Churches today are caught up in marketing. We want to advertise what we have to offer – whether to “seekers” or newcomers to our town, or even to distinguish us from the church down the road. Buzz words and catchy slogans abound. Is there anything wrong with that? After all, it works for automobiles and aspirin tablets, so why shouldn’t it work for us?
One problem is that many people are calloused toward advertising claims. If we watch television, about one-third of the things we see and hear are sales pitches. It’s just as bad or even worse with our printed media. Magazines and newspapers. So we grow not only calloused but cynical. We even assume we’re being lied to.
So when churches claim to be “exciting,” “loving,” “caring,” etc., we not only yawn, but our opinion of the church may be lowered in our estimation.
Apparently, this is nothing new. The New Testament church of Sardis seems to be more concerned about reputation than reality. Sardis was the fifth church to which the risen glorified Christ dictated a letter in the book of Revelation (3:1-6):
1. And to the messenger of the church at Sardis write: These things says the One who has the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars. I know your works, that you have a name that you are alive – and you’re dead!
2. Wake up and establish the things that remain, which were about to die, for I haven’t found your works complete before my God.
3. So then, remember how you have received and heard, and keep it and repent. If then you don’t wake up, I’ll come to you like a thief and you won’t know in what hour I’ll come on you.
4. But you have a few names in Sardis who have not defiled their garments and they will walk with me in white because they are worthy.
5. The overcomer will thus be clothed in white garments and I will not ever erase his name from the Book of Life, and I will confess his name in the presence of My Father and in the presence of His holy angels.
6. The one who has an ear – listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches.
All this church had was a name, a reputation and a few incomplete works. I can’t help but wonder how they acquired their good name.
Perhaps they had a great beginning. Perhaps they had been alive and the community around them had recognized this, but now, as many churches (and church people), they had simply “backslid” and were living on their past reputation, glorying in the good old days. Jesus’ advice to them to “remember” in verse 3 may indicate this.
Or perhaps they were devoting all their energy into promoting a reputation, with little concern about the reality behind it. If we may being them into the 21st century, we might imagine their members’ bumper stickers “SARDIS – THE LIVING CHURCH.” Billboards with the pastor’s picture heralding “THE CHURCH ALIVE – SARDIS CHURCH.” I could go on.
Perhaps it’s a bit of both.
But Jesus is more concerned about reality than reputation, completeness rather than claims. He gives them counsel.
There’s a little bit of reality remaining – the church is not quite dead. But the reality has never been carried through to completion. His advice is to wake from their near dead stupor and get back to their beginnings. He tells them to “remember how" (not “what”) they had received and heard. He is not calling them back to the facts of the gospel, but to their receiving of it.
I believe He is calling them back to their initial faith. Their church and personal life is to be built on their faith. Just as they had relied totally on Christ for their initial salvation, so they are to do in their continued daily lives. They were relying on their reputation. He wants them to rely on Him! (Compare Paul’s advice to another church: Galatians 3:1-3.)
In verse 4, He speaks of those few who “haven’t defiled their garments.” Apparently most of the church folks had. But the letter makes no mention of any gross immorality or false teaching as in most of the preceding letters. It’s possible to “defile” our garments – ourselves with an over-concern about our external reputation.
Jesus ends this letter, as the others, with a promise to the overcomer – He gives us pure garments and He guarantees us our security in Him. We don’t need to worry about making or upholding a name for ourselves. We have a name. Our name is written in permanent ink in His book.
Bill Ball
2/6/2007
Bill's Thoughts on the Bible, Theology and American Culture
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
THE TRINITY
A friend of mine who is attending seminary e-mailed me that he was assigned to ask the following question of three men in the ministry: “How does the Trinity impact your ministry and message?”
My first question back to him was: “Do you mean the doctrine or the Persons of the Trinity?”
Answer: “He didn’t say.”
This is a tough one. I’d never considered it.
Well here goes.
The more I think about it, the more I realize that my ministry and my message is the wrong place to start. I must start with my own personal relationship with God. Jesus, in His prayer in John 17:3 said, “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and the One whom you sent – Jesus Christ.” Tie that with the passages earlier in John’s gospel where Jesus spoke concerning the ministry of the Holy Spirit, and we see the ministries of the three cannot be separated (as we often do in theology class):
”But the Helper (parakletos), the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in My Name, He will teach you all things and will remind you of all things that I told you” (John 14:26).
“Whenever the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father … He will testify about Me” (John 15:26).
“He will glorify Me, because He will take of Mine and He will report it to you” (John 16:14).
Also see John 14:16, 17; 16:7, 8, 12, 13.
In John 17:1, the Son asks the Father to glorify Him, as He has glorified the Father, yet earlier He said the Spirit would be the One who would glorify Him.
Look at the passages about their mutual love:
“But that the world may know that I love the Father and as the Father commanded Me, so I do …” (John 14:3`).
“Even as the Father has loved Me, I also love you” (John 15:9).
“You loved Me before the foundation of the world” (John 17:24).
I hope I’m not sounding sacrilegious when I say that we have in the Trinity a sort of “mutual admiration society.” If God’s main desire and purpose is to bring about His own glory, I believe we can conclude that the desire and purpose of each Person of the Trinity is to bring about the glory of the other Persons.
So where am I going with this? The God I know is a Trinity, and it is only as the Trinity that I can really know Him.
So how does this affect my ministry and message? It means that their purpose must be to bring people into this knowledge of the one God who is three persons.
I believe that having a (reasonably) clear understanding of the three Persons is essential for a clear message: knowing not only what it is that distinguishes the Persons, but also their different works.
I believe that the average Christian is very vague in his/her understanding of the Trinity. We hear it in their prayers. We hear the Father being thanked for dying for us. We hear prayers closed “in Thy name,” without, I believe a real understanding of whose name it is. (We can, however, be thankful that though “we don’t know how to pray as we should … the Spirit intercedes for us … and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is …” Romans 8:26, 27.) Many think of Jesus, in His incarnation, almost as if He were some sort of theophany and have little understanding of His real humanity. The Holy Spirit seems to be thought of as some sort of “force” rather than a real Person. We may confess a belief in the Trinity, but to many, the doctrine is avoided or ignored as though it were beyond comprehension by any but professional theologians. Yet the Christian who does have some understanding and is able to relate this to life can really grow.
So the Trinity is central to my message and my ministry. No matter how the gospel is presented, no matter how I tailor the message, it must always involve the three Persons. If not, it is defective.
When we tell people that Christ died for their sins, we have to know and explain Who Christ is – not merely a good man, not merely a theophany – but God in the flesh. And we have to communicate what sin is – an offense against a Holy God – the Father of the One who died. And we must understand that the message itself would make no sense to its hearers without the illuminating work of the Spirit.
And I can only perform my ministry in relation to the Trinity. Following the example of the incarnate Christ, I must live in submission to the Father empowered by His Spirit.
Bill Ball
1/31/2007
My first question back to him was: “Do you mean the doctrine or the Persons of the Trinity?”
Answer: “He didn’t say.”
This is a tough one. I’d never considered it.
Well here goes.
The more I think about it, the more I realize that my ministry and my message is the wrong place to start. I must start with my own personal relationship with God. Jesus, in His prayer in John 17:3 said, “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and the One whom you sent – Jesus Christ.” Tie that with the passages earlier in John’s gospel where Jesus spoke concerning the ministry of the Holy Spirit, and we see the ministries of the three cannot be separated (as we often do in theology class):
”But the Helper (parakletos), the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in My Name, He will teach you all things and will remind you of all things that I told you” (John 14:26).
“Whenever the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father … He will testify about Me” (John 15:26).
“He will glorify Me, because He will take of Mine and He will report it to you” (John 16:14).
Also see John 14:16, 17; 16:7, 8, 12, 13.
In John 17:1, the Son asks the Father to glorify Him, as He has glorified the Father, yet earlier He said the Spirit would be the One who would glorify Him.
Look at the passages about their mutual love:
“But that the world may know that I love the Father and as the Father commanded Me, so I do …” (John 14:3`).
“Even as the Father has loved Me, I also love you” (John 15:9).
“You loved Me before the foundation of the world” (John 17:24).
I hope I’m not sounding sacrilegious when I say that we have in the Trinity a sort of “mutual admiration society.” If God’s main desire and purpose is to bring about His own glory, I believe we can conclude that the desire and purpose of each Person of the Trinity is to bring about the glory of the other Persons.
So where am I going with this? The God I know is a Trinity, and it is only as the Trinity that I can really know Him.
So how does this affect my ministry and message? It means that their purpose must be to bring people into this knowledge of the one God who is three persons.
I believe that having a (reasonably) clear understanding of the three Persons is essential for a clear message: knowing not only what it is that distinguishes the Persons, but also their different works.
I believe that the average Christian is very vague in his/her understanding of the Trinity. We hear it in their prayers. We hear the Father being thanked for dying for us. We hear prayers closed “in Thy name,” without, I believe a real understanding of whose name it is. (We can, however, be thankful that though “we don’t know how to pray as we should … the Spirit intercedes for us … and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is …” Romans 8:26, 27.) Many think of Jesus, in His incarnation, almost as if He were some sort of theophany and have little understanding of His real humanity. The Holy Spirit seems to be thought of as some sort of “force” rather than a real Person. We may confess a belief in the Trinity, but to many, the doctrine is avoided or ignored as though it were beyond comprehension by any but professional theologians. Yet the Christian who does have some understanding and is able to relate this to life can really grow.
So the Trinity is central to my message and my ministry. No matter how the gospel is presented, no matter how I tailor the message, it must always involve the three Persons. If not, it is defective.
When we tell people that Christ died for their sins, we have to know and explain Who Christ is – not merely a good man, not merely a theophany – but God in the flesh. And we have to communicate what sin is – an offense against a Holy God – the Father of the One who died. And we must understand that the message itself would make no sense to its hearers without the illuminating work of the Spirit.
And I can only perform my ministry in relation to the Trinity. Following the example of the incarnate Christ, I must live in submission to the Father empowered by His Spirit.
Bill Ball
1/31/2007
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
THE TOUGH LOVE OF JESUS
Years ago when I worked for a brief time with an alcohol and drug treatment center, I gained some new vocabulary. Words like “co-dependent” and “enabler” became important. Granted that they suffer today from overuse and have become part of our modern psycho-babble, they do speak of a dangerous condition into which Christians are often in danger of falling.
Sometimes, what we think of as love exercised to those involved in self-destructive behavior is really a sort of sloppy sentimentality that is not beneficial to those who are an object of that love. It “enables” them to continue in their action. We tolerate sin for whatever reason and by tolerating, we actually encourage it.
We don’t want to scare people away from church. We want to be “seeker-friendly.” This is not, however, a new problem in our churches. It was a problem that raised its head even before the ink was dry on the New Testament. It’s seen in the fourth letter that the risen Christ dictated to the apostle John in the book of Revelation (2:18-29):
18. And to the messenger of the church in Thyatire write: These things says the Son of God who has His eyes like a flame of fire and His feet like polished bronze:
19. I know your works and your love and your faith and your service and your endurance and your last works are more than your first.
20. But I have this against you that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and teaches and leads astray my servants to commit fornication and to eat idol-sacrifices.
21. And I gave her time to repent, and she doesn’t want to repent of her fornication.
22. Look! I’m throwing her into bed and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation unless they repent of her works.
23. And her children I’ll kill with death, and all the churches will know that I am the One who searches the minds and hearts, and I will give to each of you according to your works.
24. But I say to you, the rest of those in Thyatira, as many as do not have this teaching, as many as have not known the deep things of Satan, as they say: I’m not putting on you any other burden,
25. except, hold tight to what you have till I come.
26. And the overcomer and the one who keeps my works to the end, I will give him authority over the nations,
27. and he will shepherd them with an iron rod; as vessels of the potter they will be shattered,
28. as I also received from my Father. And I will give him the Morning Star.
29. The one who has an ear -- listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches.
In this letter we hear Jesus using what is known today as tough love. He is not being an enabler. He is not being “gentle Jesus meek and mild.” Though He doesn’t say so here, it’s apparent that He’s angry.
What’s He mad about? A woman named Jezebel. Verse 20 describes her actions. She was a leader in the church, a self-proclaimed prophetess. (A few Greek texts have the word “your” here. The word “woman” could also be translated “wife.” If so, that would mean she’s the wife of the “messenger” addressed in verse 18. She could be the pastor’s wife!) She is using her “gift” to seduce the folks in that church to get involved in idolatrous pagan worship. This worship involved as it often did, illicit sexual activity.
I assume that Jezebel is not the woman’s real name. I can’t imagine any parents giving their daughter that name. Her namesake Jezebel was the daughter of a pagan king of Sidon and lived hundreds of years earlier. She was married to Ahab, king of Israel and introduced the worship of the fertility god Baal to the nation (1 Kings 16:29-33). She slaughtered the prophets of the LORD and is pictured as one of the most evil figures in Old Testament history. Her final end was that she was killed in a coup – thrown out of an upper story window, trampled by horses, eaten by dogs and spread “as dung on the face of the field” (2 Kings 9:30-37). Pretty grim!
The prophets in the Old Testament railed against, not only sexual sin, but idolatry, the worship of other gods, besides the LORD. The LORD is presented as a jealous God and sees worship of other gods as adultery. Israel was his wife and “fooling around” was not tolerated.
The New Testament church is the bride of Christ and Jesus will not tolerate our “fooling around” with other “lovers” – false gods or idols. Though in this text He threatens harsh action against Jezebel, she is not the only one He is upset with. It is the church at Thyatira, addressed thought the messenger. It was the church’s tolerance of sinful teaching and leadership in its midst. The object of His disciplinary action is that “The churches will know” who He, Christ is (verse 23).
This church like the church in Smyrna (see previous) was a compromising church, but not only was it putting up with false teaching, it was tolerating sinful behavior by one of its leaders. Perhaps like the church in Corinth, they were “puffed up” (1 Corinthians 5:1, 2) and thought they were open-minded and liberal in allowing this sort of behavior.
We often hear preachers condemning the sins of those “out there.” Jesus doesn’t do that. He offers grace and forgiveness to those who have not yet come to know Him. But though He is gracious to those who have come to know Him, He expects more. He expects His bride to be pure and faithful to Him. He expects us to “hold tight” to Him (verse 23).
Bill Ball
1/30/2007
Sometimes, what we think of as love exercised to those involved in self-destructive behavior is really a sort of sloppy sentimentality that is not beneficial to those who are an object of that love. It “enables” them to continue in their action. We tolerate sin for whatever reason and by tolerating, we actually encourage it.
We don’t want to scare people away from church. We want to be “seeker-friendly.” This is not, however, a new problem in our churches. It was a problem that raised its head even before the ink was dry on the New Testament. It’s seen in the fourth letter that the risen Christ dictated to the apostle John in the book of Revelation (2:18-29):
18. And to the messenger of the church in Thyatire write: These things says the Son of God who has His eyes like a flame of fire and His feet like polished bronze:
19. I know your works and your love and your faith and your service and your endurance and your last works are more than your first.
20. But I have this against you that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and teaches and leads astray my servants to commit fornication and to eat idol-sacrifices.
21. And I gave her time to repent, and she doesn’t want to repent of her fornication.
22. Look! I’m throwing her into bed and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation unless they repent of her works.
23. And her children I’ll kill with death, and all the churches will know that I am the One who searches the minds and hearts, and I will give to each of you according to your works.
24. But I say to you, the rest of those in Thyatira, as many as do not have this teaching, as many as have not known the deep things of Satan, as they say: I’m not putting on you any other burden,
25. except, hold tight to what you have till I come.
26. And the overcomer and the one who keeps my works to the end, I will give him authority over the nations,
27. and he will shepherd them with an iron rod; as vessels of the potter they will be shattered,
28. as I also received from my Father. And I will give him the Morning Star.
29. The one who has an ear -- listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches.
In this letter we hear Jesus using what is known today as tough love. He is not being an enabler. He is not being “gentle Jesus meek and mild.” Though He doesn’t say so here, it’s apparent that He’s angry.
What’s He mad about? A woman named Jezebel. Verse 20 describes her actions. She was a leader in the church, a self-proclaimed prophetess. (A few Greek texts have the word “your” here. The word “woman” could also be translated “wife.” If so, that would mean she’s the wife of the “messenger” addressed in verse 18. She could be the pastor’s wife!) She is using her “gift” to seduce the folks in that church to get involved in idolatrous pagan worship. This worship involved as it often did, illicit sexual activity.
I assume that Jezebel is not the woman’s real name. I can’t imagine any parents giving their daughter that name. Her namesake Jezebel was the daughter of a pagan king of Sidon and lived hundreds of years earlier. She was married to Ahab, king of Israel and introduced the worship of the fertility god Baal to the nation (1 Kings 16:29-33). She slaughtered the prophets of the LORD and is pictured as one of the most evil figures in Old Testament history. Her final end was that she was killed in a coup – thrown out of an upper story window, trampled by horses, eaten by dogs and spread “as dung on the face of the field” (2 Kings 9:30-37). Pretty grim!
The prophets in the Old Testament railed against, not only sexual sin, but idolatry, the worship of other gods, besides the LORD. The LORD is presented as a jealous God and sees worship of other gods as adultery. Israel was his wife and “fooling around” was not tolerated.
The New Testament church is the bride of Christ and Jesus will not tolerate our “fooling around” with other “lovers” – false gods or idols. Though in this text He threatens harsh action against Jezebel, she is not the only one He is upset with. It is the church at Thyatira, addressed thought the messenger. It was the church’s tolerance of sinful teaching and leadership in its midst. The object of His disciplinary action is that “The churches will know” who He, Christ is (verse 23).
This church like the church in Smyrna (see previous) was a compromising church, but not only was it putting up with false teaching, it was tolerating sinful behavior by one of its leaders. Perhaps like the church in Corinth, they were “puffed up” (1 Corinthians 5:1, 2) and thought they were open-minded and liberal in allowing this sort of behavior.
We often hear preachers condemning the sins of those “out there.” Jesus doesn’t do that. He offers grace and forgiveness to those who have not yet come to know Him. But though He is gracious to those who have come to know Him, He expects more. He expects His bride to be pure and faithful to Him. He expects us to “hold tight” to Him (verse 23).
Bill Ball
1/30/2007
Monday, January 22, 2007
THE COMPROMISING CHURCH
Over two decades ago, Alan Bloom, in his highly controversial book, THE CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN MIND, spoke to what he saw as the situation among the students of his day. I don’t think it’s changed much since then.
He says, on page 25: “There is one thing a professor can be absolutely certain of: almost every student entering the university believes, or says he believes, that truth is relative. … The danger they have been taught to fear from absolutism is not error but intolerance. Relativism is necessary to openness.”
He talks about how young people can’t even understand it being any other way. The most horrible moral danger, as they see it, is to hold to absolute values. Absolutism leads to intolerance, which is the cardinal (or only) sin.
Well, those who were students when Bloom wrote are the leaders in today’s society. I’m sure that Bloom was painting with a broad brush and not all of the generation he speaks of are relativists, but it’s still frightening.
I know too that this sort of thinking has penetrated the church. Christians bring it to their worship, to their study of Scriptures (see WHAT IS TRUTH, 4/10/2006).
If I question students as to what beliefs are held by the churches they attend, I sometimes receive puzzled looks. The question makes no sense to them. Churches don’t believe! They worship. They have programs. They are “tolerant” of others’ beliefs. It’s no big deal!
But, lack of correct belief can be fatal spiritually. And this is not just a current problem. The third church which Christ addresses in the book of Revelation nearly 2,000 years ago, the church at Pergamum had a problem similar to that of many churches today.
Revelation 2:12-17:
12. And to the messenger of the church in Pergamum write: These thing says the One who has the sword, double-edged, sharp:
13. I know where your home is, where the throne of Satan is, and that you’re holding tight to my Name and you haven’t denied your faith in me – even in the days of Antipas my faithful witness who was killed among you, where Satan’s home is.
14. But I have a few things against you: that you have there those who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to throw a stumbling block in front of the sons of Israel: to eat idol sacrifices and to commit fornication.
15. In the same way you have also – you - those who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans likewise.
16. So then, repent. And if not, I am coming to you quickly and I’ll wage war with them with the sword of my mouth.
17. The one who has an ear, listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches: To the overcomer I will give the hidden manna and I will give him a white stone, and on the stone a new name written which no one knows except the one who receives it.
This was a church on the cutting edge of missionary activity. They had planted themselves right in the middle of Satan’s territory (verse 13). Pergamum was a center of idolatry at the time this letter was written. There were temples to Asklepius, to Zeus and even a center of emperor worship. Yet they’d held tight to Christ’s Name. They’d “kept the faith.” Jesus says he understands their tough working conditions and praises them for their boldness. They had already lost one of their own – a martyr because of his faithful witness.
But when we work close to the enemy, there’s danger. Perhaps new believers were coming into the church carrying their previous beliefs and lifestyles. Perhaps the church folks were simply trying to be open and tolerant toward the members of their community.
There were within the church, two groups holding to false and dangerous beliefs: “Those who hold to the teaching of Balaam,” and “those who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans.” Not all of the church people were in these parties, but apparently all tolerated them.
Balaam was a “prophet for profit” who had lived 1,500 years earlier, who was hired by the king of Moab to curse Israel. When he was prevented from this, he counseled, if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. Satan has many strategies. If outright persecution doesn’t work, he uses compromise and in this way, nearly destroyed Israel. Those who held his teaching in the church apparently taught that freedom in Christ is freedom to sin.
Who the Nicolaitans are, we don’t know, but we’ve already seen their “works” in the church at Ephesus (verse 6).
Jesus give an “or else” threat. Repent! Deal with these people! Stop being so tolerant! His threat is that He will judge by warring with the sword of His mouth. He doesn’t say exactly how He’s going to do this, but if the sword as elsewhere (Hebrews 4:12) represents the written Word of God, then He is applying it to the problem.
Intimacy, however, demands a conformity to His Word.
Bill Ball
1/22/2007
He says, on page 25: “There is one thing a professor can be absolutely certain of: almost every student entering the university believes, or says he believes, that truth is relative. … The danger they have been taught to fear from absolutism is not error but intolerance. Relativism is necessary to openness.”
He talks about how young people can’t even understand it being any other way. The most horrible moral danger, as they see it, is to hold to absolute values. Absolutism leads to intolerance, which is the cardinal (or only) sin.
Well, those who were students when Bloom wrote are the leaders in today’s society. I’m sure that Bloom was painting with a broad brush and not all of the generation he speaks of are relativists, but it’s still frightening.
I know too that this sort of thinking has penetrated the church. Christians bring it to their worship, to their study of Scriptures (see WHAT IS TRUTH, 4/10/2006).
If I question students as to what beliefs are held by the churches they attend, I sometimes receive puzzled looks. The question makes no sense to them. Churches don’t believe! They worship. They have programs. They are “tolerant” of others’ beliefs. It’s no big deal!
But, lack of correct belief can be fatal spiritually. And this is not just a current problem. The third church which Christ addresses in the book of Revelation nearly 2,000 years ago, the church at Pergamum had a problem similar to that of many churches today.
Revelation 2:12-17:
12. And to the messenger of the church in Pergamum write: These thing says the One who has the sword, double-edged, sharp:
13. I know where your home is, where the throne of Satan is, and that you’re holding tight to my Name and you haven’t denied your faith in me – even in the days of Antipas my faithful witness who was killed among you, where Satan’s home is.
14. But I have a few things against you: that you have there those who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to throw a stumbling block in front of the sons of Israel: to eat idol sacrifices and to commit fornication.
15. In the same way you have also – you - those who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans likewise.
16. So then, repent. And if not, I am coming to you quickly and I’ll wage war with them with the sword of my mouth.
17. The one who has an ear, listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches: To the overcomer I will give the hidden manna and I will give him a white stone, and on the stone a new name written which no one knows except the one who receives it.
This was a church on the cutting edge of missionary activity. They had planted themselves right in the middle of Satan’s territory (verse 13). Pergamum was a center of idolatry at the time this letter was written. There were temples to Asklepius, to Zeus and even a center of emperor worship. Yet they’d held tight to Christ’s Name. They’d “kept the faith.” Jesus says he understands their tough working conditions and praises them for their boldness. They had already lost one of their own – a martyr because of his faithful witness.
But when we work close to the enemy, there’s danger. Perhaps new believers were coming into the church carrying their previous beliefs and lifestyles. Perhaps the church folks were simply trying to be open and tolerant toward the members of their community.
There were within the church, two groups holding to false and dangerous beliefs: “Those who hold to the teaching of Balaam,” and “those who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans.” Not all of the church people were in these parties, but apparently all tolerated them.
Balaam was a “prophet for profit” who had lived 1,500 years earlier, who was hired by the king of Moab to curse Israel. When he was prevented from this, he counseled, if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. Satan has many strategies. If outright persecution doesn’t work, he uses compromise and in this way, nearly destroyed Israel. Those who held his teaching in the church apparently taught that freedom in Christ is freedom to sin.
Who the Nicolaitans are, we don’t know, but we’ve already seen their “works” in the church at Ephesus (verse 6).
Jesus give an “or else” threat. Repent! Deal with these people! Stop being so tolerant! His threat is that He will judge by warring with the sword of His mouth. He doesn’t say exactly how He’s going to do this, but if the sword as elsewhere (Hebrews 4:12) represents the written Word of God, then He is applying it to the problem.
All teaching in the church must be judged by the Scripture. Right theology is the basis for right behavior. Sin is always (among other things) a violation of the Word of God.
Jesus ends this letter, however, not with the treat, but with a promise (verse 17). Though there is much symbolism here, it seems to all point to intimacy with Christ.
Intimacy, however, demands a conformity to His Word.
Bill Ball
1/22/2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)