As I said a day ago, I started researching the Nicolaitans a few days ago and discovered that there is a lot of mere speculation floating around out there on the internet about who the Nicolaitans might have been, which doesn’t interest me at all. As I post comments on this thread my comments come mostly from historical and ecclesiastical historic sources, such as The History of the Christian Church, Volume II: Ante-Nicene Christianity, A.D. 100-325. The information can be found but it is harder to find than exposés written by some know-it-all self –proclaimed “Bible teacher” who has concocted an earthshaking essay based on assumptions of other people’s assumptions, based on assumptions of other people’s assumptions, based on assumptions of other people’s assumptions, and on and on they go.
The NICOLAITANS
Who are they?
Where the actual name ‘Nicolaitans’ came from is not definite. They were a heretical sect who some say were followers of the teachings of Nicolas—whose name means “one who conquers the people”. This Nicolas was one of the deacons spoken of in Acts 6:5. Seeing what the requirements were for a man to become a deacon, (“Brothers, choose seven men from among yourselves who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom… Acts 6:3), it does seem odd that a man full of the Holy Spirit, the major requirement, would go apostate. But it is possible that he did deny the true faith and associate himself with a group of people “holding the doctrine of Balaam,” who taught Israel “to sin by eating food sacrificed to idols and by committing sexual immorality."
However, according to The History of the Christian Church, Volume II: Ante-Nicene Christianity A.D. 100-325, the Nicolaitans are a licentious sect that claimed this same Nicolas as their founder. Clement of Alexandria (missionary theologian to the Greek cultural world) says, “They abandoned themselves to pleasure like goats, leading a life of self-indulgence.” Their teaching was a perversion of the grace of Almighty God. Yet, Clement said of this Nicolas that he was a faithful husband and raised his children in purity, but that his disciples misunderstood his saying, “that we must fight against the flesh and abuse it.”
Irenaeus (Haer. 1.26.3) basically repeats the biblical material, adding the assertion that the Nicolaitans were heretical followers of Nicolaus, the proselyte of Antioch who was chosen to be one of The Seven (Acts 6:5). Hippolytus (Haer. 7.24) underscores Irenaeus, adding that Nicolaus departed from true doctrine. Clement of Alexandria (Str. 2.20) claims that Nicolaus was an ascetic, and then current Nicolaitans were not his true followers because they perverted his teaching that it was necessary to abuse the flesh.
Because they include nothing else about the sect the importance of these early citations has been questioned by some scholars.
Other commentators believe that the label, “Nicolaitans” didn’t come from a man at all but from the Greek word Nicolah, meaning "let us eat," as they often encouraged each other to eat things offered to idols.
