are you trapped in Nicolaitan Dialectic?

[David H.]

I don't really do videos.

Very well, the passage that I would have Hoped that you Picked up on was from Acts 20, Let me quote it for you...

Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Acts 20:28-30

When We begin to read the letters to the seven churches, we can see these things playing out in them. For Example, the Ephesian church was commended for..... "and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:" (Revelation 2:2) Which Ties directly to Revelation 2:6... "But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate."

Here we see Paul warning the Church of "men arising and drawing disciples after them", and We see this Play out in this first Church in Revelation of a Church trying the false apostles and finding they are not and hating the very "Deeds of the Nicolaitans"

Now if you go on to the second church the Nicolaitans are mentioned in this gives us more details of these men.
But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. (Revelation 2:14-15)

In this "Later church", these deeds have now grown into doctrines, Doctrines that are "held" By some of the people in that church, and these doctrines are tied to the doctrines of Balaam, and Balaam's error, Which are false Teachers who exalt themselves for personal reward and grandeur. (See 2 Peter 2:14-15, And Jude 1:11, Read these Chapters in full context).....

So when You start to look at it this way, the very name Nicolaitan means what this Doctrine is, To rule over or to conquer the Laity. It is not just a lost or forgotten sect, but the very heart of what is the Antichrist spirit. Read also 1 John 2, especially consider the following:
These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. (1 John 2:26-27) This being the summary of What John wrote about before these verses.

Thoughts ?
God Bless.

 

[DancesWithGnostics]

THOUGHTS about qualifications on leadership in the early church. For bishops and deacons - a requirement was "husband of one wife". But how in the world did that ever mutate to "husband of ZERO wives" and Laity being crushed down under CLERGY in the Latin West with its "celibacy" of clergy biz, which was never advanced in the Orthodox East - and Peter falsely called a first "Pope" was
1. not in Rome
and was
2. Married (Jesus healed Peter's mother-in-law who got up and served the disciples)

Polygamy was pretty prevalent in early church days - and ONLY FOR BISHOPS AND DEACONS was it said to "have one wife".

12 gates made from a single pearl illustrate 12 gates of New Jerusalem - a gate for each son of Israel/Jacob - these 12 sons came from 4 women - Leah, Rachel and their 2 handmaidens

Sexism crept in - above and beyond the normal patriarchal society - somewhere along the line Mary Magdalene unfairly got a reputation as a prostitute WHICH IS NOT IN THE BIBLE. The CASTE SYSTEM was in place.

A celibate priesthood enhanced the power hold of the Nicolaitians.
The See of Rome was firstly "first among equals" - among the other Orthodox bishops - but somehow got too big for its britches until by 1054 Rome schitzed out in the Great Schism - daring to "excommunicate" an Orthodox Bishop.

The ancient church was successfully "Nicolaitianized" to the point that it was no longer one church.

 

[DancesWithGnostics]

Trapped in a Nicolaitian Dialectic still?

On the date of authorship of Revelation, the martyrdom of Antipas of Pergamum seemed a sure thing at 92 AD - if this was certain - it locks in the "late date" doesn't it?

I read somewhere online, and sorry I cannot find again - a reference to a book that I describe as somewhat of Greek Orthodox version of Fox's book of martyrs that spoke of Antipas - that it was NOT dead certain that 92 AD was the date of his martyrdom - that other sources said it took place under Vespasian rather than Domitian.

Kenneth Gentry has written on an "early date" for Revelation with great insight - exposing the weakness of the Irenaeus claim of a Domitian reign and Irenaeus' error of thinking Christ was 50 years old - now the other PILLAR of Antipas being martyred at 92 AD possibly crumbles to a much earlier date... and so much speculation about Revelation can be jettisonned like the "Revived Roman Empire" crock - the 7 churches represent "periods" malarkey that Scofield generated into Dispensational Truth...

Let Revelation UNTRAP itself - it was not supposed to be a sealed book - its very title is AN UNVEILING...

 

[DancesWithGnostics]

"
Antipas of Pergamum - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Antipas_of_Pergamum

The traditional account goes on to say Antipas was martyred during the reign of Nero (54-68), by burning in a brazen bull-shaped altar for casting out demons worshiped by the local population."

 

[DancesWithGnostics]

SO earlier and earlier goes the martyrdom of Antipas... but if scholars say he was martyred under Nero, Vespasian and Domitian - obviously they cannot all be right.
As it stands, we know that Antipas was martyred before Revelation was written

 

[DancesWithGnostics]

Hieromartyr Antipas, Bishop of Pergamum and Disciple of Saint John the Theologian

 

[DancesWithGnostics]

So there is disagreement on the date of Antipas' death. His name means "against all", but he was a real person - as far as I know the only martyr mentioned by name in the book of Revelation.

 

[DancesWithGnostics]

So when You start to look at it this way, the very name Nicolaitan means what this Doctrine is, To rule over or to conquer the Laity.

Amen.

 

[Pathfinder7]

The Nicolaitan dialectic perpetuates itself, The Church has Elders and Shepherds but they are like you and any believer, they are all brethren, they are not rulers over the Laity, holding the laity in their place but rather encouraging them to grow in the Grace of God to be elders themselves, and to fulfill their calling. We are all a royal priesthood, not just a select few.

A Dialectic is a relationship where a society or social construct becomes bigger than the individuals who created it, thus it becomes institutionalized and self perpetuating its authority and in order to reform it one must knock down this illusion of Authority, and untouchability and exclusivity of this leadership class. This is a big issue in Governments and secular organizations and we deal with them all the time in life, but this should not be how the Church works.

As I have mentioned to you before, The Two biggest Problems in the church today is the Nicolaitan doctrines, and the Laodicean denial in the People that leads to complacency and contentment with the way things are. the Two feed off of each other in this Nicolaitan dialectic, and the circular reasoning perpetuates this relationship.

This is not How Christ created His Body to be, and is a cycle that needs to be broken. I understand this from the worldly institutions but we are not of this world. I Hope this explains it better. I Know this is a complex topic, but the church is meant to grow and mature, not to change in Hagellian dialectics where the synthesis is worse than the thesis and antithesis and growth comes in revolutions. We the individual believer are empowered by the Holy Spirit to break this circular reasoning that keeps us dependent by growing in Christ.

Good topic/post.
----
You said,
"..This is not how Christ created His Body to be, and is a cycle that needs to be broken.
..this from the worldly institutions but we are not of this world.."
- I agree.
Modern Church is another system..
- Similar to political system/establishment.
- In many churches..often, the focus is on 'power, status,etc..'
---
We are on the 'book of Revelation study/discussion'..weekly.
- Zoom session.
Nicolaitan & Laodician issues.. ( you mentioned )
- We had an interesting discussion.

Blessings,

 

[David H.]

Let Revelation UNTRAP itself - it was not supposed to be a sealed book - its very title is AN UNVEILING...

Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter; (Revelation 1:19)

I Believe in the threefold Revelation of the Words of this Prophecy. I Believe the letters point to churches that were seen by John hence in existence at the time he was given the vision, and How they were when he was given the vision, and how they foretell of the Church ages, which are the hereafter. I Personally believe this Points to a later writing of The Book of Revelation, and the Gospel of John as dealing primarily with the Church after the destruction of the temple.

So I do believe that these letters deal with Churches in the past in relation to the vision, ones that were present at the time of the vision, and ones that prophecy of ages of the church to come. We all will face the same trials and temptation and must overcome the same adversities in our walk as do all these churches, but each age has a Specific degree to which this spirit of the age affects them. We here now, I believe are living in the Laodicean Generation and this letter speaks to us all in these times, this being the "Amen" age of the church, the final stage of its development, and the time of seduction similar to how Jesus was tempted in the wilderness, which includes the Mark of the beast and its promise of "normalcy" should you worship the beast.

I wrote the following on another post to explain this....
The Mark of the beast is the falling into the three fold seduction of the Devil, the very same temptations he used on Christ and the very same he uses on all believers. The Lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the Pride of Life. They are all intertwined in the Mark, Name and Number of the beast, and it is these sins which the final church age of Laodicea Overcomes as Christ overcame which places this church in the end times.

Read Matthew 4, 1 John 2:15-18, Revelation 3:21, and revelation 13:14-15.

There is in my Opinion truth to the Preterist position, But just like Pre-millennialism it is not the whole truth, they are more in harmony with one another than in opposition to each other. I Do not dismiss your preterism but I do disagree with the early writing of Revelation. I Believe Revelation and the Gospel of John were written after the destruction of the Temple.

God Bless, and thank you for your comments.

 

[marks]

So when You start to look at it this way, the very name Nicolaitan means what this Doctrine is, To rule over or to conquer the Laity. It is not just a lost or forgotten sect, but the very heart of what is the Antichrist spirit.

When you start to look at it that way, yes, I'd go along with that, if this is your point of view, you may more readily go with the name of the nicolaitans being all we need to know what they were about. And how to apply that to church today.

I see these letters in a number of ways. I don't see the body of Christ being in the same condition as you seem to. I don't see true believers dying spiritually, as it seems you do.

I don't see us being spiritually deficient, waiting and hoping for more Holy Spirit so we can finally start to be what all Christians were supposed to be, as it seems that you do.

I don't find your argument any more compelling than I've found any for what this doctrine of the Nicolaitans was.

"and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:" (Revelation 2:2) Which Ties directly to Revelation 2:6... "But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate."

For instance, what is the connection you see here? You state, which ties directly, what is the connection? You've tested the apostles, and you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, you are assuming the equivalence between "false apostle" and "Nicolaitan". But that's not stated in the Bible itself.

Isn't the 'heart' of antichrist denying Jesus Christ?

Much love!

 

[David H.]

I see these letters in a number of ways. I don't see the body of Christ being in the same condition as you seem to. I don't see true believers dying spiritually, as it seems you do.

I don't see us being spiritually deficient, waiting and hoping for more Holy Spirit so we can finally start to be what all Christians were supposed to be, as it seems that you do.

I don't find your argument any more compelling than I've found any for what this doctrine of the Nicolaitans was.

Your response here shows the Laodicean Denial you are living in, the two go hand in hand, and feed off of each other. One says we do not need anything else, and the other says all you need is our leadership and you will be good with God. Your comment exemplifies this perfectly.

Christ Jesus has so much more for you, and for each individual believer, More than you can even imagine, and you Limit that by saying we have everything we need and we are in need of Nothing. These are the "unsearchable riches of His Grace" (Ephesians 2:7, Ephesians 3:8) Which you are denying the need for.

It is this cycle of circular reasoning that has you and many others in Christendom trapped in a state of infancy of the faith, never growing, never arriving at the fulness of Christ. It is not that Christ is withholding his grace from us, but that mankind is resisting the Work of the Holy Spirit in them by refusing to yield to the work of the Holy Spirit in us. We are busy following man, practicing religion, and bending scripture to fit our understanding that we are trying to contain what is limitless and infinite in the finite mind and understanding of man. Man is inept at understanding God fully, But we have the mind of Christ.

I Say none of this to offend you, but to encourage you and others who may read this that there is so much more to what Christ has for us than what any man made religion can provide, A relationship with the Creator, One who knows you better than you know yourself. He wants what is best for you, Life and abundant life.

He did not just put a concept like Nicolaitanism in scripture without giving us the Unction to understand this doctrine, it is all there in scripture as scripture interprets scripture. I showed you the History of it, how it formed, How Paul saw it forming and warned against it, how it manifested in the Epistles of John, Peter and Jude and How this is Part and parcel to the churches in Asia minor at the time and how this doctrine continues on today in the church ages. It is not just these two simple mentions here in Revelation, but what all the Apostles warned about, That Christ Himself warned the Apostles about (Matthew 23:1-12) it is the very same thing that led to The religious Jews to demand the crucifiction of their Messiah and which leads the churches of men to slaughter the saints that disagree with them thinking they are doing service to God. It is the very same attitude that the harlot religion is based on, and what the antichrist will be propped up by the false prophet with, the fact that Christ gives a name to this is a blessing to help us identify this spirit at work in the world and amongst the church to show us the tares among the wheat. It is those who want to keep you under their control that want to make this sound like an outdated irrelevant sect that the church conquered early on in its history, because to say otherwise is to question their own authority by which they rule over the Laity, and their are enough gullible sheep that are easily led astray by such teachings, for those false apostles keep them suckling on their breast instead of digesting the meat of the word themselves and using the unction and anointing of the Holy Spirit to teach them.

Do you see this? I See in your response here a Laodicean mindset at work, One that feeds the Nicolaitan ego and control over the sheep, leading them to slaughter.

 

[marks]

Your response here shows the Laodicean Denial you are living in, the two go hand in hand, and feed off of each other. One says we do not need anything else, and the other says all you need is our leadership and you will be good with God. Your comment exemplifies this perfectly.

Great. Your response is nothing more than a textbook Ad Hominem.

So there ya' go!

and you Limit that by saying we have everything we need and we are in need of Nothing.

And as you make your assumptions, you put your words in my mouth, you make me sound like I'm saying what I'm not, and how is that not dishonest?

There seems to be an epidemic of this these days!

It is this cycle of circular reasoning that has you and many others in Christendom trapped in a state of infancy of the faith, never growing, never arriving at the fulness of Christ. It is not that Christ is withholding his grace from us, but that mankind is resisting the Work of the Holy Spirit in them by refusing to yield to the work of the Holy Spirit in us. We are busy following man, practicing religion, and bending scripture to fit our understanding that we are trying to contain what is limitless and infinite in the finite mind and understanding of man. Man is inept at understanding God fully, But we have the mind of Christ.

Say what you will, but in truth you do not know me, and do not describe me. Lengthy Ad Hominem. Meaningless and vain.

but to encourage you and others who may read this that there is so much more to what Christ has for us than what any man made religion can provide, A relationship with the Creator, One who knows you better than you know yourself. He wants what is best for you, Life and abundant life.

Well, yes! Moment by moment communion with God as we trust in the finished work of Christ in the cross. The God Who made us for the purpose of sharing His love with us, who has recreated us to be in a love relationship with Him, without a stain or shadow!

He did not just put a concept like Nicolaitanism in scripture without giving us the Unction to understand this doctrine,

"so if you don't get it, you are carnal!" I've heard all that sort of thing before. But I prefer to stay with what is written in the Bible, as presented by God.

Do you see this? I See in your response here a Laodicean mindset at work, One that feeds the Nicolaitan ego and control over the sheep, leading them to slaughter.

Well, that certainly speaks for itself!!

Leading them to slaughter?

So . . . what do you REALLY think?

Man, when I think I've heard it all!

Much love!

 

[David H.]

But I prefer to stay with what is written in the Bible, as presented by God.

That is Just it, my Point is based on the Bible and what is written therein, You just cannot accept the conviction it brings you, and you quench the Spirit each time you reject this. Follow the Path outlined in 2 Peter 1:5-10, that is all i encourage you to do. Begin the Journey and he too will show you these things and more..... Again I said none of this to offend you but to encourage you.

God Bless.

 

[marks]

You just cannot accept the conviction it brings you, and you quench the Spirit each time you reject this.

And you continue with this emptiness.

While in fact, I just don't use church tradition as a basis for doctrine. And I hang tight with the specific wording of the text. That's all.

Make it out to be some spiritual deficiency, but what are you really accomplishing?

A pity we can't just have a discussion without this sort of thing!

And it seems you don't see how meaningless your presumption is. That's too bad!

Much love!

 

[DancesWithGnostics]

"One that feeds the Nicolaitan ego and control over the sheep, leading them to slaughter."

My goodness!

Have the Lambs stopped screaming, Clarice?

 

[David H.]

While in fact, I just don't use church tradition as a basis for doctrine. And I hang tight with the specific wording of the text. That's all.

Out of curiousity, where did i use "church tradition" as a basis for doctrine? This is flat out a false accusation, I use scripture to interpret scripture. Jesus would not put something in the word of God and say he "hated" that thing and then not explain what it is... I used the Word of God to explain what I see as being Nicolaitanism, a doctrine of elevating men above other men, which was warned of By Christ Himself and dealt with by all the Apostles in their epistles, every one of them from Paul, to Peter to John to Jude to James. Jesus in revealing the name of the doctrine ties it all together with this name as the "antichrist" spirit which is revealed in Revelation, which itself is a word that references those who are falsely anointed, and who exalt themselves such as Lucifer has done. This is not just a Catholic problem but a Protestant one, Where denominations are built around the teachings of men, and you can see this in the names given their sects "CALVINism, LUTHERanism, WESLEYanism, etc. It is a flaw both in the Laity and the leadership that perpetuates the dialectic and leads to bondage to the religious spirits in the church. To say there is no problem is to be ignorant of ones role in maintaining the system of bondage.

While they (False teachers) promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. (2 Peter 2:19)

 

[marks]

Out of curiousity, where did i use "church tradition" as a basis for doctrine? This is flat out a false accusation,

If I'm remembering incorrectly, I apologize! I thought I had read where you were giving patristic citations for the meaning of "Nicolaitan", and the doctrine, was that someone else?

Sorry if I misspoke!

Much love!

 

[marks]

Out of curiousity, where did i use "church tradition" as a basis for doctrine? This is flat out a false accusation,

I've just reviewed, I'm not seeing what I was thinking of, so it must have been someone else.

Much love!

 

[marks]

I used the Word of God to explain what I see as being Nicolaitanism,

And then you castigate me for not seeing what you see and what's up with that?

Don't you in being my judge set yourself over me, effectively doing that which you are preaching against?

Either see this your way, or I'm leading the lambs to the slaughter?

I've yet to see a real Scripture which equates the antichrist spirit to the doctrine of the nicolaitans. Myself, I think that needlessly limits what antichrist is about. Conquering and to conquer is just a mean to an end for antichrist. The end itself, to be "instead of Christ", that's antichrist.

Much love!