Nicolaitanes philosophy of “systematic distortion” and negation of scripture.

[Elin]

Nicolaitans and Balaam

Note the mention of the Nicolaitans (Rev. 2:15) in close association with Balaam (Rev. 2:14). The two names Nicolaitans and Balaam, have very similar meanings in their respective languages: “Balaam is derived from two Hebrew words, בָּלַע [bālaʿ] (‘he swallows’) and עָם [ʿām] (‘people’). Interestingly, according to the derivative meanings of the names, the two groups troubling this church [Pergamos] were ‘swallowers of the people’ (i.e., the Balaamites) and ‘conquerors of the people’ (i.e., the Nicolaitans).” If the similar meaning of their names is significant and their mention in adjoining verses in the letter to Pergamos is intended to show a relationship, then
it is thought that

That's conjecture, not fact.

the licentious tendencies of the Nicolaitans might be understood in light of the doctrine of Balaam.

The key to the right understanding of it is given us at Rev. 2:14-15; where those “that hold the doctrine of Balaam” (Rev. 2:14) are evidently identical with those “that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans” (Rev. 2:15). We are here set upon the right track. . . . it may be observed that his name [Balaam], according to the best etymology, signifies “Destroyer of the people” ( . . . from בֶלַע [ḇelaʿ] and עָם [ʿām] ; and Νικόλαος [Nikolaos] (νικα῀ν τὸν λαόν [nikan ton laon] ) is no more than a Grecizing of this name . . . The Nicolaitans . . . are the Balaamites . . .
those who in the New Dispensation repeated the sin of Balaam in the Old, and
sought to overcome or destroy the people of God by the same temptations whereby Balaam had sought to overcome them before.

That sexual immorality is found in both heresies, does not make them one and the same.

After Balaam, who was hired by the Moabite King Balaak (Num. 22:5, Deu. 23:4) to curse Israel failed in his task (Num. 24:1), he evidently counseled that Israel could be drawn into God’s disfavor by luring them into sexual relationship with the women of Moab (Num. 25:1; Num. 31:16) which would also entice them to worship foreign gods (Num. 25:2). If the Nicolaitan doctrine is a reflection of the doctrine of Balaam,
the key may be

That is conjecture, not fact.

intermarriage with the heathen leading to compromise and idolatrous worship. Peter mentions false teachers who are “following the way of Balaam” (2 Peter 2:15) It is said that “by covetousness” these teachers will exploit the church (2 Peter 2:3). They are said to be walking “according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness” (2 Peter 2:10) and having “eyes full of adultery” (2 Peter 2:14). This would accord with the libertine aspect of the Nicolaitans mentioned by the early witnesses.
It is said that

That is conjecture, not fact.

Balaam taught Balaak to influence the Israelites “to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual immorality” (Rev. 2:14). How similar this is to the warning given the Gentiles by the Jerusalem council:
Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. (Acts 15:19-20)

In both passages a connection is made between eating meat sacrificed to idols and sexual immorality.

Yes, in the OT idolatry was spiritual harlotry.

That does not make the two heresies one and the same.

 

[just-me]

Biblical history reveals that the “House of Ephraim” never repented from their pagan practices obtained by the pagan practices of the Canaanites. As the centuries went by, as empires fell and rose, so did the populace of “the house of Ephraim” move westward. In short, these religious practices continued into European nations, Scandinavia via the Vikings, England via the Celts, and eventually the Americas, becoming the “melting pot” for all nationalities. So the evolution of religious practices continued, and changed throughout the entire world, and here we are in the “falling away” because we pick and choose what part of the Bible is irrelevant, and what parts complement religious facilities through misinterpretation and distortion which propagates division within the church. So the “doctrine of the Nicolaitanes” continues to flourish to date. This perverted false doctrine can be correctly identified if we have the foundational emphatic trust, that every word in the Bible is currently relevant for all people every moment of every day. Let no one deceive you by saying “those scriptures are for another people and don't apply to us who are under the New Covenant.”

 

[just-us-2]

You have no proof. Just opinion. why can you not just admit it?

If they were both based on the same precept (paganism) why did not john just say it, why did he seperate the two? for he would not have to. Is God that foolish that he would do such a thing?

He mentions the two differing peoples to denote the people of purgamus were getting into trouble by following two different doctrines (truths) of two different people.

it would be foolish to say you are following this group who teach this, then you also follow that group. who follow the same thing..

Prove me wrong. Unlike you I am still willing to learn when another can prove something I didn't know. As I have said before, I refuse to discuss foolish and unlearned questions (2 Timothy 2:23) and because you are weak in the faith, I will not carry on doubtful disputations with you. Romans 14:1 (KJV)

Your comment about God possibly being foolish regarding what He wrote by the hand of John - or anyone else -is ridiculous. Obviously some of us are foolish though.

Titus 1:16 (KJV)
[SUP]16 [/SUP]They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

Elin and eternally gratefull are showing themselves - see post 34.

 

[Grandpa]

I tried to find out what the error of the Nicolaitans was.

I used only the bible.

I wasn't able to find anything.

I do like what RachelBibleStudent wrote. And I kind of like what Yet wrote, although that seems like mostly conjecture as well.

I would think that with prayer and abiding in Christ we would be protected from the things that God Hates.

 

[royalscot]

these 7 churches are in turkey. yet with reference to jewish history. mixed into some of the churches etc

so they refer to history to make a point. not to change the covenant back to the old covenant.

yet paul had done a lot of work around this area for his ministry to the gentiles. (turkey)

the question would be why refer to churches in turkey, that mostly at this time would be gentle rooted by pauls.

the plot thickens lol

i think i am block too lol

 

[Elin]

Biblical history reveals that the “House of Ephraim” never repented from their pagan practices obtained by the pagan practices of the Canaanites. As the centuries went by, as empires fell and rose, so did the populace of “the house of Ephraim” move westward. In short, these religious practices continued into European nations, Scandinavia via the Vikings, England via the Celts, and eventually the Americas, becoming the “melting pot” for all nationalities. So the evolution of religious practices continued, and changed throughout the entire world,

Sexual immorality did not begin with the Nicolatians, nor are they responsible for its worldwide practice.

You "go cosmic on a little bit of evidence."

and here we are in the “falling away” because we pick and choose what part of the Bible: is irrelevant, and what parts complement religious facilities through misinterpretation and distortion which propagates division within the church. So the “doctrine of the Nicolaitanes” continues to flourish to date. This perverted false doctrine can be correctly identified if we have the foundational emphatic trust, that every word in the Bible is currently relevant for all people every moment of every day. Let no one deceive you by saying “those scriptures are for another people and don't apply to us who are under the New Covenant.”

Straw man. . .

Your thinly-veiled attempt to shoehorn the practice of Mosaic regulations into the new covenant is plain to see.

 

[just-me]

2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV)
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly *dividing the word of truth.”

1599 Geneva Bible (GNV) translated before the KJV has the phraseology as “dividing the word of truth aright.”

The CJB translation is “Do all you can to present yourself to God as someone worthy of His approval, as a worker with no need to be ashamed, because he deals straightforwardly with the Word of Truth.”

The AENT translation is “And study to present yourself before Elohim perfectly, a laborer who is not ashamed, one who correctly announces the word of truth.”

This letter of Paul's to Timothy is directly connected with the words of John the Baptist when he said “The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.” Mark 1:3

*Dividing = orthotomeoor-thot-om-eh'-o from a compound meaningright, erect, honest, level or direct:--to make straight, and disect correctly and upright. *Righly dividing is in compression totomoterostom-o'-ter-os meaningto cut as in Hebrews 4:12a “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword,.....a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”

“These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges; So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate.” (Revelation 2:12band 15)

It is clear that we are not to pick and choose what scripture we desire to follow, and neglect other scriptures as inert for todays New Testament Christian religions. If rejection is dominant in a person's understanding of their religion, then that part their doctrine is founded on the “doctrine of the Nicolaitanes” that endorsed the “systematic removal of God's law as a central pillar of the Christian way of life.”

“Lead me, O Lord, in thy righteousness because of mine enemies; make thy way straight before my face.” (Psalm 5:8)

Nicolaitanism Today

 

[Elin]

Elin and eternally gratefull are showing themselves - see post 34.

See post 38.

 

[Elin]

It is clear that we are not to pick and choose what scripture we desire to follow, and neglect other scriptures as inert for todays New Testament Christian religions.

Yes, and Eph 2:15 would be a good place for you to start regarding the Mosiac regulations.

 

[just-me]

"If you love Me, keep My commandments."(John 14:15)

"I and my Father are one" (John 10:30)

"If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?" (John 14:7-9)

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." (John 5:19)

What commandments are Jesus' in difference to His own Father?

 

[just-me]

Although prior studies on this phenomenon had been done, the church's interest in Nicolaitanism coincided with the breakup and scattering of the church in the early 1990s. Papers on the subject, often linked with ideas about the heresy of Balaam, circulated from hand to hand and across the Internet. One can even argue that these papers' definitions of Nicolaitanism spurred and intensified the scattering of the brethren.

 

[Elin]

"If you love Me, keep My commandments."(John 14:15)

"I and my Father are one" (John 10:30)

"If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?" (John 14:7-9)

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." (John 5:19)

What commandments are Jesus' in difference to His own Father?

None. . .that is why keeping Jesus' two commandments (Mt 22;37-39) is keeping all the Father's commandments (Mt 22:40; Ro 13:8, 9, 10).

And the Mosaic regulations are no longer operative (Eph 2:15).

Your job is to believe the latter and complete revelation in the words spoken by the Son in these last days (Heb 1:1-2) through the NT writers.

 

[Elin]

Although prior studies on this phenomenon had been done, the church's interest in Nicolaitanism coincided with
the breakup and scattering of the church in the early 1990s. Papers on the subject, often linked with ideas about the heresy of Balaam, circulated from hand to hand and across the Internet. One can even argue that
these papers' definitions of Nicolaitanism spurred and intensified the scattering of the brethren.

There was just as much "breaking up and scattering" of the church prior to 1990 as there was after 1990.

And "papers" do not God's truth make.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Prove me wrong. Unlike you I am still willing to learn when another can prove something I didn't know. As I have said before, I refuse to discuss foolish and unlearned questions (2 Timothy 2:23) and because you are weak in the faith, I will not carry on doubtful disputations with you. Romans 14:1 (KJV)

lol.

1. I am not weak in faith. The mere fact you made up this little strawman just goes to prove even more you do not really have anything but conjecture, ie, you KNOW you have no proof)
2. Prove you wrong? I don't have to prove you wrong. You made an assumption. A person asked you and your husband to prove it bibically. and yoiu both have failed to do it. All you have done is made up some conjecture which may or may not be true, but is not proven.

Your comment about God possibly being foolish regarding what He wrote by the hand of John - or anyone else -is ridiculous. Obviously some of us are foolish though.

See. I did not make a comment that God said anything foolish. I made a statement that if YOU WERE RIGHT, then GOD is foolish for saying what he did.

You see, Unlike you, I look at reality, not at what I want things to be.

Titus 1:16 (KJV)

[SUP]16 [/SUP]They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

Elin and eternally gratefull are showing themselves - see post 34.

Bearing false witness. You have broken one of the commands. You are in sin, REPENT..

 

[Elin]

Although prior studies on this phenomenon had been done,
the church's interest in Nicolaitanism

Whose church?

Not my church, or any other church I am familiar with.

 

[just-us-2]

Bearing false witness. You have broken one of the commands. You are in sin, REPENT..

Prove it.
Besides, I gave scripture showing the comparison between Nicolaitanism and Balaam. If scripture isn't good enough proof for you, I pity you. But I will no longer contend with someone who wants to argue and display the fruit exactly opposite of what a Christian should be bearing and tries to drag others into that same trap.

 

[just-us-2]

lol.

1. I am not weak in faith. The mere fact you made up this little strawman just goes to prove even more you do not really have anything but conjecture, ie, you KNOW you have no proof)
2. Prove you wrong? I don't have to prove you wrong. You made an assumption. A person asked you and your husband to prove it bibically. and yoiu both have failed to do it. All you have done is made up some conjecture which may or may not be true, but is not proven.

[/B]

See. I did not make a comment that God said anything foolish. I made a statement that if YOU WERE RIGHT, then GOD is foolish for saying what he did.

You see, Unlike you, I look at reality, not at what I want things to be.


Bearing false witness. You have broken one of the commands. You are in sin, REPENT..

You are the one who said I was wrong and had no proof, though I gave scripture showing the comparison between Nicolaitanism and Balaam. If scripture isn't good enough proof for you, I pity you. But I will no longer contend with someone who wants to argue and display the fruit exactly opposite of what a Christian should be bearing and tries to drag others into that same trap.

 

[Elin]

You are the one who said I was wrong and had no proof, though I gave scripture showing the comparison between Nicolaitanism and Balaam. If scripture isn't good enough proof for you, I pity you. But I will no longer contend with someone who wants to argue and display the fruit exactly opposite of what a Christian should be bearing and tries to drag others into that same trap.

Good choice. . .

 

[just-us-2]

If you people have such a problem with what we know to be truth and you don't like it, why don't you just go away? Start a thread where you all can wallow in your deceptive doctrine and let the rest of us learn in a peaceful manner from one another? After all, it is obvious that your beliefs are radically different from mine and a few others'.

 

[Elin]

If you people have such a problem with what we know to be truth and you don't like it, why don't you just go away? Start a thread where you all can wallow in your deceptive doctrine and let the rest of us learn in a peaceful manner from one another? After all, it is obvious that your beliefs are radically different from mine and a few others'.

That's not what Paul did with the Judaizers. . .

Noting you are few, and those who differ are many (15 on ignore).