Wooooaaaa, part 2 (Revelations 2)

John is told by the angel to write specific things to several churches.  After each of these, the text says that "[h]e who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches".  This suggests that even though these letters may be directed to these specific churches, the entire church is supposed to learn from these instructions to these churches.

To Ephesus

Ephesus starts the list.  Ephesus is the only one of these seven cities in which we also have a specific epistle from an Apostle elsewhere in the Bible, Paul's letter to the Ephesians.  Further, we also know some details about the church of Ephesus from the Book of Acts.

Here, John praises the same church for its hard work, perseverance, intolerance of wicked men, and their rejection of the Nicolaitans.

I looked up the Nicolaitans and there is no clear cut consensus as to what they believed.

However, John chastises the Ephesians for forsaking their first love and that they should do what they did in the beginning.  He does not provide specific details about what this means, so anything more is speculation.  The interpretation that stands out to me is that the Ephesians have lost a love for Christ that they had in the beginning.  Perhaps this means that they have become legalistic and rigid in their beliefs, since John praises them for following rules, but chastises their lack of love.

To Smyrna

This is a word of encouragement to a church that is about to receive persecution.  Some will be jailed and some will be killed.  By Jesus tells them that they will have life in the second life.

To Pergamum

This city is praised for its faith during persecution.  However, they are chastised for allowing Nicolaitan believers (we still do not know who they are) and preachers similar to Balak.  The problems with Balak that are specified are eating food offered to idols and sexual immorality.

Eating food offered to idols was a no-no according to the Council of Jerusalem (which John signed off on).  However, Paul did not have a problem with it unless it caused people of faith to fall.  Here, we have Jesus in a back-handed way saying it is bad.  Which is it?  

One possible reconciliation is that it is causing internal friction among the church of Pergamum and the other churches as a whole.  This was something that Paul warned against.

We also know that Pergamum faced persecution and the overall church Pergamum is glorified for faith during persecution.  This is speculation, but perhaps people were eating food offered to idols as a way to hide their Christian identity because of persecution.  

To Thyatira

The church at Thyatira is overall praised for its perseverance and growth.  

However, they are chastised for allowing "that prophetess Jezebel" to lead them to eat food offered to idols and sexual immorality.  This sounds similar to the advice for Pergamum, except for this "Jezebel".  

Given the context, I interpret it literally and think there actually was a false prophet named Jezebel at the church.  However, it could refer to the infamous Jezebel who was the queen of the northern kingdom during the lifetime of Elijah.  We do not exactly know what John is talking about here.

Wives, submit to your husbands (Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians)

"Wives, submit to your husbands" sometimes seems like all that people, particularly men, get out of Ephesians.

Rather, Ephesians is rich in prose and the NIV translation flows almost like poetry at point.

We do not know when exactly Paul wrote the book, but the reference to himself being an "ambassador in chains" could be a reference to the times of his long imprisonments.  There were two that were recorded in Acts, both of which lasted two years.  The first was in Caesarea and the second was in Rome.

The first 4 1/2 chapters of the book cover similar ground as do the epistles to the Romans and Corinthians.  There, Paul talks about the plan and love of Jesus and also the importance of cleaning one's life from sin.

One thing I noticed, the discussions about living a sin-free life tend to focus on the present-tense and ongoing morality of the person, rather than the mitigating the effects of the prior sin.  For instance, he instructs thieves to "steal no longer" (4:28), but says nothing about paying restitution for what one has already stolen.

Perhaps Paul expects that a truly reticent heart will try to make amends and restitution at some level.  Alternatively, some things by their very nature can never be compensated and it is only grace of Christ that can do anything at all.

Looking back at the life of Christ, two examples of this dichotomy come to mind.  First, the tax man who decided to repay everyone he stole from four times what he took.  This was actually in accordance with the principles of restitution in the Old Testament law.  Jesus praised this man.  Other reformed thieves had different ideas on restitution, if any.

Second, the adulterous woman condemned to die, Jesus only told her to "go and sin no more".  Nothing to compensate the prior acts were required.

I do not have an answer to this.  I just note it as an observation.

Harmonious relationships

Ephesians 5-6 do not seem to stand for an authoritarian hierarchy, but rather balanced and proper relationships.

Wives submitting to their husbands has only context and meaning wherein the same husbands love their wives as Christ loves people.  

Likewise, children must obey their parents, but this is balanced with the context that the parents must not exacerbate their children.

Finally, slaves must obey their masters.  Since Ephesus is a Gentile city, we should probably infer that the context for this is the Roman form of slavery and not the form of Hebrew ownership "slavery"/indentured servitude that was instituted in the Old Testament.

 A few things come to mind from this.  First, this is not necessarily an implicit acceptance of any form of slavery.  Rather, Paul is not trying to upset the social order of things.  But the terms "slave" and "master" can easily be substituted with "employer/employee", "loaner/mortgagee" "police/civilian", or any social hierarchal situation.

Second, the contextual situation of slavery gives more context to the wives/husbands and children/parent relationships.  We do not accept Roman slavery today.  Just as social hierarchal standards change over time, so do the standards of other familial relationships.  The extent thereof should be considered.

The armor of God

This is another famous portion of Ephesians in that it stands out as unique among the epistles.  One on hand, this portion can make Christians sound belligerent.  However, the lynchpin in context is that the enemy is not human, but spiritual.  We need spiritual weapons and armor to fight it.

Ephesians 6 lays it out.  Where do we get it?  From prayer, as we remember from the Gospels that God will not withhold the Holy Spirit from those who ask. 

Paul bids farewell to the church leaders at Ephesus (Acts 20:13-38)

Paul is preparing to leave for Jerusalem and hopes to arrive there by Pentecost.  

He is at Miletus and sends for the elders of the church of Ephesus.  When they arrive, he gives an impassioned speech and states that many of them will never see him again.  He also states that he has earned his entire way while he was with them.  This is a common theme that comes out of his letters.  Wherever he went, he worked with his own hands so that the local church would not have to financially support his existence.

Falling asleep at church (Acts 20:1-12)

Eventually, Paul leaves Ephesus and travels around Greece and Macedonia.  In Greece, he angers the Jews who plot to kill him, so he continues traveling.

The text slows down for an interesting anecdote at Troas.  Paul is preaching to the local church in a private home about three stories high.  He is preaching late into the night when one man, Eutychus, falls asleep and falls out of the window.  The people rush down and find him dead.

Paul jumps on the body of Eutychus and declares that he is alive.  They go back to listening to Paul's preaching until dawn the next day.

Paul does not scold Eutychus for falling asleep during Paul's sermon.  Rather, they just carry on as usual.

The riot in Ephesus (Acts 19:21-41)

After completing the first epistle to the Corinthians, Paul sent Timothy and Erastus to Macedonia.  This was referred to in the letter, so we can infer that Timothy hand-delivered the epistle of 1st Corinthians to the church of Corinth.

Paul's preaching in Ephesus causes problems.  The city thrives on the idol-manufacturing industry and one local silversmith, Demetrius, gets really angry.  He incites a mob to take hold of Gaius and Aristarchus and took them to a theater.  (note, some translations say that "they rushed in one accord", which other people find funnier than I ever did)

Gaius and Aristarchus are a few traveling companions of Paul, but they did not seize Paul himself.  Meanwhile, the local church members at Ephesus urge Paul not to go to the theater.

Things look bleak that Gaius and Aristarchus might be lynched.  However, the local city clerk emerges to quiet down the crowd.

His speech to appease the crowd is interesting.  He basically argues that it is an undeniable fact that Artemis descended from heaven and now Ephesus guards her.  Likewise, if Demetrius had a problem with Paul or his friends, they could take it up in the civil courts.

I think this is the first time that Paul has directly stirred up trouble with Gentiles.  Before this, it seemed to be the leaders of the Jewish community who either directed their followers to harass Paul or incited the Gentiles to harass Paul.  

Also, the fact that the clerk suggested taking this up in the civil courts might give some indicate that people used the civil courts to adjudicate religious matters.  This is clearly in speculation, but perhaps this is what happened with the church in Corinth as referred to in in first Corinthians.

The Ephesians (Acts 18:18 et seq.)

To Ephesus, twice

Paul leaves Corinth with Priscilla and Aquilla.

Meanwhile, Paul has his hair cut and makes a vow.  This seems to be a Nazarite vow in accordance with Numbers 11.

Paul makes his way to Ephesus where the Jews in the synagogue like him and want him to stay. So, although he told the Jews in Corinth that he was going to the Gentiles, it was not an exclusive rule as he still taught in other synagogues outside of Corinth.

Paul promises to come back if it is the will of God.  He then travels around to a few other areas, but does go back to Ephesus where the text focuses on.

In the meantime, Priscilla and Aquilla stay behind in Ephesus and meet a man named Apollos.  Apollos is a bold preacher for Jesus.  Priscilla and Aquilla mentor him before letting him go to Corinth.

We are seeing an exchange of people and leaders between the early churches.  They did not have email or even the New Testament back then, so this exchange of people was an important part of keeping the church unified.

Ephesians and spiritual power

Paul arrives in Ephesus a second time and finds a group of disciples who had received a water baptism (John's baptism), but had never heard of a Holy Spirit baptism.  Paul explains that the water baptism is about repentance.  Paul lays his hands on them and they begin to prophesy and speak and tongues.

This anecdote shows that there really are two baptisms, one of water and one of the Holy Spirit.  One is an introduction to a life of faith and the other is a step further into faith with the potential for the miraculous.  One can have a life of faith without ever having received a Holy Spirit baptism.  

If we contrast this anecdote with that of Cornelius in Acts 10 (esp., 10:44) then perhaps the order can be reversed.

In Ephesus, Paul speaks at the synagogue at first, but then must change to the lecture hall of Tyrannus, where he has daily discussions.

God also seems to have honored the (Nazarite?) vow Paul made and gives Paul more miraculous power.  Paul heals people second-hand in which handkerchiefs that had touched Paul are then used to heal the sick.

This second-hand miraculous power leads to something unusual.  Meanwhile, seven brothers, sons of a Jewish priest named Sceva, are going around casting out demons.  Their ritual is "in the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to get out."

This apparently works for a while, but they come upon a demon-possessed person who resists

  The demon says, "Jesus I know and I know about Paul, but who are you?". The demon-possessed person then beats them all up and leaves them bloody and naked.

The effect of this was that the believers began to publicly speak about their faith.  Likewise, they then burned their sorcery scrolls.  According the marginalia in the NIV, the value of the scrolls was worst about 50,000 daily wages.  (50,000 drachma silver coins).

This is an odd anecdote.  What is going on here?

Ultimately, I think it is about the role of miracles leading to a relationship with God.  Miracles themselves are not the end of faith, rather, they should confirm that it is Jesus that is Lord.  

Here, the seven sons seem to not have a relationship with Jesus.  They are going around and saying his name as if it were an incantation in a spell.  This works at first, but it cannot continue.  They are aware of the spiritual power of the name of Jesus and are aware that Paul is a source of knowledge about Jesus.  

The text is silent about them going up to Paul and then asking him "how can we learn more about Jesus?". 

This story parallels one of the parables that Jesus spoke of.  Jesus had said in a parable that just because people might perform miracles in his name, the Lord might reply "I never knew you".  Here, we have an example of just that.  Performing miracles is not a relationship with Christ.

Looking ahead to Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, perhaps some of this is indirectly discussed in that book.  There, Paul discusses the spiritual armor of God.  Without a relationship with Jesus, these seven sons lack that spiritual armor of God, which leaves them vulnerable to a beating by a demon-possessed man.

The story and its aftermath also gives us a framework to consider Paul's letter to the Ephesians.  Clearly, the volume of the scrolls of sorcery shows the stranglehold that sorcery had on the city and its influence on the believers.

This story also shows that demon possessed people can be supernaturally strong.  This gives caution that it can be a very dangerous field.  On one hand, it should only be pursued within the context of the church with the spiritual guidance to navigate it.  That said, it is an important field as Jesus commissioned and directed his disciples to do it and in fact, told them not to intervene when someone who was not in their group was doing it.

A final note, it faintly echoes the question the Sadducees asked Jesus about the Resurrection.  In the hypothetical, there were seven brothers who each died and the widow married each in turn.  Here, we have seven brothers all doing the same thing with catastrophic consequences.  However, the parallels probably end there.