1 Woe to the bloody city, all full of lies
and plunder—no end to the prey! 2 The crack of the whip, and
rumble of the wheel, galloping horse and bounding chariot! 3 Horsemen
charging, flashing sword and glittering spear, hosts of slain, heaps of
corpses, dead bodies without end—they stumble over the bodies! 4 And all for the
countless whorings of the prostitute, graceful and of deadly charms, who
betrays nations with her whorings, and peoples with her charms. 5 Behold, I am
against you, declares the LORD of hosts, and will lift up your skirts
over your face; and I will make nations look at your nakedness and kingdoms at
your shame. 6 I will throw filth at you and
treat you with contempt and make you a spectacle. 7 And all who
look at you will shrink from you and say, Wasted is Nineveh; who will grieve
for her? Where shall I seek comforters for you?
Verse 4. Compare to Revelation 17:2 and 18:3.
Also compare with Revelation 2:14-15.
with whom
the kings of the earth have committed sexual immorality, and with the wine of
whose sexual immorality the dwellers on earth have become drunk.”
For all
nations have drunk the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality, and the
kings of the earth have committed immorality with her, and the merchants of the
earth have grown rich from the power of her luxurious living.”
But I have a few things against you: you have
some there who hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling
block before the sons of Israel, so that they might eat food sacrificed to
idols and practice sexual immorality. So also you have some who hold the
teaching of the Nicolaitans.
The relationship which may exist between the mention of the
Nicolaitans (Rev. 2:15) in close association with Balaam
(Rev. 2:14) has also
been noted. The two names (Nicolaitans, Balaam) have very similar meanings in
their respective languages: Balaam is derived from two Hebrew
words, בָּלַע [bālaʿ] (‘he swallows’)
and עָם [ʿām] (‘people’).
Interestingly, according to the derivative meanings of the names, the two
groups troubling this church [Pergamos] were ‘swallowers of the people’ (i.e.,
the Balaamites) and ‘conquerors of the people’ (i.e., the Nicolaitans). If
the similar meaning of their names is significant and their mention in
adjoining verses in the letter to Pergamos is intended to show a relationship,
then it is thought that the licentious tendencies of the Nicolaitans might be
understood in light of the doctrine of Balaam.
Richard
Trench writes: “Was there, in the first place, any sect existing at the time
when these words were uttered, which actually bore this name? I believe not. The key to the right understanding of it is given us at
Rev. 2:14-15; where those ‘that hold the
doctrine of Balaam’ (Rev. 2:14) are evidently
identical with those ‘that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans’ (Rev. 2:15). It may be observed that his name [Balaam], according to
the best etymology, signifies ‘Destroyer of the people’ (from בֶלַע [ḇelaʿ]
and עָם [ʿām]; and Νικόλαος (νικα̃ν τὸν λαόν) is no more than
a Grecizing of this name. The Nicolaitans are the Balaamites - those who in the
New Testament repeated the sin of Balaam in the
Old, and sought to overcome or destroy the people
of God by the same temptations whereby Balaam had sought to overcome them
before.” Trench, Richard Chenevix. Commentary
on the Epistles to the Seven Churches in Asia, Wipf and Stock
Publishers. 1861.
Now let me insert here briefly
that I am not straying off into speculation for the sake of looking smart. The
sins mentioned in these Revelation passages are the sins for which God criticizes
His people constantly throughout the Old Testament period. And in this segment
of Nahum, it is clear that their spiritually defiling influence of God’s
covenant people is the primary impetus for God’s judgment against them.
Before expounding this notion and the sin in
question, let me briefly defend the position I have taken by appealing to a
feature of John’s writings which I take as a key to understanding this passage.
It is a motif of juxtaposing Hebrew/Aramaic words and their Greek equivalents. This
motif of setting Hebrew/Aramaic words side by side with their Greek equivalents
is common in John’s writings. Revelation 1:7; 22:20 nai/amen; 9:11 Abaddon/Apollyon;
Cephas/Peter John 1:42; Thomas/Didymus in John. In three places (John 11:16, 20:24 and 21:2) he is
given the name Didymus (Δίδυμος), the Greek word for a twin. In fact, "the
Twin" is not just a surname, it is a translation of "Thomas".
The Greek Θωμᾶς —
Thōmâs — comes from the Aramaic tômâ, "twin".
Therefore, rather than two personal names, Thomas Didymus, there is a single
nickname, the Twin. John 20:16 gives Rabboni/Master.
John also does this with Golgotha, Gabbatha and the Pool of Bethesda. Suffice
it to say that this is common in John’s writings, so it would seem to be the
easiest way to handle the Balaamite/Nicolaitan connection.
The sin, or sins, under
question were twofold. One the part of Balaam, as 2 Peter 2:15 says, it was a
desire for gain even when it meant disobeying what one clearly knows to be
God’s will. Balaam was hindered by God from pronouncing a curse against Israel,
but he still wanted Balak’s money, so he devised another way to get them
cursed, namely to get them to fall into gross sin and incur the rod of God for
their disobedience. In contemporary Evangelical circles, we have countless
“ministers” who are not accountable to anyone leading people into gross
theological error because they can make a quick buck off of their audience’s
credulity.
Last year, a pastor named Ed
Young, did an event with an accompanying sermon, book, and a host of other
related media materials called: “The Sexperiment.” For 24 hours, he and his
wife had a sleep-in, not unlike John and Yoko’s. They lay in a bed on the roof
of the church, all the while streaming themselves over the internet as they
took questions from viewers about sex. Never mind the obvious tomfoolery of
such a gimmick, let’s consider the logical inconsistency of what they did.
First of all, the stunt was intended combat our society’s promiscuous treatment
of sex. It is not something that anyone can have any time they want it. It is a
private, intimate issue strictly confined within the bonds of marriage. Yet,
this private intimate thing was broadcast over the internet from the roof of
the church! We always interpret actions through the underlying assumptions
exposed by the acts themselves. Will anyone in their right mind deduce from
such a public display that to Christians sexual relations are guarded with the
utmost vigilance? No. They will think that we treat it as tritely as the rest
of our society does. The live event, as well as the whole glut of materials
related to it made the Youngs a small fortune.
One also thinks of the book,
The Prayer of Jabez. This book was a runaway best seller. The author must’ve
made a fortune from this book alone. As if that weren’t enough, the publishers
came out with a dozen editions of it for every imaginable demographic. There
was The Prayer of Jabez for men; The Prayer of Jabez for women; The Prayer of Jabez
for teens; The Prayer of Jabez for dads; The Prayer of Jabez for moms; The
Prayer of Jabez for fly fishing enthusiasts, ad nauseum. The central feature of
the book was a Gnostic claim to secret knowledge to unlocking wealth and
success, which could be yours for the low price of $14.95. And if you call in
the next 5 minutes, we’ll double the offer.
One the part of the people
it was a perversion of God’s worship by eating food sacrificed to idols and by
engaging in sexual immorality. Adultery is a constant Scriptural metaphor for
spiritual infidelity to God or syncretistic worship. The sin which is being
rebuked at Pergamos is lax morality due to far too casual interaction with the
pagan world around them. They were desensitized by their interaction. This is
not a call for monasticism, but a reminder that we are to be in the world, but not of it.
Pagan rituals were often
rife with sexual perversions and blatant immorality. A Christian could eat the
food sacrificed to this deity, who was in fact a non-entity, without being
spiritually defiled, as Paul clearly argues in 1 Corinthians 8. The problem is
when one assumes that since the idol is not real, one can show his spiritual
strength by actually attending these pagan rites. By the very act of being
present, the Christian is exposing himself to the conscience-defiling
immorality associated with these rites. Simply consider that sexual promiscuity
as it is practiced in and endorsed by our society is based upon a philosophy of
atheistic naturalism, the pagan deity has been replaced by self-worship, and at
bottom, what we see is just another, more subtle version of the same religious
use of sexuality.
