Revelation 2-3: Letters to the Seven Churches

The Seven Churches of Revelation 

John is instructed to write the vision down, sending word to the angels of the seven churches in Asia Minor.  Seven is the symbolic number for completeness or wholeness, so it would be easy to see these churches as merely symbolic.  The letters follow a pattern:  an attribute of Jesus from chapter 1 is recalled.  The church is praised (except Laodicea) then warned (except Smyrna and Philadelphia).  Each letter ends with a warning and promise, but Yet, knowledge of the cities to whom John write shows a very definite connection between the words of the vision and the historical circumstances of the places to which he writes.  For example: In 2:10, John writes to the church in Smyrna, “Be faithful unto death and I will give you the crown of life.” The word for crown here is “stephanos” the Greek for the laurel wreath given to the victor in the ancient Olympic-like games held at Smyrna.

In 2:17, John writes to the church in Pergamum about “the white stone is written a new name that no one knows except the one who receives it.”  The buildings of Pergamum were made of dark stone, and white stones would be used for dedications or nameplates on the buildings.

In 3:15, John writes that Laodicea is neither hot nor cold, when the city was known for its nearby hot springs. The people of that church say, “I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing,” and the town was famous for having refused the emperor’s aid in rebuilding after an earthquake in 61 A.D. Also, 3:18 mentions an eye salve and, the area was famous for its Phrygian eye paste.

We do not need to understand all the details, however.  We do not know what the Nicolaitans taught, but from the context we can see that the church in Ephesus stood up to some sort of heretical teaching.  All seven letters are to be read by all seven churches, meaning that the promises and warnings are applicable to all, regardless of particular circumstances.

Some issues to consider:

The church in Ephesus is praised for not tolerating false apostles and the evil people, but criticized for having abandoned love.  Considering what a Christian is commanded to love (God and neighbor), might it be that the church has become cold in its intolerance?  Can you think of an example of someone who both stands for a particular belief and yet is able to be loving?  Are there churches which do this?

Smyrna contends with a “synagogue of satan.” Remember that when John was writing, Christians were not a separate faith from Judaism, so the argument here is probably simply over whether Jews should recognize Jesus as the messiah or not.  Are there ways to make truth claims (like that Jesus is Lord) without demonizing those who disagree with us?  Is our situation different from John’s?

Jesus’ harshest words are for the church of Laodicea, but so too is his kindest promise as he assures them of his love and promises to come feast with them (a Eucharistic reference).  The interplay of anger and mercy is a constant theme of Revelation.  What are your thoughts about this portrayal of Jesus who is both judge, with standards and punishments, and friend, offering eternal acceptance and rewards?

For John, truth is black and white—no nuances.  How comfortable are we with that sort of certainty?  Are there opinions or people who would not be welcome in our congregation?

The Cult of the Emperor

Rome embraced the idea of a god-emperor to varying degrees with some emperors allowing the practice (Nero) and other actively encouraging it (Caligula). If the dating of Revelation to Domitian (81-96 A.D.) is correct, it is significant to note that he reinvigorated John calls Pergamum, the city “where Satan has his throne” (2:13), perhaps referring to the imperial cult centered there.  Everyone who addressed Domitian in person was to begin “Lord and God.” To refuse to honor Domitian as a god was an act of treason, and this idea seems to have had broad grass roots support. Emperor worship was both as mundane and important as pledging allegiance to the flag.  Worship was a regular part of participation in the economy (see Rev. 13:17). Romans viewed those who did not participate in the civic religion (primarily Jews and Christians) as atheists. Revelation is written as Christians are deciding how to manage the tension between the demands of the Cult of the Emperor and faithful exclusive loyalty to Christ.   Writer Eugene Boring, in his commentary on the Book of Revelation, cites six possible responses, of which John only found one to be acceptable:

1. Quit: Many Christians found that their new-found faith cost them their reputations, jobs, freedom and risked their lives and so they quit the faith.

2. Lie: Other Christians felt that as the Romans did not understand the Christian faith, they should no die for a misunderstanding. They would then go through the ceremonies honoring the emperor, mentally crossing their fingers considering true religion to be a matter of the heart.

3. Fight: Armed resistance was an option to which some Christians were tempted to appeal, though there is no evidence that this ever took place after the zealot movement within Judaism was killed off in the Jewish-Roman war of 66-70 A.D.

4. Change the Law: This was a theoretical possibility, to work within the state of Rome for change. In fact, change in Christian-Roman relations did come with the Emperor Constantine in the 300s, but it was not a viable option under Domitian in 95 A.D.

5. Adjust: Many Christians chose to adjust their faith to their time and place and attempted to incorporate emperor worship and other pagan practices into their Christian faith.

6. Die: Other Christians chose to be faithful unto death and this was the only option which John’s vision validated as a truly Christian response.

Issues to consider: 

Paul offers a compromise over a similar issue in 1 Corinthians 10, about eating food sacrificed to idols (just don’t ask where it comes from), but is firm that Christians cannot participate in Roman worship rites of any kind.  We modern Christians make all sorts of compromises in order to participate in our own non-Christian society—we may not even notice.  Think of what interferes with our attending church.  What about our conversation?  Are there things we should/should not say as Christians?  Where do we draw the line?  How do you know?  Have you ever compromised too much?

Martyrdom is not a consideration for us, so what makes it difficult to be public about our faith?  Have you ever taken a stance publically because of your faith?  Is there one you think you should take?