1

In revelation 2:6 "yet this you do have, that you hate the deeds of the nicolaitans,which i also hate" What are the teachings and deeds of nicolaitans ?.

  • 1
    It is noteworthy that false doctrine is not expressed in detail in scripture. No platform is given to, first, describe false doctrine, then to counter it. Expressing false doctrine in detail is, in effect, propagating that false doctrine. – Nigel J Mar 26 at 8:37
1

Historically (prophetically) it appears to me that the meaning of 'Nicolaitans' in the context of the 7 local churches and in their use as 7 broad conditions or stages that the church consecutively goes through during the church age (that is, up to the end of the age, the last 3 1/2 years, and the Millenium), is the meaning of the word. 'Nico' is to conquer or dominate (Nike) and 'laitan' is laity or people. There's a common worldly practice (Rv 2:6) which God hates in His assembly, among His Body, that of 'clergy-laity,' where some 'professional' or simply dominant ones destroy the God-ordained mutuality of the assembly and its meetings (cf 3 Jn 9-11; 1 Cor 14). Apostles are not that. Elders/overseers are not that. It's neither Christ's nor the apostles' pattern. But it is the worldly 'dictatorship' model, that turns the church into a 'spectator sport.' Present in works in the very beginning of the church, it actually became a 'teaching' in Pergamos, the 'worldly assembly' in Rv 2:15. This is more than visible in church history.

There's no reason to suspect or blame Nicodemus or Nicolas for either this or any evil teaching

|improve this answer|||||
0

I really do not think I could explain this any better than Benson so I will simply quote from his notes on this text.

"The meaning here may be, either that, in addition to those who held the doctrine of Balaam, they had also another class who held the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes; or that the Nicolaitanes held the same doctrine, and taught the same thing as Balaam. If but one class is referred to, and it is meant that the Nicolaitanes held the doctrines of Balaam, then we know what constituted their teaching; if two classes of false teachers are referred to, then we have no means of knowing what was the uniqueness of the teaching of the Nicolaitanes. The more natural and obvious construction, it seems to me, is to suppose that the speaker means to say that the Nicolaitanes taught the same things which Balaam did - to wit, that they led the people into corrupt and licentious practices. This interpretation seems to be demanded by the proper use of the word "so" - οὕτως houtōs - meaning, "in this manner on this wise, thus"; and usually referring to what precedes. If this be the correct interpretation, then we have, in fact, a description of what the Nicolaitanes held, agreeing with all the accounts given of them by the ancient fathers. See the notes on Revelation 2:6. If this is so, also, then it is clear that the same kind of doctrines was held at Smyrna, at Pergamos, and at Thyatira Revelation 2:20, though mentioned in somewhat different forms. It is not quite certain, however, that this is the correct interpretation, or that the writer does not mean to say that, in addition to those who held the doctrine of Balaam, they had also another class of errorists who held the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes. 'Which thing I hate' - So, the common Greek text - ὅ μισῶ ho misō. But the best-supported reading, and the one adopted by Griesbach, Tittmann, and Hahn, is ὁμοίως homoiōs - 'in like manner'; that is, 'as Balak retained a false prophet who misled the Hebrews, so thou retainest those who teach things like to those which Balaam taught.' Blockquote

|improve this answer|||||

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.