Bible Options Bible Study Software
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
How Useful - Revelation 1 - 3
#1
This thread has a focus. At least I intend that it not wander all over the spectrum of Christian matters.

Avraham has put forth a concept that Revelation as a book has no use to the Christian church universal, because it was addressed only to seven local churches. He says that because it was so specific to those seven localities it is meaningless to Christians at large.

I challenge that misconception. Limiting this discussion to the seven letters to the seven churches in Revelation chapters 2 and 3 (ch. 1 can be included), let anyone mention any two or more consecutive passages from that section, and I will prove the spiritual usefulness of the passage to today's Christians.

This challenge, for FOCUS's sake, is limited to the verses from Revelation 1:1 - 3:22 mainly.

If I discuss something esoteric or symbolic I will attempt to back it up with plain straightforward teaching. My aim is to prove the profitability of every word uttered in Revelation 1 - 3 to the universal Christian church.
#2
The answer to whether this is for everyone is simply in the repeated admonitions throughout chapters 2 and 3, "He that has an ear let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." That is conclusive for anyone that takes the book seriously. Don't waste your time with anyone that is just trying to generate heat.
#3
Did you know that the problem of the unity of Christians is significantly addressed in Revelation 1 - 3 ? This revelation from God has a radical application to the problem of Christian divisions.

By "radical" I mean "the root". This book goes to the root of (radical) the problem of disunity, division, and confusion in that manner in which churches are established. It is exceedingly practical. It is exceedingly useful.

If the revelation is seen, is really seen, Christians would never establish the following errors:

We would never establish a racial church - ie. white church, a black church, an American Church, a Anglican Church, a Korean church. If the vision is seen we would not attempt to set up a Gentile church or a Jewish church.

If the revelation is seen we would abandon the idea of establishing a church according to a certain servant of God - Ie. Luther's Church, Wesley's Church (Lutheran Church, Weslyan Church).

If we grasp the revelation we would abandoned establishing churches according to certain doctrinal views - ie. a Baptist Church, a Pentacostal Church, a Methodist Church.

In the revelation Jesus Christ looks at each city and observes all the Christians in that city as being the church according to that city. And each community is seen as a golden lampstand of testimony:

" ... What you see write in a scroll and send it to the seven churches:

to Ephesus
and to Smyrna
and to Pergamos
and to Thyatira
and to Sardis
and to Philadelphia
and to Laodicea.

And I turned to see the voice that spoke with me; and when I turned, I saw seven golden lampstands, and in the midst of the lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment reaching to the feet ... etc." (See Rev. 1:11-13)


How divinely useful ! One city defines the boundary of one church. One church for one city. Seven cities define seven local churches.

#4
I find the notion that the 7 Churches are also a catalog of the history of The Church pretty fascinating.. If you read it in that context it makes for a engrossing study..
These modern liberal churches being Laodicia..
And the "Nicolaitins" being any man-made institution (such as traditional priesthoods) that seek to stand between the koinenea hoi polloi and God..

I also found myself viewing it in another way altogether recently as well (funny how God's pefect work can have so many facets..) in that the descriptions of the 7 churches represent all of the "states of obedience" that an individual can have towards The Lord and that we are challenged to recognize where we stand amongst them and should strive to endure until the very end... Much like I tend to view the Parable of the Sower.. (that we can easily fall into sin at anytime as we are not yet in glory) As followers of Christ we are in a constant battle with the flesh and darkness..

God help us all..
#5
(09-08-2012, 11:53 PM)Kelvyquayo Wrote: These modern liberal churches being Laodicia..

Modern liberal denominations, I submit are not represented by Laodicea.

Protestantism in its many nuances and hues (conservative or liberal) are represented by the church in Sardis.

Modern Protestant churches have many errors. But spiritual pride is not one of them. Your theologically liberal churches have incompleteness, a name without vitality, and spiritual deadness. But they do not have the spiritual pride which characterizes Laodicea.

Laodicea is the fallen recovered church. Philadelphia is the church life in full recovery. Laodicea has tons of spiritual knowledge but Christ is on the outside trying to get in. She doesn't realize her poverty.

Protestantism does not manifest this kind of pride. Protestantism knows that she is absent zealous members and does not boast in the same kind of self sufficiency.

Thyatira is Catholicism. Out from her comes Sardis, the reformation Protestantism. Out of the reformation Sardis comes the recovery to normality Philadelphia -Brethren like church life.

Now, when the recovered church slides backwards, THEN you have the fallen recovered church. That is Laodicea.

You see from brotherly love where heirarchy is overcome there is another danger - everyone has an opinion. Laodecia means the People's opinion. This is a anarchy and spiritual pride degradation. May God have mercy on us to escape such a state.

Please comment further.

Quote:And the "Nicolaitins" being any man-made institution (such as traditional priesthoods) that seek to stand between the koinenea hoi polloi and God..


I will shortly.





The last four churches Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea are four states of Christians which will be upon the earth when Jesus comes back.

These four are linked together by something they have in common. Do you know what it is ?
It is the order of two concepts - the promise to overcome and the exhortation to hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

If you look carefully in the first three churches, Ephesus, Smyrna, and Pergamos, at the end of each letter it is:

First - the promise to those who overcome.
Second - the exhortation to hear what the Spirit says.

In the last four churches, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea the order is reversed. It is:
First - the exhortation to hear what the Spirit says.
Second - the promise to those who overcome.

Compare Ephesus - Rev. 2:7; Smyrna - 2:11; Pergamos - 2:17

with Thyatira - 2:26-29; Sardis - 3:5,6; Philadelpha - 3:12,13; Laodicea - 3:21,22

So you have in the seven churches a grouping of 3 plus 4.
The last four states which remain on earth simultaneously.

Catholicism, Protestantism, recovered brotherly love, the fallen recovered church life.

In each state there is a reward associated to overcoming.
#6
I agree with Feedmysheep on this one, except that I think that all seven types are around until the end. Remember that it says, "He that has an ear, hear..." Any individual Christian will find that he is characterized by one of these types of churches, as well as any church in general. Each type of church is a collection of strengths and weaknesses, and these should be paid attention to by those who fall into one or the other of these categories. I also think that each age is characterized in general by one of the seven types.
#7
Quote:Now, when the recovered church slides backwards, THEN you have the fallen recovered church. That is Laodicea.

You see from brotherly love where heirarchy is overcome there is another danger - everyone has an opinion. Laodecia means the People's opinion. This is a anarchy and spiritual pride degradation. May God have mercy on us to escape such a state.

Please comment further.

I think that I agree with all of that.
I think that our terminologies are disagreeing. It seems to me that this does describe the churches of today. When I said "modern liberal churches" I meant the churches today that make it a habit to water down The Word in order to fill their coffers and make no real efforts to spread the Truth. Perhaps you thought that I was talking specifically about churches like Unitarian Universalism and the like...
but indeed; nothing seems to scream "lukewarm" than a Christian Church that reads the Koran as part of their services and promotes things like "Chrislam".... as well as those that defraud little old widows out of their money with forked honey-tongued TV evangelists; causing the Word of God to be mocked by the gentiles because of their antics and hypocrisy.

Still I posit that the letter to the Laodiceans may represent the state of the body of the "common" modern churches... although not specifically churches like Unitarian; because I don't think that those could ever by any stretch of the imagination be considered part of the Body of Christ.

also
I am still reminded, as I type this, that all of these things in addition to describing the state of the churches on Earth but still also seem to range through all of the struggles that one has as a Christian and living a Christian life

AAAAND I have just read the second part of your post regarding the last 4 churches actually being a description of "Christians" on a personal level.
Your point about the REWARDS just indeed make sense to that.
It seems that individually there is still hope for redemption.

I have always believed that True prophecy can has as many layers as there are layers in the Cosmos.

This provides a VERY cool study on Revelation that INDEED has wonderful PRACTICAL APPLICATION!!

I think I will use this at our next Bible Study actually.
#8

I have done a very poor job of writing anything very profitable in this thread. There is so much to share and the critic who I imagined would take the challenge in the first post did not.

That is all the better. But I have not done this topic anywhere near the justice it deserves. But I will provide a link to a book which taught me so very much about Revelation 2 and 3 -

"The Orthodoxy of the Church" by brother Watchman Nee. If you look up any church of the seven of interest, and turn to that chapter, I think you will receive much more edification. Or you can just start from the beginning.

http://www.ministrybooks.org/books.cfm?id=2EDF
#9
Quote:I have done a very poor job of writing anything very profitable in this thread.

I wasn't being sarcastic when I said I was going to use some of this at my next Bible study.. so it wasn't so bad in my opinion.
I actually never really considered viewing all of the churches states on a subjective level believe it or not but only as a catalog of Church History.

Quote: the critic who I imagined would take the challenge in the first post did not.

He's not here to take challenges. Apparently he is only here to throw his stone down the well and smile at the noise that it makes.
#10
This is so interesting to see all the christians agreeing on philosophy.

Noticeable is the lack of scriptural proof just like christians are in the habit of doing.

Not one person mentions the first verse of Revelations, which you conveniently neglect.


Rev 1:1 ¶ The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified [it] by his angel unto his servant John:

TO SHOW UNTO HIS SERVANTS....................... perhaps you think this does not matter.
John is a Jew, and His servant, so this is very clear who His servants are.
All the apostles are Jews .
Paul is a Jew not a christian.
Peter is a Jew not a christian.
Jesus is a Jew not a christian.
Because christains changed the words to read "churches" they think there right.
The word should read "synagogues" but the English bible is so badly translated you think
churches is correct without ever learning the proper Hebrew words.

Isa 66:4 I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose [that] in which I delighted not.

Ha Shem speaks Hebrew.
Jesus speaks Hebrew.
Why would Jesus speak to John in English which was not even invented in Israel.?


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)