The second and third chapters of Revelation contain the letters to the seven churches. These letters are probably the most familiar chapters in Revelation since they are the most easily applied to the modern church, and can be “preached” without difficulties found in the rest of Revelation. You can go on tours of the seven churches and there are innumerable charts and graphs on the internet that claim to properly interpret the “real meaning of the seven churches.”
Since Revelation is a book of prophecy, it was once thought the seven letters were prophetic of the entire scope of church history from the beginnings of the Apostolic Church (Ephesus) through the apostasy of the last days (Laodicea). They may be letters to real churches but there is a “deeper” meaning to these letters which unveils the history of the church. Naturally these interpreters see themselves living in the final period. The church of the “last days” will be like the lukewarm Laodicean church. For example, Jesus is outside the church knocking on the door, asking to come into the church, implying Jesus is not a part of the “present day church.”
Interpreters who approached the book of Revelation with the historical method spent a great deal of effort trying to determine which “eras” of church history are present in each of the seven churches. This was popular at one time even among Dispensationalists who otherwise avoided allegorical interpretations. John Walvoord, for example, sees this approach as shedding “much additional light” on the study of the seven churches (Revelation, 52-53).
I disagree with these schemes since they obscure the most important theological teaching of Revelation 2-3. These letters were written to real churches and are intended to be real communications with those churches. The letters are a literary device used by John to communicate certain teachings to the entire church. They are addressed to real churches with real problems, but they are intended to be read by the whole church. An analogy to the book of Amos is often made, since Amos begins with prophecies against 7 nations, ending with Israel and Judah. Just as those prophecies would not have been delivered separately than the rest of the epistle, the letters in Revelation would not have been intended to circulate separately from Revelation. In fact, David Aune suggests that these letters may never have circulated at all (Revelation, 1:119).
It is far better to read these churches in the context Asia Minor in the late first century. Each letter contains allusions to the culture and location of the city addressed. Using the example above, Laodicea is did not have a good water supply. Unlike other cities nearby, they did not have therapeutic hot springs nor a fresh water spring. Hot water or cold water are both positive, helpful resources. Laodicea had tepid water that was not useful for very much at all. This explains the use of lukewarm in Rev 3:16. In 3:17 the Laodicean church thinks they are prosperous, but they are really wretched, poor, blind and naked. Laodicea was known for both eye-medicine and a textile industry. This is irony based on the culture of the city of Laodicea.
Other metaphors are more obscure (Satan’s throne, Rev 2:13 or the synagogue of Satan in 3:9 are particularly difficult). But the solution is not to be found in the history of the church or some allegorical teaching pulled out of the text without any knowledge of the social world of the first century.
Why do some people not take this history, geography and social setting into consideration when they read Revelation? The main reason is because it is hard work! It takes some effort to be fully aware of the history of these seven cities, most preachers do not have the time to do the additional reading to become aware of the background. This is unfortunate, because the message of the seven churches is even more applicable to the modern church when read against the background of a Greco-Roman Asia Minor of the first century.
I think you’re onto a good point about taking Rev. so symbolically, including the 7 churches section. In the 30 years I was an Evangelical (counting from age 15, when I began paying particular attention) I heard literally thousands of sermons, Bible teachings (radio, books, etc.) and such… a good # of them on Rev. and the 7 churches. Never did I hear (that I recall) any of the cultural/geographical features you mention. The ease of falling to what a preacher/teacher had been taught was probably a good part, related to your comment. And it’s so tempting for pastors to fall to use of passages to illustrate whatever (often helpful) psychological/spiritual points they want to get across.
IMHO a major drawback of both conserv. and liberal churches is the pretense that they are helping form students of the Bible when both “ends” of the spectrum (and most in-between as well) seldom do it much. In reality, they very seldom teach either the content, interpreted carefully by genre, context, etc., nor do they teach HOW lay people can and should do it for themselves… or what to read, etc. And I’m not into biblical knowledge for its own sake, but one cannot well understand much about Christian faith or history, or Western hist/civ., or American political/religious foundations without understanding it and at least a bit of the history of its interpretation and application.
In other words, one is not a well-informed CITIZEN, let alone Christian, without a decent grasp of fundamentals of the Bible and how it has been used over the centuries. Sorry… bit of a tangent, but hopefully relevant.
Thanks, Howard. I think that the tide has turned on this particularly allegorizing of Revelation, although I have met a few pastors and laymen that remained convinced that the historical scheme is right (or worse, that they are only *future* churches in the tribulation period!) Colin Hemer has an excellent book on the Seven Churches giving copious details on each location. Most people are still relying on Ramsay’s book on the seven churches, but Hemer is really a joy to read.
I think that Walvoord’s discussion is a bit more nuanced than your brief quote would seem to suggest. It appears to me that Walvoord is not so much suggesting that each church represents a specific period of history but that as a whole the churches picture history as moving in a negative direction. So it is not so much that Walvoord “sees this approach as shedding ‘much additional light’ on the study of the seven churches,” but rather that the seven churches shed light on this trajectory which he also sees in other Scriptures. If you read Walvoord’s commentary proper in which he deals with the individual texts, he actually does deal with these churches in their historical and geographical context. I might add by the way, that Walvoord like a number of dispensational interpreters see 1:19 as providing an outline for the book which usually results in the following schema (see pp. 47-49):
1. The things that were = chapter 1
2. The things that are (John’s day) = chapter 2-3
3. The things which shall be thereafter (future to John) = chapters 4-22
In this representation, the seven churches belong primarily to John’s present not future.
Thanks for the clarification, Charles. But as I read page 52 of his commentary, he considers them “scriptural illustrations” and says “it would seem almost incredible that such a progression be pure accident, and the order of the messages to the churches seems to be divinely selected to give prophetically the main movement of church history.” He does try to nuance this in the following paragraph, saying it “should not be pressed beyond bounds” and that the view is in keeping with a futurist view of Revelation. All he is arguing for here is a general trend from an early, purer church to a latter-day apostate church.
In the following page he certainly does not press for a historical interpretation often, however on page 69 he draws a parallel between Pergamos and Constantine; page 75 he connects the eating of food sacrificed to idols in 2:20-23 to the development of Catholic doctrine in the middle ages; page 83 the church of Sardis is a “prophetic foreshadowing” of the Protestant Reformation; Rev 3:10-11 has the Rapture in view (p. 87). It is certainly not what drives his interpretation, but he does drop in a hint at the older view in a few paragraphs.
However, in the later Bible Knowledge Commentary, Walvoord says “There are some remarkable similarities in comparing these letters to the seven churches to the movement of church history since the beginning of the apostolic church. For instance, Ephesus seems to characterize the apostolic church as a whole, and Smyrna seems to depict the church in its early persecutions. However, the Scriptures do not expressly authorize this interpretation, and it should be applied only where it fits naturally. After all, these churches all existed simultaneously in the first century.” That is a bit more judicious than the 1966 commentary.
It was E. W. Bullinger applied the letters of the seven churches only to the end times, with no application in either the first century or the history of the church,
The Apocalypse, 68. I run into that from time to time among dispensational Bible teachers in my own denomination.
The three-part timing is a common way to treat the time references in the book, it does emphasize the “nowness” of the churches. I think chapters 4-5 could be included there as well, although they are more or less timeless (from ascension to beginning of the judgments to come). I have also toyed with the seals as parallel to the Olivet Discourse, and therefore John’s way of presenting the “birth pains” before the actual tribulation.
On Rev 1:19: It is not a three-fold division. As Robert Mounce describes in his NICNT commentary on Revelation, it is a main phrase (“write what you have seen”) with two dependent clauses describing what John saw (“things which are” and “things which are to come”). That is a better description of the contents of Revelation: a mix of exhortation for the present (which applies to all) and a glimpse of God’s triumphant future to encourage those who must endure and overcome until that time.
I would affirm with Phillip, the value of Hemer’s work. This is a must have resource for studying the seven churches.
One of the reasons it’s easy to try and make the letters to the seven churches into representations of something else is because the whole of Revelation is filled with symbolic imagery, which can be confusing at times. These letters fall right into a mix of metaphors and allusion, so I can see how they could be taken as figurative. But P. Long, you brought up a good point that these letters addressed issues and used illustrations that can be linked to 1st century events and facts. This strengthens the argument that the churches were in fact real churches.
I agree with having the historical background be more important than it has been when it comes to interpreting Revelation 2-3. Like you mention in the post here about Laodicea, there is a lot of value in the history and culture of the city. I remember preparing a lesson on that passage when I was in high school and being shocked to find out it meant something completely different that I thought it would. It makes me wonder how much history we don’t know that would change the way interpret passages.
“I know your works. You have the reputation of being alive, but you are dead” (Rev. 3:1). Even a verse like Rev. 3:1 could be referencing something specific that a reader today may not catch. The city of Sardis was known for its reputation and having a big name as it was a very wealthy city. So this reputation that they were trying to uphold could very well have been related to that pride.
And I also agree with the laziness part of not looking up the historical background. Preachers like theology and verses infused with emotion. But history can be dry and full of facts, which will come across as boring to many people. But in passages such as these, the historical background should be a part of the process of interpreting what the author originally meant.
I agree with Jon, I think that the reason why people see the churches as representing something else, is because Revelation holds so much imagery. However, because most of the books of New Testament were written as letters to churches, to help guide then in their daily walk with Christ. To remind them of His love for them. And to teach them how to live. Also the fact that a lot of facts from Rev. 2-3 can line up with the first century, about when this letter was written.
THE 7 CHURCHES OF REVELATION
Before we speak on Revelation The great warning to the churches of our nations
Through God’s eyes I will speak It BOLDLY no hesitation
This is MY spiritual evaluation
A spirit filled interpretation
Before we start with the 7 churches and the key to their salvation
We MUST first address the church today PLEASE!
NO MORE CONDEMNATION!
There are millions who love Jesus but have suffered indignation
By the hand of those in churches
Now to me
That’s an abomination!
In the past few years on my journey in determination
To draw closer to the Lord Because Jesus IS my adoration.
I have witnessed many a congregation
And so much discrimination Severe spiritual abuse
And degradation
Money manipulation
And fellowship termination Infair and unjust accusations When I try to share my jubilation
Of the Lord Jesus of Nazareth
MY first love.
From the highest of administration
The most apaulling insinuations
I have seen churches of mystifications
Congregation exploitations Cliques and isolation
Profound demonstrations
Of itchy ears-gossip-lying tongues
A twisted evaporation
Of the Lord’s Holy words Into SHEER FABRICATIONS!
The very utilization
Of FALSE doctrine
And misinformation
A crumbling foundation
And complete utter stagnation Which has nothing to do with Jesus Christ
Yet it is sold off to “His” Creation Our “dying” population
Who desperately needs
The Lord’s destination
The churches are leading them To Satan’s annihilation!
Can you feel my great frustration?
Love!!! There should be NO contemplation
That causes NONE humiliation Jesus loves ALL
no matter what their situation No such thing as ‘denomination’ When you are following the TRUE God… Jesus of Nazareth.
Now John had a vision
And it was NOT his imagination For when the Lord appeared to me-He was a ‘Box office hit’
An overnight sensation!
In my heart-such a celebration Jesus is my sole infatuation REGARDLESS OF SPECULATION which I KNOW comes from satan I call it “Demonization”
HE KNOWS MY HEART and that is MY affirmation!
He shows me visions of great devastation Earthquakes-Tsunami-tornadoes-war in this nation
NOT for trepidation
Visions of this spiritual war Just one more confirmation
He whispers “Go and tell the people of my amazing miracles and revelations”
But the churches will not hear me
And they take my testimony of great elation
Once again Over and over
More slaughter
And hateful condemnation Aggravation
Great frustrations
The Devil’s altercation
The churches revocation
Of TRUTH
sanctification
To be speaking the TRUTH in GOD’S house
To GOD’S people
I receive Character assassination self annointed no passion-no fire Self idolization
Who think it is THEIR invitation To scoff and spit
On foreordination
Such haughty Self rightious implications.
I am so happy he will be returning And give me a permanent Vacation
I will rejoice in adoration
This suffering be removed Just peace…love… Complete saturation
From all of this complication When all I want to do is tell People my testimony
And my great jubilation Of Jesus of Nazareth My first love!
A modern day Esther
Who hides her designation Comfort under his wing
With such high expectations
She waits for HIM to reveal and steal the limelight
In one amazing salutation
She walks the dark valley and waits-he makes no mistakes What a very strange situation
He started it-he will finish it Jesus of Nazareth is my Inspiration
HE does it ALL beyond my expectations
He has no limitations
I need no elabotations
JUST THE TRUTH
So i wait faithfully
In heavenly anticipation.
Yes! Yes! I know the implications The so-called Holy and their Self rightious provocation
“Who are you JoA to speak of the Lord? You are surely no saint… You are unholy-unlearned–It is the devil’s mesmerization
“YOUR insubordination” Hallucinations
Examination
Of my false indoctrination
They take my beautiful testimony of Jesus the Lamb of God
Rumination
Evil connotations
Spiritual casteration
Declination
Ultimate expulsion Extermination
From HIS Church.
But Jesus is STILL my first love Regardless of Fiery darts
And their lying declarations
He gives me amazing lessons And he is revealing “revelation”
Yes! Yes! I am aware of the significations
Acts of reparations
The FAILING churches of old
The FAILING churches of now Where is the Lord’s High and HOLY EXULTATION?
What I see is a GREAT Accumulation
Of Satan’s penetration
Divide and conquer
Evil fruits of Nicolas
Seeped with Pagan connotations When the churches don’t keep JESUS OF NAZARETH as their first love.
The worlds downfall
Utter Disintegration
Demonic facination
Has caused a great separation
Of the Lord’s TRUE words
Into subtle mutilation
A very deathly combination
The war is coming
He calls it GREAT TRIBULATION this EVIL vibration
Will sweep and swarm EVERY nation
The TRUE CHURCH OF CHRIST MUST ARISE TO THIS OCCASION with total dedication
And no trepidation
With HIS DIVINE WORDS Condemning SIN And repentance
With no Improvisation!!
The churches of this nation
Have made many modifications They give no explanations
A seat and pocket filled
Is their true valuation
They have betrayed the Lord Jesus
DENYING HIS DIVINATION worried about themselves
Their “about me” Reputations
Simple explanation
The Holy Bible
Its words
Its very desecration
Has caused this Great separation Between the church And its first love…
“JESUS OF NAZARETH” THE MESSIAH NAME ABOVE ALL NAMES SON OF GOD
MY first love.
Dear Jooa77,
I have purchased one of your booklets and thank you for your courage in tackling a very unpleasant subject. I know of someone who has experienced a couple of unpleasant attacks from evil. Unfortunately he is so confused and ashamed and believes the lies taught by his church that he must have some evil lurking in him – and consequently was shunned and driven out. This man has spent some years living like a hermit, totally lacking confidence and unable to move forward in life. One day those destroyers will have to face the music, and what a day that will be.
Meantime, I am interested in following your comments but am not able to access your system, though I had put in a request some time ago for access, but there was no response.
Shalom
Jardin
(Please do not publish my email address)
P. Long’s post on Revelation 2-3 on the seven Churches in Revelation is extremely beneficial in understanding the most well-known chapters in the book of Revelation. P. Long’s mention of how merely because of Revelation’s reputation of being prophecy, people used to assume the same for Revelation 2-3.
P. Long’s continue onward writing on how to better read the book of Revelation with all its context, history, and culture rather than assume it is prophecy. He further asks the question of why some people do not take into consideration the context, history, cultural context of Revelation. There are a multitude of different reasons for why some people do not take these factors into consideration when reading Revelation. One reason may merely be lack of resources to understand or look up the context, culture, and history behind Revelation. Another reason may be pure laziness that people do not desire to dig deeper into Scripture, and though a sad reality, may be very true among younger Christians.
Delving into the actual, contextual history of just one of the seven churches of Revelation certainly did take some hard work. However, I believe it was really rewarding to uncover some of the reasons why John of Patmos used the different descriptors and metaphors that he chose in his letters to the churches. For example, Pergamum is the place “where Satan’s throne is” (Revelation 2:13), most likely due to Pergamum’s status as an imperial cult center. If nothing else, it definitely puts the persecution of that church into perspective, and the whole passage of the seven churches gives insight into how the early church lived under the rule of Rome. I agree that these are very teachable passages in the grand scheme or Revelation, as different churches each achieved their own successes and had their own missteps (there are a few different exceptions to this), each of which is something that the church can learn from. While I disagree with the more figurative interpretations of the seven churches, I can see why some people may think that they hold merit. After all, if Laodicea is supposed to stand for a lukewarm, present-day church, that isn’t so far off from how the church is portrayed in the modern day.
Actually, this particular article illuminates the challenge I had when composing my last essay. The assignment was to choose one of the churches in Revelation 2-3, and then consequently do as much research about that particular place as possible–then of course explain your findings. What I found was quite astounding, and not only did it help me to have a better understanding of the history of the church I was researching, but it also illuminated the meaning of the text. This is what preachers are sometimes missing in their sermons, namely, the meaning behind the text. It is tempting, I understand, to neglect this part of the research and simply move on to the application stage, but without a contextual understanding of the church, many are misguided about what they are supposed to apply to their lives. For the essay I composed, I wrote about the Church of Ephesus, and in my research about this church, I discovered that the culture was quite pagan. It was the newly converted Christian’s reaction to this avid paganism that caused them to focus too heavily on doctrine as opposed to the love of Christ (Revelation 2:1-7). But without this knowledge about the culture, I would never been able to make sense of the letter. Thus, is it absolutely mandatory–especially when reading Revelation–that we grasp the culture and context before deducing meaning.
We have talked about before in previous blog posts that figuring out the historical context in order to understand the current passage is so important and necessary. We cant just read and skip right to the application stage and figure out how it applies to our lives, although that would be easier, but we need to figure out the setting, history, and context to truly understand what is being said in these letters. But as mentioned in the original post, all of this takes a lot of time and energy which is why a lot of people don’t do it, including pastors.
However, when we take all of this into consideration we will realize that these two chapters have a lot to say about our present life. It may be written to the single church but it is written for the whole church of Christ to read as well. We may not be able to relate fully to each and every letter written, but there is a lot that we can see directly in our lives and we need to change them and live differently. These letters were written in a historical time but they are there for us to learn from and reflect on.
“These letters were written to real churches and are intended to be real communications with those churches”. I completely agree with what you stated. I also believe that these letters were sent to real churches. Each of the letters had a meaning and it was to communicate to each church and allow each church to know what it was lacking. We know that most of the churches were not doing what God commanded them to do, therefore, the best way to communicate to the churches was by a letter sent by God Himself. The vast majority of these churches were doing the contrary of what God wanted them to do. Each of the messages that God sent to each of the churches had a very significant purpose. The message to two churches was to congratulate them and keep being strong, while the message for the others churches was to repent, otherwise they would see God’s fury. To most churches God was very critical and this is because the churches had turned their back on God and were sinning, and even practiced idolatry. With this in mind, I completely believe that each letter was sent to a real church.
There will always be the debate whether or not Revelation is historic, apocalyptic, or futuristic. I believe it is a combination of all three. I believe that these two passages are both historic and prophetic. In these passages, John reflects on the churches’ current situation and then gives each of them their own prophecy. I agree with Professor Long that these letters were circulated among the churches so that they could learn more about what God was telling the believers. I also agree that Revelation should be read in context of the time period that Revelation was written. Each of the churches had a distinctive trait that John pointed out. These traits could be good or bad. For the church of Laodicea, they were known for being lukewarm. Not the best complement. The believers thought that they were thriving in their faith when in reality they were just struggling in their faith. Hence, that was why John used metaphors that each church would understand. The church of Laodicea had waters that were lukewarm hence they understand what it meant to be lukewarm. Some of the metaphors may seem to be really weird, but they each meant something to each of the churches. In conclusion, it is better to understand the context of Scripture than focus on what kind of literature Revelation is.
I find it humorous that history and context is not taken into consideration while teaching. Not that I have taught on it or attempted to look at the history thus far. This, however, is one of the first things we are taught as Bible students. I understand the time factor and the dedication needed to understand the context with accuracy, but it does not change the significance and impact it can make on the teaching. The seven churches are very common teaching, specifically the lukewarm metaphor. Every time I hear this I think about the movie, War Room, where the elderly lady makes coffee and serves it to the younger main character. She immediately spits it out and it does not taste good. I know this first hand as a coffee lover. It is intriguing to read the letters to the church and think about it in present-day mindsets. History is made and written down to help those in the future with the hope of not repeating mistakes. The best way to move forward from history is to understand the situation and the core of the culture at the time, to be able to see the way problems evolved for better or worse. Regardless of the content, the context of the history, geography, and setting needs to be taken into consideration to be studied deeper, despite the added energy and time it requires, which is easier said than done.
We are lazy and like to take things out of context all the time. As P Long said, there is so much information and effort needed to be put in that many preachers don’t have enough time for all the background or don’t have the resources. But this is extremely important in understanding the symbolisms and metaphors. Revelations 2-3 about the seven churches is very important for us today, we can understand that this letter is written to the body of Christ, the church today. Though not all is applicable we can make sure we are not a lukewarm church. Active and fervent for God in all we do every day of the week. If we don’t understand the background and context of Laodicea then we would be making up our own interpretation.
There was an assignment that I had to choose one of the churches in Revelation 2-3, which in fact I did some research about one of the places to explain the findings and how it all started. I understand the history from what I have researched about the places and the church. Preachers will sometimes miss what they are missing in their sermons, what is behind the meaning of the text and where it began. If the preachers will not explain about the churches or any events that happened probably give at least a little bit of details. People should do this in their Bible study to break down points in the Bible to understand the story. Believers will read the Revelation by themselves to try to understand it and at the same time they will not be able to understand the Bible. I think the preachers should take the time to read Revelation and explain it to the people about the churches. There is a lot to learn about the seven churches. I think the people should take the time to read and research the history, cultures, religion and values. When I was doing research about one of the churches, I wanted to know about it by questioning why’s and how’s about the church which led me back to the history and geography. I like history’s and there is so much more to learn about. I pray and hope that one day that people will open up their Bible and take the time to read and pray and see that God has a plan and tells what the future is going to look like of the return of Christ.
The seven churches described in Revelation 2-3 are seven literal churches at the time that John the apostle was writing Revelation. Though they were literal churches in that time, there is also spiritual significance for churches and believer today. The first purpose of the letters was to communicate with the literal churches and meet their needs at that time. The second purpose is to reveal seven different types of individual/churches throughout history and instruct them in God’s truth.
The problem of each seven churches describes issues that could fit the church in any time in its history. For example, Ephesus (Rev 2:1-7) – the church that had forsaken its first love. Smyrna (Rev 2:8-11) – the church that would suffer persecution. Pergamum (Rev 2:12-17) – the church that needed to repent. Thyatira (Rev. 2:18-29) – the church that had a false prophetess. Sardis (Rev. 3:1-6) – the church that had fallen asleep. Philadelphia (Rev. 3:7-13) – the church that had endured patiently. Laodicea (Rev. 3:14-22) – the church with the lukewarm faith.
All we have the letters to the seven churches, which should be views on each problem that they are addressed to actual churches and deal with actual problems in those churches. And these churches symbolize the various types of churches that have existed and will exist throughout history. In our modern day every church undoubtedly fits the pattern of one of these churches. And also these churches represent the seven stages in the process of the history of the church, from the first century until today. Even though the history, culture and our living standard are changing year after year the word of God will remain and will never change until God himself change it.
In the book of Revelations, in chapters two and three, seven churches are addressed through individual letters. These churches include Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea. These letters are known to be the most applicable chapters in Revelation to the modern church and can often be separated from the confusing aspects of Revelation when being preached about. It helps that there is access to go on tours of these churches. Even though these are letters to real churches, there is a deeper meaning to take into consideration in order to uncover the history of the church. The church of Laodicean gives an interesting image of Jesus knocking on the outside door of the church asking to enter. Through this image, it is implying that Jesus was not already a part of this present-day church. It seems unreal to think about, but Revelation is a prophetic book. John uses these letters written to the seven churches as to be read literarily by the churches but also as the body of Christ as a whole in order to address certain issues arising in the church.
I feel that people do not take history, geography and social setting when reading the book of Revelation simply because they do not understand it or have that knowledge. I grew up believing that Revelation was a difficult book to read and therefore had no desire in attempting to understand the complexity that goes with reading it. I feel that not enough pastors preach on this topic enough because it must be a difficult topic to gain a congregations interest in.
One of the main questions posed in this blog post stood out to me amongst the rest: “Why do some people not take this history, geography, and social setting into consideration when they read Revelation?” This is a great question that I didn’t consider until I read through this passage. The answer provided by P Long immediately after sums it up very well. It is hard work! After writing a paper on the themes and significance of Revelation 2 two and three, I am beginning to understand why. After all of that, those were apparently the “easier” chapters to read and thoroughly study. I certainly can’t imagine writing a paper based on the themes later on in the book of Revelation. What strikes me as the most interesting aspect of these two chapters is their relatability to us today as believers. I think the point made about how these were real letters written for real churches is a brilliant one. I truly believe a greater understanding of Revelation as a whole can begin with a solid understanding of Revelation 2 and 3 as a gateway- and I would like to think that this is not by accident, maybe it was even perhaps as design. While there are many elements of the will of God we are not meant to understand, I definitely believe chapters two and three of Revelation are something we are meant to understand!
In the blog, I see that there is a strong importance in understanding the historical, geographical, and social context of the churches in Asia Minor. I think the understanding of all of these points is crucial to the understanding of the passages that talk about these churches. I agree with Philip Long when he says that he believes the letters are written to real churches that have real problems and that these letters are written to communicate the concerns of the entire church. By understanding the geographical background of all the churches that are discussed in Revelation 2-3, we can understand the challenges each of these churches faced. For example, in the explanation of Laodicea’s tepid water and the suggestion of lukewarmness provide meaning to the text, as well as it contributes and help us understand the seriousness of Jesus’ rebuke. I think that readers and some preachers may overlook how important the historical and cultural background with trying to interpret the Book of Revelation. This is important because it helps us understand the text better and understand the eternal truths.
Chapters 2-3 of Revelation are composed of letters that John wrote to the seven churches in Asia Minor. Reading these letters can give readers a good sense of what the culture of the church was like during this time. For example, the church of Laodicea was known for being lukewarm, meaning the church was neither for or against God. The church of Laodicea could not see where they were in the wrong. Revelation 3:17 says “You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.” The church believed that they were doing well when in fact they were not. To me, the church of Laodicea reminds me of churches today. There are many people who are lukewarm in their faith and who cannot see how wretched and poor they are. It is evident that the church of Laodicea thought that they knew everything and had everything when in reality they had nothing of true substance at all. This describes today’s culture. We live in a world that is heavily revolved around social media and following fleshly desires rather than following God. We gather as many materialistic possessions as we can to fill the God-shaped hole that we have inside. This is not the life that God wants for us just like how he did not want the Laodicean church to be lukewarm. Revelation 3:19-20 says “Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent. Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me.” God wants us to turn from the things of the world and to fully rely on him.
The Seven Churches were all sent letters about their churches and the good and bad parts about them. The Seven Churches were important because these churches were the first of it’s kind and set a foundation of churches. Church is important because it acts as a time to gather and worship our Lord. I agree with Phillip Long’s statement of saying that the letters were important because it was such a great way of communication with the churches and taught them great information about the churches. I think it is great to see these churches being appreciative of these letters because it really helped the churches out with learning. The Church of Sardis was considered to be dead and I find it very valuable to know that no church is perfect, especially not the very first ones. What is unique about the Seven Churches is that each one of them represent something different and each church was its strengths and weaknesses. The Book of Revelation was be a confusing chapter to understand but such an important Book to understand in The Bible. After writing a paper on the Church of Sardis, I got to understand the importance of the letters sent out to the Churches and the reason they got sent to them.
Within revelations chapter two and three 7 churches are addressed By Jesus which John is recording to be sent to each of the churches. Over the years there have been several ways these passages have been interpreted, one being the historical method, this would explain How each church represents a different season or “era” of the global church (Long, 2014). I agree with Long’s statement about trying to figure out different eras of church Is not what this passage was intended for. Revelations 2 and 3 were written to churches within the 1st century In Asia Minor, and it is more beneficial to try to understand the cultural historical background behind each of the seven churches So that one can have more insight as to why the churches were given the instructions That they did.
For example, the church of Laodicea is being recorded as being Lukewarm, (Rev 3:15, NIV). Through Understanding the history of Laodicea one can see how their water supply was poor and had a lack of cold or hot water Because of where that Laodicea is located. Being lukewarm is a play on words given the locational context of where this Church is. Also, Even though the Church is rich They are Ridiculed and are instructed “to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich” (Rev 3:18, NIV). Understanding the original historical cultural context of the churches helps us to better understand why They are being rebuked and instructed in the ways that they are. It can also be a lesson to churches today of how we are being shaped by the culture that is around us. So that we are reminded. What influences are in our lives, and who are we relying upon, and who are we following? The one of whom we should always follow is Jesus
When considering the seven churches of Revelation 2-3, it is important to remember their historical and cultural context, as these were letters intended to be read by these churches, delivering messages that needed to be heard by the believers in Asia Minor. Often, especially in evangelical/dispensationalist contexts, attempt to read futurism into a section of Revelation which is largely not concerned with the future coming eschatological age. While certain sections, especially as the book progresses, begin to concern themselves with the apocalyptic judgment and the inauguration of the future coming kingdom of God, Revelation should mostly be read from a Preterist perspective in its early chapters. Many of these churches had deep loyalties to the practice of the Roman Imperial cult, as five of these cities had imperial priests and altars, and six of them had temples (Long, 115). Pergamum and Ephesus were known to have competitions between themselves and other regions, constructing temples to the contemporary Roman rules in an attempt to gain favor and prove superior to one another in their loyalty and participation in the Imperial cult. This dedication inevitably led to the persecution of believers in these regions, as Revelation 2:13 records the name of a martyr, Antipas, in Pergamum. These churches needed encouragement and guidelines in their times of difficulty directly relating to them, not only future prophecies. There is sort of an irony that within Dispensationalist thought there tends to be such a commitment to ‘literal’ interpretation, yet the same tradition clings so heavily to an exclusively futurist perspective of Revelation, not allowing the text to say what it is actually attempting to say. Of course, this does not mean everyone within the tradition or that Dispensationalism itself must succumb to this proclivity, but it is still a valuable observation.
It does matter how one interprets Scripture, especially a book like Revelation; so many believers can get wacky ideas and form uniquely absurd concepts from their interpretation that it leads a whole group of believers astray. Without understanding the historical and cultural background and its context, one is already doomed to understand the verses properly and sadly don’t glean as much richness as they could if they interpreted it the correct way. One thing that I’ve noticed in recent years, is that any believer in Christ is valued and recognized for their own interpretation of Scripture in certain groups/churches. This is a dangerous action to approve as a church because it disregards the importance of pastor-teachers in the body of Christ who are gifted with the spiritual ability to uncover certain truths and drive home spiritual applications to their congregation. Not everyone has the gift of pastor-teacher, though we are each called to search the scriptures and study on our own, this doesn’t assume that a believer is creating their own doctrines on their own and then spreading and preaching their ideas to others; therefore leading them away from the truth (Acts 17:11, John 5:39, 2 Tim 2:15). Culture does influence how one reads scripture, so one must be aware of this and also must recognize the importance of understanding the culture during the time of whichever passage one interprets. I agree with the article, that pastors don’t “have time” to study a lot of times, but they should make time; because teaching proper doctrines is crucial for the spiritual growth of a congregation and as a body of Christ. Christ sees the importance of defending against false doctrines and teachers; one must fortify and saturate their soul in The Word and in love (which is only produced by the Holy Spirit) in order to recognize false teachers and doctrines. 1 Tim 1:3-7 warns believers of false teachers, and Ephesus is commended in Revelation 2 for their faithfulness in this matter.
You mentioned at the end of your post about why people do not take the historical, geographical settings into consideration and it is something that has plagued my thoughts as well. I grew up in a church that was very much these churches represent future churches and here is who and what they will be doing in the end times. At the time I did not see anything wrong with it, but now studying the scriptures for myself, s deeper understanding of these churches has become present in my life. A paper that I have just recently written was on the church of Sardis and the letter that Christ leaves to them. Christ says to them that he knows there works, and although they are known to be alive, they are dead and need to come back to him (Revelation 3:1-3). A church that is known for being alive but is coming close to death? This could go multiple ways in interpretation. It is one I believe could very easily become one that some interpreters would use to try and make some church in our day. Which I will not say that there isn’t a possibility of a dual prophecy because it has been seen in scripture before like Isaiah 7:14. I am merely saying based on what we know, sticking with the actual church in the time of Revelation would be our best bet. One of the interesting pieces that I found out in my historical background check of the church was just how heavy the Roman culture would have been for the Christian church there. Temples, entertainment, and culture all screamed Rome. They could have fallen very easily back into pagan culture or allowed for some of it to enter the church itself. The lesson for the church from that is enough application for us today and the other churches! We have to make sure we do not slip back into our old ways or we will think we are a live but actually have died.
The seven churches are a key part of Revelation, and they offer a practical application to the church and warnings for what is to come. The seven churches have created questions regarding the interpretation of the churches and the practical understanding of them in this context. However, I agree with this blog and its stance on the letters being literal forms of communication with churches of those days. “They are addressed to real churches with real problems, but they are intended to be read by the whole church” (Long,2014). The problems that John discusses are to the individual church at the time, they also apply to the churches of today. The church today is given a warning of complacency and a warning against sin. Often when people read Revelation, they discard all literary understanding of scripture. They can go off the rails and allegorize everything. This is an excuse when it comes to understanding scripture. It takes work to understand the cultural and historical implications of a passage. The churches in Revelation point us to the reality of the time then and a warning to right now. As I continue my education in eschatology. I pray that I do not take the short cut of going off the rails. I desire to be seeking the truth that is grounded in word of God through understanding the history and context. Revelation is such a rich book and too many people misinterpret it out of laziness and ignorance.
The seven churches in Revelation chapter two and three needed help more than ever even though they only may slightly differ from each other. Examples include eating foods that were sacrificed to idols and being lukewarm. The sinful nature that occurs within and around the seven churches provides evidence that they need God just as much as those who do not attend church.
One of the main takeaways that I found while reading this memory was something that was said during the end of the post and that was on how we need to account for the things that are happening during the time of when the letters were sent and not just always thinking about how they impact us today. When you try to scrap for every little detail it becomes us looking for something that might not even be there or we misinterpret something that was meant for something else. If you are able to take into account the history and context to the book and what is happen throughout you gain a greater understanding of what the book is trying to tell you .
I like your interpretation of the seven churches. I think that a literal hermeneutic, as is often espoused by dispensational circles, is extremely useful, but not always necessarily accurate to the original intent. As with all interpretation methods, it’s easy to take it too far. It also doesn’t help that the term ‘literal’ is able to be applied so flexibly; an old-earth creationist might take Genesis 1-2 as literally being poetry, because that’s how they view the original intent. Those who use the historical method of interpretation believe Revelation to be literally intended to be historical in application.
I am covenantal in my theology. I believe myself to have a literal hermeneutic, because I see different things than a dispensationalist as being originally intended to be taken literally. However, all of this goes out the window with Revelation. This book is bonkers. It is a minefield, easily the most complex and confusing of all biblical books. What is literal? What is figurative? Oh, wait, it’s all figurative, but it may or may not have any number of meanings depending on what style of interpretation you like. It’s wild.
I appreciate the reading of the first couple chapters of Revelation for our modern day church specifically and how easy it can be for us to apply it. Seeing those difficulties in the rest of Revelation for preaching topics and how those messages can so quickly become ambiguous when they are preached. I always find it interesting how many interpretations, as you stated, miss the surface meaning when trying to dive too deep into the allegory or into a specific passage they see as prophecy. Its always important as I’ve learned from my classes to truly look at the context in which the passage was written first, before diving into other crazy possible theories. The messages gained and the exciting understanding of reading something in its true context brings about so much more reward in the end. We can get so much more out of a passage like this
The seven churches in Revelation are an important part of the book of Revelation, but in my opinion the value of the seven churches often gets overlooked. Many people, and sometimes churches, only discuss the eschatology of Revelation and completely ignore the seven churches, because they do not have much eschatology contained within them. There is also the other side of the coin where people place way too much emphasis on the seven churches. There is not anything to suggest that the seven churches are actually a representation of church history. There is also the common act of reading through the letters to the seven churches and trying to pick out which one fits your own church. All of these ways of reading through the letters to the seven churches misses out on some of the principles we can gain from the seven churches. The seven churches contain a wide variety of Christians facing different situations. We have encouragement for those suffering through persecution (Rev. 2:10). We have warnings against holding to false teaching (Rev. 2:14-16). This is a very important topic within the letters to the seven churches. “John presents a crisis that deals with false teaching in the church and the consequences for following that teaching” (Mathews, 2019, p. 48). The seven letters contain many principles and encouragement for some of the similar situations we are facing today. Studying the backgrounds and history of the seven churches and their cities will help amplify what is happening in these churches, but we often miss them because we are too focused on eschatology.
It’s so cool to look into the historical and cultural context of the seven churches in Revelation, particularly when considering the significance of each location’s unique characteristics and then interpreting the messages conveyed to them. It is just so cool that all of these Churches that Jesus wrote letters to actually did exist. I could not even imagine if Jesus wrote a letter to our Church. I think it would be cool, but I think a lot of us would be surprised about some of the stuff that the letter would be about and it definitely would expose a lot of churches. One of these churches that I think is a lot like our churches in America is the Church of Laodicea. It stands out for its portrayal of lukewarmness. I have learned that understanding the historical and cultural differences grows our interpretation of Revelation. It’s amazing how looking at the Bible and outside history how well they fit together. When take the letters of the seven churches within the socio-political landscape of Asia Minor in the late first century, we gain and learn so much insight into the specific challenges and concerns facing these early Christian communities. This approach not only enhances our understanding of Revelation but also allows us to apply it to our own lives and the churches that we may run or be a part of.
There are several reasons why some individuals may not consider the historical, geographical, and social setting when interpreting Revelation, particularly the letters to the seven churches. Firstly, a lack of awareness plays a significant role. Many readers may simply not be acquainted with the historical and cultural context of first-century Asia Minor. Some people are sadly too busy (or just plainly lazy) to do the proper research necessary. Without this foundational knowledge, it becomes challenging to grasp the nuances and allusions embedded within the text. In fact, interpreting Revelation within a historical and cultural framework demands more effort and research, which some may find daunting or time-consuming. As a result, some may prefer simpler, more straightforward interpretations that fit neatly into preconceived theological frameworks or popular beliefs. There is a huge danger in doing this type of theology. The way that a person frames their theology plays a great role in how they will interpret Scripture, and I believe that a literal hermeneutic (studying both grammatical and historical context) is the best way.
Furthermore, there is a prevalent emphasis on future events within Revelation, particularly concerning the end times. Consequently, many readers may overlook the immediate relevance of the letters to the seven churches and instead focus on decoding future events, missing the rich historical backdrop. Theological biases also come into play, as individuals may prioritize interpretations that align with their theological perspectives or denominational traditions. I know some people that are more followers of John Calvin than they are Jesus Christ, and this is dangerous. It can lead to a neglect of the historical context and a preference for interpretations that reinforce existing beliefs, even if those beliefs are not accurate. Despite these challenges, understanding the historical, geographical, and social setting of the seven churches can greatly enrich our interpretation of Revelation, making its message more relevant and applicable to the modern church. It allows us to appreciate the depth of John’s communication and helps us avoid simplistic or misleading interpretations.
If there was anything in Revelation that would extremely interesting, it would be the seven letters for the seven churches. I have never had really gave much thought about the meaning behind the letters. One thought that I have had is shows the dangers of not watching out for stumbling blocks. One idea that I would to bring to the forward is that the churches could be also showing the problems that the future church would be facing. I also so like to say that the problems that the church were facing are similar to the problems that we are facing today, therefore we should be using these passages to know what we need to look for. I would say that I do not understand why the history of the cities wasn’t looked at in depth because, I personally find them interesting especially after reading this article and the notes in the ESV study bible, it makes some of things that said make for sense.
I think it interesting how we can apply the letter in 7 churches. like for instance in one of the letters Paul discuss how the church of Ephesus need to go back to their first love and i think that is a similar problems we are facing in today church. I found it interesting how each church had it own struggles and how related able each one was to us as a church. in the same context I think it is important to look at the text and take into consideration the consequences of their actions. furthermore seeing how the church fell integrated themselves with other religion is a clear reminder to stay in God.
There is a common understanding among many scholars and theologians regarding the letters to the seven churches in Revelation 2-3. These letters were addressed to specific churches in Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey) during the time of John’s writing. Each letter contains commendations, rebukes, and exhortations tailored to the particular circumstances and spiritual conditions of the respective churches. Dr. Long made a point to think about how these letters had immediate relevance to the churches they were addressed to, they also have broader spiritual significance and applicability for churches and believers throughout history. Many interpret the letters as symbolic representations of different types of churches and believers, each facing their challenges and opportunities. By examining the characteristics and conditions of these churches, contemporary readers can gain insights into the various strengths and weaknesses that churches may exhibit, as well as receive guidance for addressing spiritual issues and striving for faithfulness to God. Interpreting the letters to the seven churches involves considering both their historical context and their ongoing relevance for the church today. This dual purpose underscores the timeless nature of the messages contained in Revelation and the ongoing relevance of its teachings for believers in every age.
That’s quite a big idea in this context, the fact that Jesus is outside of the church calling them, as Jesus wasn’t part of this church. However, the challenge remains to define which are those churches. It is true that today, people just tend to look for a figurative side of things, and look for a meaning that is more convenient to them, instead of seeking to understand the context that the author was experiencing and try to approach when he writes about those visions. But it is true that if the pastors today took more time to invest in learning about the context so they could be more able to explain, those passages could be great resources to teach us today. It is interesting that we can make some connections. One thing comes into my mind when thinking about today, and this idea of Jesus being at the door of the church but not being part of it. Is how many churches today preach about God’s grace, but seem to lack so much of the depth of the gospel, and the power of the gospel to transform lives, and then we have people claiming to be Christina but leaving a completely different life outside of church. “These letters were written to real churches and are intended to be real communications with those churches. The letters are a literary device used by John to communicate certain teachings to the entire church. They are addressed to real churches with real problems, but they are intended to be read by the whole church” (Long, 2014).
Reading the Seven Churches of Revelation 2-3 in their background context is extremely important. The main cultural references are specifically for the Seven Churches in Revelation 2-3, and while it can be used symbolically in some places, it should be placed in the context of their time, as it makes the most sense (Long, 2014). Unfortunately, by not doing so, and by focusing on the other related symbolic and metaphorical statuses of the Seven Churches, some interpreters and commentators lose sight of the fact that the churches were indeed real, and were meant for these specific churches, at that specific time (Long, 2014).
This is the problem of taking a book like the Book of Revelation metaphorically (even though there is both metaphor and symbolic in the Book of Revelation) at times, one loses sight of the context in which it should be set in, before connecting or bridging it to our context in the 21st century. Indeed, sometimes by looking at the background context of the Book of the Bible, one can find even more applicable context for this day and age in the 21st century, especially in a book such as the Book of Revelation and other books of the Bible.
The question that Long proposes is interesting. I have written on the seven churches and it was extremely hard work to go through and process the context of what was written. These are not long letters, yet they are packed with information that is easy to take out of context. I was just talking to a friend about how easy it is to see the humanity in the Bible and in turn how easy it is to insert oneself into the scripture. The reflection is that it is harder to keep yourself on the outside of the scripture and study it correctly. As culture changes and the world becomes more and more selfish and lazy, it is so easy to do the wrong thing because it is faster and less work. As someone who works with the younger generation, I can see a lot of changes happening when it comes to the way that things are being done. I am only 4 years removed from high school and yet it has changed the way I was taught in school. The education is training the students to be able to take the easy way out of things. This relates to the young people who are going through and only taking pieces of scripture and using them in the wrong way. The same thing applies I believe to the way that scripture is being taught. It is hard and difficult but at the same time, it is so important to do the hard work. I see a lot of conversation on how Revelation was written to us because we are past the time of scripture and are closer to the second coming of Christ. However, I think this is a messed up way of thinking about just one part of the Bible.