The LCS Factor

[Peter Debelak]

Originally Posted by Thankful Jane

The one thing we know, Peter, is that God doesn't hold us accountable if we are not accountable. If the Spirit didn't hold them responsible in some way for the "them" in this church, then He would have not required them to repent. At this point, I don't see another way to look at it. (The verse actually says "you hold them there" that hold the doctrine ...). This seems simple enough to me. They clearly didn't hate this doctrine like God did. They should not have had such doctrine among them in the church there. It couldn't have remained there if it hadn't been accepted.

May I ask why the scope of accountability is important to you? The simple thing is to take this letter as one written to individuals in a church calling each of them to repent. If I am guilty of practicing/teaching the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, I need to repent.

I personally have never been on the end demanding others to submit to me, but I have been on the end of submitting to others absolutely. I have repented for this. I have set my heart to submit absolutely to only one person, Jesus. That takes care of the problem for me.

Thankful Jane

TJ:

I have felt and feel strongly in agreement with you: he holds us accountable for our specific beliefs in light of the truth to which we have been exposed.

Here’s the problem: given our stupid little heads and fallen nature, we often don’t realize we have failed in our responsibilities to God. Especially when the unhealthy teachings have for soooooo long been couched in Scriptural terms, etc… We may desire to heave out all forms of idolatry from our hearts and beliefs, but may be blind to its existence. This is, in part, why the discussion on whether idolatry can be subtle or whether it is necessarily obvious, is an important discussion. We need to hear something many many times and, finally, only through much fellowship, openness and time in His Word do we finally allow His light to shine and expose our hearts.

But even once we each, individually, assess our accountability and repent accordingly, it is important to understand clearly what the Scripture teaches, even if we are not dealing with our own current problem before God. Especially when it is relates to teaching very very serious matters and serious consequences for believers.

So, back to Revelation:

I agree that there is something about the tolerance of the teachings of Balaam and the Nicolaitans which imbues the whole church in Pergamum with accountability. There is an implication, but not a clear one, that they perhaps allowed this teaching to be held and promulgated by leadership. As you say, it could not have remained unless they tolerated it.

But I see this in Thyatira as well. It wasn’t just practices that crept in. It was teachings. Verse 24 absolves “those who do not hold this teaching…” There was a doctrine present among the church in Thyatira just as it was in Pergamos. And the teaching introduced in Tyatira is arguably closer to idolatry than in Pergamos.

It true that the teaching of Balaam and that of the Nicolaitans did include eating sacrifices to idols. But Balaam sought to bring in anything which would entice Israel – that was his focus. Its known purpose was to entice Israel into corruption by means which Balaam knew were against God. The teachings of the Nicolaitans were similar, though perhaps less starkly ill-intended. It was an extreme usurpation of the gospel in order to bring in a broader group into Christianity while not requiring the purity of the gospel. It was intended to make Christianity easier to believe and practice, because it did not require the restraint of the flesh. But it was still a known and pointed perversion of the gospel Here’s Iraneas on the matter from Against Heresies:

The Nicolaitanes are the followers of that Nicolas who was one of the seven first ordained to the diaconate by the apostles. They lead lives of unrestrained indulgence. The character of these men is very plainly pointed out in the Apocalypse of John, [when they are represented] as teaching that it is a matter of indifference to practice adultery, and to eat things sacrificed to idols.

Thyatira was different. Jezebel, as far as we can tell – and those who came into Thyatira (Lydia?) – genuinely believed the mixture they brought in. Jezebel believed in Baal and Israel incorporated this belief alongside their belief in God. They weren’t knowingly perverting the truth, they had to be shown the error of their ways by an awesome display of the power of the Lord – See 1 Kings 18:

21Elijah came near to all the people and said, "How long will you hesitate between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him."

Furthermore, the mixture was specifically about bringing in idolatry. Where Balaam and the Nicolaitans used any means possible for their ends, which happened to include idolatry, Jezebel specifically brought in worship of pagan gods. But Jezebel genuinely believed this worship to be proper.


So, in short: here’s the distinctions I see:

1) the perversions brought in by Balaam and the Nicolaitans were known to be perversions and were brought in because of that reason

2) the perversions brought in by Balaam and the Nicolaitans weren’t specific unto themselves – they were simply anything and everything that could be brought in to pervert Israel or to broaden “Christianity,” respectively

3) The worship of Baal, on the other hand, was a genuinely held belief brought into Israel and was specifically about idolatry – not just mixture for the sake of mixture.

Now, why these distinctions result in different consequences for the churches in Revelation, I don’t know. Since I didn’t initially see the difference between the errors of the two churches (since the outward behavior was the same), I wanted to determine the distinctions first. The next questions are:

1) do these distinctions hold up?
2) If so, why the different consequences (i.e. scope of accountability) in the two churches?
3) Which, if any, is more applicable to the LC? One? The other? Both? Neither?


Thoughts?

Peter