Message to the Seven Churches. IN REVELATION TWO AND THREE CHRIST DEFINES THE THE CHURCH. HE SETS OUT THE CRITERIA THAT WILL BE USED TO DETERMINE THOSE WHO JOHN WILL SEE WHEN HE IS RESURRECTED. REVELATION 2 SPEAKS TO EPHESUS, SMYRNA, PERGAMOS AND THYATIRA.

Revelation 1-13 comprise what I consider to be the Historical perspective of the church. John gets symbolically resurrected and begins to give a historical review of the Church that he sees as passed on to him by Christ from the perspective of The day of The Lord. It is necessarily a historic perspective because of how the seals are actually opened and NOT how people generally say that they are.

Use this link to go back to the summary.

Peter had addressed this issue to a lesser degree. To me the translation obscures what Peter said. So what did Peter say?

So you see it comes, by a rather circuitous route, back to first love.

Christ had summarised this same opportunity for eternal life in Matthew 13 with the parable of the sower, by the grain that fell among thorns and on stony ground. That approach again shows that it is a process that takes commitment. The common theme in Revelation 2-3 is that Christ understands our plight and is there for us but we must do our part and hold on until the Day of the Lord, not hold on indefinitely. The cursus publicus was the state sponsored courier and transportation service of the Roman Empire. The original post was implemented by runners but soon switched to wagons operated by the same runners and that was the state of affairs at the time of John. The seven Churches were on a Roman mail route in Asia Minor and the mail followed the sequence that the book addresses the churches in. This has spawned the theory and doctrine that these churches refer to church eras. A messenger sent from Patmos would most naturally land at Ephesus and would follow the mail route north-west to Pergamum and back down (south-east) to Laodicea and back to Patmos to report. Notice that the course of the letter is only relative to where John was at the time and it does not indicate that the mail route had a specific beginning or end; it would only be the course of that particular messenger. Generally the route forms a continuous loop so it does not mean that Roman mail-men would follow this circuit but that a messenger sent by John to these destinations would find this the most natural route. There is an even more compelling reason why the route starts with Ephesus for John. After John's release Irenaeus says that he worked out of the Ephesian area and it is there that he wrote Revelation followed by his gospel and letters. This explains why the letter first went to the Church at Ephesus.

The Lettter

The Roman Empire went from Britain to Iran (Parthia) and the Church spread even beyond that i.e. to Ethiopia for sure. We all accept that the letter with the seven messages were sent only to churches in Asia Minor and not to the Church at large. Did only the Church in Asia Minor have problems? I think not, but they embodied the  problems of the whole Church. I believe that the Church in Asia Minor is symbolic of the whole Church over all time but that does not mean that I believe in Church Eras.

Church Eras

. . . Leger maintains that there was another doctor, a German,  named Reinerius, whom historians have confounded with  Reinerus, who adopts the words of the latter as his own; and  that Usher and M. Frecher ‡ are of the same mind. This  confirms our view.

A certain anonymous inquisitor, addressing Rostagn, Archbishop of Embrun and others, § " deposes, says, and intends  to prove, that these men of the valley of Frassinier have been  for a hundred years or more, and through these times, and  other times, from such a duration of those beginning no remembrance exists among men, have been, and for the present,  are heretics." Popliniere, || speaking of the confession which  those who had escaped the massacres of Merindol, presented  to Francis I. 1544, without hesitation admits, that they had  received it from their ancestors, " even as they had learned  from the ancients, according to every monument of ages and  times."

John Crispin and others, say, that " the Waldenses of the  valleys of Piedmont are from time immemorial, and that they  are come of the Albigenses of Provence." Campion the Jesuit calls them " our ancestors," and, therefore, more ancient  than the Roman Church.

Marco Aurelio Iiorcnco, Joint Lord of the valley of Lucerna, and Prior of St Roc, in 1632, published in Italian, "A  Narrative of the Introduction of Heretics into the Valleys."**  He intends to show, that the heretical religion is not so an-  cient as the apostles, but after tormenting himself to no purpose, to evince its late original, he is obliged to own, that  " no certainty can be had of its first entrance." He is ashamed  to confess that it is as old as the apostolic age, and continues,

"No edict can be found of any prince who gave permission  for the introduction of this religion into those parts. The  princes only grant permission to their subjects, to continue  the same religion which they had received from their ancestors.". . .

There is a facebook entry on The Waldensians or Waldenses, dated July 3, 2015, https://www.facebook.com/BiblicalTruth2027/posts/the-waldensians-or-waldenseslentolo-is-the-author-of-the-earliest-history-of-the/592475930855097/

. . .Sacho admits that they flourished at least five hundred years before the time of Peter Waldo. Their antiquity is also allowed by Gretzer, a jesuit, who wrote against them. Crantz, in his "History of the United Brethren," speaks of this class of Christians in the following words:

'These ancient Christians date their origin from the beginning of the fourth century, when one Leo, at the great revolution in religion under Constantine the Great, opposed the Innovations of Sylvester, bishop of Rome.

Let me outline what I hear when people defend church eras. As I understand it this doctrine is traced to Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser, a Catholic priest and prophet of the 17th century, who prophesied of seven church ages as he called them. It is not a part of the tradition of apostolic Christianity and is not mentioned even in Revelation. It has been modified by the Worldwide Church of God and is now a part of their doctrinal arsenal. The basis appears to be an acceptance that the mail route stopped at some point and started at some point but I do not see that recorded in history. It seems to me that it was a circuit and mail could join it or be delivered at any point. When mail reached Laodicea I perceive it going to Ephesus and continuing again. Because I struggle with accepting the view that the route starts and ends I have had to form a different understanding of what John is saying.

Simultaneous Problems

To me it is quite logical that the letter started out at Ephesus. One possibility is that John started at Ephesus  because it was the most convenient place for someone starting out from Patmos, the other and more likely possibility is that he was living in Ephesus at that time, but in either case it was not the beginning of the route. I see one Church at the same time (around AD 100) with groups carrying different historical baggage in different places under one Roman authority (the same general environment) and with a communication system that ensured that everybody knew everybody else's business. I see it as different experiences that different people go through or observe simultaneously. It was one Letter and everybody knew everybody else's message and hence problem while the problem existed. With Church eras the problem would be gone by the time the letter reached the next destination.

As a consequence of my limitations I also see the messages each carrying ONE fundamental principle that is critical for an individual or group to enter the Kingdom. Now to how it fits into the rest of the book.

Christ defines the Church. He sets out the criteria that will be used to determine those who John will see when he is resurrected. The common theme in Chapters 2-3 is that Christ understands our plight and is there for us but we must do our part and hold on until the Day of the Lord. He gives us seven points to keep us in focus; the seven main issues that will plague us down through the centuries as individuals and collectively as a Church. He used seven churches of an existing mail route to portray them. The captions that I have made are for memory value. Each Church had a spiritual issue to deal with.

Ephesus:

there will be danger of love growing cold instead of maturing with age (chapter 2:4);

Smyrna:

there will be fear (chapter 2:10, note 1 John 4:18) leading to acting without faith;

Pergamos:

there will be exploitation for money (Balaam) and for preeminence (Nicolaitans);

Thyatira:

there will be seduction to do evil by those closest to us (Jezebel);

Sardis:

some who already have their names in the Book of Life will have it blotted out(chapter 3:5) because they have forgotten HOW they received the word of God (chapter 3:3);

Philadelphia:

staying on course (sticking to the Word chapter 3:8) by discerning what is spiritual from what is carnal (chapter 3:9).

Laodicea:

who deceive themselves into believing that they have got it covered (chapter 3:17) because of their material success, instead of facing their trials in faith by The Word.

Now each of the messages above were directed at a specific group but at the end of each message God tells them that the Spirit speaks to ALL the churches and they (implying the whole Church) must ALL be careful to listen to that Spirit. The messages are given by one Spirit to the whole Church. To me this highlights the danger of the doctrine of Church eras. Church eras focus on time not situations. Church eras propose that during a particular time there will be a specific danger and in my opinion that is not what God says nor what I have observed in history. For example, at present a significant part of the body of Christ lies in danger of having their names blotted out because they have forgotten how they received the word but that is not to say that we are in Sardis. Many people live in fear (we call it stress nowadays) because they work hard when they can find a job but still they can't make ends meet. The source of the fear was different in Rome but it has the same effect. I don't think that one can understand the pressures on Philadelphia without an understanding that these things were happening all around them. In every Christian group there is and element of all the Churches mentioned. Every Christian has to deal with these things in himself or in others and this synopsis gives us the approach to take in each situation.

It is certain that there is an end time fulfillment since Christ says that He will come quickly (assuming that quickly means soon) when He is addressing these churches. For this to happen they must all exist shortly before He comes. I prefer to believe that these represent the complete Church given by the use of the number 7. It is completely broken or fragmented but collectively whole. Each represents a characteristic that the Church carries throughout its existence.

It must also be true that these conditions exist throughout the reaping of the 144,000 since it is directed to those who want to be counted among them.

These points are all supported by the warning given in Revelation 2 to Christians throughout time who want to be firstfruits:

Whichever Church we belong to this is talking to us therefore our church must resemble at least one of these churches. These lead me to conclude that seven here refers to the complete church.

Finally it appears to me that the mail route was a complete circuit. I have not been able to establish this conclusively in history but from looking at the map it seems logical to go from Laodicea back to Ephesus. It did not have an end but formed a loop. It may be that in the cycle one situation leads to the other (check it for yourself and see that this is possible). A loop is eternal. The issues with the Church form a closed loop that never ends. So why bother so much with this? Because these seven problems are in my family and probably in yours too. They are often so well concealed (sometimes by institutional or national values) that you may not see them at first. Take the issue with exploiting the Church. Your spouse and children are part of the Church. Check to see if you do any of these to them as we go along.

Why does He talk to the Churches first? The churches are also the 12 tribes. They were arrayed around the tabernacle in order so in approaching the tabernacle the first thing you encounter would be the church. It is not divided into tribes here but into spiritual groups.

Before I get into the meat of the matter let me say that these things are directed at the family. The Church is just a collection of families and so it fails when families fail. It is about each of us ensuring that these things do not exist in our families and it would then never be extended to the Church. For example if I am primarily concerned about my feelings and how the actions of the family impact on me rather that on how I can be a blessing to the family then love will grow old and I will infect the Church. If I am wrapped up in my fears, what the neighbours think, will I lose my job etc. then I will compromise God's will and infect the Church.

The Sympathetic Nervous System

In response to acute stress, the body's sympathetic nervous system (fight-or-flight response system) is activated with a sudden release of hormones. The sympathetic nervous system causes the release of adrenaline and noradrenaline among other hormones. The heart rate, blood pressure, and breathing rate increase and we are ready but for what: flight or fight? When you cannot fight then the only response seems to be flight. Fight is not a Christian option based on the message to Ephesus. After the threat is gone, it takes up to an hour for the body to return to normal but with stress it may be constant and never go away. Sometimes the cause of the stress is so deeply embedded in our subconscious that we have no real understanding of it. The typical response to any stress is flight (associated with fear) or fight (associated with anger and aggression). The fight response is dealt with in dealing with first love while the second response is dealt with as fear. They are flip sides of the same coin.

EPHESUS

Dealing with ageing love. AS LOVE AGES IT MUST MATURE AND SHIFT FROM EMOTION TO COMMITMENT. THE CHALLENGE WITH LOVE IS THAT SOMETIMES FIRST WORKS ARE SEPARATED FROM FIRST LOVE BY CONSIDERABLE TIME. THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF LOVE MAY WELL BE COMMITMENT. BECAUSE OF CHRIST'S FIRST LOVE HE COULD DO THE FIRST WORKS WHICH WERE ORDAINED FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD. HIS COMMITMENT TO LIVING UP TO THOSE FIRST WORKS NEVER WAVERED.

First love is what counteracts the fight response. Jesus said (John 18:36 [KJV]) . . . My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. So it is a waste of time fighting now. We would be in opposition to God. First love comes with first works. First works are what we do before the sympathetic nervous system kicks in and corrupts them due to stress. Love gets corrupted by stress which causes hurt so we build callouses to prevent the hurt but it also deadens us. To return to first love is difficult because we do not want to remove the callouses and expose the tender areas under them again. That means we settle for loss of sensitivity, which makes us callous to the promptings of the Holy Spirit, in other words we quench the Spirit. The Ephesians were gentile converts who had put paganism behind and were already known for their love.

Paul wrote them a letter of encouragement which they apparently heeded since he did not write a second. He encouraged them to unity in chapter 4.

First let me comment on verse 3 because it seems to give no end of trouble. The bond of peace is like glue, it is like the ligament between two joints. Peace acts as glue. Unity of the Spirit is necessary when you have different parts that are of the same Spirit. Let us look at an excerpt from I Corinthians 12 which deals with the matter in great detail: I Corinthians 12:4-11 [KJV], Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.  [5] And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.  [6] And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.  [7] But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.  [8] For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;  [9] To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;  [10] To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:  [11] But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will . When you put it together is makes perfect sense. The glue of peace keeps people with different personalities, but the same Spirit, united.

So he encouraged them to unity in chapter 4 and to family in chapter 5.

To deal with the second (family) first, it is easy to get married, it is staying married that poses the problem. Once the initial excitement settles down the daily commitment must begin. Nobody can sustain the initial high of first love expressed in courtship, but it is during that period that we are able to identify first works. Casting our mind back those first works reignites the flames that protect us from emotional incontinence. It is by being committed to those initial intentions that the marriage endures and deepens.

The other issue is encapsulated in the statement familiarity breeds contempt. At initial encounters we usually put our best foot forward and try to make a good impression. No human can sustain the peace that comes from innocence and high expectations. It is by reminding ourselves of the original attitude, that we know how to act to sustain love when time erodes our initial inhibitions, and subsequent events propel us to abandon relationships and create war.

In 1 Corinthian 13 we see the effect of first love, which is in contrast to the works of the flesh in Galatians 5:16-26. With first love we are able to satisfy all demands for benevolence by the overwhelming emotion that is a constituent of first love. As time goes on these same activities can only be achieved by a sound commitment since the pull of life is downwards like gravity towards the works of the flesh.

Paul visited Ephesus on his third missionary journey (Acts 18:23-20:38). He was accompanied by Priscilla and Aquila (Acts18:18-19). It is here that we are introduced to Apollos (Acts 18:24-28). Paul spent three years there working at his trade (Acts 20:31-34) and preaching from one house to another (Acts 20:20) and in whatever hall he could use, to the point where magicians were converted and burned their books (Acts 19:19).

The external environment (the establishment) is one of strong pagan tradition. In Acts chapter 19 we see how the church started out and became an unstoppable force to convert pagan magicians in verse 19, but soon had to face the immovable object of the statue of Diana of the Ephesians in verse 28.

During the reign of Augustus (27 BC), Ephesus began to be developed as a city of eminence and prosperity. Augustus (the emperor who established the Roman Empire as a united power) made Ephesus the capital of the Roman province of Asia and it became the largest commercial centre in Asia and the third largest city in the Empire, after Rome and Alexandria, during his time. Ephesus was the beginning of The Royal Road, built by the Persians, that ended in Susa the Persian capital. Ephesus had everything that the Romans could offer in the way of enticement and entertainment.

Despite this, in the Church at the time of Paul we see a strong commitment to Christ. The challenge was to sustain their godly love first in the face of the pulls of the society. In Revelation Christ reminds them that He controls the message and He is aware of what is happening in the Church. As He put it He walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks. This is clarified by an understanding of what was recorded of Satan by Ezekiel.

This is an allegory to Satan and indicates his authority at the time, and his relationship with the other angels. He traversed the ranks and interacted at all levels because of his authority and by such means he shared their experiences. Christ is saying something similar about Himself. Satan was only able to do that with part of the Kingdom but He is aware of all.

The Pros: You have worked tirelessly, You hate evil, you reject those who are not really sent by me.

The Cons: Your actions are no longer fuelled by your initial commitment. Things like ingratitude and callousness are setting in.

The Requirement: Relive the initial experiences and implement the actions as you would have then.

The Promise: 1..I know, 2..Eternal life, 3..if you don't I will remove you.

God defines true love as loving Him first. If we love Him we keep his commandments and the first part of love is to love Him (Matthew 22:36-40). The stress of life drives us to put our own interests first. The Bible goes into more detail and I have captured the essentials in an article called First Love.

SMYRNA

Dealing with fear. THE ISSUE WITH SMYRNA WAS FEAR (REVELATION 2:10), THAT WAS WHAT GOD WAS CONCERNED ABOUT, NOT THE PERSECUTION. THE PERSECUTION WAS NOT UNDER THEIR CONTROL BUT THE FEAR WAS. PERSECUTION WOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM IF THEY DID NOT EXPERIENCE FEAR. DAVID SAID THAT WHEN HE WALKED THROUGH THE VALLEY OF THE SHADOW OF DEATH HE WAS NOT AFRAID (PSALM 23:4). THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL WALKED THROUGH THE RED SEA TOWARDS THE WILDERNESS FROM EGYPT WITH A WALL OF FEAR ON EITHER SIDE BUT DID NOT SUCCUMB. GOD HAS NOT GIVEN US A SPIRIT OF FEAR (II TIMOTHY 1:7). PERFECT LOVE CASTS OUT FEAR (I JOHN 4:18). CHRIST SAID DO NOT BE AFRAID.

Paul told Timothy (II Timothy 1:7 [KJV]) For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind . So in place of fear we use the power of the Holy Spirit, be rational and express love. Fear can petrify people, which means that they do nothing, and just wish that the cause will go away. Most people are more afraid of being hurt than of death. When faced with the hurt or embarrassment some people elect to commit suicide. Fear comes in many forms: fear of embarrassment, fear of ridicule, fear of losing, fear of failure and the list goes on. All of these things are associated with pain and people fear pain. This world causes fear to be normal and we develop unhealthy coping mechanisms. It manifests itself as stress or even bravado. When you cannot fight then the only response seems to be flight. Fight is not a Christian option based on the message to Ephesus. After the threat is gone, it takes up to an hour for the body to return to normal but with stress it may be constant and never go away. Sometimes the cause of the stress is so deeply embedded in our subconscious that we have no real understanding of it. The typical response to any stress is flight (associated with fear), or fight (associated with anger and aggression). The fight response is dealt with in dealing with first love, while the flight response is dealt with here as fear. They are flip sides of the same coin.

The key thing about fear is that it can cause us to respond irrationally and prevent us from doing what should be done, and we defer to the most comfortable situation. We cannot stop those hormones by ourselves. The answer  to dealing with fear is psalm 23. Psalms Chapter 23 [KJV], The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want. [2] He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters. [3] He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name’s sake. [4] Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me. [5] Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over. [6] Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever. Notice that David recognised that there was a reason to be afraid. The shadow of death means that you know that it is there but you don’t know where, when or how it will strike, but it is like a looming shadow. It is not something quite tangible. That is what fear does and sometimes the reality is really far less threatening than we imagine once we learn how to handle it: Isaiah 14:12-19 [KJV], How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! [13] For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: [14] I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. [15] Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. [16] They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms; [17] That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners? [18] All the kings of the nations, even all of them, lie in glory, every one in his own house. [19] But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet . The reality is that God will give us the power over it in due time, so we can go on boldly.

The environment is hardship and martyrdom. The challenge is to resist succumbing to the allure of those who claim that they are specially blessed on the evidence of their carnal assets, and hence need have no fear. He reminds them that He has been there too.

The Pros: You are laying down your lives for my sake

The Cons:

The Requirement: continue to do what is right

The Promise: 1..I know, 2..Eternal life

The Synagogue of Satan (Jews)

This is not talking about Jews as a people but as an abstraction. These represent people who claim the outward evidence of being God's people but their hearts reveal something else. Interestingly it is these people who are the greatest threat. Let me state the meaning of synagogue according to Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments

G4864 συναγωγή sunagoge (sïn-a-ğō-ǰee') n.

1. a gathering of persons.

2. (specially) a Jewish “synagogue” (the meeting or the place).

3. (by analogy) a religious meeting or building (of Jews, Jewish Christians, Greeks, or even of Satan)

We see that this is referring to a group (the synagogue of Satan is people not a building) who claim to be of the royal line of Israel (Jews) but are really agents of Satan. Jews are the people that the messiah came to in person, He sent apostles to the other tribes: Matthew 15:24 [KJV], But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel ; Matthew 10:5-6, 23 [KJV], These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: [6] But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel...23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come . Jews are a people who have a lot of physical evidence for being God's people. They are the tribe that remained so we all know who they are but the rest were scattered. They have relied on physical signs as in Matthew 12:38-39 [KJV], Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. [39] But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas ; and also Matthew 16:1-4 [KJV], The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven. [2] He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red. [3] And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowring. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times? [4] A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed . They had Moses and the prophets (Luke 16:29) i.e. the Bible at that time or the Oracles of God (Romans 3:1-2), but they did not believe Christ (John 5:3647). They also have circumcision, the Tabernacle and the Priesthood. The first mention of circumcision is in Genesis 17 where God appears to Abraham and promises that his descendants will become a great nation and inherit the land which came to represent God's kingdom. It continues in Genesis 21 with the birth and circumcision of Isaac. So these are people who appear to have evidence that they are specially blessed and have a claim to Christ and the Kingdom but do not believe Him and take Him at His word. This group is referred to again when speaking to Philadelphia. The issue of Jewishness and the Synagogue of Satan is critical to Philadelphia and Smyrna because they cannot look to the physical for answers to fear or God's truth. For example circumcision is now of the heart (Romans 2:25-29) and and really always has been (Deuteronomy 30:6) so the sign has in a sense changed and we have to know where to look for it. The Tabernacle has also changed (1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19) as well as the priesthood (Hebrews 5:5-6). The Synagogue of Satan is important to fear because they want Christians to focus on physical evidence to deal with fear, but God points us to the spiritual. The issues are no longer physical as with the physical Jews, but spiritual for the spiritual Jews of Romans 10, which we discuss later when dealing with the 144,000.

The synagogue of Satan is not a temple of idol worship, they are not representatives of an identifiable pagan God, but are used by Satan to stand in opposition to God's Church. In the very early stages they where actually Jews by lineage that cast the true Church out of the synagogue and forced them to meet in homes and so on. As time went on the face of this group changed and the claim to be the royal line of Israel is now identified with Christianity. On a personal level they may be the very members of our Church who encourage us to act on fear of physical instead of faith in spiritual. They would be oblivious to the fact that they are working for Satan. Institutionally the Synagogue of Satan then is an organisation that impersonates the Church but rejects the authority of the Word of God, or individually, perhaps that group of otherwise genuine Christians who now encourage the rest to abandon spiritual Christian values for physical ones. This is seen especially in some particular matter that they elect as an exception, as is often the case during political campaigns. From where it is mentioned in Revelation fear seems to be their primary tool. Our fears and phobias are exploited by these people.

Christ knew that we would have to face trials of varying degrees and so He told us not to be afraid.

Many preach the prosperity gospel but that is not biblical.

Things will happen to us and some will shake our faith but we are not to go off running scared. We are told to pray (James 5:13). Satan presents all sorts of negative scenarios for if we don't capitulate but God tells us to be like Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego.

Fear

This is what happens to honest people, and if not for God it would destroy us all. You can be prosecuted for not baking an obscene cake. The present trend in sexual harassment cases leaves me to fear for the children. Same sex relationships are on the rise with no corresponding sexual harassment issues, but a man can bring a woman flowers and find himself on the wrong end of a lawsuit even though he is doing what has always been considered as desirable. A person can do a masters degree and not earn enough to have a decent livelihood. Honest people need to be afraid of what they eat, where they go and so on and the covid situation hosts an even more dastardly potential.

Abraham Harold Maslow was an American psychologist who created Maslow's hierarchy of needs, a theory of psychological health which proposed that needs were fulfilled in priority. The most basic was physical and the last to be sought after was self actualisation. I am suggesting that the intensity of our fears follow the same path. Much of the feedback from social commentators suggest to me that in the fifties and sixties people were concerned about the top of the pyramid but nowadays the fears are more fundamental.

Paul describes the atmosphere of fear to Timothy

PERGAMOS

Exploiting the brethren. TWO THINGS FORM THE BASIS OF THE PROMISE OF MESSAGE 3. THESE DISTIL TO MONEY AND PREEMINENCE. GET RID OF THE DOCTRINE OF BALAAM (MONEY GRABBER) AND GET RID OF NICOLAITANS (PREEMINENCE GRABBERS). IN FACT THESE TWO HAVE SOMETHING IN COMMON. THEY BOTH USED GIFTS FOR MATERIAL GAIN AS JAMES SAID ABOUT BALAAM (JAMES VERSE 11). BALAAM ABUSED HIS GIFT OF PROPHECY WHICH GAVE HIM INSIDE UNDERSTANDING OF GOD AND HIS PURPOSE (NOTE THAT BOTH PREACHING AND EDUCATING ARE TYPES OF PROPHECY). NICOLAITANS USED THEIR GIFTS FOR SERVICE GIVEN BY THE LAYING ON OF HANDS TO GAIN PROMINENCE IN THE CHURCH, TO CREATE MATERIAL GAIN FOR THEMSELVES.

When I first came to an understanding of this message I understood it to refer to spiritual gifts alone but since then I came to recognise that it is all gifts. We have gifts of eyesight, education, material resources and so on that are part of us like prophecy was a part of Balaam; as well as gifts that come by our station in life like access to people of value, like rank was to the Nicolaitans. All gifts or talents must be used according to God's will and not primarily for our profit. The Parable of the Talents is found in Matthew chapter 25, verses 14-30. It points out that we are accountable for our talents. Our greed leads to exploitation. Balaam also brings this to focus as he did not concern himself with the impact of his actions on Israel. Read more on the Doctrine of Balaam here . How do we deal with our brothers in Christ in relation to seeking our own interest? Cain ended up a murderer because he did not consider himself his brother's keeper (Genesis 4:9). Notice what is said in I John 3:14-22 [KJV], We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. [15] Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. [16] Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. [17] But whoso hath this worlds good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? [18] My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. [19] And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him. [20] For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. [21] Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God. [22] And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight . Our conscience pretty much tells us when we are doing something wrong and if our conscience knows that, God knows for sure.

Notice that the doctrine is the doctrine OF Balaam, in other words it was a perspective that Balaam had (something in his heart) that was now accepted by the Church. Casting a stumblingblock is not the doctrine it just describes what actions Balaam took as a result of his doctrine. Anyone who holds that doctrine will end up casting a stumblingblock against the Church or some individual in the Church. In my opinion we are opened to this when we feel that we are entitled to our gifts and more so when we decide that other people are not entitled to theirs, particularly if their gift acts as an obstacle to us getting what we want. We cannot do as we please with our gifts. We see from verse 8 that Balaam actually started out right: Numbers 22:7-8 [KJV] And the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the rewards of divination in their hand; and they came unto Balaam, and spake unto him the words of Balak. [8] And he said unto them, Lodge here this night, and I will bring you word again, as the LORD shall speak unto me: and the princes of Moab abode with Balaam . This is how we should handle our gifts i.e. ask God what His will is for them. But what if God says no? The next step would be to obey His will and not just expect Him to rubber stamp our intentions. God's gifts must be used to give Him glory always and we can seek personal gain only within that context. God will guide us to righteousness and lead us away from unrighteousness if we let Him. With Balaam's doctrine we see no problem in using the gifts that God has blessed us with to undermine someone else to seek material gain. When I first came to understand this I was only looking at special gifts but it is all of our gifts. We can abuse health, education, and anything else. Notice the instruction that Balaam got: Numbers 22:34-35 [KJV] And Balaam said unto the angel of the LORD, I have sinned; for I knew not that thou stoodest in the way against me: now therefore, if it displease thee, I will get me back again. [35] And the angel of the LORD said unto Balaam, Go with the men: but only the word that I shall speak unto thee, that thou shalt speak. So Balaam went with the princes of Balak . God told Him to use His gift as instructed. He said that he was unaware that he was sinning but that later progressed to defiance of God and His will. God intended for Him to use His gift to bless Israel. If you read the story from earlier in Numbers 22 you will note in verses 20-22 God gave Balaam permission if the men came back but he did not wait. He had a blessing from God and he was eager to profit from it. Balaam advised on the destruction of the Church through the use of moral corruption while the Nicolaitans introduced the Babylonian style of control through a religious elite fraternity that brought them material gain and political prominence. None of the apostles sought out the political elite but came into contact with them only accidentally and none of them craved tithes and material gain. People gravitate towards nicolaitanism when we see our value in things and immediately begin to establish a pecking order to make ourselves seem superior. God says that we are all the same and we should use our gifts to bless others but we humans want to find ways to glorify ourselves.

I think that at the root of it is a belief that we deserve to be who we are. Because we are entitled to all that we are then we are justified in using it to our advantage whether it be our health, education, intelligence or whatever else, we all have the Nebuchadnezzar complex: Daniel 4:30 [KJV] The king spake, and said, Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty . We are not entitled to these things and the person whom we exploit by our actions does not deserve their unfortunate status either. Taking all together they may even be more deserving of a better life than we are. Remember the widow's mite. The point is that we are not entitled to pursue self interests without looking at how it affects other people, especially God's people. In fact we are supposed to put God's will first in doing our best to ensure that that others whom God have a plan for achieve it even if it costs us. Balaam had to be forced to do what God intended him to do all along, that is bless Israel. As Christians we are obligated to learn how to bless others with our gifts and not exploit them.

The question of tithing arises when I raise this point. Should you tithe? Yes if you can, but the issue is not a tenth. The issue is generosity. Tithing lets everybody off the hook. I give my tenth so I have fulfilled my obligation... wrong. If you are giving that tenth out of fear and not out of love of the work and a sense of participation then you are in danger. If a shepherd of the church does not allow you to fulfil your potential in the Church then he has robbed you. I could add another ten pages to include all of the scriptures for and against, but an interested party could do that for themselves. I have put tithing in Biblical context in this article on sacrifices .

The environment is one where Satan dominates the society. In verse 13 was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth tells us that this place was where Satan's influence emanated from, like how God dwelled between the cherubim. The historical significance of this statement was brought out in an on-line article at the VISION website called Through an Ancient Looking Glass, http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/history-berlin-pergamon-museum/638.aspx , by David Hulme 2014-10-16. The article traces the Chaldean mystical religion and the centrepiece of Babylon's international trade links to Pergamos at the time of John.

Babylon's original crime was that it united nations when God told them to spread out. Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon dominated the world and was the centre of international trade so that it linked the world. At the centre of its existence was the religious festivals which were inherited from the original Babylon. The Ishtar Gate was not only a portal to world trade but also the access way to join the annual religious processions of the counter-religion to worshipping the true God. Satan is the one pushing this counter-religion and so the instrument that makes it most effective has to be the seat of Satan's power or his throne i.e. the root of his authority. Ishtar Gate has now been reconstructed in Berlin the centre of the activities of United Europe.

The Babylonian priests were enormously powerful because of the tight bond between the religious, economic and political life of the people. Kings were worshipped and to be deified they needed the religious support, hence the woman (religious harlot) rode the beast. The Persian king Cyrus conquered Babylon and a subsequent Persian king Xerxes came and destroyed Babylon in 487 B.C. and tore down the temples and removed the statue of Marduk. Around that time the Chaldean priesthood fled and re-established at Pergamos. According to David Hulme's article quoted above:

At this point, around 480 B.C, the Babylonian priests are thought to have left the city and reestablished their base elsewhere. According to one source, the defeated Chaldeans fled to Asia Minor, and fixed their central college at Pergamos, and took the palladium of Babylon, the cubic stone, with them. Here, independent of state control, they carried on the rites of their religion (William B. Barker, Lares and Penates: or, Cilicia and Its Governors, Ingram, Cooke and Co., London, 1853, pp. 232233).

So Pergamos now held the religion and was on the leading trade route. The Great (Pergamon) Altar was originally built in Pergamos (also called Pergamum or Pergamon) in western Turkey. It is a monument to the same beliefs that persisted in the Babylonian religion. David Hulme states that according to Barker (William B. Barker, Lares and Penates: or, Cilicia and Its Governors, Ingram, Cooke and Co., London, 1853, pp. 232233) the Chaldeans at Pergamos plotted against the peace of the Persian empire, caballing with the Greeks for that purpose. They brought forward Alexander as a divine incarnation, and by their craft did as much as the Greeks by their prowess to overthrow the Persian power . At the time of John the Great Altar would have been a prominent place of pagan worship.

Concerning Pergamon Altar we find on Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pergamon_Altar (2017-10-27) : Probably in the 2nd century, the Roman Lucius Ampelius recorded in his liber memorialis ("Notebook"), in Chapter VIII (Miracula Mundi), "At Pergamum there is a great marble altar, 40 feet (12 m) high, with colossal sculptures. It also shows a Gigantomachy".(ed. E. Woelfflin 1873): Pergamo ara marmorea magna, alta pedes quadraginta cum maximis sculpturis; continet autem gigantomachiam) .

This centre of Satan's religion would have subsequently moved again to Rome. For the Pergamos Church it would have been like fighting Catholicism at Vatican City. In these circumstances the tendency is to live and let live but God says no. Adopt a zero tolerance stance.

The challenge is to resist using our gifts primarily for personal gain.

The Pros: you stand up for me against the fiercest opposition

The Cons: you tolerate class segregation and condone grasping for preeminence in the Church

The Requirement: stop tolerating those attitudes

The Promise: 1..I know, 2..Eternal life

The name Antipas means for all, or against all . This suggests that he did not believe in shades of grey. Things were right or wrong. Tradition says he was a bishop, so with that name we can see that when confronted with allowing a hierarchy in the Church and exploiting the sheep for profit, he would not budge. God's Church has no hierarchy, we are all brothers, nobody is better than anybody else. Being a bishop like Antipas is a gift conferred by the laying on of hands. It was a talent for which he was accountable.

White stone with a new name

There are several possibilities given for the meaning behind the white stone with a new name, which claim to come from common practice at the time of John. Unfortunately I have not found any to have been corroborated by references. Among the better ones are:

FREEDOM FROM ACCUSATION

When a person was pressed with charges and went to trial they where sometimes entitled to be bailed out of jail by a family member. That person would buy a white stone (pebble) from the court and would give it to the person on trial as a special token. The White stone had to be given to the accuser. As the stone was received the case was closed and there would be no more legal right to go back to court because of the same charges.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF VICTORY

In the original Olympic games athletes where rewarded with a crown of leaves and a white stone with their name on it. Time would consume the glory of the victory as the crown would dry out but the stone remained as a reminder of the past exploits.

RECEIVE ALL THINGS

In ancient Greece honourable guests to the city would receive from the magistrate a white stone with their name on it. The guest could go to the market and had the right to acquire anything he wanted. The City would pay the expense so the special visitor had unlimited credit and the right to buy anything he wanted. In modern days the French have the expression Carte Blanche that goes back to that old tradition.

GUEST OF HONOUR

If a host had a special guest whom he greatly appreciated, the guest was given a white stone with a name or message written on it, directed only to the guest.

When I consider that the new name bore significance regarding the stone and the context of the message, I have come to the conclusion that if it has a single meaning it would have to be Receive all things . The new name would signify that it is unmistakeably you. The context would be that greater eminence and wealth is to be had by resisting the temptation to grasp it in this age.

So Christ is telling us that we don't have to fight for power and prominence. He will give us all things, a fresh start with limitless possibilities.

In verse 13 was slain among you , where Satan dwelleth could mean that he was slain by a satanic element within the church. It suggests that it was an internal action. The Nicolaitans were for the clergy and against the laity and could have contributed to this.

The Nicolaitans

Now why did God add verse 15?

A doctrine is a teaching and especially a teaching by practice and example. It seems to me that it was added because it was a similar issue or an extension of the same problem.

The phrase hold the doctrine of is applied to both the Nicolaitans and Balaam. Whatever their relationshipwas with regard to Balaam, it was exactly the same with the Nicolaitans. There are two ways that I understand to look at this, 1..) did they do what their mentor did or 2..) did they do what their mentor said? Did the church do what the Nicolaitans did? Many apparently adopted the approach of seeking power over others by acquiring rank and claiming proviledges, so yes. Did the Church do what the Nicolaitans said? Apparently yes because it is possible that the Church was persuaded that their approach was godly, through the use of preaching for propaganda. Let us now apply that to Balaam. Did they do what Balaam did? Apparently yes because many other Church writers said that Balaam was greedy of gain and warned the Church against it. Did they do what Balaam said? Well you can judge. Balaam never said anything to Israel, he spoke only to Balaac. What he told Balaac was to deceive Israel into separating themselves from their God so that they could be cursed and he gain the advantage over them. Did the Church hold that as one of its teachings/doctrines? Not that I am aware of. In looking at the commonality we can see that it involved behaviour. There is no evidence that Balaam committed fornication either. What Balaam talked about was being devious and what Balaam did was to practise being devious and in both cases the objective was money. That doctrine that he lived by crept into the Church. The doctrine/behaviour was to obtain money by being devious and to obtain money by supporting others in being devious. He put that above his relationship with God. 

The Nicolaitans and Balaam have something in common. What I am suggesting is that they both know God's will but have determined to pursue their personal objectives in opposition to Him. In Revelation we are told that Balaam taught Balaac to cast a stumblingblock. A stumblingblock is a trap. They both had the ability to see what their victims could not and to pursue their objectives as the expense of others. The example of the stumblingblock that Balaam got Balaak to use was to eat things in honour of another God (probably participate in eating and drinking at a pagan celebration, maybe like a week long carnival) and to commit fornication (possibly connected with the same behaviour). The Greek for stumblingblock is:

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments

G4625 σκάνδαλον skandalon (skan'-d̮a-lon) n.

1. a trap-stick (bent sapling).

2. (concretely) a snare.

3. (figuratively) a cause of displeasure or sin.

[probably from a derivative of G2578 (“scandal”)]

KJV: occasion to fall (of stumbling), offence, thing that offends, stumblingblock

Root(s): G2578

Notice that the primary meaning is snare. In the Old Testament they refer to snare.

At the core of it is that the people do not see what is happening to them. They did not see the true objective of their adversary and they could not see the end result to themselves. I do not believe that the people in the Church as a body intend to do harm to others, what I see is that some want to achieve personal goals that they pursue at the expense of the others and in conflict with God's word. In the case of Balaam it was money while in the case of the nicolaitans it was preeminence. They pursue these by using what they were given as a blessing (their gifts, including spiritual ones which might include benefits from prayer and Bible study etc.) like a snare to advance their objectives, and harm God's people.

Getting to the point

The point, as I see it, is that we have two options for understanding the verse. If it is identifying Balaam then we have to look for what Balaam is noted for elsewhere in the Bible and that can be found in such places as Jude or Peter.

If it is identifying the teaching, then Balaam taught only Balak, and the doctrine must be found by identifying something that he taught Balak. What Balaam taught Balak was which snare to use or subterfuge to choose based on insider knowledge and the understanding of God that Balaam had. Balaam did not teach Balak to use snares or to commit fornication, Balak already knew those.

To emphasize what those who follow the doctrine of Balaam have in common with the Nicolaitans. In my opinion they all went about using a gift that God had given them to exploit the Church and achieve material objectives through subterfuge. The Nicolaitans use their relationship given by the laying on of hands, Balaam used his visions and others use varying methods but it all boils down to that.

As I mentioned above, my first understanding of this was that it applied to spiritual gifts only but in looking at it again I realised that all of our gifts actually come from God whether it is health, education, intelligence or whatever.

THYATIRA

Against Jezebel, seduction to do evil by those closest to us. THERE WILL BE DEVASTATION FROM WITHIN THE CHURCH (OR GIVING INFLUENTIAL IDOLATERS, JEZEBELS, OPPORTUNITY TO TEACH AND SEDUCE THE CHURCH). THE SPIRITUAL PROBLEM WAS ALLOWING HER A SPACE TO TEACH AND SEDUCE (REVELATION 2:20). BALAAM AND THE NICOLAITANS ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH CHANGING THE CHURCH JUST EXPLOITING IT, BUT JEZEBEL'S FOCUS IS TEACHING AND SEDUCING. JEZEBEL WAS THE HIGH-PRIESTESS OF BAAL THAT CONSORTED WITH THE LEADERSHIP OF GOD'S PEOPLE, AHAB AT THE TIME. WITH SUCH A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP SHE EVENTUALLY WAS ABLE TO TAKE OVER. SOLOMON, THE WISEST MAN THAT EVER LIVED, COULD NOT DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM. JEZEBEL NEVER HAD ANY INTENTION TO CONVERT TO AHAB'S RELIGION BUT USED THE MARRIAGE TO ADVANCE HER POSITION AS HIGH-PRIESTESS.

Teaching and seducing can occur simultaneously. It is clear that Ahab would not have done those things, like what was done to Naboth, if he was not stirred up by Jezebel (1 Kings 21:25). In other words we have to judge if we would have led a better or worse spiritual life if certain people were missing from our lives. If it is worse then they have seduced us. We also have to judge if our light is being overpowered by the light of our unchristian friends. We should be teaching by example and if their light is overpowering our Christian example then we are not teaching but they are.

It is useful at the outset to summarise what happened with Jezebel, Naboth and Ahab. Ahab had a problem in that he wanted Naboth's vineyard. Jezebel said let me teach you how to deal with that sweetie. She killed Naboth. He gave her space to teach and seduce him and eventually the whole of Israel. That is found in 1 Kings 21.

A prophet is a spokesman (and hence a teacher) and a prophet of God is a spokesman for God. This Jezebel called herself a prophetess (Revelation 2:20) but did not actually have that right in the Church, nevertheless they gave it to her (same verse). Note also Leviticus and James.

Perhaps a more to the point caption would be giving influential idolaters, Jezebels, an opportunity to teach the Church right from wrong.

The things that endear people to us

Most people, if not all, are partial to the things of the flesh. Thyatira appears to have had them all. As a region it had fame, money, pedigree and was probably beautiful and would have projected them onto people who represented the establishment. It had the characteristics of a pop star. In many ways Jezebel is like a modern day pop star. She too had fame, money, pedigree and was probably beautiful. God tells us not to be respecters of people. If she is like a modern pop star she would be most interested in advancing her reputation and in moving up in the world. She was an idolater and the knowledge and understanding that she accepted combined to make her what she was. This was all she was and what she knew. Inevitably it was the only thing that she could do. We cannot let people with unchristian lives teach us how to live. We respect their specialities, admire their talents and positions and try to understand the technical information that they present but the choice of how to live must come from the Bible and other Christians. Seduction is a devilish matter and and some people just have powerful personalities. We can create our own pop stars, our own Jezebels, of people that we admire.

On a more personal basis Jezebels are the people of the world that we let get close to us in our lives. Jezebel thought that she was doing Ahab a favour by killing Naboth. If we go back to 1 Kings 21-22 with Naboth, it appears that Ahab's loving wife could not stand to see him sad so she got Naboth killed and confiscated the property. You may say that she did it out of love but that was the problem. It was her world view. Ahab let her teach him right from wrong, how to solve problems. She seduced him and his people into her world view that was contrary to the way of Israel. It was all that she knew and we run the risk of the same. If someone's world view does not include keeping God's commandments, His Sabbaths and His Holy Days then we cannot trust their decisions, not their intentions. A world view is built by pieces that connect so that the whole thing stands. If you change one piece then the one that is next to it does not fit and you change that too. When does it stop? Our world view needs to be built by God's word and God's people.

We know that in verse 17 the word is does not exist in the original text. The principle is clear. People who do not obey God are not to be our source of spiritual knowledge. Some have very good intentions but I think that we also need to consider Ahab a bit. If we look at how God treated Ahab, He seems to have recognised something good in him. Left to himself Ahab might have been a wonderful king but he let Jezebel control his situation.

There is a lot to be said about the wealth of Thyatira. We know of the story of Lydia.

Lydia was a wealthy business-woman from Thyatira who lived in Philippi dealing in expensive purple dyes, that was part of what made Thyatira wealthy.

Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thyatira timestamp 07:10, 10 November 2021 says that ...In classical times, Thyatira stood on the border between Lydia and Mysia. During the Roman era, (1st century AD), it was famous for its dyeing facilities and was a center of the purple cloth trade.[4] Among the ancient ruins of the city, inscriptions have been found relating to the guild of dyers in the city. Indeed, more guilds συντεχνία suntechuia (syndicate)are known in Thyatira than any other contemporary city in the Roman province of Asia (inscriptions mention the following: wool-workers, linen-workers, makers of outer garments, dyers, leather-workers, tanners, potters, bakers, slave-dealers, and bronze-smiths)... .

Jezebel was a Phoenician princess who married the Israelite king Ahab. Jezebel continued to worship the nature god Baal as the daughter of Ithobaal I.

The environment is one of looseness and consorting with paganism. The image of Jezebel suggests a willingness to form ties with influential but pagan elements of the society in order to advance personal objectives. This Church allowed pagans to teach the brethren and to seduce them to their ways. The challenge is to remain unbending like iron. The church appears to be a very hospitable group of Christians that did not know where to draw the line. The people that are exalted in the Church and given a voice must always be Christians. The people that are precious to God are Christians not influential idolaters. In practice we cannot avoid these people just as the Jews could not avoid Jezebel. She was the queen. The problem is allowing them to influence how we live as God's people. An idolater can only teach idolatry but we tend to be respecters of people and nestle up to them because of their aura.

The challenge is to remain unbending like iron. The promise is that they will be the brightest star, beyond the influence of others. He reminds them that He is untarnished, righteous and full of destructive power.

The Pros: You continue to grow in love

The Cons: Do not extend hospitality to enemies of the Church

The Requirement: learn where to draw the line

The Promise: 1..I know, 2..Eternal life and kingship

A flame of fire

Fire removes the dross so that righteousness will be established. It drives evil out of the presence of a leader.

It drives evil out of people and purifies them for God.

The first place that we see the term flaming fire is Psalms 104:4

The writer of Hebrews shows that the ministers in psalm 104 include the angels and hence angels are in this case also a flaming fire. As far as angels made spirits is concerned that is perhaps best seen in the incident with Balaam in Numbers 22. Balaam could not see the angel and so was staring an invisible judgement right in the face so to speak, Numbers 22:31-33 [KJV] Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face.  [32] And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Wherefore hast thou smitten thine ass these three times? behold, I went out to withstand thee, because thy way is perverse before me:  [33] And the ass saw me, and turned from me these three times: unless she had turned from me, surely now also I had slain thee, and saved her alive . If we combine that with what we know of fire purging evil then the imagery is clear. Watch your step.

In Egypt flaming fire destroyed the Egyptians but left the Israelites, as God's judgement through a plague. Again it purged evil.

In Isaiah it illuminated the night as in the Exodus.

In Lamentations it devoured in God's anger.

In Ezekiel it burned all in judgement.

In Thessalonians it took vengeance.

We have God as a consuming fire.

When you combine the function of eyes with the function of fire in the Bible you get eyes that illuminate, separate and obliterate. They consume/obliterate in God's vengeance, separate the precious from the worthless and illuminate the darkest area.

Teaching

The Bible has something to say about what God means by teaching. This is the outline that Ahab was supposed to follow. The first thing that He says about teaching in Exodus is to teach His people the laws, then teach them by example.

Teach them what He gives to teach.

Why they need to teach.

When they need to teach.

What not to teach.

Teach them to discern.

The headquarters of the teaching.

Who should not teach.

Wasted teaching.

Concerning false teachers.

seduction

God also has quite a bit to say about seduction. Again this is what Ahab was supposed to follow. The first thing to note is that because of God in us we are automatically better than those who don't have God in them. Don't be deceived.

They will try to paint a rosy picture of what they can do without God. It is a lie.

We need to avoid seduction to be among the elect.

We do not rely on people but go straight to the source, then Bible, led by the Holy Spirit.

The Morning Star

A morning star ushers in a new day. If you own a morning star then this is something that you could do, open new possibilities. Christ alone is the bright and morning star (Revelation 22:16). In Revelation 22 He brings a new day of prosperity that will continue forever. There are some special angels that are morning stars who sang at creation. Satan was undoubtedly one of them because of his talent for music.

These angels heralded a new age and a fresh start with limitless possibilities. When I first wrote this document I had a reference to Isaiah 14:12 since it spoke of light bringing and drew a reference to Lucifer. I found out later that it could well be a mistranslation.

According to Abarim Publications @ 2018-09-23, Lucifer meaning , http://www.abarim-publications.com/Meaning/Lucifer.html#.W6giCq3U-V5

The original Hebrew text of Isaiah speaks of הילל (helel), which scholars generally derive from the verb הלל (halal), meaning to shine or radiate. Here at Abarim Publications, however, we're not so sure about that and see more in the verb ילל (yalal), meaning to wail (see for a full discussion of this our article on the "name" Helel). But whether Isaiah spoke of radiating or wailing, when the Greek Septuagint was being written, the authors decided to spice Isaiah's statement up a bit, and turned הילל (helel) into εωσφορος (eosphoros).
.
.
.
The ancients called Venus the Dawn-Bringer and the Light-Bringer because it heralded the imminent rise of the sun and the end of the night. And they called the kings of Babylon and Tyre the same because the evolution of local human culture is only a sign that something greater is on the rise. In Revelation 22:16, Jesus says without ado, "I am the bright morning star," and the principle is really quite simple. Between the darkness of the caves and the dawn of the New Creation is a period of darkness in which pockets of human culture provide whatever light there is on planet earth. Whichever earthly monarch or insightful scientist is leading the way, it's still either the pre-incarnate Christ or else the incarnate Christ. No matter by what label folks call themselves, in whatever measure they differ from the caveman, that difference must come from God, and specifically: from the Word Of God. We call it science and technology, wisdom or culture; the ancients called it Logos.

When Jerome translated the Septuagint, he turned the Greek εωσφορος (eosphoros) into lucifer, which was an existing adjective meaning light-bringing and also the Latin name for the Morning Star.

There is no Lucifer in the Hebrew. Lucifer is a Latin word that was used to replace the Hebrew helel which is accepted by many as meaning shining but may also refer to wailing. There is no link to morning star and Satan by the name of Lucifer to be drawn from Isaiah. There is a reference to A shining one or A wailing one who was spawned by (was son of) the morning but did not give rise to the morning, he did not usher in a new day.

Returning to the script

There might well have been a real woman in Thyatira that deceived the Church and she might have been called Jezebel but God is undoubtedly referring us back to the rule of Ahab in Israel. Jezebel was a pagan princess who became part of Israel and gained influence in Israel because of her marriage to the King. As far as the Church is concerned we are talking about someone who has become installed at a high position (either in society or just in our minds) by an intimate relationship that we create for them. In the case of Ahab it would have been a wise choice politically because of the wealth of Tyre but a disastrous decision spiritually.

Zimri ended the line of Jeroboam I. He was the chariot commander who murdered king Elah and all his family at Tirzah the capital, and proclaimed himself king. Zimri reigned for only seven days, because the army elected Omri as king and besieged the king in his palace. With no escape Zimri set fire to the palace, killing himself. Omri was the father of Ahab. Ahab's successors were Ahaziah then his brother Jehoram (Joram) who showed some signs of repentance but not enough to be righteous (2 Kings 3:2-3). God ended this line by sending Elisha's student to anoint Jehu as king (2 Kings 9:56) while Joram the king was wounded and had returned to the palace in Jezreel to recover. When they understood what transpired Jehu's companions blew their trumpets and proclaimed him their king. God ended that dynasty in order to root out Jezebel's Idolatry. The obvious implication is that a Church with Jezebel will be purged.

Ithobaal I (in Hebrew Ethbaal, 1 Kings 16:31) was a king of Tyre who founded a new dynasty. In other words this is not the same dynasty as Hiram who was an ally to David and Solomon. He expanded the territory and power to control all of Phoenicia including Sidon. Tyre's power included part of the island of Cyprus and other overseas colonies. He was succeeded by his son Badezorus (Baal-Eser II) and was father of Jezebel. The name baal or bel in his name and the names of his children says something of how strong pagan worship was in the family.

Jezebel married Ahab, most likely to strengthen an alliance between Israel and Tyre. For Israel this represented great power and influence. Ahab, just like Solomon before him, felt compelled to provide for the religion of his influential mate. Her father had been high priest of the goddess Astarte, principal of the phonetician religion, and Jezebel would have been brought up steeped in Baal worship. She brought her religion with her to Samaria (capital of Israel), along with several hundred priests of Baal. Jezebel progressed from Naboth. She operated behind the scenes to actively persecute and murder the servants of YHWH (1 Kings 18:4) and Ahab did nothing to constrain her teaching and corrupting Israel with her ways. The national problem was allowing such a religiously corrupt person to teach Israel right from wrong in the first place, notwithstanding her exalted position. Her seduction is seen by her effect on the moral and religious impact on the nation. Ahab did not reign her in.

Jezebel continued on as widow Queen under her two sons, Ahaziah and Joram who inherited the throne in turn after Ahab. Her religious poison that had turned them to Baal religion continued to flourish in Israel. Her daughter Athalia married Jehoram, an evil King of Judah, and took the religion of Baal to Judah as well. The sickening practises, including male prostitution, were left to be removed by Josiah (2 Kings 2:37).

God showed her who was the true God through the events at Mount Carmel, and gave her space to repent at the expense of Elijah, 1 Kings 17:18-19:4. She was an influential pagan and even when she was given undeniable proof of the sovereignty of God she chose, instead of repenting, to try to destroy God's prophets so that paganism would flourish. It is amazing that she not only corrupted the king but was complicit in the freak accident that removed the king. It is a long story told in first and second Kings. The point is that this intimate bond with the daughter of the priest of Baal corrupted Israel but did not work in reverse. Even after Mount Carmel proved beyond a doubt who was the real God, she did not change but taunted the prophet of God, Elijaj, instead. Intimate relations with the daughters of the false Church will not convert the false Church but will corrupt the true Church.

1 Kings 22 tells the story of the death of Ahab.

Jezebel was complicit in the death of Ahab whether or not we believe that she genuinely loved him. Why would I say that? Look back at verses 6-8 again. Who were these prophets that Jehoshaphat did not trust? They were not prophets of God. If they were 400 prophets of God then why would he ask for one more?

These were Jezebels prophets and they told Ahab what Jezebel wanted him to hear. They were prophets of Aserath (the groves being a reference to Aserath poles, sacred trees or poles). Notice that the 400 prophets which ate with Jezebel never turned up at Carmel. Zedekiah, who prompted Ahab to go into battle (1 Kings 22:11), was a prophet but among the group that the king of Judah rejected. He was a prophet of Aserath. He served Jezebel and was supported by her.

Only the 450 prophets of Baal turned up and were destroyed at Mount Carmel. Jezebel kept her Baal prophets safe and did not send them to Carmel but her actions caused the death of her husband. Her prophets deceived him. Could the same thing happen to us? Could the teaching that we bring into the Church from an idolatrous source lead to our spiritual demise?

God promises us that we will rule nations if we obey Him. He said to Thyatira to him will I give power over the nations . As devoted to unconverted people as we may become they can unintentionally lead us to destruction. We do not need to forge unholy alliances. Jezebel is the wealthy and powerful corrupting influence that joins with the Church to corrupt its relationship with God. The national problem was allowing such a corrupt person a chance to teach right from wrong notwithstanding her exalted position. Ahab did not reign her in. The spiritual problem of the Church is allowing such people a voice in the Church to seduce people (Revelation 2:20). One perspective on this is when we exalt unchristian people or organisations above God's people. There are other possibilities for opening God's people to be taught right from wrong by idolaters. This certainly includes the great harlot but may also include other strange religions or movements or organisations with powerful backing.

As I go through this I can hear someone say, but the people in the Chruch are no smarter than anyone else and could be just as wrong . This is true but short-sighted. God also tells us in the Church how to deal with issues of truth. We need first listen and understand, then gather all of the facts, especially those from the Bible and apply sound reasoning with an appeal to God for guidance. This guidance is something that an idolater would lack. God is guaranteed to work with those who serve Him and keep his commandments but He has no such obligation to idolaters. Even if the Church starts out wrong God will guide them to truth or at least as much truth as is necessary. In the Old Testament he sent prophets. If we have thrown our lot in with an idolater then the most likely outcome is strong delusion to believe a lie, because God is not working in the pagan at all and we rejected the way that we are given to improve.