Asclepius was a serpent god according to the mythology Asclepius was a god who had received a healing fruit from a serpent and the imagery of two serpents adorns the temple of Asclepius and you know Art was actually mentioning this earlier that the symbol for the American Medical Association is a pole with two serpents on it some people maybe mistakenly think that that's an allusion back to Moses raising up a serpent on the pole because you think well they were healed a snake bite but there's two serpents on it and it's actually based on the myth of Asclepius the god of healing the serpent god you know the Hippocratic oath which doctors used to always have to say as they entered medical practice or completed their education the Hippocratic oath is sort of the accepted oath for all medical people to say have you ever read it the opening lines are I swear by Asclepius and all the gods and goddesses that and it goes on imagine western doctors in a Christian country saying this oath I swear by Asclepius and all the gods and goddesses Asclepius was the god of healing the temple of Asclepius was visited by people who were sick from all over the world it was like the lords of the ancient world people apparently were healed there if so probably by demonic power now whether it was the worship of the emperor or the worship of Zeus or the worship of this occultic power of healing one of those or all of them combined Jesus refers to as the throne of Satan this is Satan's throne here and so we read to the angel of the church of Pergamos write these things says he who has the sharp two edged sword I know your works and where you dwell where Satan's throne is you're up against something I know it this is not an easy place to be a Christian there's a lot of spiritual warfare going on in this place and yet you hold fast to my name and did not deny my faith even in the days in which Antipas was my faithful martyr who was killed among you where Satan dwells this is the only church we know of that has already had a martyr the martyr's name was Antipas but we know nothing else about him Fox's book of martyrs I think has some kind of information about his martyrdom but I don't think it's taken from early sources we don't really have authoritative information about who this Antipas was but we know this he was a martyr he died and this was in the Roman capital so it was very probable he died under Roman authority as opposed to you know just tripping and falling and being run over by a chariot or something you know by accident he probably was killed by the Romans and this was something that the church was commended that they didn't you know draw back from their confession when they watched this guy go he may have been the church leader at the time he is referred to as my faithful martyr in the Greek that's the same expression that you find of Jesus in Revelation 1.5 where he's called the faithful witness the word witness and martyr are the same Greek word so actually the expression is the same Jesus is called the faithful witness Antipas is called the faithful witness too that in a sense is the dignity afforded to a faithful martyr that he wears the same title in a sense that his Lord does and he says this church though they lost a martyr no doubt a very demoralizing experience for a church did not give up they did not back down they didn't deny him even under that kind of pressure but I have a few things against you because you have there those who hold the doctrine of Balaam who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the children of Israel and to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit sexual immorality thus also you have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans which things I hate repent or else I will come to you quickly and I will fight against them with the sword of my mouth he who has an ear let him hear what the spirit says to the churches to him who overcomes I will give some of the hidden manna to eat and I will give him a white stone and on the stone a new name written which no one knows except him who receives it now as quickly as possible the problems in this church were they had those who were teaching the doctrine of Balaam and of course they had the doctrine of the Nicolaitans now what is the doctrine of Balaam said to be well it's what Balaam taught Balak who's Balak well Balak was the Moabite king who wanted to curse Israel when they were passing through his territory and he hired Balaam to curse them and Balaam couldn't do it he tried he wanted to make the money but God always overpowered Balaam and he was not able to do it he'd go into a trance and instead he'd prophesy a good thing about Israel and this made his employer very upset and Balak was furious and said I'm paying you to say the opposite not this and Balaam found himself totally incapable of earning his fee and so he came up with another plan and that is I'll tell you what I can't curse these people but you can get their god to curse them you send your pretty girls down there from Moab and from Midian and seduce the men of Israel into sexual immorality and to worship Baal Peor your god and their own god will curse them and of course that didn't happen and as the men of Israel compromised in the area of sexual immorality and idolatry through what Balaam had counseled a plague came on Israel and almost wiped them all out until Phineas a priest threw a javelin through a couple who were having sex killed them and that ended the plague pretty gruesome story as a matter of fact a lot of people died but Balaam was responsible for that this is actually mentioned in Numbers chapter 31 and verse 16 on the occasion of Balaam's death it records that he had instigated this thing and so Jesus refers to it Balaam counseled Balak to put a stumbling block in front of the children of Israel to get them to commit fornication and to sacrifice to idols or to eat things sacrificed to idols therefore the teaching of the antinomians which encouraged immorality and idolatry was very parallel to that and so it's called the doctrine of Balaam and apparently it was not too different than the doctrine of the Nicolaitans which things Jesus hates now what he promises the overcomers here are two things I will give some of the hidden manna to eat now what they have to overcome is the temptation to follow this doctrine of Balaam it's much easier when you live in a pagan Roman stronghold like Pergamos to just kind of go along and especially when everyone expects you to participate in the idolatrous feast that was as normal for citizens to do as for kids to say the pledge of allegiance at school it was basically your way of being a good citizen you go offer a sacrifice to Caesar Augustus or to the gods of Rome if you didn't placate the gods of Rome you're causing the gods of Rome to get angry and maybe they'll send an earthquake or a volcano or something to wipe people out you are you're like a traitor to your country you're endangering your nation if you don't worship the gods of Rome and especially in a place like Pergamos which was the Roman capital of the region they were under great pressure to participate at least in the idol feast no wonder there were people in church saying it's okay to do that we don't have to have this tension between us and our environment we can just go along and there would be great pressure but the overcomers are those who aren't going along they're actually facing the prospect of death like Antipas did because they won't eat meat sacrificed to idols and Jesus says well don't worry I'll give you something better to eat you stay away from those idol feasts and I'll give you a feast of your own I'll give you the hidden manna this is a reference no doubt to the manna that was in the golden pot that was stored in the Ark of the Covenant and it was a Jewish tradition that Jeremiah the prophet had taken the Ark of the Covenant down to Egypt before the Babylonians came and destroyed the temple that is Nebuchadnezzar and his armies never took away the Ark of the Covenant because Jeremiah according to tradition had whisked it off and spirited it off to Egypt where he escaped that destruction and some rabbis taught it's kind of a strange tradition but they had many strange traditions the rabbis did they taught that when the messianic age arrives that Jeremiah will come back and he'll pull out the pot of manna out of the Ark of the Covenant and he'll miraculously feed the multitudes with it this is probably why when Jesus fed the multitudes people said this is surely that prophet that was to come and they got all excited they were thinking of that tradition probably well the hidden manna is the if Jeremiah showed up and opened the pot of manna and fed people it was the beginning of the messianic age Jesus says I'll give you the hidden manna to eat you'll be part of this age of the Messiah and of course the manna is Jesus as he pointed out in John chapter 6 I am the bread that came down from heaven and so he's saying basically I'm going to give you myself really and you'll be part of the messianic age messianic feast you don't join the feasts of the pagan idols and you'll be part of my feast he says now give him a white stone on the stone a new name written which no one knows except him who receives it the white stone there's three very good opinions about what this means in fact my next book will be the white stone three views no I can't write a whole book length on this but the white stone there are three opinions I've encountered about this one is that it's a reference to a custom in the courts that a man when he was on trial and his case had been heard and the judge is handing down a verdict hands down either a white stone if it's acquittal or a black stone if it's condemnation the stone he receives either white or black determines his fate but a white stone to me he's acquitted and for Jesus to say I'll give you a white stone would be a way of saying I'm justifying you I'm acquitting you I'm going to judge you innocent and treat you as somebody who deserves to go free rather than punished like we are justified and so for Jesus to give a white stone to them would be basically saying you'll be justified you'll be acquitted you'll not be condemned if you overcome another view of the white stone is that a white stone was a token that was given to Olympic runners when they finished their race which they would later redeem for their actual wreath at the end of all the games that when each person finished their individual race the winner would get a white stone it's like a token to hold on to and when all the races had been run and the games were over everyone would redeem their wreath, their award by turning in the white stone in exchange for it. I have no idea where these ideas come from. Commentators give them, they sound good I don't know if they make them up as they go along or if there really is documentation for these practices but it's great you finish your race you make it to the end of course you won't be rewarded until the races are run by all your brothers too but you get a white stone to hold on to until the day of judgment when you'll all be rewarded together the third view and the one that seems to be most common among commentators is that a white stone was sometimes given to a visitor to a town like a key to the city somebody important comes to town you give them a white stone and it serves as sort of a backstage pass to the theater and to the games and to the other thing, it's sort of like a key to the city, you get that you get access to everything in particular among the pagans it gives you access to the idolatrous feasts but if Jesus gives you a white stone it would be a pass to his feast and not to the idolatrous feast these are some of the thoughts associated with the white stone, which one is true if I knew that I could write a book but come to think of it I have but I didn't write one on that I don't know now quickly I know we've gotten late here but I want to take this last one now Thyatira is the least important of the churches in Asia, not much significance to this town I should say, the church I don't know but the town is not very significant yet it receives the longest letter of them all Smyrna, a very good church received the shortest letter Thyatira, a church that's got some serious problems in it receives the longest letter and Thyatira was the hometown of Lydia, that was Paul's first convert, the first Christian in Philippi Philippi of course was the first place Paul went in Europe, and so Lydia was the first European Christian but she was not from Philippi she lived there, she was there probably maybe had relocated on business, she was a seller of purple cloth, which was what her hometown Thyatira was famous for, but not for much else the town didn't have an awful lot as it claimed to fame, but it did produce purple cloth which was very expensive by the way purple, you know, we take for granted the cheap dyes and things we get, they had to make dye from plants and bugs and things like that and they had to squish bugs and get purple dye out of it or something and so it was quite arduous, quite labor intensive to make dyes and so a town that was famous for making purple was just, you know, that was enough, that's a lot of work and that's their claim to fame apart from that, Thyatira was not known for very much except it is known that there were quite a few trade guilds in the town one of the things, and that might have been significant because trade guilds means, you know, if you want to work at that town, you've got to be in the union there's a union shop here, you want to do your trade, you better join the guild problem is, these are pagan guilds and when they had their guild meetings, they all you know, they offered incense to idols and things like that, which all the pagans did, it was part of the meetings and so forth of the guild, so a Christian who couldn't do that, a person who wouldn't compromise like that would have trouble finding work because he couldn't be part of the guild so, you either were under pressure economically to compromise in this town, and maybe some Christians were in fact compromising, there was one woman in town, they called her Jezebel, or at least Jesus called her that I don't know if they called her that, Jesus called her Jezebel, and she was actually teaching the church, she was like a prophetess claiming to be, and says, it's okay participate in the idolatry and fornication while you're at it and, because fornication was often part of the idolatrous temple worship too they had priestess prostitutes and, so that's what this town was like and it says, to the angel of the church of Thyatira write, these things says the son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and his feet like fine brass, eyes like a flame of fire, feet like brass, he sees clearly, penetrating vision he can judge righteously and his feet can trample irresistibly trampling the grapes of wrath as it were, when he judges his judgment is well informed and irresistible I know your works your love service, faith, and your patience and as for your works the last are more than the first so they're getting better in some ways nevertheless I have a few things against you because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and beguile my servants, to commit sexual immorality and to eat things sacrificed to idols now that's the same doctrine that was being taught in the church of Pergamos the difference is, apparently there were prophets or false teacher males teaching it in Pergamos, and in this town it happened to be a woman who was carrying that banner of antinomianism interestingly though the doctrines are both there commit fornication and eat sacrifice to idols, but in reverse order it may be that her emphasis was on the fornication whereas the teachers in Pergamos their emphasis was on the idolatry, but those two things often went together and there is emphasis in what Jesus says later on the sexual immorality of this woman and her followers he says I gave her time to repent of her sexual immorality and she did not repent God's very gracious, he could just strike someone dead when they're offending him especially when they're corrupting the church but he gives them time, space I give her space to repent it says in 2 Peter 3 9 that God is not slack concerning his promise, but he's patient toward all, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance he gives time to repent of course the time he gives, sometimes these people can do more damage, so he can't give them forever, but he gave her space to repent, she didn't use the time well, she didn't repent, indeed I will cast her into a sick bed this may be literal, this woman might have actually gotten sick or it may be figurative as opposed to a bed of fornication she's going to go to a bed of sickness, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation unless they repent of their deeds and I will kill her children which might be her literal children or it might be her disciples hard to say because it's hard to know how much of this is literal, how much is figurative her name probably wasn't literally Jezebel either probably a figurative name I'll kill her children with death and all the churches shall know that I am he who searches the minds and hearts and I will give to each one of you according to your works, the churches need to learn this, God's going to judge us according to our works this is stated by Jesus in Matthew chapter 16 verse 27 he says the son of man will come in the glory of his father and his holy angels with him and he'll reward everyone according to his works or Paul in Romans 2 verses 6-8 says that he will reward each one according to his works and he gives examples, those who do evil, tribulation and wrath and so forth and those who do good will have eternal life in 1 Peter 1 17 1 Peter 1 17, Peter said if you call him father who without partiality judges every man according to his works pass the time of your sojourning here in fear he's writing to Christians you should live in the fear of God, why? because you call God your father and you know that he's going to judge everyone impartially by their works, including you apparently so judgment is by works in the book of Revelation chapter 20 we find that the books are open to everyone who's judged by their works so what about our doctrine of justification by faith or by grace through faith not by works what do we do with that well we believe it we are justified by faith, we are justified by grace but we're judged by our works now is that a contradiction not at all if you are in fact born again which is the result of being justified by grace through faith, you will be born again you'll have a new heart, your works will be consistent with what you say you believe, remember James said faith without works is dead, if you say you have faith but you don't have the works, he says can that save you, he doesn't think so a faith that works through love is what Paul says saves us in Galatians 5, 6 it's faith that works through love, faith saves us but it has to be a faith that works, not a faith that doesn't work, it has to be a faith that changes you, if it doesn't change you, it doesn't change God's opinion of you if your faith doesn't matter to you, doesn't make a difference to you why should it make a difference to God when a person is converted genuinely, their faith changes who they are changes the direction of their going and their works show that they're a different person, their works aren't perfect no one's works are perfect but they're changed and God can take a look at our works and say okay, you have evidence that you have faith, you're in, you're saved by your faith but the way that your faith is registered is by the way you behave and that's Jesus apparently and Paul and Peter and every New Testament writer who talks about it seems to think that your works are a fairly fair gauge of whether you're saved or not so even though we're saved by something other than our works our works will show if we're saved or not because once you're saved it changes you, that's why it's called converted what does convert mean? in secular language convert means to change, that's what it means in scriptural language too it means you're changed, if you're not changed you're not converted if you're not born again you don't have a new life new behavior, then you're not what the Bible calls saved if you're justified by faith you'll be changed because that's the privileges that come with being a Christian you get changed by God, by His Spirit so I'm going to judge each one by his works and all the church is going to find that out he said in verse 23 but to you I say and to the rest in Thyatira as many as do not have this doctrine and who have not known the depths of Satan, as they call them I will put on you no other burden but hold fast what you have till I come and he who overcomes and keeps my works until the end to him I will give power over the nations he shall rule them with a rod of iron as a potter's vessel shall be broken to pieces, the quote is from Psalm 2 it's really a quote about Jesus but because you're an overcomer, you'll reign with him as Paul said, if we endure, we'll reign with him, you stay faithful to death and you'll sit with him on his throne Jesus says that later in chapter 3, he says to him that overcomes I will grant to sit with me on my throne even as I overcame and am seated with my father on his throne Revelation 3, 21 so you're going to reign with me, I'm going to reign over the nations, so will you if you're overcomers, I'll give you power over the nations along with me as I have also received from my father and I will give him the morning star which in chapter 22, verse 16 is said to be Jesus, Jesus is called the bright and morning star in Revelation 22, verse 16 so he gives the hidden manna to one group of overcomers, that's Jesus, he gives them himself, he gives the morning star to another group, that's Jesus too basically he says, you overcome what you get is me hope you like me because that's what you're going to get you know it says in Hebrews chapter 11 that he that comes to God must believe that he is and that he is the rewarder of those who diligently seek heaven no, no it doesn't say that and he's the rewarder of those who diligently seek prosperity and health no he's the rewarder of those who diligently seek happiness no that's not in there either he's the rewarder of those who diligently seek him those who come to God must believe that he is and he's the rewarder of those who diligently seek him well if you're seeking him and you get rewarded, what do you get rewarded with? Him you'd be ripped off if you're seeking him and you got something else that's no reward, if I'm seeking him what I want is him and he says if you're an overcomer you'll get me you'll get the morning star, you'll get the hidden man, you'll get me in the deal, that's what this is all about this Christian life you get Jesus he who has an ear let him hear what the spirit says to the churches I apologize some of these nights I do go quite late there's just not a good stopping point so we just keep going