Church of the Laodiceans

mkrishna · July 13, 2015

One thing to remember about the Laodicean church, is that, their candlestick was still in its place. For all their problems and worldliness, and that Jesus was outside knocking to go it, it was STILL seen as Jesus' church. As such, we need to be very careful in how they are judged. Certainly we need to call out false teachers and false doctrines, but we need to be careful when we seek to call out what churches are false and true, because even Laodicea was in its place before the Lord, shakey though that place may have been.

This is an interesting topic. Is there a reason why God did not tell the true believers in these type of churches in Revelation to leave? Were they to wait until the candlestick was completely removed? How does this apply to us today in leaving a church?

Edited July 13, 2015 by mkrishna
Mistake

Ukulelemike · July 13, 2015

I have a little different understanding of this church. Not that I am correct, but just that my understanding is different. I see this as an apostate church. Not a church that has "lost" anything, but has never gained it, which is why Jesus was knocking. Verse 17 and 18 doesn't look to be descriptions of people that are saved, especially being "naked" in need of "white raiment". This had to be a spiritual reference as these people were rich.

Well, apparently, since, as I said, their candlestick was in its place before Christ, it WAS His church still. That many obviously needed yet to be saved is evident. It may be the pastor and some were saved, yet had moved away, though the Lord still saw it was possible to bring them back, or at least some. But still, it WAS His church-that much is clear, since their candle was present.

2 Timothy 4:18 · July 13, 2015

Well, apparently, since, as I said, their candlestick was in its place before Christ, it WAS His church still. That many obviously needed yet to be saved is evident. It may be the pastor and some were saved, yet had moved away, though the Lord still saw it was possible to bring them back, or at least some. But still, it WAS His church-that much is clear, since their candle was present.

Thanks for the discussion Ukulelemike. Where do you see in scripture that their candle was present?

Ukulelemike · July 13, 2015

This is an interesting topic. Is there a reason why God did not tell the true believers in these type of churches in Revelation to leave? Were they to wait until the candlestick was completely removed? How does this apply to us today in leaving a church?

Good questions. Perhaps, the Lord didn't want those holding to the right to leave because He didn't want to lose that church, he still saw redemption was possible, despite how far they had gone. Sometimes, even an apostate group needs a real witness to bring them around.

This is why I believe that this also refers to a specific time period, a 'church age', as it were, because even today, we are not to abandon the local church. Even as bad as 'American' Christianity is today, and it IS about the worst there is, as a whole, in the world, so full of apostasy and wickedness, and riches, and seeking after numbers and size and self-glory, yet there are still good, godly churches out there, and those should still continue the fight. I know people who teach that we are to leave 'organized' churches, meet at homes or in the wilderness, that believers should form Christian communities and get away from civilization as a whole, because of the great apostasy of the age, but I don't see that anywhere in scripture. So, the believers weren't to abandon the Laodicean church, because to do so would be to leave them to die in their sin.

Thanks for the discussion Ukulelemike. Where do you see in scripture that their candle was present?

Rev 1:21:

"The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches." Laodicea was one of the seven churches, as depicted by the seven golden candlesticks. If its candlestick was not in its place, then there would have been no need to direct a letter to it. The very fact that the Lord Jesus chastens them shows they are His. he also tells them, "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent." in 3:19. Thus, he still loves them and chastens and rebukes them as a living father would His erring children.

2 Timothy 4:18 · July 13, 2015

Ukelelemike, I guess you are assuming that they indeed have a lamp stand if there are seven lamp stands and seven churches. I'll have to study it more. I was forming my opinion based on the description of needing to buy fine raiment, with the understanding that the believer is given the "cloak of righteousness" mentioned elsewhere in scripture. I'm not trying to be provocative, I just like to study and discuss scripture and get other peoples views. If I direct my study in a particular area, I feel like I have a goal to reach, and in making my way to that goal I sometimes discover things I wasn't even looking for.

Genevanpreacher · July 13, 2015

No Nicolaitans hit the nail on the head.
We are now living in the age of Laodicea. The Laodiceans, "use," the scriptures as they see fit for their own agenda and own beliefs (or the beliefs of their denomination). I f they cannot twist meaning of the scriptures to fit their own doctrines or beliefs, they change the scriptures: the KJV of 1611, and translate it into a "new" version.
The Bible is not the final authority and many of the saints do not love the scriptures as the other churches did.

I have heard preached the so called church ages many times from previous pastors and preachers and never bought into that type of view.

Seems useless to make up something that is not in scripture and teach it as if anyone who doesn't believe it is anathema.

I see it as a 'parallel' but not as true 'historic occurrences' down through the centuries. Some I heard teach the 'ages' of the church, even go so far and say that this part of Revelation is allegorical and not really talking about real churches, but is a message for the future churches down through history.

I believe they were real churches that the Lord told John to write about and to.

Edited July 13, 2015 by Genevanpreacher

Invicta · July 13, 2015

I have heard preached the so called church ages many times from previous pastors and preachers and never bought into that type of view.
Seems useless to make up something that is not in scripture and teach it as if anyone who doesn't believe it is anathema.
I see it as a 'parallel' but not as true 'historic occurrences' down through the centuries. Some I heard teach the 'ages' of the church, even go so far and say that this part of Revelation is allegorical and not really talking about real churches, but is a message for the future churches down through history.
I believe they were real churches that the Lord told John to write about and to.

There was one who used to be on OB who believed that these letters were to so called "tribulation churches."

Alan · July 14, 2015

No Nicolaitans hit the nail on the head.
We are now living in the age of Laodicea. The Laodiceans, "use," the scriptures as they see fit for their own agenda and own beliefs (or the beliefs of their denomination). I f they cannot twist meaning of the scriptures to fit their own doctrines or beliefs, they change the scriptures: the KJV of 1611, and translate it into a "new" version.
The Bible is not the final authority and many of the saints do not love the scriptures as the other churches did.

Brethren,

Some have indicated in their posts that since I wrote the above statement that I do not believe that the 7 churches in Asia were real churches. That is not true nor do I even indicate, hint, or imply that that is true. Read the post again closely.

Before I continue. The Apostle John was also a prophet of the Lord Jesus Christ. As with the prophets in the Old Testament were used as a similitude; or a sign, or type, to the people they preached to, the Apostle John is also a sign, or a type, to the people he preached to.The Apostle John is a similitude: or a sign, or a type, to the Church; the whole church from his age to ours and these 7 churches are types of churches in every age.

"I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets." Hosea 12:10

The 7 churches in Asia were, at the time of John's vision, real churches made of real people: literal in every sense of the word. Every church had its good spiritual points and every church had its own particularities. The Lord Jesus used these churches to represent the spiritual condition of the churches in that age, they represent churches in our age, and they also represent the seven ages of Church History. if you know your church history very well, and are honest about the conclusion, you can see this clearly.

May I give one example. The church at Philadelphia, Revelation 3:7-13, was a local, real church. The saints loved the Lord and had a deep love for written the word of God, "Because thou hast kept the word of my patience...." Revelation 3:10a. The Philadelphian church is a type of churches in our current age who love the written word of God in contrast to a lot of church who have very little love for the written scriptures. Also, the Philadelphian Church represents the age of revivals, missionary work around the world, the sending of preserved word of God, the King James Version of 1611 around the world, and the love for the souls of men. The Philadelphian church age is, generally, accepted as the years from 1700 to 1900.

The church at Laodicea was a lukewarm church in all aspects and the Lord Jesus wanted to spew the members out of His mouth. Why? Deadness, no zealousness, no love for the written word of God, a lax missionary movement (compared to the Philadelphian Church), riches in abundance, and extreme worldliness. That, my beloved brethren, represents a lot of churches in our age. Does it not? The Laodicia Age is, generally, accepted as the time frame from 1900 to the current time.

In conclusion, my above statement is valid and I still stand behind every word.

Alan

Edited July 14, 2015 by Alan
spelling revise

Genevanpreacher · July 15, 2015

Alan, I was not referring to you specifically, and didn't know clearly what you believed, but some phrases you said made me think of others, not on OB, and I made statements about them.

As for this belief - you can think what you like, but I think that there are now, and were back then, all 7 types of churches down through the centuries in every century.

There are no verses in the whole of the Bible that says these churches are examples of 7 church ages that would follow as your example of church ages being from certain years. That is mans teaching, it may be somewhat correct from our perspective in history, but then again, we don't have information about all the churches that existed through the centuries either.

Alan · July 15, 2015

Genevanpreacher, I see your point and I do not think we are too far apart in our thinking.

2 Timothy 4:18 · July 15, 2015

As for this belief - you can think what you like, but I think that there are now, and were back then, all 7 types of churches down through the centuries in every century.

I think you're right that "all 7 types of churches down through the centuries in every century." But I believe the Laodicean church is more prevalent today than any other time in history.

John81 · July 15, 2015

Is this to be determined as a local matter, regional, worldwide?

Most often when I read/hear this being discussed it's by American pastors/Christians and they generally base their conclusions upon how they perceive the American church (meaning churches in America) to have been and to now be. For the moment we won't bother to consider how wrong some of the views on churches in America's past are so we can look at the world. Most often not taken into account are the condition of churches in South Korea, China, Africa, India, etc.

Looking at history we can see how the church (used here to convey Christian assemblies, not a monolithic church) grew and served strong in a particular region or nation and then began to wane. As those churches waned, churches in other regions or nations came to the forefront. Then the same pattern occurred with those strong churches sliding away and churches in another land growing to replace them. As discussed in another thread, one of the most recent examples being that of England being a land of Christian strength in the 1800s and they were waning in the early 1900s even as American churches surpassed English churches in world evangelism. Today we see the American churches falling away even as other churches around the world are standing strong and even now sending missionaries to America and other so-called "Christian nations".

While today we may see American churches being much in a Laodicean pattern, that's not the case in some other parts of the world.

So, do we really have a Laodicean age or is there perhaps more a Laodicean stage many churches go through?

heartstrings · July 15, 2015

The meaning of the word "laodicea" is a pretty much vague to me and the King James doesn't say. History says, basically, that it was the name of a city which was named after a Queen and etymology says the compound word is translated as "people justice". What does that mean really? But the Bible does say something about their works and their status:

17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

Is that speaking of merely tangible "riches"? Like they were worldly and materialistic? Or something else?

Like, I don't drink. smoke, chew tobacco, dance, go to the movies or watch TV. I cut my hair above my ears, don't have a mustache or beard. I don't wear shorts, my wife doesn't wear pants, she wears dresses and I always come to church in a suit and tie.* I have a King James Bible so I have the truth. * I'm well grounded in the Bible so there's nothing more I need to learn. I don't need to be preached to because I am brother so and so, or Dr. so and so and I have "arrived". I wonder if the "angel" (it's written to the angel) or the church had all "truth" but no Spirit?

Edited July 15, 2015 by heartstrings