II. LETTERS TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES (2:1–3:22)

The letters to the seven churches of Asia (chaps. 2 and 3) form a distinct unit in the book of Revelation. That they are integrally related to the vision in chapter 1 is indicated by the fact that in the introduction to each letter the writer (Christ) identifies himself by means of a descriptive phrase taken from the vision and appropriate for the specific church. To the angel of the church in Ephesus the message comes from the one who “holds the seven stars in his right hand” and “walks among the seven golden lampstands” (2:1; cf. 1:12, 16). To Smyrna he writes as “the First and the Last, who died and came to life again” (2:8; cf. 1:17, 18). To Pergamum he is the one who “has the sharp, double-edged sword” (2:12; cf. 1:16).1 Charles understands this phenomenon as the result of the author’s reediting an earlier set of his letters dealing with the spiritual conditions of the churches so as to relate them to the impending crisis. Part of the process consisted in bringing the original titles into closer conformity with the divine titles of Christ in 1:13–18.8 The plausibility of this conjecture rests on one’s larger understanding of the nature and purpose of the letters themselves.

The older view is that the letters existed independently of the rest of the book. Charles maintains that they were originally sent to the various churches separately at a time prior to the fundamental antagonism that developed between Christianity and the imperial cult. The allusion in 3:10 to universal persecution, therefore, would belong to the period of later redaction.3

Most contemporary commentators understand the letters as an integral part of the Apocalypse, but differ as to their nature and purpose. Dispensational writers take them as real letters to historical churches, but also as a preview of church history in its downward course toward Laodicean lukewarmness. Walvoord says that to interpret such a remarkable progression as pure accident would be incredible. “The order of the messages to the churches seems to be divinely selected to give prophetically the main movement of history.”4 Richardson, on the other hand, maintains that this idea is “based on pure fancy” and argues that God is in control of history, moving it toward ultimate victory through the agency of the church.5

It has often been noted that what we have are not true letters, but “messages,”6 “special words,”7 or “proclamations.”8 They form a sequel to chapter 1 and are part of a common epistle sent to all seven. Feuillet suggests that a greater emphasis should be placed on their being oracles. Christ comes to inspect his churches, and issues words of warning and notes of encouragement. The utterances, says Feuillet, resemble the prophetic oracles of the OT more than the epistles of the NT.9 In any case, the messages are a vital part of the Apocalypse as a whole and are intended for the exhortation and edification of the church universal. Each oracle contains the challenge, “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches” (the plural is significant!).

The symmetry of the seven letters has long interested scholars. Each letter is prefaced by a charge to write to the angel of that specific church. This is followed by an identification of the author in descriptive phrases taken from the vision in chapter 1. The body of each letter is composed of an acknowledgment of the church’s positive achievements (except in Laodicea and, perhaps, in Sardis), followed by words of encouragement, censure, counsel, or warning. Only Smyrna and Philadelphia escape some note of censure. The letters close with an exhortation to hear and a promise to those who overcome.10 The orderliness and symmetry of the seven letters betray a purpose that goes beyond ethical instruction to seven particular churches in the Roman province of Asia. The entire sequence is a literary composition designed to impress upon the church universal the necessity of patient endurance in the period of impending persecution. It is this motif that binds the oracles to all that follows in the subsequent chapters. In the final conflict between Christ and Caesar, believers will need to hold fast to their confession of faith and stand ready for whatever sacrifice may be required. Bruce writes that the letters give a vivid impression of Christian life in Asia at a time when “pressure is being brought to bear on the Christians to be less unyielding in their negative attitude to such socially approved activities as emperor worship and the like.”11

A. EPHESUS (2:1–7)

1“To the angel of the church in Ephesus write:

These are the words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand and walks among the seven golden lampstands: 2I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked men, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. 3You have persevered and have endured hardships for my name, and have not grown weary.

4Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken your first love. 5Remember the height from which you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place. 6But you have this in your favor: You hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

7He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.

The first letter is directed to the angel of the church in Ephesus. In it the church is praised for its orthodoxy, chided for its failure to love, and challenged to repent and return to its original high ground. The “angel” of the church is not its guardian angel or the ruling official of the congregation but its prevailing spirit.1

It is appropriate that the first letter should be sent to Ephesus. It was the most important city of proconsular Asia. Situated at the mouth of the Cayster River on a gulf of the Aegean Sea,2 it flourished as an important commercial and export center for Asia. The traveler from Rome landing at Ephesus would proceed up a magnificent avenue thirty-five feet wide and lined with columns that led from the harbor to the center of the city. Ephesus was part of the kingdom of Pergamum, which Attalus III bequeathed to Rome in 133 B.C. By NT times it had grown to more than a quarter of a million in population. Its commercial importance was heightened by the fact that three great trade routes converged at the city (from the Euphrates by way of Colossae, from Galatia through Sardis, and from the Maeander valley3 to the south and east).

Although Ephesus was not the titular capital of Asia (Pergamum retained this honor), it was a city of great political importance. As a free city it had been granted by Rome the right of self-government. It also served as an assize city in which the Roman governor on a regular schedule tried important cases and dispensed justice. It boasted a major stadium, marketplace, and theater. The latter was built on the west slope of Mt. Pion overlooking the harbor, and seated some 25,000 persons.

The imperial cult was not neglected in Ephesus. Temples were built to the emperors Claudius, Hadrian, and Severus. The major religious attraction, however, was the Temple of Artemis (Diana in Latin), one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. About four times the size of the Parthenon, it was adorned by the work of many great artists. After a devastating fire in 356 B.C. that destroyed the first temple, it was rebuilt, with Dinocrates (who later built Alexandria) as architect. Pliny the elder4 gives the dimensions of the temple as 425 feet long, 220 feet wide, and sixty feet high. He also notes that the 127 pillars were of Parian marble, with thirty-six of them overlaid with gold and jewels.5 Artemis herself was originally an Anatolian fertility goddess, but under the influence of Greek culture she had become the focus of an extensive religious cult.

The Christian faith came to Ephesus perhaps with Aquila and Priscilla about A.D. 52 when Paul left them there en route from Corinth to Antioch (Acts 18:18–22). On his next missionary journey the apostle remained in Ephesus for more than two years (Acts 19:8, 10), and some time later Timothy ministered there (1 Tim 1:3). It was the apostle John, however, who is most closely associated with the city.

1 The letter to Ephesus comes from the One who holds the seven stars in his right hand and walks among the seven golden lampstands. From 1:20 we learned that the lampstands are churches and the stars their angels (personifications of the prevailing spirit). The two participles are instructive: Christ holds the angels (they are in his control) and walks among the lampstands (he is present in their midst and aware of their activities). In the context of the seven letters his presence is better interpreted in terms of inspection and resulting knowledge than in relationship to the fundamental theme of the Holiness Code, “I will walk among you and be your God, and you will be my people” (Lev 26:12).

2 As one who walks in the midst of the churches, Christ is able to say, “I know your deeds” (cf. 2:9; 3:1, 8, 15).6 The deeds Christ knows are not so much separate acts as they are an overall manner of life. The two nouns that follow (hard work and perseverance)7 give the active and passive sides of this lifestyle. The Ephesians had toiled to the point of exhaustion8 and borne patiently the hostility of a society at odds with their goals and efforts (cf. the problems of Paul in Ephesus with disbelieving Jews, the seven sons of Sceva, and the mob aroused by Demetrius the silversmith; Acts 19:8–40). Much of the church’s trouble, however, stemmed from people who tried to place themselves within the believing community. These Christ labels “wicked men,” people who called themselves apostles but were found to be false.9 The importance of Ephesus in the ancient world and its crucial location on the trade route between Rome and the East made it susceptible to itinerant frauds. The problem was especially acute in predominantly Gentile areas, where recent converts were less apt to be schooled in OT backgrounds and could easily misunderstand Christian terminology. The false apostles mentioned have been variously identified as Judaizers from Jerusalem (as in 2 Cor 11:13–23), Nicolaitans (v. 6), or any self-styled apostles who claimed a position over that of the local elders. Jesus warned his own followers of false prophets who come in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves (Matt 7:15). Paul had told the Ephesian elders in his farewell, “After I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock” (Acts 20:29), and the message to the Ephesian church in Revelation confirms the accuracy of his prediction. The context suggests that the self-appointed apostles were antinomians rather than legalists. The necessity of testing doctrine and advice was widely recognized in the early church (1 Thess 5:21; 1 Cor 14:29; 1 John 4:1). Jesus provided the very simple and pragmatic, “By their fruit you will recognize them” (Matt 7:20). In the Didache the test for a true prophet is that “he have the behavior of the Lord.”10 The Ephesians heeded this advice, tested those who called themselves apostles, and found them not simply self-deceived, but deceivers.11 They were liars because when tested they could not measure up to their pretensions.

3 Verse 3 brings to a close the sentence (in Greek) that began with v. 1. Its content is somewhat repetitive, although it does add “for my name” (i.e., “for me” in the sense of for the advancement of all that gives expression to my character) and “have not grown weary” (“without quitting,” NLT). The church is again commended for its patience, its willingness to put up with hardships,12 and its dedicated labor (the Greek perfect may suggest some specific work in the recent history of the church).

4 Every virtue carries within itself the seeds of its own destruction. It seems probable that desire for sound teaching and the resulting forthright action taken to exclude all impostors had created a climate of suspicion in which love within the believing community could no longer exist.13 Unfortunately, the history of the Christian church has all too many instances of “unholy zeal in the pursuit of ‘truth.’ ”14 Good works and pure doctrine are not adequate substitutes for that rich relationship of mutual love shared by those who have experienced for the first time the redemptive love of God. The Ephesian church had forsaken its first love. The expression includes both love of God and love of humanity at large, but here it seems to refer mainly to the love that the Ephesian converts had for one another (as in 2 John 5).15 Jer 2:2 is instructive. God speaks through the prophet to apostate Israel, “I remember the devotion of your youth, how as a bride you loved me and followed me through the desert” (cf. Judg 2:7, 10–11; Hos 2:14–16). A cooling of personal love for God inevitably results in the loss of harmonious relationships within the body of believers. Jesus had made it clear that “By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another” (John 13:35). Love for other believers was the distinctive badge of Christian discipleship,16 but at Ephesus hatred of heresy and extensive involvement in the works appropriate to faith had allowed the first fresh glow of love for God and one another to fade.17

5 The church is called upon to remember the earlier days in which love abounded in the congregation. Memory can be a powerful force in effecting a return to a more satisfying relationship (when the prodigal son in Luke 15:17–18 “came to his senses” he remembered that his father’s hired men had more than enough to eat while he was starving). First love is pictured as a height from which the church had fallen. The present imperative, “remember,” stands in contrast to the aorist imperative, “repent,” and suggests a continuing attitude over against a decisive break. Bear in mind the loving relationships you once enjoyed and make a clean break with your present manner of life! The “things [they] did at first” were those that resulted from their initial response of love. The love that John requires is not an “undiscriminating amiability,”18 but an attitude toward the brethren that expresses itself in loving acts.19 Repentance is an active step.20 It is a radical redirection of one’s entire life. If the church does not repent, Christ will come and remove their lampstand from its place. The reference is not so much to the parousia as it is to an immediate visitation21 for preliminary judgment. Christ, after all, walks among his churches (2:1). Without love the congregation ceases to be a church.22 Its lampstand is removed. From the prologue to Ignatius’s Epistle to the Ephesians (also 1.1) we learn that the church at Ephesus heeded the warning. One ought not to soften the warning out of theological concern for doctrines appropriate to other settings.

6 The reprimand for having left their first love is followed by commendation for hating, as Christ does, the practices of the Nicolaitans. This heretical group is mentioned both here and in the letter to Pergamum (2:15). The mention of eating food sacrificed to idols and committing sexual immorality in the letter to Thyatira (2:20–21) as well as in the letter to Pergamum (2:14, where this is connected with the teaching of Balaam and closely related to the teaching of the Nicolaitans)23 indicates that all three of the churches were in some way affected by the sect.24 Broadly speaking, they had worked out a compromise with the pagan society in which they lived.25 But this compromise violated the requirements of the apostolic decree in which Gentiles entering the fellowship should abstain from “food sacrificed to idols … and from sexual immorality” (Acts 15:29; cf. v. 20).

Early tradition identifies the Nicolaitans with Nicolaus, the proselyte of Antioch who was appointed one of the first seven deacons in the church (Acts 6:5).26 There is no particular reason, however, why this connection needs to be made. If Eusebius is correct that the sect lasted only “a very short time,”27 it may be that the only information the patristic writers had was the book of Revelation itself. In any case, their claim to practice idolatry and immorality under the banner of spiritual liberty was soundly rejected by the Ephesian congregation. The church shared Christ’s own hatred of evil when it refused to tolerate any compromise with paganism.

7 The exhortation to hear28 what the Spirit says introduces a promise in the first three letters and follows a promise in the last four. There is no apparent reason for this variation in format.29 The Spirit which speaks to the churches is probably “the prophetic Spirit sent by Christ to illumine His followers,”30 or Christ’s own spirit.31

He promises the overcomer the privilege of eating from the tree of life in the paradise of God. Just as the opening description of Christ in each case echoes the vision in 1:13–16, so this and many of the “overcomer’s promises” anticipate the eschatological visions later in the book. The overcomers in Revelation are not those who have conquered an earthly foe by force, but those who have remained faithful to Christ to the very end. The victory they achieve is analogous to the victory of Christ on the cross.32

Genesis speaks of a tree of life in the garden of Eden (2:9) that, following the sin of Adam and Eve, was guarded by a flaming sword lest they eat of its fruit and acquire immortality (Gen 3:22–24). It is appropriate that at the end of time the faithful be allowed access to this symbolic source of eternal life. In apocalyptic thought the tree of life exists as a reward for the righteous following judgment.33 Prov 3:18 says that wisdom is “a tree of life to those who embrace her.” In Rev 22:2 the tree of life produces its perennial fruit in the heavenly Jerusalem. Paradise was originally a Persian word for pleasure garden. In later Judaism it was used to portray the abode of the righteous dead. The paradise of God in Revelation symbolizes the eschatological state in which God and people are restored to that perfect fellowship which existed before the entrance of sin into the world.

B. SMYRNA (2:8–11)

8“To the angel of the church in Smyrna write:

These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again. 9I know your afflictions and your poverty—yet you are rich! I know the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. 10Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer. I tell you, the devil will put some of you in prison to test you, and you will suffer persecution for ten days. Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown of life.

11He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death.

The second letter is addressed to the church in Smyrna (modern Izmir), the only one of the seven cities still in existence, although the small town of Bergama still stands on the plain below the acropolis of Pergamum. Christ reminds them that he is aware of their suffering, forewarns them of coming persecution, and encourages them to remain faithful even to death. Smyrna lay about thirty-five miles north of Ephesus on the east shore of the Aegean Sea. Its excellent harborwas sufficiently narrow at the mouth that it could be closed for protection in time of war. An important road extended eastward from Smyrna over which the produce of the rich valley of the Hermus moved. In exports, Smyrna was second only to Ephesus.

Smyrna was a proud and beautiful city. Three to four hundred years after it had been destroyed by Alyattes, king of Lydia, it was rebuilt in 290 B.C. by Lysimachus and Antigonus as a model city. It boasted a famous stadium, library, and public theater (the largest in Asia). It claimed to be the birthplace of the great epic poet Homer. A famous thoroughfare called the Street of Gold curved around Mt. Pagus (which rose over 500 feet from the harbor) like a necklace on the statue of a goddess. At either end was a temple, one to a local variety of Cybele, known as Sipylene Mother (a patron divinity), and the other to Zeus. The acropolis on Mt. Pagus was called the crown or garland of Smyrna. In NT times the population may have been about 200,000. Coins describe the city as “First of Asia in beauty and size.”

Smyrna sustained a special relationship to Rome and the imperial cult. During the period when Rome was engaged in a struggle for supremacy against the Carthaginian empire (roughly 265–146 B.C.) Smyrna had placed itself squarely on the side of the Romans, and in 195 B.C. it became the first city in the ancient world to build a temple in honor of Dea Roma. Later, in 23 B.C., Smyrna won permission (over ten other Asian cities) to build a temple to the emperor Tiberius.1 This strong allegiance to Rome plus a large Jewish population that was actively hostile to the Christians made it exceptionally difficult to live as a Christian in Smyrna. The most famous martyrdom of the early church fathers was that of the elderly Polycarp, the “twelfth martyr in Smyrna,” who, upon his refusal to acknowledge Caesar as Lord, was placed upon a pyre to be burned.

We do not know when the church was first founded at Smyrna, but it is reasonable to suppose that it could have been during the time Paul lived in Ephesus on his third missionary journey (cf. Acts 19:26).2 From Ignatius’s letter to Smyrna (early second century A.D.) we learn that the church was already well organized, with a bishop (Polycarp), elders, and deacons.3

8 In the salutation of each of the seven letters, Christ identifies himself by means of some part of the description in the initial vision (1:13–16). There is normally a certain appropriateness between the identifying characteristic and the church that is addressed. The church at Smyrna was a persecuted church, so the letter comes from the sovereign One (“the First and the Last”; cf. discussion on 1:17), who died and came to life again.4 As he was victorious over death, so they, too, can face martyrdom knowing that faithfulness is rewarded with eternal life.

9 The church at Smyrna is reminded that its afflictions5 and stark poverty6 have not gone unnoticed by the Lord of the church universal. He is fully aware of the pressures brought upon the faithful. The linking of affliction and poverty suggests a close connection between the two.7 In an antagonistic environment it would be difficult for the Christian to make a living, and thus many were economically destitute. They may also have been the victims of mob violence and looting (cf. Heb 10:34). Their poverty, however, was a material poverty: spiritually they were rich (note the contrast with the Laodicean church, which claimed to be rich but was poor; 3:17). James wrote to a similar group, indicating that “God has chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith” (Jas 2:5; cf. Matt 6:20; 2 Cor 6:10).8

Christ is also aware of the slanderous accusations directed against the believers by the Jewish population at Smyrna.9 The Martyrdom of Polycarp documents this hostility most clearly. After the venerable Polycarp confessed that he was a Christian, “the multitude of heathen and Jews living in Smyrna cried out with uncontrollable wrath.”10 They then joined (although it was the Sabbath) with the mob in gathering wood to burn Polycarp alive.11 Jewish hostility to Christians seems to have stemmed both from their conviction that to worship a Galilean peasant who had died a criminal’s death would be blasphemy and the apparent success of the Christians in evangelizing God-fearers and even some from within Judaism.12 Antagonism against believers would lead Jews to become informers for the Roman overlords. In a city like Smyrna with its strong ties to Rome it would be a fairly simple matter to incite the authorities to action.

The Jews who blasphemed, however, were not real Jews. This should be taken in the sense of Rom 2:28–29, where Paul says that “a man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly … [but] … a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly.”13 Farrer remarks, “Whereas the Ephesian angel is troubled by self-styled apostles, the Smyrnaean is troubled by self-styled Israelites.”14 Like the Jews of John 8:31–47 who claimed to be descendants of Abraham, they were, instead, of their father the devil. The hostile Jews of Smyrna were, in fact, “a synagogue of Satan” (the latter term is Hebrew and means “adversary”; its Greek equivalent means “slanderer” or “false accuser”). Regardless of their national descent, they had become, by their bitter opposition to the church and its message, a synagogue carrying out the activities of God’s supreme adversary, Satan.15

10 The church is told not to be afraid of what they are about to suffer.16 Jesus had counseled his disciples not to fear those who could kill the body but not the soul (Matt 10:28), and Paul had warned that the godly would be persecuted (2 Tim 3:12). Yet as the time approached, believers needed to be admonished lest the threat of martyrdom would cause the fainthearted to relinquish their hold on Christ. They must recognize that while the persecution would be carried out by Roman authorities, it was in reality the devil himself who was responsible for their plight. He is the one who would try their faith through imprisonment and tribulation.17 Most commentators note that in the ancient world prison was a place where the accused awaited execution. Acts 16:23 and 2 Cor 11:23 would suggest that it also served as a place of temporary confinement and punishment.

Believers at Smyrna (or at least some of them) are to suffer persecution for ten days (or “within ten days”).18 Opinions vary about the time intended. Most view the ten days as a round number indicating a short period of time, but others hold it to be a prolonged but definitely limited period.19 The latter interpretation is more in keeping with the seriousness of the impending crisis.20 The church is to continue faithful even though it may lead to death (cf. Rev 12:11; Heb 12:4). The reward for faithfulness is the crown of life, that is, the crown that is life itself. It is not the royal crown (the diadēma) that is promised, but the wreath or garland (the stephanos) that was awarded to the victor at the games. Its value lay not in itself but in what it symbolized. According to Pausanias, Smyrna was famous for its games (6.14.3). With others, Bruce thinks that the imagery is suggested by the circle of colonnaded buildings on the crest of Mt. Pagos called the crown of Smyrna.21

11 The call to hear what the Spirit says to the churches is repeated (cf. comm. on 2:7). Overcomers are promised that they will not in any way (strong double negative in Greek) be hurt by the second death.22 In Rev 20:14 it is identified as the lake of fire, and in 21:8 as the final lot of “the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile,” etc. Over the faithful, who share in the first resurrection, it has no power (20:6).

C. PERGAMUM (2:12–17)

12“To the angel of the church in Pergamum write:

These are the words of him who has the sharp, double-edged sword. 13I know where you live—where Satan has his throne. Yet you remain true to my name. You did not renounce your faith in me, even in the days of Antipas, my faithful witness, who was put to death in your city—where Satan lives.

14Nevertheless, I have a few things against you: You have people there who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to entice the Israelites to sin by eating food sacrificed to idols and by committing sexual immorality. 15Likewise you also have those who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans. 16Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.

17He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give him a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to him who receives it.

The road north from Smyrna follows the coastline some forty miles and then turns inland in a northeasterly direction up the valley of the Caicus River. About ten miles inland from the Aegean Sea stands the impressive capital city of Pergamum.1 In the letter to Pergamum Christ commends their faithfulness to his name even when Antipas was martyred, but rebukes them for allowing in their midst false teachers who had encouraged them to accommodate themselves to the prevailing culture. If they overcome they will be invited to the messianic banquet, but if they fail to repent Christ will come and fight against them.

Pliny called Pergamum “by far the most distinguished city in Asia.”2 Built on a cone-shaped hill a thousand feet in height, it dominated the surrounding valley of the Caicus. Its very name in Greek (Pergamon) means “citadel.” Although the site appears to have been inhabited from prehistoric times, its rise to prominence came in the third century B.C. when it became the capital of the Attalids. Under Eumenes II (197–159 B.C.) Pergamum became “the finest flower of Hellenic civilization.”3 It boasted a library of more than 200,000 volumes. Legend has it that parchment was invented there when the supply of papyrus from Egypt was cut off in reprisal for Eumenes’s attempt to lure a famous librarian by the name of Aristophanes away from Alexandria.4 Until Attalus III bequeathed his kingdom to Rome in 133 B.C. the Pergamene kings continued as enthusiastic patrons of Hellenistic culture.

The most spectacular aspect of this remarkable city was the upper terrace of the citadel with its sacred and royal buildings. Of these, the most remarkable was the great altar of Zeus that jutted out near the top of the mountain. A famous frieze around the base of the altar5 depicts the gods of Greece in victorious combat against the giants of earth (symbolizing the triumph of civilization over barbarism). It commemorates the victory of Attalus I (the first ruler in Asia to refuse tribute to the plundering Gauls) over the Galatians. Religion flourished in Pergamum. It was a center of worship for four of the most important pagan cults of the day—Zeus, Athene (the patron goddess), Dionysos, and Asklepios (who was designated Sōtēr, Savior).6 The shrine of Asklepios, the god of healing (also known as “the Pergamene god”), attracted people from all over the world.7 Galen, one of the most famous physicians of the ancient world, was a native of Pergamum and studied there.

12 Of greatest import for the Christians living in Pergamum was the fact that it was the official center in Asia for the imperial cult. It was the first city of Asia to receive permission to build a temple dedicated to the worship of a living ruler. In 29 B.C. Augustus granted permission for a temple to be erected in Pergamum to “the divine Augustus and the goddess Roma.”8 Of all the seven cities, Pergamum was the one in which the church was most liable to clash with the imperial cult. To the church Christ writes as the one who has “the sharp, double-edged sword.” In the context of life in a provincial capital where the proconsul was granted the “right of the sword” (ius gladii), the power to execute at will, the sovereign Christ with the two-edged sword would remind the threatened congregation that ultimate power over life and death belongs to God.9

13 The letter to Pergamum begins with an acknowledgment of the difficulty of living in an environment so distinctly pagan and a commendation for the church’s faithful witness in the face of severe opposition. The risen Christ knows10 where they live (katoikeis suggests permanent residence): it is “where Satan sits enthroned” (Moffatt, The NT: A New Translation). Many suggestions have been put forward to explain the phrase, “where Satan has his throne.” Frequent mention is made of the great thronelike altar to Zeus that overlooked the city from the citadel.11 Others take the phrase to refer to the cult of Asklepios, who was designated Savior and whose symbol was the serpent (this would obviously remind Christians of Satan; cf. 12:9; 20:2).12 Wood notes that as the traveler approached Pergamum by the ancient road from the south, the actual shape of the city-hill would appear as a giant throne towering above the plain.13 The expression is best understood, however, in connection with the prominence of Pergamum as the official cult center of emperor worship in Asia. In addition to the erection of a temple to Augustus in 29 B.C., a second temple was built in the time of Trajan when the city acquired the title “twice neōkoros (temple warden).” It was here that Satan had established his official seat or chair of state.14 As Rome had become the center of Satan’s activity in the West (cf. 13:2; 16:10), so Pergamum had become his “throne” in the East.

In these adverse conditions the church at Pergamum had remained true to the name of Christ. They had not denied their faith by yielding to the pressure of burning incense to the emperor and declaring “Caesar is Lord.” Not even in the days of Antipas,15 who was put to death in their city, did they renounce their faith. Little is known of this early martyr16 apart from this reference in Revelation. The name is found in a third-century inscription of Pergamum,17 and he is mentioned by Tertullian.18 The legend appears in later hagiographers (Simon Metaphrastes, the Bollandists) that he was slowly roasted to death in a brazen bowl during the reign of Domitian. His name (abridged from Antipater) has mistakenly been taken to mean “against all,” and the idea that he gained the name by his heroic stand against the forces of evil is unfounded.19 What is noteworthy is that he is given the Lord’s own title from Rev 1:5—“faithful witness.” Later martyrs in Pergamum are identified as Carpus, Papylus, and Agathonike.20 The verse concludes with a repeated emphasis on Pergamum as the place “where Satan lives.” A contrast is intended with the first clause (“where you live”)—both the believers and their ultimate adversary live in the same locality. Little wonder that martyrdom begins in Pergamum.

14 Although the church at Pergamum had remained faithful in the midst of severe opposition (even when Antipas was martyred), they were guilty of allowing within their number21 some who held the teaching of Balaam. It is clear from the context that this refers not to a body of doctrine,22 but to Balaam’s activity in advising the Midianite women how to beguile the Israelites into acting treacherously against the Lord. Num 25:1ff. reports that the Israelite men “began to indulge in sexual immorality with Moabite women,” who in turn were successful in getting them to worship their gods and take part in their sacred meals. Although there is no mention of Balaam at this point, we learn in Num 31:16 of his role in Israel’s apostasy (the Midianite women “followed Balaam’s advice”).23 Thus Balaam became a prototype of all corrupt teachers who betrayed believers into fatal compromise with worldly ideologies. At Pergamum, where Satan sat enthroned, some within the church had decided that accommodation was the wisest policy. They taught the way of compromise. Caird explains the action of this group by saying that “the sum total of the Nicolaitans’ offence, then, is that they took a laxer attitude than John to pagan society and religion.”24 He conjectures that they may have been a group who honestly believed that it was possible without disloyalty to maintain a peaceful coexistence with Rome. “The very plausibility of the case explains the violent and abusive language John uses to refute it.”25 While not denying that the compromisers were able to rationalize their position (perhaps along the lines Caird suggests), it is doubtful that the risen Christ (not John) would need to resort to “violent and abusive language” to refute heresy.

“Food sacrificed to idols” probably refers to meat that was eaten at pagan feasts rather than that sold in the open market after having been offered to idols. “Sexual immorality” should also be understood literally as part of the pagan festivities. Some writers take both expressions metaphorically as referring to idolatrous practice in general and religious infidelity.

15 The construction of v. 15 is not altogether clear. “Likewise” refers to the preceding verse and indicates a comparison between the situation at Pergamum and that of Israel being led astray by the cunning of Balaam.26 “You also” emphasizes this comparison.27 If the first four words are to be taken as a unit, it follows that the Nicolaitans are essentially the same group as the Balaamites.28 Both describe an antinomian group that had accommodated itself to the religious and social requirements of the pagan society in which they lived.29

16 The indifference of the church at Pergamum to the presence of Nicolaitans is a matter of considerable concern. John is uncompromising in his position.30 Unless the church repents, Christ will come and fight against them with the sword of his mouth. Only a portion of the church has fallen prey to the pernicious doctrine of the Balaamites, but all are guilty of not taking action against their presence. The fault of Pergamum is the opposite of Ephesus, where the heretics were rooted out but love was missing (2:2, 4). The “coming” of Christ should be understood as a coming in judgment. From the perspective of the first century it could also be the second or final coming of Christ (cf. 3:11; 22:7, 12, 20).

17 To the faithful at Pergamum the risen Lord promises some hidden manna and a white stone inscribed with a new name known only to the recipient. Manna was the food supernaturally supplied to the Israelites during their sojourn from Egypt to Canaan. The idea of hidden manna reflects a Jewish tradition that the pot of manna that was placed in the ark for a memorial to future generations (Exod 16:32–34; cf. Heb 9:4) was taken by Jeremiah at the time of the destruction of Solomon’s temple (sixth century B.C.) and hidden underground in Mt. Nebo (2 Macc 2:4–7). There it was to remain until the coming of the Messiah when Jeremiah would reappear and return the ark and its contents to the new messianic temple in Jerusalem. Charles31 takes a different view—that the reference is to a treasury of manna (cf. Ps 78:25, “the bread of angels”) that was to descend from heaven during the messianic kingdom to feed the blessed.32 Since John is never limited by his sources, there is no reason to exclude either as a possible source. In the context of the letter to Pergamum it alludes to the proper and heavenly food of spiritual Israel in contrast to the unclean food supplied by the Balaamites. While the promise is primarily eschatological, it is not without immediate application for a persecuted people.33

There are perhaps a dozen or more plausible interpretations of the “white stone.”34 Ancient jurors signified innocence by casting a white pebble into an urn. There existed a Thracian custom of marking every good day by a white stone.35 It could have been an amulet or charm to ward off evil. According to popular superstition mysterious powers were associated with the name of a god. According to rabbinic lore precious stones fell from heaven with the manna. Reference could be to a stone in the breastplate of the high priest (or perhaps to the Urim, Exod 28:30). In the context of a messianic feast (the “hidden manna”) it seems best to take the white stone as a tessera that served as a token for admission to the banquet. These little tablets of wood, metal, or stone were used in ancient times for many purposes. They were distributed to the poor in Rome by the emperors to insure a regular supply of corn,36 given to the victor at games and to gladiators who had won the admiration of the public and had been allowed to retire from further combat.

The stone awarded to the overcomers at Pergamum was white in that it symbolized the triumph of their faith. Commentators are divided on the identity of the “new name.” It is normally held to be the name of Christ by those who interpret the white stone as a magical charm. It is thought that secret knowledge of a god’s name (note: “known only to him who receives it”) gave special power over the deity. Exactly in what sense the name of Christ could be considered secret, or “new,” for that matter, is not explained. The new name is more likely to be the name of the one who overcomes. No one else can know the transforming experience of fidelity in trial and the joy of entrance to the great marriage supper of the Lamb. The overcomer’s name is new (kainos) in quality; it is appropriate to the New Age.

D. THYATIRA (2:18–29)

18“To the angel of the church in Thyatira write:

These are the words of the Son of God, whose eyes are like blazing fire and whose feet are like burnished bronze. 19I know your deeds, your love and faith, your service and perseverance, and that you are now doing more than you did at first.

20Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. 21I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. 22So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. 23I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. 24Now I say to the rest of you in Thyatira, to you who do not hold to her teaching and have not learned Satan’s so-called deep secrets (I will not impose any other burden on you): 25Only hold on to what you have until I come.

26To him who overcomes and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations—

27‘He will rule them with an iron scepter;

he will dash them to pieces like pottery’—

just as I have received authority from my Father. 28I will also give him the morning star. 29He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

Christ commends the church at Thyatira for their life of active service but holds against them the fact that they tolerate the prophetess Jezebel whose influence has led them into an unholy alliance with the doctrines and practices of their pagan neighbors. She will be dealt with most severely, and the church will learn from experience that God inevitably repays on the basis of what one has done. Concerning the letter to Thyatira, Hemer writes, “The longest and most difficultof the seven letters is addressed to the least known, least important, and least remarkable of the cities.”1 The difficulty in interpreting the letter grows out of its numerous references to details of daily life that have become obscured with the passing of time and the lack of archaeological evidence that would reveal its past.

Following the overland route from Pergamum to Sardis, travelers would head eastward along the south bank of the Caicus River, turn southward over a low-lying range of hills, and descend into the broad and fertile valley of the Lycus. Their journey of about forty miles would take them just across the Mysian border to the city of Thyatira situated on the south bank of the Lycus in the long north-south valley that connected the Caicus and Hermus valleys. Thyatira was founded2 by Seleucus I as a military outpost to guard one of the approaches to his empire. Since it possessed no natural fortifications, it would draw heavily upon the spirit of its soldier-citizens to make up for its vulnerability. In 190 B.C. the city fell to the Romans and became first part of the kingdom of Pergamum and then part of the Province of Asia.

With the coming of stable conditions under Roman rule, Thyatira was destined for growth and prosperity as a center for manufacturing and marketing. An outstanding characteristic of Thyatira was the large number of trade guilds that flourished there. Ramsay notes that inscriptions, although not especially numerous, mention “woolworkers, linen-workers, makers of outer garments, dyers, leather-workers, tanners, potters, bakers, slave-dealers and bronze-smiths.”3 In Acts 16:14ff. we meet “a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira,”4 who also had a house at Philippi. It would appear that Thyatira’s market extended across the Aegean Sea into Macedonia. Since the trade guilds were inseparably intertwined with local religious observances, they posed a special problem for the economic well-being of Christians. The divine guardian of the city was the god Tyrimnos5 (identified with the Greek sun-god Apollo), who would be conceived of as the patron of the guilds and therefore honored in their festivities.

18 The writer of the letter to Thyatira describes himself as “the Son of God.” Only here in the book of Revelation is this title found (although it is implied in many other places; e.g., 2:27; 3:5). Since Ps 2:9 is quoted later in the letter (v. 27), it may be that Ps 2:7 (“the LORD … said to me, ‘You are my Son’ ”) suggested its use here. In any case, it stands in strong contrast to the local cultic worship of Apollo Tyrimnos, which was merged with that of the emperor (identified as Apollo incarnate) so that both were acclaimed as sons of Zeus. Thus it is not the emperor or the guardian deity of Thyatira, but the resurrected Christ, who is the true son of God. He is described as having eyes like blazing fire and feet like burnished bronze. Both descriptions are taken from the initial vision of chapter 1 (vv. 14–15). In Daniel’s great vision of the last days (chaps. 10–12) the celestial being appearing to him has “eyes like flaming torches” and “legs like the gleam of burnished bronze” (Dan 10:6). The blazing eyes suggest the penetrating power of Christ’s ability to see through the seductive arguments of Jezebel and those who were being led astray by her pernicious teaching. Feet (or legs; cf. on 1:15) like burnished bronze6 convey the idea of strength and splendor.7

19 The glorified Christ is well aware of the deeds that characterize the Thyatiran church. They are listed as love, faith, service, and perseverance.8 The first two identify the motive forces of Christian activity,9 and the other two, the results that follow. While the love of the Ephesian church had decreased (2:4), the practical expression of love at Thyatira had grown (“you are now doing more than you did at first”). This rather liberal praise is explained by Swete as a preface for the blame that is to follow.10

20 Major attention is given to the self-styled prophetess Jezebel (vv. 20–24), whose seductive teachings had led some of the believers at Thyatira into fatal compromise with the secular environment. The choice of the epithet, Jezebel, and references to sexual immorality and eating food sacrificed to idols indicate a first-century parallel with the wicked queen of Ahab who fostered in Israel the idolatrous worship of the Canaanite Baal (1 Kgs 16:29ff.; 2 Kgs 9:30ff.).11 In a city whose economic life was dominated by trade guilds in which pagan religious practices had become the criteria for membership, Christian converts would be faced with the problem of compromising their stand at least enough to allow participation in a common meal dedicated to some pagan deity. To reject this accommodation could mean social isolation and economic hardship. With her Nicolaitan orientation the prophetess could suggest that since “an idol is nothing at all” (1 Cor 8:4), believers need not undergo the privation that would follow from an unwillingness to go along with the simple requirements of the trade guild. Christ, however, speaks with great severity about any such compromise. Since they were unwilling to repent, Jezebel and her adulterous associates are to suffer greatly (v. 22) and her children are to be struck dead (v. 23).12

Several identifications for Jezebel have been proposed. Some have suggested Lydia, the seller of purple from Thyatira, who was converted to the Christian faith at Philippi (Acts 16:14–15). While as a business woman she may have faced some of the same problems to which Jezebel encouraged an antinomian response, there is no substantial reason why we should identify the two. Schürer advanced the view that she may have been the Sibyl Sambathe, whose sanctuary was outside the walls of the city and apparently in existence at the time of Revelation.13 This view is unlikely in that it is doubtful that the religious syncretism of the day could have infected the church to the point that a Sibylline priestess could also function so effectively within the church itself. The opportunity for repentance (v. 21) suggests someone from within the church who had gone astray rather than a female fortune teller from the pagan world.

One variant reading translates “your wife Jezebel,”14 which would make her the wife of the bishop or leader of the church at Thyatira. As the variant is improbable, so also is the identification. The Thyatiran Jezebel is probably some prominent woman within the church who, like her OT counterpart, was influencing the people of God to forsake loyalty to God by promoting a tolerance toward and involvement in pagan practices. This extended to sexual immorality and participation in the religious feasts connected with membership in trade guilds. Jezebel “symbolizes the corrosive powers of false religion among the people of God.”15

It is questionable whether her teaching was in any sense formal. It may only have taken the form of popular persuasion built upon unexamined assumptions. In any case, it had seduced a considerable number of believers into a fatal compromise with paganism. While at Pergamum antinomianism had made its way into the church and affected some (2:14), at Thyatira it was aggressively promoted by a prominent woman claiming the gift of divine prophecy. Since the eating of “food sacrificed to idols” is undoubtedly intended in a literal sense, it is best to take “sexual immorality” in the same way.16 Pagan feasts often led to sexual promiscuity.

21 Participation in the guild-feast with its penchant for licentiousness would involve the believer in yet another kind of immorality. The concept of religious infidelity under the figure of harlotry is common in the OT. “Do not rejoice, O Israel … for you have played the harlot against your God” (Hos 9:1, NKJ; cf. Jer 3:6; Ezek 23:19; etc.). The fornication of which Jezebel was not willing to repent was her adulterous alliance with the pagan environment. She had been given time (perhaps by the Seer) to repent, but had refused.

22 Severe punishment is about to be meted out17 to Jezebel and her adulterous associates. She is to be cast onto a bed, and they will suffer intensely. The bed is not a “funeral-bier”18 or a dining-couch of the guild-feasts,19 but a bed of sickness and pain.20 Disease as a punishment for sin was an accepted view. Paul wrote that participation in the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner was the reason why many of the Corinthians were weak and ill and some had died (1 Cor 11:27–29). The parallel structure of the two main clauses sets “bed”21 over against “intense suffering” (thlipsin megalēn). Jezebel’s associates in adultery were all those she had led astray within the church. It appears that her time for repentance had passed (v. 21) but that “they [still had the opportunity to] repent of her ways” (italics added).22

23 The promise of certain punishment continues. Jezebel’s “children” are not the literal offspring of her adulteries23 or a second generation of heretics,24 but those who have so unreservedly embraced the antinomian doctrines of their spiritual mother that they are best described as younger members of her family. The killing of Jezebel’s children may reflect the bloody occasion when the rulers of Samaria murdered the seventy sons of Ahab and sent their heads to Jezreel in baskets (2 Kgs 10:1–11). If a distinction is to be drawn between the children of Jezebel and “those who commit adultery with her” (v. 22), the latter would be those who “flirt with her teaching” and the former, “the totally converted.”25

The persuasive logic of the compromisers had confused many in the church at Thyatira, but imminent punishment would demonstrate that the one who searches the “hearts and minds”26 of people had found them guilty. Each is to receive “according to [his or her] deeds.” Through the prophet Jeremiah, God expressed in the clearest of terms the principle of divine judgment: “I the LORD search the heart and examine the mind, to reward a man according to his conduct, according to what his deeds deserve” (Jer 17:10). It is restated both by Jesus (“the Son of Man … will reward each person according to what he has done,” Matt 16:27) and by Paul (“God will give to each person according to what he has done,” Rom 2:6).27

24–25 On those in Thyatira who have not been led astray by the Jezebel party, Christ lays no additional burden28 “except that you hold on to what you have until I come” (Phillips). To combine the two verses in this way answers the question, What burden? which would go unanswered if v. 25 is separated and introduces a new idea. Those who have remained faithful at Thyatira are described as not having learned “Satan’s so-called deep secrets.” This phrase is normally taken in one of two ways. Some feel that it is no more than “a sarcastic reversal of their main slogan.”29 Claiming to know the deep secrets of God, they are told that the “deep secrets” they claim to know are really the deep secrets of Satan.30

It is more likely. however, that knowing Satan’s “deep secrets” is a reference to the view that in order to appreciate fully the grace of God one must first plumb the depths of evil. Later gnosticism boasted that it was precisely by entering into the stronghold of Satan that believers could learn the limits of his power and emerge victorious. On the basis that a believer’s spirituality is unaffected by what is done with the body, Jezebel could argue that the Thyatiran Christians ought to take part in the pagan guild-feasts (even if they were connected with the deep secrets of Satan) and thus prove how powerless is evil to alter the nature of grace.

26–27 In the first three letters the exhortation “He who has an ear …” preceded the concluding promise. Beginning with the Thyatiran letter the order is changed and the exhortation follows the promise. Hemer notes two additional changes in the form of the letter: (1) only here is the final promise made dependent on a double condition, and (2) only here and at Pergamum (2:17) are two apparently distinct promises made to the victor, each separately introduced by “I will give.”31 Authority over the nations and “the morning star” are promised to the overcomer, that is,32 the one who does the will of Christ until the end.33 It is by faithful allegiance to the cause of Christ that believers overcome in the hostile environment of pagan values and practices.

Verses 26b–27 are a free rendering of Ps 2:8–9, which had been interpreted messianically as early as the first century B.C. The Psalms of Solomon (written probably between 70 and 40 B.C.) say of the son of David who is to rule over Israel, “He shall destroy the pride of the sinners as a potter’s vessel. With a rod of iron he shall break in pieces all their substance” (Pss. Sol. 17:23–24). It was a regular feature of Jewish eschatology that the followers of the Messiah would share in his final rule. This feature carried over into Christian thought (1 Cor 6:3; Rev 5:10).

Christ promises the overcomers that they will rule the nations with an iron scepter. The verb means “to shepherd”34 and should be taken in the sense of wielding the shepherd’s staff or club (the “iron scepter” may have been an oak club capped with iron) to ward off the attacks of marauding beasts. In Rev 12:5 and 19:15 the prerogative of ruling (shepherding) the nations belongs to the conquering Christ. A share in this rule is promised to the overcomers in Thyatira. The description of this rule as the shattering of the potter’s vessel speaks of the absolute power of the victorious Christ and his followers over the rebellious nations. The concluding clause of the verse picks up from v. 26. Christ will give authority to the overcomer just as he has received it from his Father.35 It reflects the messianic “You are my Son; today I have become your Father” of Ps 2:7.

28 In addition to authority over the nations the overcomer is promised the morning star. No completely satisfactory answer for this symbol has yet been offered. Among the many suggestions one finds (1) an allusion to Lucifer of Isa 14:12, (2) Christ himself (cf. 22:16), (3) a reference to Dan 12:3 and the immortality of the righteous, (4) the dawn of eternal life, (5) a literal reference to the planet Venus, and (6) the Holy Spirit. Hemer suggests rather tentatively that the author’s mind may have passed from Ps 2:7–9 to Num 24:17 (the rod or scepter in each passage symbolizes authority) with its mention of a star, which then suggested the “morning star,” a local concept whose significance has now been forgotten.36

29 Once again the exhortation to hear what the Spirit says to the churches is repeated (cf. 2:7, 11, 17). This same emphasis on hearing and doing also marks the conclusion of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. The wise build against the coming storm of judgment by hearing and doing (Matt 7:24–25).

E. SARDIS (3:1–6)

1“To the angel of the church in Sardis write:

These are the words of him who holds the seven spirits of God and the seven stars. I know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead. 2Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have not found your deeds complete in the sight of my God. 3Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you.

4Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. 5He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels. 6He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

The church at Sardis was considered to be alive and well, but actually it was on the point of death. Christ admonishes the congregation to wake up to their perilous condition and take steps to restore their former vitality. Otherwise he will visit them unexpectedly in judgment. Those who overcome will have their names in the book of life and stand approved before God.

In the sixth century B.C. Sardis was one of the most powerful cities of the ancient world. Yet by the Roman period it had declined to the point that Ramsay could describe it as “a relic of the period of barbaric warfare, which lived rather on its ancient prestige than on its suitability to present conditions.”1 It was located some fifty miles east of Ephesus on a northern spur of Mt. Tmolus overlooking the broad and fertile plain of the Hermus. The acropolis, with its nearly perpendicular rock walls rising 1,500 feet above the lower valley (on all but the south side), was essentially inaccessible and provided a natural citadel.2 As Sardis grew, it became necessary to develop a lower city to the north and west of the acropolis on the banks of the Pactolus, a southern tributary of the Hermus. Excavations in the lower city have unearthed a Roman theater and stadium as well as an exceptionally large (160 by 300 feet) temple dedicated to Artemis. Its seventy-eight Ionic columns (of which two are still standing) are each fifty-eight feet in height. Built on the sixth-century-B.C. foundations of an ancient temple constructed by Croesus, it was destroyed in 499 B.C. and reconstructed but never completely finished in the time of Alexander the Great. It was dedicated to a local Asiatic goddess usually referred to as Cybele, who was identified with the Greek Artemis. This patron deity was believed to possess the special power of restoring the dead to life.

Sardis was the capital of the ancient kingdom of Lydia, the most obstinate of the foreign powers encountered by the Greeks during their early colonization in Asia Minor. In 546 B.C. it fell to Cyrus and became the seat of the Persian governor. Later it became part of the Seleucid kingdom, then passed to Pergamum, and subsequently to Rome (133 B.C.). In A.D. 17 Sardis suffered a catastrophic earthquake,3 but it was rebuilt with considerable help from the emperor Tiberius (10,000,000 sesterces—about a million dollars—and five years of tax remission.4 Nine years later (in A.D. 26) it competed with ten other Asian cities for the privilege of building an imperial temple, but it lost out to Smyrna, which stressed its practical services to Rome.5 Situated at the western end of a famous highway from Susa through Asia Minor, Sardis was a city of wealth and fame. Under Croesus gold was taken from the Pactolus. Jewelry found in the local cemeteries indicates great prosperity. It was at Sardis that gold and silver coins were first struck. It claimed to be the first to discover the art of dyeing wool.

The church at Sardis comes under the most severe denunciation of the seven. Apparently untroubled by heresy and free from outside opposition, it had so completely come to terms with its pagan environment that although it retained the outward appearance of life, it was spiritually dead. Like the fig tree of Mark 11:20 it had leaves but no fruit.6

1 The letter to Sardis comes from the one who holds “the seven spirits of God and the seven stars.” We are reminded that the letter to Ephesus came from the one who “holds the seven stars in his right hand” (2:1).7 The seven stars are identified in 1:20 as the angels of the seven churches, but the seven spirits of God are enigmatic at best. Perhaps Ramsay is right in his opinion that they “must certainly be taken as a symbolic or allegorical way of expressing the full range of exercise of the Divine power in the seven churches,”8 although from 1:4 it would seem that the figure represents some part of a heavenly entourage that has a special ministry in connection with the Lamb.9

Christ knows their deeds, and there is little to commend. Although they have the reputation of being alive, they are in fact dead. Subsequent verses indicate that while the entire church had not fallen into a state of complete spiritual death (vv. 4–5), the majority had so fully compromised with the pagan environment that the church was Christian in name only (i.e., “nominally” Christian). Like the prodigal son of whom the father said, “This son of mine was dead” (Luke 15:24), only by repentance and return could life be restored (cf. Eph 5:14).

2 The first of five imperatives in vv. 2 and 310 is joined to a participle and should be translated “be watchful” rather than “wake up” (as in the translations by Moffatt, Beck, and others). The exhortations to watchfulness would carry special weight in Sardis because twice in its history the acropolis had fallen to the enemy due to a lack of vigilance on the part of the defenders. In 549 B.C. Cyrus captured the acropolis by deploying a climber to work his way up a crevice on one of the nearly perpendicular walls of the mountain fortress.11 Late in the third century the city was again captured in the same way. A Cretan by the name of Lagoras discovered a vulnerable point and with a band of fifteen men made a daring ascent, opened the gates from within, and allowed the armies of Antiochus the Great to overpower the rebel Archaeus (216 B.C.). As in history, so in life, to consider oneself secure and fail to remain alert is to court disaster.12

Although the church at Sardis was dead (v. 1), some things still remained (although on the verge of dying). Rather than attempting to distinguish what was in fact dead and what could still be saved, it is better to take the two statements as paradoxical. Although Sardis could be pronounced dead, it still had the possibility of restoration to life. The city is to “strengthen13 that which still remains though it is at the point of death” (Weymouth). Christ, who knows their deeds (v. 1), has not found any of them14 carried out fully. Like the unfinished temple of Artemis, the works of the church constantly fell short of completion. They lacked the appropriate motivation and spiritual orientation, without which all external activity is morally impotent. The believers at Sardis had established a name for themselves in the eyes of the community, but in God’s sight (i.e., from God’s point of view) their works had not measured up.

3 The church is called upon to bear in mind (present imperative) what15 they had received and heard. The change in tense between “have received” (perfect) and “heard” (aorist) is instructive. Members of the church had received the faith as an abiding trust at the moment faith came by hearing. Christ calls on them to remember what they had been taught.16

Like the churches at Ephesus, Pergamum, and (later) Laodicea, Sardis is told to repent (cf. 2:5, 16; 3:19). Behm writes that “the urgent call for conversion in the epistles of Rev … is based on the prospect of the imminent end” and summons the churches “from sin and weakness, to the renewal of their former state of life.”17 If the church does not wake up to its perilous position, Christ will “come like a thief” (i.e., unexpectedly) and visit them in judgment.18 In other NT passages where the coming of Christ (or the day of the Lord) is said to be like a thief in the night (Matt 24:42–44; 1 Thess 5:2; 2 Pet 3:10), the second advent is in view. Here, however, some historical visitation must be in mind since the eschatological coming is not dependent on repentance in Sardis.19 When that visitation comes, it will be swift and unexpected (they will not know “at what time” he will come).20

4 Although the majority of the church had become thoroughly secularized, there were a few people21 who had “not soiled their clothes.”22 It is often noted that since the manufacture and dyeing of woolen goods was a principal trade in Sardis, an allusion to soiled clothes would be immediately recognized. It is unlikely, however, that anything more than a general reference to the danger of contaminating the Christian witness by accommodation to the prevailing standards of a pagan city is in mind.23

The promise to the undefiled minority is that they will walk with Christ, “dressed in white.” While this could suggest a reference to Enoch, who “walked with God” (Gen 5:22, 24), it is more likely an allusion to the itinerant ministry of Jesus in Galilee (cf. John 6:66). In Revelation 7 the great multitude wearing white robes (vv. 9–10) is led by the Lamb to springs of living water (v. 17), and in chapter 14 the 144,000 “follow the Lamb wherever he goes” (v. 4). In the context of the following verse (5), where those dressed in white do not have their names blotted out of the book of life, it would appear that walking “in white” is a way of describing those who are justified.24 Other possible references are to purity, festivity, resurrection bodies, or the Roman custom of wearing white on the day of triumph.25 Here, as elsewhere, the author is not limited to our knowledge of possible sources. While background is helpful, it does not determine how a figure must be used or what it may subsequently mean. The faithful at Sardis walk with Christ, dressed in white, “for they are worthy.” They themselves have done nothing to merit their exalted position, but are worthy in the sense that they have withstood the pressure to apostatize and hence have done nothing that would result in forfeiting their position.

5 To the overcomers a threefold promise is given: (1) they will be dressed in white, (2) their names will not be blotted out of the book of life, and (3) Christ will acknowledge them before God and his angels. White garments (or robes)26 are mentioned seven times in Revelation, but no distinctive pattern is established. The Laodiceans are counseled to buy them to cover their shameful nakedness (3:18). The martyrs awaiting vindication are given white robes (6:11). In the heavenly throne room the twenty-four elders are dressed in white (4:4), and before the Lamb stands a great multitude wearing white robes that have been washed in his blood (7:9, 13). The armies of heaven who appear with the warrior Messiah are “dressed in fine linen, white and clean” (19:14). It would seem, therefore, that the white garments promised to the overcomer here represent an attire appropriate to the heavenly state.27 Since they are made white by being washed in the blood of the Lamb (7:14), the figure is highly appropriate to portray justification.

The second promise is that the overcomer’s name will not be blotted out of the book of life. The idea of a divine ledger is first mentioned in the OT in Exod 32:32–33, where Moses prays that if God will not forgive the sin of his people, he himself wants to be blotted out “of the book you have written” (cf. Ps 69:28; Dan 12:1). Thus, in the OT, the book of life was a register of all those who held citizenship in the theocratic community of Israel.28 The idea was common in the secular world as well. “When a criminal’s name was removed from the civic register of an Asiatic town, he lost his citizenship.”29 Walvoord is troubled lest someone interpret the concept of being blotted out of the book of life as indicating the possibility of people losing their salvation. Consequently, he suggests that (1) there is no explicit statement that anybody will, in fact, have his name blotted out, or (2) the book of life lists the entire human race and individuals who do not accept Christ are blotted out.30 Caird, on the other hand, suggests that John believes in a “conditional predestination” in which the decrees of God wait on the acceptance or rejection of each individual.31 It is hermeneutically unsound to base theological doctrine solely on either parables or apocalyptic imagery. Better to allow the text, even when theologically awkward, to present its own picture.

Finally, to the overcomer Christ promises that he will acknowledge his name before his Father and the angels. This is a clear reflection of Matt 10:32 (cf. Luke 12:8; Mark 8:38/Luke 9:26), “Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven.” Faithfulness in trial now is to be rewarded beyond measure in the life to come.

6 See commentary on 2:7.

F. PHILADELPHIA (3:7–13)

7“To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write:

These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. 8I know your deeds. See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut. I know that you have little strength, yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. 9I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. 10Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth.

11I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 12Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new name. 13He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

The letter to Philadelphia contains no note of disapproval or reproach. Although the believers may have been excommunicated from the local synagogue, Christ has placed before them an open door into the messianic kingdom. They have remained faithful, and those who are not really Jews will be forced to come and acknowledge that God loves the Christian community. Because of their patient endurance God will keep them from the coming time of trial, and as overcomers they will take their place in the temple of God sealed with his name.

Philadelphia (modern Alashehir)1 lies at the eastern end of a broad valley that, passing through Sardis (some thirty miles west-northwest), leads down to the Aegean Sea near Smyrna. Its location commanded high ground on the south side of the river Cogamis, a tributary of the Hermus. This strategic location at the juncture of trade routes leading to Mysia, Lydia, and Phrygia (the imperial post route from Rome via Troas passed through Philadelphia and continued eastward to the high central plateau) had helped it earn the title “gateway to the East” and made it a city of commercial importance. The great volcanic plain to the north (katakekaumenē, the burnt land) was fertile and well suited to growing grapes. With an economy based on agriculture and industry, Philadelphia enjoyed considerable prosperity. Its one major drawback was that it was subject to earthquakes. The devastating earthquake of A.D. 17 that leveled twelve cities of Asia overnight2 had been particularly severe on Philadelphia, perhaps because it was nearer the fault line and also suffered a long series of tremors that followed. With the defeat of Antiochus IV at Magnesia in 190 B.C. Lydia passed to Pergamene control. Although Philadelphia is the most recently established of the seven cities of the Apocalypse, there is some confusion as to whether Eumenes II, king of Pergamum, or his younger brother Attalus II Philadelphus, who reigned from 159 to 138 B.C., founded the city.3 What is certain is that its name commemorates the loyalty and devotion of Attalus II to his brother (this is what earned him the epithet Philadelphus, “lover of his brother”). Hemer calls attention to two incidents of special note: (1) a false rumor of Eumenes’s assassination led Attalus to accept the crown, which he then relinquished when his brother returned from Greece, and (2) Attalus’s resistance to Roman encouragement to overthrow his brother and become king.4 The city was probably founded between 189 B.C. when the region came under the control of Eumenes and 138 B.C. when Attalus died, although without doubt it was built on the site of some earlier settlement. In its development under Pergamene rule Philadelphia was intended to serve as a “missionary city” to bring Greek culture to the recently annexed area of Lydia and Phrygia. Ramsay indicates the success achieved by noting that before A.D. 19 the Lydian tongue had been replaced by Greek as the only language of the country.5

Following the great earthquake of A.D. 17 it took the name of Neocaesarea for a time in appreciation for the imperial help received for rebuilding. At a later date, under Vespasian (A.D. 69–79), the name Flavia began to appear on coins. Philadelphia was remarkable for its many temples and religious festivals. For this reason, in the fifth century A.D. it was called “little Athens.” Because it was located in a vine-growing district, the worship of Dionysus was its chief pagan cult. After Tiberius’s help, it founded a cult of Germanicus, the adopted son and heir of the emperor. Between A.D. 211 and 217 a provincial temple to the imperial cult was built, and Philadelphia was honored with the title Neocoros, warden of the temple.

Attention has often been called to the similarities between the letters to Smyrna and Philadelphia. Kiddle, for example, points out that both are designed to strengthen the faithful and, in fact, point by point cover the same ground.6 They are the two churches that receive unqualified praise from the Lord.

7 Apparently all suitable phrases from the vision of chapter 1 have been used up,7 so from other sources the speaker identifies himself as the true Messiah who controls access to the eternal kingdom. While the NIV uses “holy and true” to describe the risen Christ, a more literal translation of the Greek text is “the Holy One, the True One” (ho hagios, ho alēthinos). In Jewish culture the Holy One was a familiar title for God (e.g., Isa 40:25; Hab 3:3; Mark 1:24; John 6:69; 1 Clem. 23:5). Here it is joined with “the True One” and applied to Christ. In Rev 6:10 they are combined to further describe God just addressed as “Sovereign Lord.” If “true” is taken in the classical sense of “genuine,” it may be used in 3:7 to refute those Jews of Philadelphia who would claim that Christ was a false Messiah.8 If it is taken in the OT sense of “faithful,”9 it could serve to remind the believers at Philadelphia that not only has Christ been set apart (the root meaning of hagios) to carry out his messianic task, but that he can be counted on to carry it to completion.10

Christ is next described as having “the key11 of David,”12 a metaphorical expression indicating complete control over the royal household. Specifically, in view of the following clauses, it means the undisputed authority to admit or exclude from the New Jerusalem. The background is the oracle against Shebna, Hezekiah’s major-domo (Isa 22:15–25), who was to be removed from office and replaced with Eliakim. Concerning the new chief steward the text says, “I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open” (Isa 22:22; cf. Job 12:14b). The language of Isaiah is used to present Christ as the Davidic Messiah with absolute power to control entrance to the heavenly kingdom. It may be an intentional contrast with the practice of the local synagogue in excommunicating Christian Jews.

8 A preliminary problem in v. 8 is the punctuation of the first clauses. The ASV considers “Behold, I have set before thee a door opened, which none can shut” parenthetical. Commentators who follow this punctuation take the following conjunction (hoti) as declarative and the remainder of the verse as detailing the “deeds” that Christ knows. If a major stop occurs after “deeds,” then the conjunction is better translated “because” and supplies the reason for the open door being placed before the church. The NIV takes the first four words as a complete sentence and after the somewhat parenthetical statement repeats “I know” from the first sentence and carries on “that you have little strength” (see NRSV for a similar construction). This is the most satisfying solution to the syntactical problem.

Most of the discussion centers on the meaning of the open door. The more common interpretation is that it denotes a great opportunity for missionary activity. Paul uses the metaphor in this way. He writes to the Corinthians of his plans to stay in Ephesus until Pentecost, “because a great door for effective work has opened to me” (1 Cor 16:9; cf. 2 Cor 2:12; Col 4:3). Ramsay explains the expression in terms of Philadelphia’s geographic position at the eastern end of the valley leading up onto the great central plain. As the “keeper of the gateway to the plateau,” it had been given a unique opportunity to carry the gospel to the cities of Phrygia.13

A different interpretation, however, fits the context better. The preceding verse spoke of a messianic kingdom whose access was under the absolute control of Christ. He is the one who possesses the key and can open and shut at will. Now in v. 8 he reminds the Christians at Philadelphia who may have been excommunicated from the local synagogue (v. 9) that he has placed before them an open door into the eternal kingdom, and no one can shut it. Roloff writes that “Jesus has opened the door to the kingdom of God to this church.”14 No matter if the door to the synagogue has been closed, the door into the messianic kingdom remains open.15

Christ recognizes that although they have but little strength (it was probably a fairly small congregation and they had not made a major impact upon the city), they have faithfully kept his word and not denied his name.16 The two aorist verbs point to a particular period of trial in the past. In the remainder of the letter we will learn the threefold reward for faithfulness: vindication before their foes (v. 9), deliverance in the final period of testing (v. 10), and security in the coming age (v. 11).

9 Verse 9 takes us to the heart of a serious conflict between church and synagogue in Philadelphia. The Jewish population was convinced that by national identity and religious heritage they were the people of God. Not so, claimed the Christians. Had not Paul, alluding to Deut 30:6, taught that “a man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly.… A man is a Jew if he is one inwardly: and circumcision is circumcision of the heart” (Rom 2:28–29)? It was the church that could now be called “the Israel of God” (Gal 6:16), for the Jewish nation had forfeited that privilege by disbelief.17 Members of the local synagogue may claim to be Jews, but the very claim constitutes them liars. By their slander and persecution of Christians they have shown themselves to be the “synagogue of Satan.”18 Jesus had said to hostile and unbelieving Jews, “You belong to your father, the devil” (John 8:44), and later in Revelation Satan is labeled “the accuser of our brothers” (12:10). Little wonder that their synagogue was called “the synagogue of Satan” (cf. Rev 2:9; also 2 Cor 11:14–15).

As in the preceding verse, the syntax of v. 9 is somewhat awkward. The initial clause in Greek may be expanded to read, “I give [to you those] of the synagogue of Satan.” The NIV translates, “I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan,” so as to parallel the later “I will make them to come and fall down at your feet.” The intervening phrases describe those persons as falsely claiming to be Jews. The major question is whether they are “given” in the sense of becoming converts to the Christian faith or “given” in the sense that they will finally come to understand that “you [the church] are my beloved people” (NEB). The first alternative supports the interpretation of the open door (v. 8) as a missionary opportunity, but we have already shown that to be less probable. Once again, an eschatological interpretation is to be preferred. Isa 60:14 represents the postexilic confidence that with the restoration of Israel the nations would come to honor and serve the people of God (“the sons of your oppressors will come bowing before you”). The nations will bring their wealth to Israel, become their servants, and acknowledge their God (Isa 45:14; cf. Isa 2:3; 49:23; Zech 8:20ff.). Now, in what Moffatt calls “the grim irony of providence,”19 what the Jews fondly expected from the Gentiles, they themselves will be forced to render to the Christians. They will play the role of the heathen and acknowledge that the church is the true Israel of God.20

Caird takes issue with commentators who hold that John envisages here, not the conversion, but the ultimate humiliation of the Jews. He reasons that “we should not submit to this gloomier interpretation” because (1) post-exilic Judaism looked for a reversal in world affairs that would include the redemption of Gentile nations, and (2) John had boundless confidence in the power of Christ.21 But Christ’s words in v. 9 certainly do not demand a cringing response from conquered foes. To come and worship is simply an Oriental metaphor that in this context involves no more than the acknowledgment that the church is the object of Christ’s love and that with his return their faith in him will be vindicated.

10 Because the believers at Philadelphia had kept “Christ’s command to endure patiently for His sake,”22 he will keep them from the hour of trial that is going to come23 upon the whole world. The major question is whether Christ is promising deliverance from the period of trial or safekeeping through the trial. The preposition “from” (Gk., ἐκ) is inconclusive. Walvoord holds that “if this promise has any bearing on the question of pretribulationism, however, what is said emphasizes deliverance from rather than deliverance through” and “implies the rapture of the church before the time of trouble referred to as the great tribulation.”24 The thrust of the verse is against this interpretation. It is precisely because the church was faithful to Christ in time of trial that he in turn will be faithful to them in the time of their great trial. The promise is consistent with the high-priestly prayer of Jesus, “My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one” (John 17:15). It is their preservation in trial that is taught. That the martyrs of 6:9–11 are told to wait for vindication until their full number would be killed indicates that the issue is not physical protection. The spiritual protection of the church is presented elsewhere in Revelation under such figures as sealing (7:1ff.) and flight to the wilderness (12:6).

The hour of trial is that period of testing and tribulation which precedes the establishment of the eternal kingdom. It is mentioned in such passages as Dan 12:2, Mark 13:19, and 2 Thess 2:1–12. It is the three and a half years of rule by Antichrist in Rev 13:5–10. In fact, all the judgments from 6:1 on relate to this final hour of trial. It is during this period that Christ will reward the faithfulness of the Philadelphian church by standing by to ward off all the demonic assaults of Satan. The text indicates that the hour of trial comes upon the “whole world” to test “those who live on the earth.” In the other places in Revelation where the latter phrase occurs (6:10; 8:13; 11:10 [twice]; 13:8, 14; 17:8) the enemies of the church are always in mind.25 The hour of trial is directed toward the entire non-Christian world, but the believer will be kept from it, not by some previous appearance of Christ to remove the church bodily from the world, but by the spiritual protection he provides against the forces of evil.26

11 The “coming” of Christ to Ephesus (2:5), Pergamum (2:16), and Sardis (3:3) posed a threat to each church. At Ephesus the lampstand would be removed unless they repented; at Pergamum Christ would fight against them with the sword of his mouth; at Sardis he would come like a thief. The “coming” to Philadelphia, however, is eschatological. It will end their time of trial and establish them as permanent citizens of the eternal kingdom. Verse 11 presupposes the continuance of the church until the second advent.27 The promise is not that Christ’s coming will take place quickly whenever it happens, but that it will take place without delay. It is to be taken in the sense of 1:1, “what must soon take place” (cf. 2:16; 22:7, 12, 20). Since the end is not far off, they are to hold on to what they have (faith in Christ and obedience to his word; cf. v. 8) so that no one will take their crown. The crown was the wreath awarded to the winner of an athletic contest (cf. 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Tim 4:8). The metaphor would be especially appropriate in this letter in that Philadelphia was known for its games and festivals.28

12 To the overcomers (those who hold on to what they have, v. 11) is given the promise of being made pillars in the temple of God. The metaphor is found elsewhere in the NT (James, Peter, and John were “reputed to be pillars,” Gal 2:9; the church is “the pillar and foundation of the truth,” 1 Tim 3:15) and is current in most languages. It conveys the idea of stability and permanence. This latter aspect is emphasized in the following clause, “Never again will he leave it.” To a city that had experienced devastating earthquakes that caused people to flee into the countryside and establish temporary dwellings, the promise of permanence within the New Jerusalem would have a special meaning. Various sources for the figure of the pillar have been suggested. Some refer to the custom in which the provincial priest of the imperial cult erected in the temple area at the close of his tenure of office his statue inscribed with his name.29 Others suggest the two pillars in Solomon’s temple that bore personal names (Jakin and Boaz, 1 Kgs 7:21), the colonnades of the Artemisium at Ephesus, or the occasional sculpturing of pillars in human shapes. Probably no single allusion is intended. If the Isaiah passage (22:15–25) is still in mind (from v. 7), the stability of the pillar may be in contrast to Eliakim, who was fastened like a peg in a firm place (v. 23) to bear the whole weight of his father’s house (v. 24) yet in time would give way (v. 25).30

A further promise to the overcomers is that Christ will write on them31 the name of his God, the name of God’s city, and his own new name. The impact of the threefold inscription is to show that the faithful belong to God, hold citizenship in the New Jerusalem, and are in a special way related to Christ. Aaron, the high priest, wore on his forehead a golden plate with the engraving “HOLY TO THE LORD” (Exod 28:36–38). In Rev 7:3 the servants of God are sealed on their foreheads, which according to 14:1 takes the form of the name of the Lamb and of his Father written on their foreheads (cf. 22:4). The name of the city of God indicates citizenship in the heavenly commonwealth (cf. Gal 4:26; Phil 3:20). Christ’s own new name symbolizes the full revelation of his character, which awaits the second advent (cf. 19:12). It is not hidden at the present time because of some primitive superstition that if known could be used to his disadvantage,32 but reflects the current inability of the human race to grasp the full theological significance of the incarnation. While it is interesting that Philadelphia twice adopted a new name (Neocaesarea, out of gratitude to Tiberius for his help in rebuilding after the great earthquake, and, later, Flavia, the family name of Vespasian), it adds little to our understanding of the verse.

13 Once again we hear the exhortation, “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.” The message to each church is at the same time a message to all churches.

G. LAODICEA (3:14–22)

14“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:

These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. 15I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth. 17You 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. 18I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.

19Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest, and repent. 20Here 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 him, and he with me.

21To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne. 22He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”

The church at Laodicea posed a special problem. Their self-confidence had blinded them to the fact that in reality they were “poor, blind and naked.” Assurance that they had it all together had resulted in a lukewarmness that made Christ want to spit them out of his mouth. They were counseled to buy from him spiritual wealth, the white robes of righteousness and clear vision into spiritual matters. He stands at the heart’s door of each believer and knocks, requesting permission to enter and share the blessings and joy of personal fellowship. Christ promises to each overcomer the privilege of sitting with him on his throne.

Laodicea (modern Eski-hisar, “the old fortress”) was located in the Lycus valley in southwest Phrygia at the juncture of two important imperial trade routes1—one leading east from Ephesus and the Aegean coast following the Maeander and then via the gentle ascent of the Lycus to the Anatolian plateau, and the other from the provincial capital at Pergamum south to the Mediterranean at Attaleia. Five of the seven cities to which John wrote lay in order along this latter road (Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and, some forty miles on to the southeast, Laodicea). Its sister cities were Hierapolis, six miles to the north across the Lycus River, and Colossae, ten miles on up the Lycus glen.2 To the south lay mountains that rise to over 8,000 feet. The city occupied an almost square plateau several hundred feet high some two miles south of the river. It was founded about the middle of the third century B.C. by Antiochus II to command the gateway to Phrygia and settled with Syrians and Jews brought from Babylonia.3 Antiochus named the city after his wife (and sister?) Laodice.

In Roman times Laodicea became the wealthiest city in Phrygia. The fertile ground of the Lycus valley provided good grazing for sheep. By careful breeding a soft, glossy black wool had been produced that was much in demand and brought fame to the region.4 Among the various garments woven in Laodicea was a tunic called the trimita. So widely known was this tunic that at the Council of Chalcedon in A.D. 451 Laodicea was called Trimitaria.5 Agricultural and commercial prosperity brought banking industry to Laodicea. Cicero, the Roman statesman and philosopher of the last days of the Republic, wrote of cashing his treasury bills of exchange there.6 The most striking indication of the city’s wealth is that following the devastating earthquake of A.D. 607 the city was rebuilt without financial aid from Rome. Tacitus wrote, “Laodicea arose from the ruins by the strength of her own resources, and with no help from us.”8

Laodicea was widely known for its medical school, established in connection with the temple of Mēn Carou9 thirteen miles to the north and west. It boasted such famous teachers as Zeuxis and Alexander Philalethes (who appear on coinage). Ramsay notes that the Laodicean physicians followed the teaching of Herophilos (330–250 B.C.) who, on the principle that compound diseases require compound medicines, began a strange system of heterogeneous mixtures.10 Two of the most famous were an ointment from spice nard for the ears, and an eye-salve made from “Phrygian powder” mixed with oil.11

Laodicea’s major weakness was its lack of an adequate and convenient source for water. Its location had been determined by the road system rather than by natural resources. Thus water had to be brought in from springs near Denizli (six miles to the south) through a system of stone pipes approximately three feet in diameter. Such an aqueduct could easily be cut off, leaving the city helpless, especially in the dry season when the Lycus could dry up.12

A large number of Jews had emigrated to the area, so many, in fact, that the rabbis spoke bitterly of those who sought the wines and baths of Phrygia. From the amount of gold seized as contraband following an embargo on the export of currency by Flaccus, governor of Asia (62 B.C.), Barclay estimated that there were at least 7,500 adult male Jews in Laodicea and the surrounding district.13 Laodicea was the center of the imperial cult and later received the Temple-Wardenship under Commodus (A.D. 180–191). The church was probably founded during the time Paul spent at Ephesus on his third missionary journey (Acts 19:10), perhaps by Epaphras (Col 4:12). There is no evidence that Paul visited the church, although he wrote them a letter (Col 4:16) that was subsequently lost.

14 The One who writes to the angel of the church in Laodicea identifies himself as “the Amen.” The title is unique and perhaps reflects Isa 65:16, which speaks of “the God of Amen.”14 In the OT and Judaism “Amen” is primarily the acknowledgment of that which is valid and binding.15 As a personal designation it would indicate the one in whom perfect conformity to reality is exemplified.16 The suggestion that “Amen” is appropriate as a liturgical conclusion to the seven letters is beside the point. What the title means is further expressed by the following appositional phrase, “the faithful and true witness.” It presents the trustworthiness of Christ in sharp contrast to the unfaithfulness of the Laodicean church.17 The final designation, “the ruler (archē) of God’s creation,” is undoubtedly linked to Paul’s great christological passage in Col 1:15ff., where Christ is designated “the beginning” (archē; v. 18) and “the firstborn over all creation” (v. 15). The close geographical proximity of the two cities and Paul’s instructions to Colossae that they exchange letters make it all but certain that the writer of Revelation knew the Colossian epistle.18 Although Wisdom’s declaration in Prov 8:22, “The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works, before his deeds of old,” is often mentioned as a background for the NT use of the expression, as applied to Christ it carries the idea of “the uncreated principle of creation, from whom it took its origin.”19 The Arian meaning, “the first thing created,” is at variance with the Colossian passage that declares that “by him and for him” all things were created (Col 1:16). This self-designation is the most explicit allusion in the Apocalypse to the preexistence of Christ.

15–16 Once again we hear the familiar “I know your deeds” (cf. 2:2, 19; 3:1, 8). Their “deeds” show them to be neither cold nor hot, but lukewarm. Consequently Christ is about to spit (Spanish, vomitar) them out of his mouth. This rather vivid portrayal has long been interpreted against the local background. Six miles north across the Lycus was the city of Hierapolis, famous for its hot springs that, rising within the city, flowed across a wide plateau and spilled over a broad escarpment directly opposite Laodicea. The cliff was some 300 feet high and about a mile wide. Covered with a white encrustation of calcium carbonate, it formed a spectacular natural phenomenon. As the hot, mineral-laden water traveled across the plateau, it gradually became lukewarm before cascading over the edge.20 Blaiklock is representative of those who see this as the background for picturing the lukewarmness of the Laodicean church and Christ’s reaction to it. Expecting an affirmative response, he asks, “Did the eyes of listeners seek through door and window the distant view of the lime and sulphur encrusted cliffs under Hierapolis, where the plumes of steam told of hot pools and sickly insipid water seeping over the slimy rock, water rough with alum which the unsuspecting visitor drank only to spit upon the ground?” and adds, “Such was their Christianity.”21

In an important article, Rudwick and Green argue that the adjectives “hot,” “cold,” and “lukewarm” are not to be taken as describing the spiritual fervor (or lack of it) of people.22 The contrast is between the hot medicinal waters of Hierapolis and the cold, pure waters of Colossae. Thus the church in Laodicea “was providing neither refreshment for the spiritually weary, nor healing for the spiritually sick. It was totally ineffective, and thus distasteful to its Lord.”23 On this interpretation the church is not being called to task for its spiritual temperature but for the barrenness of its works.24 Among the several advantages of this interpretation is the fact that it is no longer necessary to wonder why Christ would prefer the church to be “cold” rather than “lukewarm.”25 It should be noted that although the Lord was about to spit26 them out of his mouth, there was yet opportunity to repent (vv. 18–20).

17 Verse 17 explains why their works were offensive to God. Secure in their affluence, they were unaware that in reality they were wretched, pitiful, poor, blind, and naked.27 The material wealth of Laodicea is well established. The huge sums taken from Asian cities by Roman officials during the Mithridatic period and following indicate enormous wealth.28 The Zenonid family (private citizens of Laodicea) is a remarkable example of the power of individual wealth.29 The “wealth” claimed by the Laodicean church was not only material but spiritual as well. Their pretentious claim was not only that they were rich but that they had achieved it on their own. And beyond that, they had need of nothing. Like the farmer in Jesus’ parable who counseled his soul to eat, drink, and be merry for he had laid up many good things for many years to come (Luke 12:19), the Laodiceans felt they were secure in their spiritual attainment. But the truth was that they (the Greek pronoun is emphatic) were the ones who were poor, blind, and naked. It is frequently noted that Laodicea prided itself on three things: financial wealth, an extensive textile industry, and a popular eye salve that was exported around the world. It is hard not to see here and in the following verse a direct allusion to Laodicea’s banking establishments, medical school, and textile industry. The adjectives “wretched” (elsewhere in the NT only in Rom 7:24) and “pitiful” are coordinate with the other three (one article governs all five) and present five aspects of one and the same condition. And saddest of all, they did not realize their wretched condition. According to Philo, “The witless are all paupers.”30

18 A tone of “sustained irony”31 runs through vv. 17 and 18. The smug satisfaction of the Laodiceans is countered with the advice that they make some purchases in those specific areas in which they are confident that no need exists. Since they are in fact “poor” (v. 17), they need to buy from Christ (the prepositional phrase “from me” is emphatic) “gold refined in the fire” so that they may become genuinely rich. The gold is spiritual wealth that has passed through the refiner’s fire and has been found to be totally trustworthy.32 The Laodiceans need white clothes as well in order to cover the shame of their nakedness. A contrast with the black woolen fabric for which the city was famous could be intended, but the figure of white clothes as symbolic of righteousness is so widely used in Revelation (3:4, 5; 4:4; 6:11; 7:9, 13–14; 19:14) that no local allusion is necessary. In the biblical world nakedness was a symbol of judgment and humiliation. Isaiah walked naked for three and a half years as a sign that Assyria would lead captive the Egyptian and Ethiopian exiles, “stripped and barefoot … with buttocks bared” (Isa 20:1–4; cf. 2 Sam 10:4; Ezek 16:37–39). At the same time, to receive fine clothing was an indication of honor (cf. Joseph being honored by Pharaoh in Gen 41:42 and Mordecai by Ahasuerus in Esth 6:6–11). Thus in God’s sight (certainly not their own!) the Laodiceans were walking about spiritually naked, not understanding their humiliation and needing the white robes of righteousness that could be purchased at no cost (cf. Isa 55:1) except the acknowledgment of their shameful condition. The immediate cause of their problem was spiritual blindness. Laodicea was known for its famous medical school (established, according to the Greek geographer Strabo, in his own time, in connection with the temple of Mēn Carou; 12.8.20) and exported a “Phrygian powder” widely used as an eye salve.33 Confident of their clear vision into spiritual matters, the Laodiceans needed, as it were, their own eye salve to restore sight.34 We are reminded of Jesus’ dictum, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind” (John 9:39). Jesus now says, Recognize your blindness or there is no hope of healing.

19 Ramsay considers 3:19–22 as an epilogue to all seven letters rather than the concluding portion of the letter to Laodicea. He argues that (1) since the seven letters are a single literary unit they call for an epilogue, (2) it would be inconsistent to join Laodicea (sharply condemned) with courageous Philadelphia as the two churches singled out as loved by Christ, and (3) at this point clear references to Laodicea cease.35 Hemer answers the first two points almost in passing and then spends considerable time showing that both v. 20 and v. 21 are to be understood against the local background of Laodicea.36 Few have followed Ramsay in separating vv. 19–22 from the Laodicean letter. The rather stereotyped and continually repeated pattern of the seven letters calls for the promise (cf. 2:7b, 11b, 17b, 26; 3:5, 12) and the exhortation (cf. 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13) in the letter to Laodicea as well.

The syntax of the Greek sentence places emphasis both on ego (“I”) and hosous (“as many as”—inclusive, without exception).37 One might loosely paraphrase, “Now my practice is that all those I love, I also correct and discipline.” The principle of reproof and discipline as an expression of love is found in Prov 3:11–12, “My son, do not despise the LORD’s discipline and do not resent his rebuke, because the LORD disciplines those he loves, as a father the son he delights in” (cf. also Ps. Sol.10:1–3; 14:1; Heb 12:5–6). Of note is the fact that the LXX word for love (agapan) has been changed in the Laodicean letter (to philein).38 This unexpected show of personal affection39 has seemed strange to some but not to those who recognize that God’s stern hatred of evil is a necessary part of his love for people.40 It takes the form of rebuke41 and discipline.42 The idea of divine discipline runs throughout Scripture (Ps 94:12; Job 5:17; 1 Cor 11:32; Heb 12:7–8). “It is the fact of life that the best athlete and the finest scholar receive the hardest and the most demanding training.”43

The advice to the Laodiceans, therefore, is that they repent (in one decisive act: aorist imperative) and make it their practice to continue to live zealously for the Lord (present imperative).44 This is the fourth direct call to repentance in the seven letters (cf. 2:5, 16; 3:3; reference to repentance at Thyatira is indirect, 2:21–22).

20 Verse 20 is often quoted as an invitation and promise to the person outside the community of faith. That it may be pressed into the service of evangelism in this way is obvious. Compared with other world religions the seeking God of the Judeo-Christian heritage is perhaps its major uniqueness. In the context of the Laodicean letter, however, it is self-deluded members of the church who are being addressed. To the church Christ says, “Here I am! I stand at the door and knock.” In their blind self-sufficiency they had, as it were, excommunicated the risen Lord from their congregation. In an act of unbelievable condescension he requests permission to enter and reestablish fellowship.

Two principal interpretations of v. 20 exist: (1) that it represents a call to the individual for present fellowship, and (2) that it is eschatological and speaks of the imminent return of Christ. The latter interprets the verse in conjunction with the reward promised the overcomer in v. 21 (an eschatological scene, to be sure), while the former ties it in with the call to repentance in v. 19.45 In that the phrase “he/him that overcomes” serves as a semi-technical term that leads to the close of each letter (cf. 2:7, 11b, 17b, 26; 3:5, 12) and because v. 20 provides a strong positive motivation for the repentance demanded in the previous verse, it seems best to interpret the saying as personal and present rather than ecclesiastical and eschatological.

As in Holman Hunt’s famous picture (The Light of the World), Christ is outside the door and knocking.46 The invitation is addressed to each individual in the congregation: “if anyone hears … and opens.” The response of Christ to the opened door is that he enters and joins in table fellowship. In Oriental lands the sharing of a common meal indicated a strong bond of affection and companionship. As such it became a common symbol of the intimacy to be enjoyed in the coming messianic kingdom. Enoch portrays the future blessedness of the elect, saying, “And with that Son of Man shall they eat and lie down and rise up for ever and ever” (1 Enoch 62:14). In Luke 22:30 Jesus tells his disciples that they are to eat and drink at his table in the kingdom (cf. Matt 26:29; Rev 19:9). Whether eucharistic associations are intended or not,47 it is hard not to see in the picture at least an anticipation of the future messianic kingdom. All present fellowship with God is a foretaste of eternal felicity.

21 The promise of sitting with Christ on his throne is wholly eschatological. Jesus had promised his disciples that in the coming age when the Son of man would sit on his glorious throne, they also (those who had followed him) would sit on twelve thrones judging the tribes of Israel (Matt 19:28). But now the faithful are promised that they will sit with him on his throne (which is also the Father’s throne, 22:1). The martyrs in 6:10 cried out for vindication. It is to be fully realized when the overcomers take their place beside the Lamb on his throne. Their victory and consequent exaltation follow the pattern of the victory of Christ, who also overcame and sat down with his Father on the heavenly throne.48 Paul, as well, had promised, “If we endure, we will also reign with him” (2 Tim 2:12).

22 Here for the seventh and last time we hear the exhortation to hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches. We are reminded that the messages to the seven historic churches in Asia are at the same time a composite word to the church universal throughout time. Walvoord calls it a “comprehensive warning” in which the dangers of losing our first love (Ephesus), fear of suffering (Smyrna), doctrinal compromise (Pergamum), moral compromise (Thyatira), spiritual deadness (Sardis), failure to hold on (Philadelphia), and lukewarmness (Laodicea) are brought home with amazing relevance for the contemporary church.49