Do the seven churches in Rev. 2-3 symbolize seven "church eras" in church history?

[miamited]

You're not testifying that truth of God's. I asked you if you read Revelation as prophecy, you said yes, but obviously you don't, it's nothing but an instruction manual for you. I don't understand you as much as you don't understand me, because I, first and foremost, read the Scripture as a history book, the whole history of humanity, the past, present and the future.

Hi Carry_Your_Name

That's great and most of us read the Scriptures that same way. Now you've determined that your understanding about these seven letters is that they haven't been written yet because John is writing about a vision that he sees happening on the 'Day of the Lord', which you define as the last coming of Jesus. I say that such letters that John will be writing on that day, according to your understanding, would be a worthless effort. On the 'Day of the Lord' the churches will be over and done with on the earth. Those who will be saved will already have been saved by the time the 'Day of the Lord' comes to the earth. Why would Jesus instruct John, on the 'Day of the Lord' to sit down and write several letters to churches that, at that point, will no longer exist? Rather than my understanding that these letters are exactly where they should be and explaining to us the failures of mankind as we move through the 'church' age in keeping their worship and fellowship activities pure before God... as we live through this age and can make corrections from the warning given in the letters.

Now, I don't think it's fair that you denigrate all Scripture study by someone who doesn't agree with this one little piece of the Scriptures, that certainly on the surface, seem to be explaining that John was actually told by Jesus to write these things down for the seven churches that are named as the first churches to be started by the traveling apostles that opened the 'church' age. But, if that's the way you see it, then I'm certainly willing to allow you to describe my Scriptural studies as you will. And yes, I absolutely agree with your understanding that the whole of the Scriptures does testify to us all that God has done in this realm of His creating... from the beginning of it in Genesis to the ending of this realm of existence described for us in the revelatory writings of the Revelation of Jesus to us. And yes, ultimately, the Scriptures are the instruction manual that God has given us concerning how He wants us to live on this earth that He created for just that purpose... but it also speaks of so much more of what God has done and is doing that some might find His promise of eternal life with Him.

 

[miamited]

Hi again Carry_Your_Name

Revelation 1:19 says this:

“Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. As far as I can tell, every reliable translation of the Scriptures translates this passage as relating to what is NOW and what will take place.

You should probably try to understand that the phrase, 'what is now' is referring to things that were going on at the moment that John was receiving these visions. So, just be careful in explaining to others that all of the writings of the Revelation are all future events. The writing itself denies that fact.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

That's great and most of us read the Scriptures that same way. Now you've determined that your understanding about these seven letters is that they haven't been written yet because John is writing about a vision that he sees happening on the 'Day of the Lord', which you define as the last coming of Jesus. I say that such letters that John will be writing on that day, according to your understanding, would be a worthless effort. On the 'Day of the Lord' the churches will be over and done with on the earth. Those who will be saved will already have been saved by the time the 'Day of the Lord' comes to the earth. Why would Jesus instruct John, on the 'Day of the Lord' to sit down and write several letters to churches that, at that point, will no longer exist? Rather than my understanding that these letters are exactly where they should be and explaining to us the failures of mankind as we move through the 'church' age in keeping their worship and fellowship activities pure before God... as we live through this age and can make corrections from the warning given in the letters.

Those seven letters were written in the first century by John as Jesus dictated, but the contents were NOT limited in the first century. These letters are relevant because these seven churches are seven archetypes of churches that encompass the whole church age, because on the Day of the Lord, the church age is over, their works are wrapped up, the great commission is complete, and Lord Jesus will be reviewing their works retrospectively. According to your understanding, John's writing would be worthless when those seven literal churches ceased to exist in modern day Turkey. You don't seem to be able to make any correction, even though you claim you can, as long as you refuse to read the book as prophecy, even though that's the the context which is explicitly set in 1:19 - "Write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after this."

Now, I don't think it's fair that you denigrate all Scripture study by someone who doesn't agree with this one little piece of the Scriptures, that certainly on the surface, seem to be explaining that John was actually told by Jesus to write these things down for the seven churches that are named as the first churches to be started by the traveling apostles that opened the 'church' age. But, if that's the way you see it, then I'm certainly willing to allow you to describe my Scriptural studies as you will. And yes, I absolutely agree with your understanding that the whole of the Scriptures does testify to us all that God has done in this realm of His creating... from the beginning of it in Genesis to the ending of this realm of existence described for us in the revelatory writings of the Revelation of Jesus to us. And yes, ultimately, the Scriptures are the instruction manual that God has given us concerning how He wants us to live on this earth that He created for just that purpose... but it also speaks of so much more of what God has done and is doing that some might find His promise of eternal life with Him.

Ultimately the bible is a special revelation of God for us to know our Almighty Creator and develop a relationship, that's why Christianity is not just a religion. All human religions acknowledge mankind's sinfulness and seek a way to reach God, only Christianity is God reaching to us. If you read the bible as an instruction manual, you're putting yourself in the center and God in a tool box, by which you're practicing a religion in futile effort to perfect yourself, as much as the Pharisees and Saduccees practicing Judaism in futile effort to keep the law.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Hi again Carry_Your_Name

Revelation 1:19 says this:

“Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. As far as I can tell, every reliable translation of the Scriptures translates this passage as relating to what is NOW and what will take place.

You should probably try to understand that the phrase, 'what is now' is referring to things that were going on at the moment that John was receiving these visions. So, just be careful in explaining to others that all of the writings of the Revelation are all future events. The writing itself denies that fact.

"What is now" or "the things which are" are referring to John's vision of Jesus in his glorified form. The conducts of those seven churches, however, are what apostle John HEARD from Lord Jesus, all he saw was the seven stars and the seven lampstands symbolizing those churches. When he wrote the letters, he was already in the church age, which is NOT limited to the first century or the lifespan of those seven literal churches, but from the Pentecost to the second coming. Rev 1:19 is a continuum stretches from the first century to the Great tribulation without any gap, it would be no sense for Lord Jesus to have skipped the entire church age and jumped right into the end. This "present" vs "future" assessment is a false dichotomy.

 

[miamited]

but the contents were NOT limited in the first century.

I'm not sure I understand that statement. The contents were not limited in the first century. Limited in what way? What do you mean by saying that the contents were not limited in the first century. The contents were not limited... how or in what way to you think that the contents were not limited?

Those seven letters were written in the first century by John as Jesus dictated,

Ok, so the letters were written in the first century and not on the 'Day of the Lord'.

These letters are relevant because these seven churches are seven archetypes of churches that encompass the whole church age, because on the Day of the Lord, the church age is over,

But that's all conjecture on your part. There is nothing included in the MSS that would indicate that these 'churches' that Jesus tells John to write these letters to were not fellowships meeting in the time that Jesus commanded John to write the letters. In fact, oddly enough they are all named for cities existing in the area of the apostles' journeys and most of them even mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles specifically as the churches begun in those days.

Ultimately the bible is a special revelation of God for us to know our Almighty Creator and develop a relationship, that's why Christianity is not just a religion. All human religions acknowledge mankind's sinfulness and seek a way to reach God, only Christianity is God reaching to us. If you read the bible as an instruction manual, you're putting yourself in the center and God in a tool box, by which you're practicing a religion in futile effort to perfect yourself, as much as the Pharisees and Saduccees practicing Judaism in futile effort to keep the law.

And that's all theologically wonderful thinking and I agree and encourage in all of that also for the child of God... but it has nothing to do with the point of issue at hand.

"What is now" or "the things which are" are referring to John's vision of Jesus in his glorified form. The conducts of those seven churches, however, are what apostle John HEARD from Lord Jesus, all he saw was the seven stars and the seven lampstands symbolizing those churches. When he wrote the letters, he was already in the church age, which is NOT limited to the first century or the lifespan of those seven literal churches, but from the Pentecost to the second coming. Rev 1:19 is a continuum stretches from the first century to the Great tribulation without any gap, it would be no sense for Lord Jesus to have skipped the entire church age and jumped right into the end. This "present" vs "future" assessment is a false dichotomy.

As I say, if that's the way you understand it, then so be it. I will still offer my argument against it as a valid understanding of what this piece of Scripture is leading us to understand about these churches.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I'm not sure I understand that statement. The contents were not limited in the first century. Limited in what way? What do you mean by saying that the contents were not limited in the first century. The contents were not limited... how or in what way to you think that the contents were not limited?

Those seven churches are characterized as: loveless/legalistic; persecuted/oppressed; compromised/state-controlled; corrupt/idolatrous; dead/stagnant; faithful/missionary; lukewarm/worldly. Their names also bear specific meanings - Ephesus - desired; Smyrna - myrrh (an aromic resin used for embalming); Pergamus - married; Thiatyra - continuous sacrifice; Sardis - escape; Philadelphia - brotherly love; Laodecia - rule of the people (especially laity, non-professionals). These seven types of features and meanings have co-existed in the Lord's assemblies throughout the church history, therefore contents of these letters are not limited to the first century.

Ok, so the letters were written in the first century and not on the 'Day of the Lord'.

These letters are written from the perspective of the "Day of the Lord", otherwise John wouldn't have visions of the end time. His vision of Lord Jesus in the glorified form is a direct reference of Dan. 7:9-14, which appeared AFTER the vision of the four beasts and the little horn, that's when the Beast was being defeated (Dan. 7:11).

But that's all conjecture on your part. There is nothing included in the MSS that would indicate that these 'churches' that Jesus tells John to write these letters to were not fellowships meeting in the time that Jesus commanded John to write the letters. In fact, oddly enough they are all named for cities existing in the area of the apostles' journeys and most of them even mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles specifically as the churches begun in those days.

If you believe that these seven letters are set in the context of "what is now" or "the things which are", then that's a reference of the entire church age, not just the first century; what must take place after that is the eschaton, i.e. the millennial kingdom and the New Jerusalem. I never denied the fact that those seven churches in first century were the targeted recepients of these letters, all I'm saying is that it did NOT stop there, the contents of these seven letters continued to be applicable after those seven original churches ceased to exist in modern day Turkey.

And that's all theologically wonderful thinking and I agree and encourage in all of that also for the child of God... but it has nothing to do with the point of issue at hand.

It has everything to do with your erroneous point of view, because these seven letters were written to the seven angels/messengers of the seven churches, not a personal self help book or instruction manual for you.

As I say, if that's the way you understand it, then so be it. I will still offer my argument against it as a valid understanding of what this piece of Scripture is leading us to understand about these churches.

It's invalid as long as you can't even tell the difference between these letters and Paul's letters. Paul usually greeted the church, offered some equipping messages, then responded to speicific troubles in those churches with his advice and divine inspiration. That's not the case in these letters. Lord Jesus revealed and evaluated their works ("I know your works"), then declared his judgements - punishments for the five bad ones and rewards for the two good ones, all in a definitive tone, no arguments or pleading, they're not mere warnings or instructions.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I'm not sure I understand that statement. The contents were not limited in the first century. Limited in what way? What do you mean by saying that the contents were not limited in the first century. The contents were not limited... how or in what way to you think that the contents were not limited?

Look. if you still don't get it, see these verses below. Seven churches, symbolized by seven lamps, are seven spirits of God, and these seven spirits are sent out into ALL THE EARTH, not just Asia Minor.

The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands which you saw are the seven churches. (Rev. 1:20)

Seven lamps of fire were burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God. (Rev. 4:5)

And I looked, and behold, in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as though it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent out into all the earth. (Rev. 5:6)

 

[miamited]

Hi Carry_Your_Name

therefore contents of these letters are not limited to the first century.

I don't think that's ever been my position. Do you have somewhere where I said that the contents of the letters were 'limited' to the first century? I merely stated that they were written for those churches in the first century. I have repeatedly said, just as with many other passages of Scripture, that there is application for our fellowships today in the message of those seven letters.

These letters are written from the perspective of the "Day of the Lord", otherwise John wouldn't have visions of the end time.

Yes, you continue to misunderstand the difference between the Scriptures' use of the term 'Day of the Lord' and the 'Lord's Day'. But that's ok.

I never denied the fact that those seven churches in first century were the targeted recepients of these letters, all I'm saying is that it did NOT stop there,

Well then, our difference is resolved because that's exactly what I've been trying to say. Sorry if I muddled it.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Hi Carry_Your_Name

I don't think that's ever been my position. Do you have somewhere where I said that the contents of the letters were 'limited' to the first century? I merely stated that they were written for those churches in the first century. I have repeatedly said, just as with many other passages of Scripture, that there is application for our fellowships today in the message of those seven letters.

I have also repeatedly clarified that these letters are a living history of the church, and precisely because of that can we glean wisdom and instruction from them. They were written not only for those churches in the first century, but also for us, especially the last one.

Yes, you continue to misunderstand the difference between the Scriptures' use of the term 'Day of the Lord' and the 'Lord's Day'. But that's ok.

You fail to understand the fact that in the first century, Christianity was still a sect of Judaism known as the Way, there was no "Lord's Day" service on sunday, only Sabbath.

Well then, our difference is resolved because that's exactly what I've been trying to say. Sorry if I muddled it.

No, it's not. I don't blame you though, most churches don't teach any prophecy.

 

[miamited]

They were written not only for those churches in the first century, but also for us, especially the last one.

Ahhh good. So we agree. God bless.