A
Prophetic History of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Church
(The Seven
Prophetic Periods of the Church Age)
By Harry A. Peyton
Table of Contents:
INTRODUCTION (3)
CHAPTER 1 THE EPHESIAN PERIOD, AD 96 TO 200
(7)
Christ’s Apostles Prophetically Forewarned God’s
Apostolic Pentecostal Churches Concerning Nicolaitan Bishops and Ministers
The
Historical Account of the Nicolaitan Doctrine
Ignatius Invented the Nicolaitan Monarchian Bishop Doctrine
Ignatius Invented the Eucharist Doctrine to Establish A Paid Ministry
for A Special Priesthood of Hirelings
The Historical Account of the Ministerial Structure
of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Churches
The
Biblical Account of the Ministerial Structure of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal
Churches
The First-Five Persecutions of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal
Children by Pagan Roman Emperors
CHAPTER 2 THE SMYRNA CHURCH PERIOD, AD 200 TO 313 (41)
The Six-Ninth Persecutions of God’s Apostolic
Pentecostal Children by Pagan Roman Emperors
Historical Proof that the
Vast Majority of Martyrs in the Ephesian and Smyrna Church Periods Were God’s
Apostolic Pentecostal Children
CHAPTER 3 THE PERGAMUS CHURCH PERIOD, AD 313 TO 1200 (53)
Lucifer Marries His Pagan Roman Empire to His Pagan
Catholic Church
Emperor Pope Constantine and
His Catholic Council of Nicaea
Lucifer Uses Catholic Emperors and Later Kings of
Europe to Persecute and Murder God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Children as Heretics
CHAPTER 4 THE THYATIRA CHURCH PERIOD, AD 1200 TO 1700 (67)
The Murderous Spirit of Jezebel in the Roman
Catholic Emperor Popes and their Inquisitions
The Murderous Spirit of Jezebel in the Protestant
Reformers and their Inquisitions
God Sent Great Tribulation to Catholic Popes,
Protestant Reformers, and their Churches
for Murdering His Anabaptist
Apostolic Pentecostal Children as Heretics
CHAPTER 5 THE SARDIS CHURCH PERIOD, AD 1700 TO 1800 (84)
The Coming Out of Religious Bondage and the Struggle
for Liberty and Religious Freedom
God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Children Began to Come
Out of their Underground Churches
CHAPTER 6 THE PHILADELPHIAN CHURCH PERIOD, 1800 AD TO THE PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE
AND RESURRECTION (90)
The Spirit of Brotherly Love and
Great Revivals in the Philadelphian Church Period
CHAPTER 7 THE LAODICEAN CHURCH PERIOD, 1900 AD TO THE POST-TRIBULATION RESURRECTION (97)
The Spirit of Philadelphian Love and Revivals in the
Laodicean Church Period
CHAPTER 8 “LET
MY PEOPLE GO THAT THEY MAY SERVE ME,” SAYS
THE LORD (Exo 7:16) (105)
The Ministries of Love that Should Be in God’s
Church
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(111)
ENDNOTES (116)
Copyright May 30,
1996 by Harry A. Peyton under the title of “The Doctrines Of Christ
A Note from the Author: Since
Almighty God, the Lord Jesus Christ, gives His Salvation and His Word to all
freely (Rev 22:17, Mt 10:7-8), this book, and all other
books, written by Harry A. Peyton are given without charge, and can be accessed
through the Internet at the following address: http://www.DoctrinesOfChrist.com.
Therefore, fell free to copy it in digital or written form, and share it with
others. Since this book is copyrighted, the author forbids any alteration of
its contents, and the reproduction of it in any form for Marketing Purposes.
This book may be placed on anyone’s web page, as long as my website address is attached to it.
The author believes that the Word
of God is infallible in the ORIGINAL LANGUAGE it was written in, and all
translations of the Bible regardless of how good they may be are NOT. Since the author has implicit
faith in the infallibility of the Word of God, the author has formed his
beliefs firmly on the truth of the Bible. This author uses the ancient ANTIOCHIAN
LITERAL-HISTORICAL METHOD OF INTERPRETING THE BIBLE, which was used by early
Christian Prophets and Apostles of the Bible. I definitely believe that the
ancient Alexandrian Allegorical Method of spiritualizing scripture, which was
made popular by the ancient Jewish philosopher Philo Judaeus (13 BC –
50 AD)
and later used by the Ante-Nicene Catholic Priests, especially Origen and his
student Clement of Alexandria (200 AD), is an abomination to our Lord.
Therefore, all scriptures will be interpreted in a literal exegetical fashion,
unless the language used and the context demands a spiritual interpretation.
All CAPITALIZATION and ITALICIZATION
in QUOTES used in this book is always
MINE. All Biblical quotes used in this book will be in Dark Red, and from the New King James version of
the Bible, unless another version is stated as the reference. The vast majority
of all translations of the Bible, as well as Hebrew and Greek Lexical
definitions and grammar, will come from BibleWorks computer software program version 7.0. The author in most places will quote verses from the Bible instead of
commenting on a verse and giving a reference; for He believes that the written
Word of God’s has greater power to inspire and enlighten a heart to understand
and act upon truth, than the elegant oratory or writings of any man.
If this book has been a
blessing to my beloved readers, and they would like to send an offering to the
author, feel free to do so. If anyone wishes to send any biblical or historical
materials to the author, my address is: 148 Little Creek Hills Rd.: Alto, NM
88312: Phone # 575-336-2800: Email address: DoctrineOfChrist@Hotmail.com.
INTRODUCTION
Our great Lord and
Savior asked this question: “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man,
am…? Simon Peter answered and said, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living
God….’ And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this Rock I will build
My Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it” (Mt 16:13, 16, 18). The apostle Paul told us
who the “Rock” was when he wrote: “All drank the same
spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and
that Rock was Christ” (1Co 10:4). The prophet David revealed that God is our
Rock when he wrote: “The LORD is my Rock and my fortress and my
deliverer; My God, my strength, in whom I will trust…. For who is God,
except the LORD? And who is a Rock, except our God (Psa 18:2, 31)? Therefore, God built His New
Testament Church on the same Rock that He built His Old Testament Church, which
was the revelation that Christ is the one and only God (Deu 6:4)! Paul said it this way: “And
without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested
in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among
the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory” (1Ti 3:16).
In this book, the
author will present a brief biblical, prophetical and historical account of
God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Church. Because the majority of the writings of
God’s Pentecostal Apologists, throughout the centuries have been destroyed by
Catholicism, or buried away in a vault in the Vatican, the history of God’s
Church is a little obscure. Therefore, the only way historians can trace her
through history is by the writings of the Catholic Priests, who hated her.
Because of their writings against her Oneness Modalist Monarchian, Jesus’ Name,
Tongue Talking Doctrines, we can trace her existence in history throughout
centuries; for the Priesthood of Baal were constantly writing against her, and
hurling their anathemas upon her and her children! I believe the only safe way
we can discover the history of God’s Church is through the prophetic Word of
God. As we examine the prophecies concerning God’s Apostolic Church, which is
mention in the Book of Revelation, and compare it with the religious historical
record, I believe my beloved readers will be able to see the truth. These
records will not only give us an insight into God’s Church, but also to it
adversary, the Roman Catholic Church.
As we examine the
Book of Revelation, the first thing we should take note of is the name of this
book. What does the word “Revelation” signifies. Revelation is the Greek noun “Apokalupsis (ap-ok-al'-oop-sis).” In, fact many
of the first through the fourth century Bible commentators use the term “The
Apocalypse” to refer to this book. Drs. J. P. Louw and E. A. Nida in their Louw-Nida
Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based defined “apokalupsis” as: ‘to uncover… to cause something to be fully known’ – ‘to
reveal, to disclose, to make fully known, revelation….’ The thoughts of many
will be fully known’ Lk 2.35…. ‘The
disclosure of the secret truth which was hidden for long ages in the past’ Ro
16.25 (#28.38). Therefore, God is telling us
by the name of this book that He is going to remove the veil that has
hidden His Prophetic Secrets in past ages and reveal them to those in
His Church. This is why the Book of Revelation is the key in understanding all
other end-time prophetic passages of scripture in the other books of the Bible.
With this truth in mind, let us proceed in our study of the Church Age.
First Time
Scripture: God spoke to John and
told him that the visions that He would give him: “must SHORTLY take place” (Rev 1:1). After God gave John all of his visions, He again
confirmed to John that these visions were of future events when He said:
“The Lord God of the holy prophets sent His angel to show
unto His servants the things which must SHORTLY be done”
(Rev 22:6). Therefore, without any
dispute, the Word of God declares that NONE of the visions God gave to John could have take place before AD
93-96. Now this is a great truth that needs to be understood and proved,
if one wishes to interpret the prophecies of Revelation correctly. It is a
well-known fact among Church historians that in the writings of the
Premillennialist and Amillennialist, who lived before 400 AD, that they
declared that John wrote Revelation at the END of the reign of the Roman Emperor Domitian.
According to Merriam-Webster Collegiate
Dictionary: Titus Flavius Domitianus, Roman Emperor (AD 81-96), noted for severity
especially in reign of terror (93-96).
180 AD: Premillennialist Irenaeus, a Bishop
in France: If it were necessary that
his [i.e.
the Antichrist’s] name should be
distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been
announced by him [John] who beheld the APOCALYPTIC VISION. For that was
seen NOT very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the END of Domitian’s
Reign (All
quotes from ANF and N&PNF are from Sage Digital Christian Library). [1]
350 AD: Amillennialist Eusebius in his Contents of Church History: It is said that in this persecution the apostle
and evangelist John, who was still alive, was condemned to dwell on the
Island of Patmos in consequence of his testimony to the divine word. Irenaeus… (says it took place) at the END of the reign of Domitian….’
Even those writers who were far from our religion did not
hesitate to mention in their histories the persecution and the
martyrdoms, which took place during it [Domitian’s Persecution]. And they, indeed, accurately indicated the
TIME. For they recorded that in the FIFTEENTH YEAR [i.e. 96 AD]
of Domitian, Flavia Domitilla daughter of a sister of Flavius Clement,
who at that time was one of the consuls of Rome, was exiled with many others to
the Island of Pontia in consequence of testimony born to Christ [chp 18, pg 257]…. [The
Relatives of our Savior]
Of the family of the Lord there were still living the grandchildren of
Jude, who is said to have been the Lord’s brother according to the flesh. Information
was given that they belonged to the family of David, and they were brought to
the Emperor Domitian by the Evocatus. For Domitian feared the coming of
Christ as Herod also had feared it….
These things are related by Hegesippus [chp 20, pg 259]…. But after Domitian had reigned FIFTEENTH
YEAR, and Nerva had succeeded to the empire, the Roman Senate, according to
the writers that record the history of those days, voted that Domitian’s
honors should be canceled, and that those who had been unjustly banished should
return to their homes and have their property restored to them. It was at
this time that the APOSTLE John returned from his banishment in the
Island and took up his abode at Ephesus, according to an ancient Christian
tradition [chp
21, pg 260]….
[Narrative Concerning John the Apostle] At that time the APOSTLE and evangelist John,
the one whom Jesus loved, was still living in Asia, and governing the Churches
of that region, having returned AFTER the death of Domitian from his exile
on the Island. And that he was still alive at that time may be established by
the testimony of two witnesses… Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria. [2]
Second Time
Scripture: “Write therefore the things which you have seen, and the things which are,
and the things which shall take place after [meta -
AMONG] these [houtos] things (Rev 1:19, NAS). Dr. A. T. Robertson, in his Word Pictures in the Greek New
Testament gives a fair word picture of the prophetic meaning of the verse.
He declares: Which thou sawest (ha eides). The vision of the Glorified Christ
in verses 13-18. The things which are
(ha eisin)... ha is
neuter plural, certainly the MESSAGES to the seven churches (1:20-3:22)
in relation to the world in general.... The things which shall
come to pass hereafter (ha
mellei ginesthai meta tauta). Present middle infinitive with mellei,
though both aorist and future are also used.... In a rough outline this part begins
in 4:1 and goes to end of chapter 22”
(Comment on Rev 1:19).
The Things John Has Seen: John’s first vision or the things he “HAS SEEN” was the Lord standing in the midst of the Seven
Churches: “Then I turned to see the VOICE that spoke with me. And having turned I saw
seven golden lampstands, and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like
the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about the
chest with a golden band. His head and hair were white like wool, as
white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire; His feet
were like fine brass, as if refined in a furnace, and His
VOICE as the sound of many waters; He had in His right hand seven
stars, out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword, and His
countenance was like the sun shining in its strength. And when I saw
Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me,
saying to me, ‘Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. I am He
who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have
the keys of Hades and of Death’” (Rev 1:12-18).
The apostle John described Jesus the very same way as
the prophet Daniel described Him just before the angel Gabriel came to him: “I looked up and there before me was a man dressed in
linen, with a belt of the finest gold around his waist. His body was like
chrysolite [i.e. a brownish gemstone], his face like lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs
like the gleam of burnished bronze, and his voice like the sound of a
multitude. I, Daniel, was the only one who saw the vision; the men with me did
not see it, but such terror overwhelmed them that they fled and hid
themselves. So I was left alone, gazing at this great vision; I had no
strength left, my face turned deathly pale and I was helpless” (Dan
10:5-8, NIV).
Let my beloved readers take note that John and Daniel, who were holy men of
God, both were so terrified at this vision of Christ, that both of them fell to
the ground as dead men.
Daniel had another vision of
Christ as the Judge, that is, the Ancient
of Day who sat on His Throne and JUDGED
lost humanity. Daniel described this fearful event this way: “I was seeing till that thrones have been thrown down, and the Ancient of Days is seated, His garment as
snow is white, and the hair of his head is as pure wool, His
throne flames of fire, its wheels burning fire. A flood of fire is proceeding
and coming forth from before Him, a thousand thousands do serve Him, and a
myriad of myriads before Him do rise up, the JUDGE is seated, and the
books have been opened” (Dan 7:9-10). After
comparing the above three passages of Scriptures, can anyone deny that the
Ancient of Days and the Lord Jesus Christ are the same person, and all three
reveal him as the Judge of the Universe.
What else can the symbolic terms: “eyes like a flame of fire,
His feet like fine brass… His mouth went a sharp
two-edged sword” be symbols of, if is not
a terrifying picture of Jesus being the Judge of all lost souls (Rev 19:11-12; 2:18)? The Two-edged sword is the Word of God by which He
will Judge all of mankind (Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12; Rev 2:12; 19:15-21). The prophet Isaiah stated this truth this way: “For behold, the LORD will come with FIRE And with His chariots, like a
whirlwind, To render His anger with fury, And His rebuke with
flames of fire. For by fire and by His sword the LORD will JUDGE all flesh;
And the slain of the LORD shall be many” (Isa 66:15-16; cp with
Ti 4:1,
8; 2Th 1:7-9). The
Scripture that declares: “It is a terrifying thing to fall into the
hands of the living God”
definitely becomes vivid in our mind with the above description of Jesus as the
Judge (Heb
10:30, NAS; cp with Jn 5:22-27; Acts 10:38-42; 17:31; Ro 2:16; 1Pe 4:5).
The Things which Are: In chapters two and three of the Book of Revelation, God spoke of seven
churches that represented the “things which ARE.”
John said it this way: “The
mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden
lampstands: The seven stars ARE the angels [messengers] of the seven churches,
and the seven lampstands which you saw ARE the seven churches”
(Rev 1:20). In these two chapters,
God give us a prophetic history of His Church as it existed in seven definite
periods in history. In other words, God divided the Church Age into Seven
Church Periods. Therefore, they should be called Seven Church Periods, not
seven church ages. Now, there can be no doubt that each of the seven churches
mentioned in these chapters, actually existed in Western Asia Minor or Western
Turkey at the time the apostle John wrote of them. The student of the Bible
cannot help but ask himself or herself why did God choose these seven to typify
His Church in these seven periods? Why did He not choose the Church in
Jerusalem, or in Antioch, or in Rome, or even one of the other churches in
Western Asia Minor, such as the Church in Colosse (Col 1:2), or in Hierapolis (Col 4:13), or in Troas (Acts 20:4-7; 2Co 2:12)?
Reverend Clarence Larkin, in his book Dispensational
Truth or God’s Plan and Purpose in the Ages, gave us his answer. He wrote: These Seven Churches then
must be representative or ‘typical’ churches, chosen for certain
characteristics typical of the character of the Church of Christ from the end
of the First Century down to the time of Christ’s return for His Church, and
descriptive of Seven Church Periods clearly defined in Church History…. While
the character of these Seven Churches is descriptive of the condition of those
churches, as described, were their exact condition in John’s day. So we see
that at the close of the First Century the leaven of ‘False Doctrine’
was at work in the Churches. The churches are given in the order named, because
the peculiar characteristics of that Church applied to the period of Church
History to which it is assigned.... The Message to the Seven Churches compared
with Church History. [3]
I definite agree with Rev. Larkin that these Seven
Churches represented: “Seven Church Periods. I also believe that God chose these Churches,
and not any of the others, because each Church had a certain PROBLEM that exist
in it, which would be PREDOMINATE in the Church Period it represented and would
CONTINUE in each Church Period after that in a MODIFIED form!” For example, in the Ephesian Church Period, the
problem was Nicolaitanism: “This problem really started in 90-100 AD when one
of the bishops in God’s Church of Antioch, by the name of Ignatius,
invented the Nicolaitan Doctrine. This doctrine consisted of: 1) The Monarchial
Bishop Doctrine, that is, one Bishop being the authority in each Church instead
of several or many Bishops; also the Bishop becoming a Lord over God’s
Children. 2) The establishment of a special ordained Priesthood and robbing ALL
Born-Again Believers of their Priesthood Ministry.”
In the Ephesian Church Period, Ignatius’ Nicolaitan teachings
became a source of irritation to God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Churches. As a
result, he and some of the other Bishops in God’s Churches, who believed in his
demonic teachings, were branded as heretics. They then departed from God’s
Church and started a rival church, which they called the Catholic Church.
However, in the Pergamos Church Period Ignatius’ teaching became a firm fix
doctrine, not only in the Catholic Churches but also in some of God’s Apostolic
Pentecostal Churches. Consequently, God deprived them of Eternal Life by taken
away His New Birth Message from them and gave them over to Satan. Lucifer then
married the heretical Catholic Churches and the heretical Apostolic Churches to
the Roman Empire, and they became the state religion of the Roman Empire.
Therefore, with these things in mind, let us begin our study of God’s Church by
examining the First Church Period!
The Seven Churches of Revelation in Asia Minor or Turkey
The
Distance of Each Church from the Aegean Sea: Ephesus (3 miles E), Smyrna (0
miles), Pergamos
(15 miles E), Thyatira (40
miles E), Sardis (45
miles E), Philadelphia (75
miles E), and Laodicea (83
miles E).
Each of the Seven Messages the Lord Jesus Christ gives to the Churches
of Asia Minor in Turkey begins and ends alike. Each message is given to
Christ’s Priesthood of all Born-Again Believers in the Church, who are His
Angels or Messengers. Our Lord’s message addresses certain conditions and problems
that were unique to the Church He was writing
to, which was typified to a Church Period in
the Church Age. In each case, God’s Priestly Messenger, the Born-Again
Believer, who overcomes has a promise of blessing and Eternal Life.
CHAPTER 1
THE EPHESIAN CHURCH PERIOD, AD 96 TO 200
The
Salutation: “To the angel of the
Church of Ephesus write, ' These things says He who holds the seven
stars in His right hand, who walks in the midst of the seven golden
lampstands.” The Commendation: “I know your works, your labor, your patience,
and that you cannot bear those who are evil.”
The Problem: “And you have TESTED those who say they are
APOSTLES and are NOT, and have found them liars; and you have persevered and have patience, and
have labored for My name's sake and have not become weary.” The
Reproof: “Nevertheless I have this against you,
that you have left your first love. Remember
therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I
will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place -- unless you
repent. But this you have, that you HATE the deeds of the Nicolaitans,
which I also HATE.” The Promise: “He who has an ear, let him
hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes I will give to eat
from the tree of life, which is in the midst of the Paradise of God” (Rev 2:1-7).
History of City: Ephesus was
an ancient Greek city on the west coast of Asia Minor in present-day Turkey. It
was about: 3 miles East of the Aegean Sea, 60 miles
East of the Island of Patmos in the Aegean Sea, 80
miles W of Laodicea, and 30 miles S of Smyrna. It was the most easily accessible city in Asia, by both
land and sea. It was on the
Cayster River and famous for its Temple of Diana (Acts 19:35), one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, whose theatre was the largest in
the world capable of containing 50,000 spectators. It was also the home of the Magic Arts (Acts 19:19), and the Mystery-Cults. Ephesus was destroyed by the Goths in the middle of the
third century. The small village of Ayasaluk marks part of the site of this
once famous city, which later became the home of the apostle John. [4]
The Salutation: “Unto the angel of the Church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth
the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden
candlesticks” (Rev 2:1, KJV; the NKJ, ASV, NAS, NIV all neglect the rules of
Grammar in this verse). The Holy
Bible and the New Living Translation both translated this verse this
way: “Write this letter to the angel of the Church in Ephesus. This is the
message from the one who holds the seven stars in his right hand, the one who
walks among the seven gold lampstands” (2nd edition). This translation does a better job grammatically then
the other translations, but it fails to understand God message. In the Greek,
this passage appears this way: “Tw/| avgge,lw| th/j evn VEfe,sw| evkklhsi,aj gra,yon\” (Robinson-Pierpont Majority Text & Friberg NT -UBS3/4).
The word “Church” is in the genitive case or the case that
expresses possession, which should be translated “of
the Church.” The Greek
preposition “evn” or “in” modifies the word “Ephesus,” which is also
in the dative case, which is an indirect
object, therefore it to should FOLLOW
the verb and not come before it. The Greek noun “aggelos” or “messenger” is also in the dative case, consequently it also
should FOLLOW the verb and not come before it.
According to Daniel B. Wallace in his book, Greek
Grammar Beyond the Basics: The dative substantive is that to or for which the action of a verb is performed.
The indirect object will only occur with a transitive verb, when the transitive verb
is in the active voice. The verb “write” is in the AORIST
tense, active voice, IMPERATIVE mood, second person, and singular number. Imperative mood is the mood that
expresses a COMMAND with the subject
being “you” in this case “You write.” Because the aorist tense refers to continuous
action, regardless of when the action began, Jesus is not only
referring to the Church that existed in Ephesus at that day, but also the
Church that existed in that Church Period. Therefore Revelation 2:1, 8, 18,
3:1, 7, & 14 all should read: “You [John] write
OF the CHURCH, the MESSENGER in” Ephesus, Smyrna, etc.
Since
the Church consists of God’s holy Priesthood of all Born-Again Believers, every child of God in the church is God’s one and only Messenger to the
world during the period of time he or she lives. The word of God states this
truth this way: “As NEWBORN BABES, desire the pure milk of
the word, that you may grow thereby…. You also, as living stones, are being
built up a spiritual house, a Holy PRIESTHOOD, to offer up spiritual
sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ…. You are a chosen
generation, a Royal PRIESTHOOD, a holy nation” (1Pe 2:2, 59; Mt 28:19-20;
Acts 8:3-4). Peter is quoting the
Priesthood Promise God made to all the Children of Israel, who failed to
receive His Promise because of their unbelief. God told Moses to tell every
Tribe of Israel, and not just the Tribe of Levi: “If
you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special
treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is
Mine. ‘And you shall be to Me a Kingdom of PRIESTS and a holy
nation.’ These are the
words which you shall speak to the Children of Israel” (Exo 19:5-6). In other words, God has fulfilled this Priesthood
Promise by calling and ordaining every Born-Again Child of God to His Holy
Priesthood. If you have received the New Birth, you are right now a Priest of
God and are part of His Holy Priesthood.
Baptist Greek Scholar, AT
Robertson in his work Word Pictures in the Greek New Testament made the following comments on
the verses in Peter’s Epistle. He declared 1Pe 2:2, 5: As newborn babes… probably
meaning that they were recent converts…. The spiritual milk which is
without guile… that ye may grow thereby…. Peter uses the Word of
God as the food for growth, especially for Babes in Christ…. To be a Holy Priesthood (eis
hierateuma hagion). Late word (from hierateuô, to serve as Priest,
Lu 1:8 alone in N.T.), in LXX (Ex 19:6), in N.T. only here and verse 9, either
the Office of Priest (Hort) or an order or body of Priests. At any rate, Peter
has the same idea of Rev 1:6 (hiereis, Priests) that ALL BELIEVERS are
PRIEST (Heb 4:16) and can approach God directly.
God’s
Priests are His Messengers: “For the lips of a PRIEST
should keep knowledge, And people should seek the law from his mouth;
For he is the MESSENGER [Septuagint a;ggeloj - aggelos] of
the LORD of hosts” (Mal 2:7).
Another example of the Greek noun aggelos being translated as Messenger is: “When the MESSENGERS [aggelos] of John had departed, He began to speak to the multitudes
concerning John” (Lk 7:24). Therefore
God’s Messenger in the Church is His Holy Priesthood of all born-again
believers; and grammatically speaking, all the above verses should be
translated as: “You [John] write
OF the CHURCH, the MESSENGER in” Ephesus, Smyrna, and so on. Let my beloved readers take note to the
fact that Jesus called the Church His Messenger in the Ephesus’ Church Period
of the Church Age. In fact, no one would argue the fact the Christian Church from
the time of its birth has always been, is now, and will continue to be God’s
one and only Messenger to the world! Because the grammar in Jesus’ address to
the Churches in the other 6 Church Periods is the same, verses 8, 12, 18, 3:1,
7 & 14 should be translated the same way as verse one of chapter two. Jesus
reminds His Children they are like Stars that He is holding in His hands. The
Word of God definitely declares that God HOLDS all of His Children in His HAND (Jn 10:28-29; Psa 37:23-25; Ecc 9:1) and they are compared to the stars in heaven (Dan 12:3; 8:10; Gen
37:9-10; Jude 1:13).
Commendation: “I
know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who
are evil.” Jesus praised His faithful overcoming Priestly Saints for their works,
labor, patience, and their zeal for holiness and truth. They were evidently
strong in the knowledge and understanding of the Word of God!
The
Problem: “And you have TESTED those who say they are APOSTLES and are NOT, and
have found them liars; and you have persevered and have patience, and
have labored for My name's sake and have not become weary…. But this you have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans,
which I also HATE.” Robertson made the
following comment on Rev 2:2-6: And didst try (kai epeirasas). First aorist active indicative
of peirazô, to test, a reference to a RECENT CRISIS when these Nicolaitans
(verse 6) were condemned. The present tenses (dunêi, echeis)
indicate the continuance of this attitude (cf. 1Jo 4:1). Which call themselves
apostles (tous legontas
heautous apostolous)… these Nicolaitans who posed as equal to
or even superior to the original apostles…. Rev 2:4 - Thy first love… had cooled off in spite of their doctrinal purity.
They had remained orthodox, but had become unloving partly because of
the controversies with the Nicolaitans. Rev 2:6 - That thou hatest…
which I also hate (ha kagô misô).
Christ himself hates the teachings and deeds of the Nicolaitans…
but the Church in Pergamum tolerated them.
John spoke of these Nicolaitans in his Epistle: “Beloved,
do not believe every spirit, but TEST the spirits, whether they are of God;
because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1Jn
4:1). Paul speaking to the Corinthins about some of the
Christian Nicolaitan-Pharisee Judaizers, who were claiming to Apostles of
Christ, who claim to have equal authority with him and other Apostles wrote: “What
I do, I will also continue to do, that I may cut off the opportunity
from those who desire an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in
the things of which they boast. For such are false apostles, deceitful
workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no
wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.
Therefore it is no great thing if his [Lucifer’s] ministers also transform
themselves into ministers of righteousness” (2Co 11:12-15). Paul
defended his apostleship against the False Apostles of the Nicolaitans told
some of God’s deceived Children: “I ought to have been commended
by you; for in nothing was I behind the most eminent apostles, though I am
nothing. Truly the signs of an apostle were accomplished among you with all
perseverance, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds” (2Co 12:11-12).
Therefore, it is very evident that in this Church Period, God’s Priestly
Children had a definite problem with Nicolaitan Bishops, who claimed to be APOSTLES! These False Prophets claimed to
have equal authority over the Church as the APOSTLES of Christ. Jesus commended His
Children for testing these False Prophets by the Word of God. In other words, our Lord told us that there were some HERETICS in His Churches in this Church Period, whom He called Nicolaitans. Jesus also told us that He
and His Priestly Saints HATED these Nicolaitan
Bishops, their deeds and later their doctrines.
What was the
Nicolaitan doctrine that God and His Priestly Children hated? Etymologically
the word “Nicolaitan” according to Dr. James Strong, in his Strong’s
Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, is a compound Greek word, which is
derived from the words “nikos” and “laos.” “Nikos” means: a conquest or to conquer or
to utterly vanquish, and “laos”
means: people. [5]
Our English word laity comes from this Greek word. In other words, God is
informing us that the Nicolaitans were out to conquer the People of God.
Since God has revealed to us that the Nicolaitans would try to conquer the
Children of God, the questions we should ask are: who are these Nicolaitans,
why would they want to do this, and did they succeed in conquering the People
of God? Now, according to the
above passage of Scripture, the Nicolaitans in the Ephesus Church Period were
claiming to be apostles, or in other words, they were claming to have
the authority of an apostle over God’s Church. The Lord called
these evil ways, which satanic inspired men tried to bring into His Churches,
the practices or deeds of the Nicolaitans. In this Church Period, the deeds of
Nicolaitans were only a source of irritation to God’s People, but it was not a
major problem. For according to their own Catholic history, God’s Apostolic
Pentecostal Churches were in the VAST MAJORITY in this Church Period, while these Catholic Nicolaitans only had a few
churches!
Larkin spoke of the problem these Nicolaitans created
in God’s Churches when he wrote: the Nicolaitans were not a sect, but a party in
the [true
Apostolic]
Church who were trying to established a ‘priestly order.’
Probably trying to model the Church after the Old Testament order of Priest,
Levites, and common people.... The object was to established a ‘Holy Order of
Men,’ and place them over the laity, which was foreign to the New Testament
plan. [6]
What Larkin is saying is this: these Nicolaitans tried to establish in God’s
Churches a special PAID PRIESTHOOD order of Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons, who
were to become the mediators between God and His Children. This was how it was done in Levitical Priesthood. In
God’s New Testament plan, this would never work, for all Born-Again
Believers are Priests of God (1Pe 2:5, 9). As a result, they had to destroy the Priesthood Ministry of God’s
People, before they could establish a paid special priesthood ministry.
Oneness Pastor Marvin M. Arnold, in his great work History
of the Christian Church, gave us some interesting insights into the
Nicolaitan doctrine. Arnold wrote: DeHaan saw Nicolaitanism-Balaamism as a racket
formed in the hierarchical clergy [Bishops].... It was the extreme, expansive division between
the clergy and the laity, two factors in the universal-ecclesiastical orders.
Nor were Nicolaitans confined only to Ephesus or Pergamos! Characteristically
schismatics, they undermined true, Judaic-Christian theology that stemmed from
the Upper Room of Jerusalem, Acts two.
[7]
Therefore, these heretical Nicolaitan apostates departed from God’s Apostolic
Pentecostal Churches around 90 AD,
and form there own churches, which they called the Roman Catholic Church.
Oneness Minister Dr. C. C. Gosey, in his book Clear Vision Bible Studies,
spoke of these apostates when he wrote: We have the name and order, which instigated
the Apostolic Succession, fostered in the ritual of the Roman Catholic Church….
Paul’s wolves of Acts 20 were the Nicolaitans of Revelation 2:6. [8]
Some Ante Nicene Catholic Priest, either because of
their lack of facts or in an effort to misdirect their readers of the true
history of Catholicism, have claimed that the Nicolaitans were a sect of
Gnostics, and the biblical and godly deacon Nicolas (Acts 6:5) started this demonic sect. Professor Schaff in his History
of the Christian Church speaking of Nicolas wrote: He is supposed to have
apostatized from the true faith.... But the views of the [Catholic] Fathers are conflicting....
Clement of Alexandria [200 AD] says that Nicolas was a faithful husband, and brought up his
children in purity. [9]
Professor George R. Mead in his history Fragments of A Faith Forgotten
stated: Tradition
claims Nicolas as an ascetic, and relates an exaggerated instance of his
freedom from passion.... There seems [to be] no reason why we to-day should follow these [Catholic] Church Fathers in their
condemnation of everything but their own particular view of Christ’s doctrine. [10]
Who were these early Nicolaitan preachers that claim
to be apostles of Christ in the first century? Since this is the Post-Apostolic
Church Period, they must have lived during the time the apostle John wrote the
Book of Revelation. The first time scripture in God’s book reveals that all of
John’s visions are from 96 AD to the end of time (Rev 1:1). Therefore, nothing in the Book of Revelation is
before this time. The Word of God does not tell us who they were, but it does
tell us about them. The Bible does inform us that the apostles of the Lamb
indeed prophetically warned God’s children, in their Epistles, about these
heretical ministers that would come into the Church during this time.
The Reproof: “Nevertheless I have this against you,
that you have left your first [protos - former] LOVE [agape]. Remember therefore
from where you have FALLEN; repent and do the first works, or else I will come
to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place -- unless you repent.” The Greek noun
“agape (ag-ah'-pay)” is a love based in the will or heart of an individual; it
is expressed in deep admiration, appreciation, and veneration; it is the word
use to express God’s love for His Children and their love for Him. It is a love
that willfully surrenders all of one’s heart to the one he or she loves (Jn 15:9-13; Rom 5:5, 8, 35, 39; 13:10; 1Jn 3:16; 4:7-16;
Rev 2:4). Jesus is therefore telling some of His Priestly
Children, which included the Nicolaitan Bishops that they have lost
their former fiery, self-sacrificing, total commitment agape love for
Him. This can only mean that some of God’s Children along with some of their
Bishops fell away from the truth, that is, they were backslidden. Their
loving Savior instructed them to remember their first works, whereby all of
their dedicated and consecrated service to Him came from a heart full of agape
love. In other words, all their holy living, preaching, teaching, evangelism,
and everything else they did for Him was motivated by their agape love for
Calvary! He also tells them, if they did not return to their Agape love,
they would be lost and He would remove them out of the Church, which He did
from this Church Period on.
Christ’s
Apostles Prophetically Forewarned God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Churches
Concerning
Nicolaitan Bishops and Ministers
The Prophecy of the Apostle Peter Concerning Nicolaitan
Ministers: Peter wrote his second
epistle around AD 64. He addressed it to
God’s Priest all around the world. In it he warn them about future Nicolaitan
pastors who would try to corrupt them with not only their lordship doctrine,
but other false teachings as well. He told them: “There
will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce
destructive heresies, even denying the Sovereign Lord
who brought them - bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow
their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In
their greed these teachers will exploit you [or make merchandise of you] with
stories they have made up…. [They] despise [apostolic] authority. Bold and arrogant, these men are not afraid to slander
celestial beings…. [They] blaspheme in matters
they do not understand...while they feast with you. They seduce the unstable;
they are experts in greed - an accursed brood! They have left the
straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Beor,
who loved the wages of wickedness…. They speak [or preach using] great
swelling words of vanity…. They promise
you liberty…. For it… [would have] been better for them
not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to
turn from it the holy commandment delivered unto them” (2Pe 2:1-22, NIV).
Let’s examine the false doctrines these Nicolaitan
Ministers were going to preach in God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Churches
somewhere around AD 90: FIRST, these bishops or preachers will teach false doctrine
or heresies of such a nature that will destroy the faith of some of the
children of God. SECOND, one of the heresies
they will teach involved the godhead. They will deny the total
sovereignty and deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, or in other word, they will
subordinate the Word or Logos and make Him a second god, just as Plato, Philo,
and early Catholic priests had done up to AD 325 in their teachings on deity. THIRD, these heretical Nicolaitans will preach against the true doctrines of
Christ, including God’s plan of salvation. They will pervert God’s plan of
salvation by mixing the Law of Moses with it by instituting continuing
sacrifices for sin, which they called the Eucharist.
They will claim that the Lord’s Supper is the actual
body and blood of Christ, and that Jesus must die again for them in the mystery
of the Mass, so that they can have the sins, they committed after baptism
forgiven! Therefore, by killing Christ again in the mystery of the Mass, these
priests of Satan will claim to be the mediators between God and man. Therefore,
they will pervert God’s ministerial structure of the church by changing it to
the Levitical priesthood pattern. They taught these demonic doctrines so that
they could have some reasons for establishing a special paid priesthood, which
would have total dominion over God’s holy priesthood of all born-again
believers.
FOURTH, some of God’s apostolic Pentecostal pastors and
preachers will believe and follow their teachings, especially their ministerial
structure. FIFTH, these men will be lying, sinful, carnal preachers,
who love worldly pleasures. They will endeavor to exploit God’s children in
order to get their money. SIXTH,
these pastors and preachers will blaspheme the doctrines of Christ by teaching
against them, even while they are feasting in the homes of God’s people. They
obviously had close fellowship with God’s children. SEVENTH, these Balaamites will preach the doctrine of Balaam,
which is basically bishops and preachers ministering for shameful material gain
or wages. According to the Word of God, the Moabites “hired”
Balaam to be their preacher (Deu 23:3-5).
Jesus gave us a clear picture of the character of a
hireling Nicolaitan-Balaamite Preacher. He said: the hireling is a “thief,”
and he comes “to
steal,” and to “kill” the sheep with his false doctrines. He also flees
when danger comes because he does not love the sheep (Jn 10:10-13). Jesus told us that a hireling is someone who works
for wages. You take away the wages and he is gone. He does not love the sheep!
Being a shepherd to him is not a calling from God but a job. He is a paid
professional, who sells his talents to anyone who pays him. His attitude is:
“what is in it
for me” or “how can I profit from
this?” Because these Balaamites
will be greed materialistic minded pastors and preachers, they will leave the
Biblical guidelines for the ministry and set up a hireling ministry, which will
imitating and duplicating the paid ministerial order of pagan Babylonian
priests.
Therefore, a complete definition of the doctrine of
Balaam would be: Nicolaitan bishops and preachers will work as hirelings, which
will lead them to compromise the Word of God when it comes to sin. Therefore,
they will preach a loose standard of holiness and separation from the world,
which will result in a number of God’s Priests committing spiritual adultery by
joining in an unholy union with them. This is turn will cause them to worship
God in a pagan way. Because these men are hirelings, they and their deceived
followers will not come out from some or many of the doctrines of “Mystery Babylon” or “Nimrod’s Babylonian Religion.” EIGHT,
these Nicolaitan-Balaamite Preachers will be orators, who use great swelling
words of vanity in their preaching to impress their followers. These men will
also be apostate, who knew the truth but did not love the truth. They will sell
their soul to the devil for material and sensual rewards. They will hate
apostolic authority and doctrines, and go about to set up their own authority
and doctrines. In fact, they will claim that God has given them absolute
authority over the Church they pastor, and the people should totally submit to
them as they do to God Himself!
The Prophecy of the Apostle Paul Concerning Nicolaitan
Ministers: Around 64 AD, Paul told the pastors of the Church of Ephesus:
“For after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in
among you not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:28). Around AD 67, Paul
wrote his second epistle to Timothy, in which he warned him of future apostasy.
He wrote: “Preach the Word, …reprove, rebuke with all long-suffering
and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;
but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having
itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be
turned unto fables” (2Ti 4:2-4).
Paul died somewhere around AD 68.
The Epistle of Jude Was Against the Nicolaitan Ministers of
His Day: Jude wrote his epistle
around AD
90. Jude spoke of the heretical
Nicolaitan- Balaamite bishops and preachers, which were evidently in God’s
Churches in his day. He proclaimed: “I felt I had to write
and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the
saints. For certain men... have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless
men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality, and deny
Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and LORD. These dreamers pollute their own
bodies [and] reject [apostolic] authority [and doctrine].... Woe
to them! They have taken the way of Cain [meaning they started their
own religion]; they rushed for profit into Balaam’s error.... These men
are grumblers and faultfinders. They follow their own evil desires; they boast
about themselves and flatter others for their own advantage.... But, beloved,
remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord
Jesus Christ; how that they told you there should be mockers in the last time,
who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. These are the men who divide
you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit” (Jude 1:3-19, NIV).
Jude, like Peter and Paul, gave us a vivid description
of these Nicolaitan Balaamite pastors and preachers. The only difference is
that these Nicolaitans existed in his day! Let’s examine what he said: FIRST, he definitely proclaimed that this was the
fulfillment of the prophesies of the apostles. SECOND, these men preached a loose standard of holiness or
godly living, justifying sin in their lives and others, thereby perverting the
message of God’s grace. THIRD, they denied that
Jesus Christ was the “only Sovereign and LORD.” This was definitely the fulfillment of Peter and
Paul’s prophecy concerning the Nicolaitans Balaamite Bishops that would come.
The word “only”
is the Greek word “monos” which means: “alone, by himself, no other.” These Balaamite preachers had the impertinence to deny
that Jesus was the only Sovereign; since they made Jesus a separate person or
being from the Father, they made the Father the only Sovereign, and Jesus a
subordinate or inferior god. This was the doctrine of Plato, Philo, and the
early Catholic Priests. For a history of their doctrine, my beloved readers can
read my book entitled A History of Oneness Throughout the Centuries.
These Balaamite Bishops also vehemently denied that
Jesus was the only “LORD” or “YHWH.” The apostles of Christ understood the word “LORD” when referring to Jesus to mean “YHWH.” The title “LORD”
is used 6,789 times in the Old Testament, and it always means “YHWH.” This name was the personal covenant name that God the
Father revealed Himself to His Children. No one today knows how to pronounce
this name. The Old Testament Jews only worshipped one LORD or YHWH and
that was God the Father, who in the New Testament became the man Jesus Christ! FOURTH, they rejected the authority of some of the teachings
of the apostles. FIFTH, they worshipped God
their own way, or made up their own religion and dogmas, just as Cain had done.
Let us remember that Cain was trying to approach God on his own terms; this is
why God did not accept his sacrifice. God told Cain: “If
thou does well, shall thou not be accepted” (Gen 4:3-7; or in other words, “if you repent of your man
made religion, with all of it false doctrines and traditions of men, and served
Me in Spirit and Truth, shall not I accept you.” This is one of the reasons why John called Cain the “wicked
one” (1Jo 3:12), for he
knew the truth and refuse to humble himself and obey it! Therefore, Cain and
those like him are definitely a type of a religious people, who are in
Christendom and Pagan Religions, who wants to serve God on their own terms.
SIXTH, these Balaamite Bishops were greedy, prideful,
grumbling faultfinders, who preached for material gain, to be lords over the
people, and to be worshipped as gods. SEVENTH, the goal of these Nicolaitan pastors was to divide the body of
Christ, so they could conquer them and steal their priesthood and ministry.
They did this by teaching the monarchical bishop, the Eucharist, and the
special paid priesthood doctrines. It was around this time that many of the
heretical Nicolaitan-Balaamite pastors and their deceived disciples were either
excommunicated from God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Churches, or they left the
Church on their own accord; if they left on their own accord, it was probably
because they could not take being rebuked for their false doctrines. It was at
this time that these Nicolaitan ministers and their followers established rival
or opposing churches to fight against the true apostolic believers. These
Catholic heretics established churches in the cities of Rome, Antioch, Ephesus,
Corinth, Smyrna, Philadelphia, Tralles, and Magnesia. They may have had
churches in Philippi, and Tarsus also. Around AD 100, Clement wrote his Epistle to the Corinthians from
Rome, and Ignatius around AD 107
wrote his Epistles to the above name churches.
The Apostle John’s in His Epistles Wrote Against the
Nicolaitan Gnostic Bishops of His Day: The apostle John, like Jude, wrote his epistles around AD 90; he wrote to all of God’s Churches throughout the
world, warning the saints about these Nicolaitan-Balaamite-Catholic Antichrists.
John, like Paul, Peter, and Jude, told God’s children that one of the heretical
doctrines these Catholic heretics would deny is: Jesus is the only supreme
deity, or Sovereign, or “LORD,” or “YHWH” of all
Christians; in other words, as the apostle Paul boldly proclaimed: “For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (Col 2:8-9). John said it this way: “Little
children, it is the last time, and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come,
even now are they many antichrist; whereby we know that it is the last time.
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us,
they would have continued with us; but they went out, that they might be made
manifest that they were not all of us” (1Jn 2:18-19). Robertson made this comment on
this verse: From
us (ex hêmôn) -- of us (ex hêmôn). The
same idiom, ex and the ablative case (hêmôn), but in different
senses to correspond with exêlthan (they went out from our membership)
and ouk êsan (they were not of us in spirit and life)…. They had lost
the inner fellowship and then apparently voluntarily broke the outward.
John explicitly, expressly, emphatically told God’s
people how to recognize these apostles of Satan. He says: “Beloved,
do not believe every spirit, but TEST the spirits, whether they are of God;
because many false prophets [meaning Catholic Nicolaitans] have
gone out into the world [meaning from their congregations]. By this you
know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come
in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus
Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of
the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world” (1Jn 4:1-2). What did the apostle John mean by the phrase:
“Jesus Christ has come in the flesh.” The name Jesus means: “YHWH is our salvation or
savior,” and Christ means: “the Anointed One or the
Holy One.” Therefore, John
declared that everyone, who does not confess that Jesus is “the one and only God”
or “YHWH our
Savior, the Christ or the Holy and Anointed One of Israel,” became a sinless fleshly human being, is not of God!
Let us always remember that Jesus in his human nature had a human mind and will,
which caused Him to pray, be limited in knowledge, and so on (Lk 2:52); but in His divine nature, Jesus was not limited in
any way, for He was: “God… manifested in the flesh” (1Ti
3:16).
The apostle Paul also made a similar statement as John
concerning the supreme deity of Christ, when he wrote: “Wherefore
I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus
accursed, and no one can say [epo] that Jesus is LORD
except by the Holy Spirit” (1Co 12:3). The Greek word “epo” means “to speak or say by word or writing.” Now this scripture can only mean that no man can say
or write that Jesus Christ is “YHWH,” except
the Holy Spirit of God reveals it to them. Permit me to prove this statement:
The Jews of Jesus’ day called Him Lord, but they certainly did not believe that
He was God. The Mormons call Jesus Lord, but they believe that He was Adam, who
came down to the earth with one of His many wives called Eve, and He is one of
a multitude of gods. The Jehovah's Witnesses call Jesus Lord, but they believe
that He is Michael the archangel, who is not the true God in any sense of the
word. The Cults, Occults and Eastern Religions call Jesus Lord, but they
believe that Jesus is just one of many prophets, who is not God. Is the Holy
Spirit of God inspiring these religious people to call Jesus Lord? The answer
is obviously no, so this Scripture can only mean that no one can write or call
Jesus Christ LORD or YHWH, except it is by the direct unction of the Holy
Ghost. For a comprehensive exegesis on
the Supreme Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, I invite you to read my book The
Mystery of the Godhead Revealed.
Conclusion:
Therefore, the Bible explicitly informs us that there were heretical Nicolaitan
Bishops in some of God’s Churches around 90-100 AD, who preached a perverted doctrine of the godhead.
They separated the unity of the godhead by declaring that Jesus was not “the
one and only God,” or “YHWH,” and “Sovereign,” who came in the flesh. These Balaamite pastors also
preached a perverted doctrine of God’s grace, where they mixed Old Testament
rituals and continual offerings for sin with God’s message of salvation. These
heretical Nicolaitan ministers also tried to change the ministerial structure
of God’s Church, by preaching the Nicolaitan doctrine, which robbed God’s
people of their ministry and priesthood, which thing God and His Church hated.
Professor Philip Schaff, in his History Of The
Christian Church, spoke of the ministerial structure of the Apostolic
Church when he declared: Dean Stanley asserts that no existing church can find any pattern or
platform of its government in the first century…. It is certain that… Bishop
and Presbyter were convertible terms, and that the body of men so-called were
the rulers—so far as any permanent rulers existed—of the early church…. It is
certain that… the word ’Bishop’ gradually changed its meaning, and by the middle
of the second century became restricted to the chief Presbyter of the
locality.
[11] Therefore, by AD 150, this satanic Nicolaitan doctrine
had become firmly established in the Nicolaitan Catholic Church, but God’s
Apostolic Pentecostal Church hated this doctrine and remained pure.
Dr. Schaff continued his discourse by saying: The sacred
office [of a Bishop] is in its divine origin and
import… was separated by no impassable chasm from the body of believers.
The Jewish and later Catholic antithesis of clergy and laity has no
place in the apostolic age…. In the apostolic church, preaching and
teaching were not confined to a particular class, but every convert
could proclaim the gospel to unbelievers, and every Christian who had
the gift could pray and teach and exhort in the congregation. The New
Testament knows no spiritual aristocracy or nobility, but calls all
believers ‘saints,’ though many fell far short of their vocation. Nor does it
recognize a special priesthood in distinction from the people, as mediating
between God and the laity. It knows only one high priest, Jesus Christ, and
clearly teaches the universal priesthood, as well as universal kingship, of
believers. It does this in a far deeper and larger sense than the Old; in a
sense, too, which even to this day is not yet fully realized. [12]
The Historical Account of the Nicolaitan Doctrine
Since the apostle John definitely declared that some
of these Nicolaitans departed from God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Church in His
day, which was somewhere between AD 90-100,
these heretical bishops and ministers were no long part of God’s Church!
After they apostatized from the truth, they started their rival churches in the
cities where God’s Churches existed. It was around this time that these
apostate bishops form the first ministerial alliance in history, as they united
their churches into an organization, which they called the Roman Catholic Church.
Most Catholics and Protestants are not aware that Catholicism began somewhere
around this time. It began with Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome and others
of that ilk, who spearheaded the formation of the Catholic Church. The true
history of the rise of Catholicism is a mystery. We know very little of her
history during the first century. The document called the Constitutions of
the Holy Apostles has been proclaimed by historians as a complete
fabrication and other earlier writing as being altered.
The major thread of history we have of Catholicism’s origin and early development is her Monarchial Bishop doctrine and her doctrine of two unequal-gods, which can be found in almost all of her writings before the Council of Nicaea in AD 325. The only reasons why historians have spoken of Catholicism as the original church is because their history is the only history they have. This daughter of the Babylonian Religion has burned the writings of God’s Apostolic Apologists, who wrote against her and her doctrines of Baal. As a result, the truth of her past in the first century remains a mystery. It is obvious from the writings of these Catholic Nicolaitan Nicene Priests that many books were written against them by God’s apologists, the apologists of various denominations, and even pagans.
Professor Charles Guignebert in his book, The Early History of Christianity, revealed that these religious groups have: written a great deal against her, or concerning her; this literature has almost entirely disappeared and the little that remains is only enough to show us how great would be the service it might render. Because it has no alternative but to use (a) polemical or exegetical writing mainly, badly emended by accounts reputed to be historical, but written long after the events and at a time when they were scarcely understood.... It is right and necessary that we should not forget that fact…. Try to exact from the collection of [Catholic] Christian documents alone an exact idea of the early times of the Church was to give way to a tantalizing delusion. Whether the fact was realized or not, the undertaking [of it by historians] was inspired by prejudgments of the faith.... They endeavored to preserve its old standing as an originality, and this desire was fed from more than one root in the theological postulate of revelation. [13]
Professor Mead confirmed Guignebert analysis of the early history of Catholicism by saying: The historical origins of [Catholic] Christianity are hidden in impenetrable obscurity. [14] The apostasy first began with the Nicolaitan doctrine of Ignatius, one of the bishops of God’s Apostolic Church in Antioch, Syria; he claimed to have the same and even greater authority over God’s Church than the apostles. He and his cohorts also tried to changed the ministerial structure of the church from several bishops or pastors over each assembly to just one; but the thing God hated the most about this doctrine was that this doctrine robbed God’s people of their priesthood and ministry by setting up a selected paid priesthood! This particular aspect of the Nicolaitan doctrine became known in church history as the Monarchical Bishop doctrine.
Ignatius Invented the Nicolaitan Monarchian Bishop
Doctrine
How did this Nicolaitan-Balaamite ministerial system
come into being, and who was the first Nicolaitan Bishop to start these
practices? Church historians point to Ignatius, one of the early bishops of the
Church of Antioch, Syria. According to a Catholic history book entitled, The
Story of the Church, Ignatius: had been bishop of Antioch for nearly fifty years, and
he died in 107 AD. [16]
If this is true, this means he was ordained a Bishop in God’s Apostolic
Pentecostal Church of Antioch in AD
57. Some Catholic authorities claim that Ignatius became a bishop in AD 69, using Eusebius’ Church History II as their
source of information, which would mean he was not a Bishop for 50 years but 38
years. I personally believe it was probably the latter date. Regardless of the year, he became a bishop, Satan
used this brainless apostate to start his Babylonian Catholic Church somewhere
between 90-100
AD. According to the Bible,
Ignatius and other heretical bishops in God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Church were peddling the gospel for
material gain. Paul said it this way: “For we are not, as so many, peddling [kapeleuo] the Word of God” (2Co 6:17). The Greek verb “kapeleuo” means: to
peddle for profit or to make money by selling something; in other words to teach or preach the Word of God in order to get a
material reward.
As a result, these hirelings later turned from the truth of the gospel
and became apostates. Arnold
speaking of these apostates and the Gnostic-Nicolaitan Catholic Churches they
started wrote: Have you wondered about the spread of early Catholicism.... Sohm wrote,
‘Primitive Christianity was not Catholic.’ Nevertheless, soon Grecian-Catholic
bishops… had established their Basilicas at Corinth, Ephesus, Tralles, Rome,
Philadelphia, Troas, Smyrna, Philippi, Antioch, etc., how do we know…? Ignatius
wrote… [his] quasi-religious letters to
these institutions…. Froom... wrote, ‘Gnosticism permeated the Catholic
Church.... The Gnostics were moved by mysticism. They loved symbols and
fostered gorgeous ritualistic worship and liturgy.... Gnosticism was
pre-eminently a religion of sacraments and mysteries….’ He named some Catholic
Gnostics as being: Ignatius, Saturninus, Tatian, Basilides, Valentinus, and
Marcion. [17]
When Ignatius and all the other Nicolaitan Bishops
established their apostate churches, they changed the apostolic ministerial
structure of the local church. In their struggle for a paid ministry, they
realized they had to destroy the ministry of the laity or their priesthood,
whereby they would become the sole ministers of the church. Dr. Guignebert
speaking of this wrote: As long as the idea of the sovereignty of the Spirit which ‘breatheth
where it listeth’ still holds, no way existed of establishing a lasting
distinction between the cleric [the bishops] and the inspired believers, and, I repeat,
that ordination had not yet acquired this meaning. By rights a
simple believer may... baptize, preach, consecrate the Eucharist and
impose penance. The [Catholic] clergy naturally endeavor to restrict and even suppress these
privileges and powers, which circumscribe their own importance. [18]
Let my readers take note of all the privileges and responsibilities the laity
had in the Catholic Churches at that time. Of course, the people of God’s
Apostolic Pentecostal Churches always enjoyed these privileges of their
priesthood ministry.
As these Nicolaitans tried to dominate or become lords
over the laity in their churches, there was a great conflict that developed.
Even though the Catholic laity believed in the Nicolaitan doctrine or the
Monarchial Bishop doctrine of Ignatius, they were not willing to surrender
their priesthood privileges and responsibilities to him and his presbyters at
first. Professor Maurice Gouel, in his history, The Primitive Church,
spoke of the great power struggle Ignatius and his presbyters had as they tried
to destroy the ministry of the Catholic laity. He declared: the Ruling circles in the [Catholic] Church felt that the
pressure of heretics [preachers and teachers among the laity] was an evil, which for the
time being had to be endured; while they did all that was possible to keep the
members of the Church uncontaminated by the pernicious example of those in
error, and reduced contact with them to a minimum. These hirelings did this by restricted the
preaching, teaching, and other ministries of laity. They even had the audacity
to forbid the laity to yield to the gifts of the Spirit.
Gouel continued by saying: This moderate course was not
dictated by a spirit of tolerance and charity, but by the feelings of the most
determined opponents of the heretics, that they would not receive sufficient
support from the mass of the faithful, to enable them to gain measures leading
to [their] ejection. Gouel declared
that the reason why these Nicolaitan-Balaamites could not excommunicate these
lay-preachers and teachers was because: the Church, when assembled together,
was not entirely hostile to them…. [Therefore], their enemies have recourse to indirect
tactics, by gathering round the [Monarchical] Bishop, a concentration of antiheretical
elements. They [the presbyters] make him [the bishop] the center of the Church, and in this way put the heretics on the
circumference, and so make them Christians on the fringe, at the same time
waiting for them to take the initiative and separate themselves from the
church, or until the bishop feels himself strong enough to put them beyond the
pale. [19]
Professor Guignebert revealed that the Monarchical
Bishop doctrine did not only prevailed in the Catholic Church in Antioch, but
also in some of the other cities where Nicolaitan-Balaamite bishops set up
their churches to combat God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Church. Guignebert wrote: By the end of the first
century, in some [Catholic] churches at least, there is a single bishop, the general ‘overseer’ of
the whole community, who consequently is in a fair way to keep the upper hand
in all matters; and, at his side ‘presbyters,’ specially charged with the
exercise of spiritual offices; and ‘deacons,’ mainly concerned with material
affairs. [20]
Somewhere before the end of the first century, Ignatius and his Nicolaitan presbyters
had finally conquered the laity and had total control over them. The ministry
of the laity as: prophets and teachers in the church, says Dr. Adolf Harnack in his book History of
Dogma, began
to pass over to the officials of the community. [21]
Guignebert told us the tragedy that happen in the Catholic churches of the
first century, which had a Monarchical Bishop. He said there was a: lessening of the authority
of the inspired persons.... The gifts which the Spirit had been scattering at
will upon a large or smaller number of the brethren do not disappear, however;
they [supposedly] pass to the [Monarchical] Bishop and strengthen him
in his authority. [22]
Since the bishop and presbyters were conductors of
public worship, they could quench the Spirit and inspired speaking in their
services anytime they wanted. My readers should bear in mind that the bishop
and his presbyters, at this time in Catholicism, did not receive a salary for
their ministry. As long as the laity in church were considered as priests, who
could preach and teach, there was no need for a special paid priesthood. As the
Word of God so clearly declared, God and His Apostolic Churches hated their
ministerial Balaamite-Nicolaitan doctrine, and now my beloved readers should be
able to understand why. These Nicolaitan Bishops had truly conquered the laity
in their apostate churches, striped them of their liberty in God, and stole
their priesthood ministry from them. The laity became spectators instead of
participators, full of unbelief instead of full of faith, silent mummies
instead of oracles of God, and spiritually dead instead of spiritually alive.
All of this took place in the Ephesian or Post Apostolic Church Age.
Professor Henry Chadwick in his history, Heresy and
Orthodoxy in the Early Church, spoke of the main stratagem Ignatius used to
get total control over the laity in his church. He wrote: According to Ignatius, the
Monarchian Bishop was the counterpart - typos - of God. [23]
Dr. Schaff speaking of Ignatius’ glorification and deification of the bishop,
quoted Ignatius as saying: The human bishop is the center of unity for the
single congregation, and stands in it as the Vicar of Christ and even of God.
The people, therefore, should unconditionally obey him, and do nothing without
his will. Blessed are they who are one with the bishop, as the church is with
Christ, and Christ with the Father, so that all harmonizes in unity. Apostasy
from the bishop is apostasy from Christ, who acts in and through the bishop as
His organs. [24]
A vicar is: one who serves as a substitute for someone else. Therefore, this
heretic claimed that he and all other bishops served as a substitute on earth
for Almighty God! No wander why the Catholic laity became scared to death of
their bishop. I hate to say it, but Nicolaitan pastors and minister of today
rejoice at hearing this kind of satanic garbage.
According to Schaff, Ignatius also taught: Look to the bishop that God
also may look upon you. I will be in harmony with those who are subject to the
bishop, and the presbyters, and the deacons; with them may I have a portion
near God.’ ‘It is evident that we should look upon the bishop as we do upon the
Lord Himself. I exhort you that ye study to do all things with a divine
concord: the bishop presiding in the place of God, and presbyters in the place
of the college of the apostles.’ ‘Let all of you follow the bishop, as Jesus
Christ - follows - the Father; and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and
reverence the deacons as the ordinance of God. [25]
All you Nicolaitan bishops and ministers who believe this lie say: “God help me to repent.” Now beloved you should be able to see where the
Catholic Church received their doctrine of the Pope being the Vicar of Christ,
and later on their infallible Pope doctrine; for Catholicism in 350 AD abolish the doctrine of the bishop being the Vicar of
Christ, and made their Pope, the one and only Vicar of Christ.
In the Ante
Nicene Fathers, we can read the Epistles that Ignatius wrote. Here are some
of his writings concerning the deification of a bishop. In His Epistle to the
Ephesians he wrote: Wherefore it is fitting that ye should run together in accordance with
the will of your bishop, which thing also ye do. For your justly renowned
presbytery, worthy of God, is fitted as exactly to the bishop as the strings
are to the harp…. It is manifest, therefore, that we should look upon the
bishop even as we would upon the Lord Himself. [26]
In Ignatius’ Epistle to the Magnesians he wrote: Let nothing exist among you
that may divide you; but be ye united with your bishop, and those [presbyters] that preside over you, as a
type and evidence of your immortality…. I
exhort you to study to do all things with a divine harmony, while your bishop
presides in the place of God, and your presbyters in the place of the assembly
of the apostles…. As therefore the Lord does nothing without the Father… so do
ye, neither presbyter, nor deacon, nor layman, do anything without the bishop.
Nor let anything appear commendable to you which is destitute of his approval. [27]
In Ignatius’
Epistle to the Trallians we read: In like manner, let all reverence the deacons as an
appointment of Jesus Christ, and the bishop as Jesus Christ, who is the Son of
the Father, and the presbyters as the Sanhedrim of God, and assembly of the
apostles…. Reverence your bishop as Christ Himself…. He that is within the
altar is pure, wherefore also he is obedient to the bishop and presbyters: but
he that is without is one that does anything apart from the bishop, the
presbyters, and the deacons. Such a person is defiled in his conscience, and is
worse than an infidel. For what is the bishop but one who beyond all others
possesses all power and authority, so far as it is possible for a man to
possess it…. And what is the presbytery but a sacred assembly, the counselors
and assessors of the bishop? [28]
In Ignatius’
Epistle to the Philadelphians he wrote: Let governors be obedient to Caesar; soldiers
to those that command them; deacons to the presbyters as to high-priests; the
presbyters, and deacons, and the rest of the clergy, together with all the
people, and the soldiers, and the governors, and Caesar [himself], to the bishop. [29]
It was this teaching that Bishops of Rome, who late became know as Popes,
enforced upon the kings of Europe and later the world. Ignatius continued his
deification of himself by saying: See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus
Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles…. Let no man
do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a
proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he
has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever
Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the
bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast. [30]
It was Ignatius’ teaching on the Eucharist that paved the way for a special
paid priesthood. Ignatius concluded his
Epistle to the Philadelphians by writing: He who does anything without the knowledge of
the bishop, does serve the devil…. Honor… the bishop as the high-priest, who
bears the image of God…. Nor is there any one in the Church greater than the
bishop, who ministers as a [high] priest to God for the salvation of the whole
world…. Let the laity be subject to the deacons; the deacons to the presbyters;
the presbyters to the bishop. [31]
After reading this satanic garbage, it is easy to understand
why Ignatius’ fellow Catholic bishops, in Satan’s rival and polluted church in
Antioch, gave their power to him and made him the head bishop. Through his
preaching and teaching, he gave them more power or authority over the people
than they had ever known. Did he not preach that the bishop should be looked on
as God Himself who is infallible, and the presbyters as the apostles who had
supreme authority over the Church! Now you can understand why the poor and
misguided laity in Lucifer’s Catholic Churches became terrified of them. It was
probably this kind of demonic rhetoric, which can no where be found in the New
and Old Testament, that led Professor Schaff and other historians to believe
that Catholicism began with Ignatius. Dr. Schaff wrote: The distinction of a regular
class of teachers from the laity became more fixed and prominent. This appears
first in Ignatius [AD 107], who in his high Episcopalian spirit, considers the
clergy the necessary medium of access for the people to God.... He is also the
first who uses the term ‘Catholic Church,’ as if episcopacy and catholicity
sprung up simultaneously. [32]
In Ignatius
deification of himself, he did not consider himself to be the bishop of the
city of Antioch only, but the bishop of an entire nation of Syria, for he
wrote: God
has deemed me, the bishop of Syria, worthy to be sent for from the east unto
the west. [33]
It was this doctrine that later paved the way for the office of Archbishop or
one man over several churches in different cities, Patriarch or one man over
all the churches in a nation, and later in 350 AD the Pope or one man over all the Catholic Churches in
the world. It was because of this kind of Satanic teaching that I stated at the
beginning of this book, the entire history of the Catholic Church can be sum up
in these words: Their demonic struggle to place all authority and power into the hands
of one man. Why did Satan want all
the power and authority placed in the hands of one man? It is obvious, for all
he had to do to get control over the entire Catholic Church is to control the
Pope; and this he has done very successfully over the centuries. This is why
many historians called the period that popes ruled the earth as the dark ages.
The Popes during this period were very immoral, and they murdered God’s people
as heretics. In fact, one of them was so immoral that those in the Vatican
called him the devil in flesh, for no virgin woman or man within fifty miles of
the Vatican was safe. If anyone thinks I am bias or fabricating this statement,
I challenge him or her to read Catholic professor Malachi Martin’s book on the
“The History of the Popes.”
The apostle John called those who espoused Ignatius’
teaching Antichrist. John speaking of Ignatius and those who followed his
demonic teaching said: “Little children, it is the last time, and
as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are they many antichrist;
whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were
not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but
they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us”
(1Jn 2:18-19). John unquestionably
declared that these bishops, preachers and saints were once children of God,
but now they have apostatized from the truth. In other words, they have left
God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Church and started Lucifer’s Nicolaitan Catholic
Church. Why would Ignatius and the other Catholic ministers want to dominate
the laity in their churches this way? Was it pride or vanity, whereby they
wanted to be worship by the laity? Was it because they desired and enjoyed
having power or control over others, which is the spirit of witchcraft? Was it
because of greed, and they wanted to use the laity to financially support them?
It was probably a combination of all these things.
Ignatius Invented the Eucharist Doctrine to Establish A Paid Ministry
for A Special Priesthood of
Hirelings
As long as the laity in Catholic Churches were
considered priests and ministers, who could preach, teach, and minister to
other saints, there was no need for a special priesthood of paid ministers. I
am not diminishing the office of a bishop in any way, but I am placing it in
its biblical and historical context. There is no place in the New Testament that
reveals that any of God’s ministers, whether they are called apostles, bishops,
or deacons, ever received a salary. The Bible does reveal that ministers did
receive freewill offering from the body of Christ. The inordinate desire for
money and power is the root of all evil. I do believe these are the reasons why
Catholic pastors in Ignatius’ day, and I might add some Protestant and
Pentecostal pastors today, have squashed preachers in their congregations whom
God wanted to use. These pastors became afraid of losing their position, if one
of the saints became a better preacher or teacher than they were!
Ignatius came up with a demonic plan to establish a
special paid or hireling priesthood. He started by teaching the Lord’s Supper
was actually the real body and blood of Jesus. The New Catholic Encyclopedia
speaking of Eucharist stated: The early writers were absolutely convinced of the
Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Ignatius of Antioch criticized the
Docetists, who ‘hold aloof from the Eucharist and prayer because they do not
believe that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior, Jesus Christ’ (Letter to
the Smyrneans, chp 7). [34]
Ignatius told the Philadelphians: Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [consecrated] either by the bishop, or by
one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let
the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic
Church. [35]
In the Nimrod’s Babylonian Religion, this doctrine of
partaking of the bread and wine that the priests of Baal consecrated was
called: “eating
the gods.” The only ones beside
the bishop, who consecrate the Eucharist, were the presbyters and deacons. In
other words, only a so-called special paid priesthood, who would have to give
up their secular jobs, so they would not be contaminated with the sinful world
around them, could change the bread and grape juice into the actually body of
Christ! This created a need for a special paid priesthood. But before Ignatius
apostatized, any one of God’s children could consecrate the Lord’s Supper,
which was not the actually body of Christ, but a memorial looking back at what
Jesus had done at Calvary.
Once the Catholic laity believed Ignatius’ satanic
lie, that the Lord’s Supper was actually the real body and blood of Jesus, he
then convinced them that only a special and separate priesthood could
consecrate the Eucharist and can change it into the actually body of the Lord
Jesus Christ. After all, who among the Catholics of that day would doubt the
teaching of this so-called infallible god! After this so-called miracle took
place, Ignatius claimed that only this special priesthood had the power to
actual crucify afresh the Savior, through the mysteries of the Babylonian Mass.
Ignatius then taught that partaking of the Eucharist was the only way God would
forgive the sins one committed after water baptism. Therefore, according to
Ignatius, repentance and confession to God was not enough for a child of God to
have their sins forgiven; they had to also receive the Eucharist.
Later on Catholicism taught that no one could confess
their sins to God, for there were to sinful to commune with God, so they a to
go through one of the hireling priest, who would act as a mediator between them
and God! This ancient Babylonian doctrine was called in Catholicism Confession.
According to The Encyclopedia of Religion, Ignatius called the
Eucharist: the
antidote of life. [36]
Ignatius called the gifts of bread and grape juice the “sacrifices,” which the poor mislead Catholic people offered to him,
the presbyters, and deacons to consecrate. The International Standard Bible
Encyclopaedia speaking of this declared: The gifts themselves were
called prosphorai, ‘oblations,’ or thusiai, ‘sacrifices.’ The sacrificial
conception of the [Lord’s] Supper was thus gradually created (Ignatius, Phil., iv; Smyrna, vii,
viii). [37]
In 150 AD, Justin Martyr confirmed that
Ignatius’ Eucharist doctrine was an established teaching in the Catholic
Churches. Justin wrote: And
this food is called among us Eujcariatia [the Eucharist], of
which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things
which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for
the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ
has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but
in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word
of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been
taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which
our blood and flesh by transmutation [transformation] are
nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. [38] By comparing the Old Testament sacrifices with that
of the Eucharist, Ignatius came up with an idea for a new sacrifice. Harnack
speaking of it says: the idea of the chosen bishops and deacons as the antitypes of the
Priest and Levites, had been formed at an early period in connection with the
idea of the new sacrifice. [39]
The new sacrifice of these Nicolaitans was the
offering of the Eucharist for the purpose of removing of sins committed after
water baptism. This meant that Jesus would have to die over and over again at
ever consecration of the Eucharist. This was truly a satanic perversion of
God’s grace. As the preceding paragraphs have shown, Ignatius, this
demon-possessed bishop, came up with the idea of creating a new ministry in the
church, which would require a special paid priesthood to fulfill. He compared
the ministry of the Old Testament priesthood, that is, a Levi priest offering
up daily sacrifices for the sins of the people, with their new special
priesthood that offered up the Eucharist for the sins of the people. Later,
these Nicolaitan-Balaamites, or followers “Nimrod’s Babylonian Religion,” invented a special Babylonian ceremony called the Mass
for the purpose of consecrating the Eucharist. Thus, through these doctrines of
devils, as the apostle Paul called them, Ignatius create a need for a paid or
salary ministry. All this took palace at the end of the first century.
Professor Harnack, in his book The Mission and
Expansion of Christianity, speaking of the financial structure for
ministers in the local Church wrote: Church-officials were not,
in the first instance [meaning in the beginning], obliged to abandon their civil calling, and so far
as that provided them with a livelihood, they had no claim upon the church’s
funds. Harnack then spoke of the
change that took place in Catholicism after Ignatius brought in his
Nicolaitan-Balaamite priesthood. He declared: From the very first, the
president [the
Monarchical Bishop] appears to have had practically an absolute control over the
donations; but the deacons had also to handle them as executive agents. The
responsibility was heavy, as was the temptation to avarice and dishonesty;
hence the repeated counsel, that bishops and deacons were to be ‘no lovers of
money. [40]
According to Otto Heick, in his History of Christian Thought, the Catholic
bishop Clement of Rome in 100 AD
taught: Almsgiving
is therefore excellent as a repentance for sins, fasting is better than prayer;
but almsgiving is better than either.
[41]
The inordinate desire for money and power has always
been the roots of all evil. Jerome speaking of this informs us that even though
the office of presbyter in Catholicism is a greater and higher office than a
deacon, for some mysterious reason deacons were paid more. Jerome said it this
way: If…
it is the deacon that is ordained presbyter, this latter should recognize that,
although he may be less highly paid than a deacon, he is superior to him in
virtue of his priesthood. [42]
Therefore beloved, it is not hard to understand why a deacon was paid more than
a higher-ranking presbyter, for evidently the bishop willed it so. After all
the deacons were the people who collected and distributed all monies of the
Church. In other words, the deacons not only gave the Monarchical Bishop his
salary, but also keep quite when he wanted more than his salary.
Even though Ignatius’ Eucharist doctrine was invented
long after the apostle Paul’s death, God had Paul to write against some
Christian Jews in his day, who wanted to continue some of the ordinances of
Judaism, such as offering up animal sacrifices for sins (Acts 15:1-2, 5; Ga 6:12). This was a perversion of God’s grace as the apostle
told them in his Epistle to the Hebrews. Praise God that this great book not
only corrected the Jewish problem in Paul’s day, but the Holy Spirit has used
it to keep God’s Apostle Pentecostal Church in the truth and away form
Ignatius’ Eucharist Doctrine!! Lets examine Paul’s teachings on Christ dieing
for the sins of all mankind once and for all time. The great apostle wrote: “When
Christ came as High Priest... He entered the Most Holy Place once [not daily] for
all by His own blood, having obtained eternal redemption.... Nor did He enter
heaven to offer Himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most
Holy Place every year with blood that is not His own. Then Christ would have
had to suffer many times since the creation of the world” (Heb 9:11-12,
25-28).
Paul went on to reveal that it was not God’s will for
Christ to die daily, or offer Himself up on the cross over and over again! It was for this reason why Jesus: “appeared
once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of
Himself.... Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people…. [Jesus our great High] Priest
had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins... because by one sacrifice He
has made perfect forever those who are being made holy” (Heb 10:12-14,
NIV)!! Paul then warned those
Christian Judaizers who wanted to continue with the Law of Moses, and animal
blood sacrifices by saying, “If we deliberately keep
on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for
sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire
that will consume the enemies of God.... How much more severely do you think a
man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has
treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and
who has insulted the Spirit of grace” (Heb 10:26-29). This warning without doubt also applies to the
priests of Catholicism!
If Catholic priests, like these Christian Judaizers in
Paul’s day, keep on sinning by continually to mock the crucifixion of Christ on
Calvary’s cross, day after day, week after week, month after month, and year
after year, then they, like these Christian Judaizers, will be trampling on the
blood of Jesus, and doing away the atonement Jesus made for their sins, and the
sins of the Catholic people! If they do not repent of this satanic Babylonian
tradition, then they will earn for themselves and those who follow them a place
in the Lake of Fire. I say this in love, for if I truly love you, I will tell
you the truth. Catholics need to repent of this abomination and all other sins
against Christ. They need to confess their sins to Jesus and not some priest,
for Jesus in His humanity is our High Priest, and the one and only mediator
between God and man (1Ti 2:5).
Friend, the precious blood that the humanity of Jesus
shed is the only mediation God will honor for sin (1Jn 2:1-2). Therefore, there is no other sacrifice for sins
except the one and only sacrifice Jesus made at Calvary. Once a believer
repents of their sins, is immerge in water in the name of the Lord Jesus
Christ, and receives the Holy Spirit with the initial evidence of speaking in
tongues, they are in Christ. From that time on, they are covered with the
precious blood of Jesus, and all they have to do to receive forgiveness of any
sins committed after their New Birth, is to ask Jesus to forgive them and
repent, which means to turn your back on sin and your face towards God. This is
the one and only way God can remit sins after the New Birth!
The Historical
Account of the Ministerial Structure of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Churches
History indisputable reveals that God’s Apostolic Church was originally set up with many bishops or presbyters to lead, guide, and rule over each local congregation; also every born-again believer was a priest, minister, preacher, and teacher in the church; also bishops were servants not lords over God’s priesthood. This is why professor Schaff boldly proclaimed that no church denomination or organization today can find any biblical or historical evidence in the first century to support their ministerial structure! Clement, one of the Catholic bishops of Rome, in his Epistle to the Corinthians (100 AD) mentions bishops and deacons in the hierarchy ministerial structure of his church, but in no place does he teach Ignatius’ doctrine of a single bishop ruling the church. However, he does teach the Catholic two-unequal-god doctrine.
Clement told the Church in
Corinth to be: Obedient
to those who had the rule over you… giving all fitting honor to the presbyters
among you. [43]
He told them that the apostles: preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first-fruits
[of their
labors], having
first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should
afterwards believe. [44]
He then proceeded to warn them not to rebel against their bishops: For our sin will not be
small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily
fulfilled its duties. Blessed are those presbyters who, having finished their
course before now, have obtained a fruitful and perfect departure [from this world]. [45] Clement continued by saying: It is disgraceful beloved,
yea, highly disgraceful, and unworthy of your Christian profession, that… [the] Church of the Corinthians
should, on account of one or two persons, engage in sedition against its presbyters.
[46]
He then concludes by saying: let the flock of Christ live on terms of peace with the presbyters set
over it. [47]
Polycarp, one the bishops of Smyrna, wrote an Epistle
to the Philippians (AD 100), and he also
mentions bishops and deacons in the ministerial structure of the church, but in
no place does he teach Ignatius’ doctrine of a single bishop ruling the church.
Nevertheless, he does teach the Catholic two-unequal-god doctrine. Polycarp
mentions other bishops who were with him in Smyrna by saying: Polycarp, and the presbyters
with him, to the Church of God sojourning at Philippi. [48]
Polycarp then proceeded to instruct the pastors, who were in Philippi, what
duties a bishop should perform. He proclaimed: And let the presbyters be
compassionate and merciful to all, bringing back those that wander, visiting
all the sick, and not neglecting the widow, the orphan, or the poor, but always
providing for that which is becoming in the sight of God and man; abstaining
from all wrath, respect of persons, and unjust judgment; keeping far off from.
All covetousness, not quickly crediting [an evil report] against any one, not severe
in judgment, as knowing that we are all under a debt of sin. [49]
Jerome taught that the episcopate or the office of a
chief bishop that Ignatius invented supposedly rose from the presbyterate as a
safeguard against schism.
Let us examine Jerome’s writings, and see if he can shed some light on the
ministerial structure that God’s apostles set up. Around AD 390, Jerome wrote a letter to Evangelus. In it, he
defended the Catholic Nicolaitan-Balaamite ministerial doctrine, which was in
full bloom in his day. Jerome refuted the beliefs, of some of his fellow
Catholics, who made deacons equal to presbyters in authority. Jerome clearly
revealed that the words presbyter and bishop are synonymous, in that they both
referred to the same office. In doing so, he unwillingly revealed that the One
God Apostolic Churches in the Book of Acts had several presbyter-bishops in each
local congregation, which shared equal authority, instead of one monarchical
presbyter-bishop with all the authority. Jerome’s confession, found in The
Nicene And Post Nicene Fathers volumes, was this: We read in Isaiah the words,
‘the fool will speak folly,’ and I am told that some one has been mad enough to
put deacons before presbyters, that is, before bishops.... The apostle [Paul] clearly teaches that
presbyters are the same as bishops.... In the Acts of the Apostles, Paul thus
speaks to the priests of a single church: ‘Take heed unto yourselves and to all
the flock, in the which the Holy Ghost hath made you bishops [episkopos], to feed [shepherd] the church of God, which He
purchased with his own blood (Acts 20:28). Jerome declared that there was only
one Church, not many churches in Ephesus.
Jerome went on to say: There is the following
passage, which clearly proves a bishop and a presbyter to be the same. Writing
to Titus the apostle says: ‘For this cause left I
thee in Crete, that that you shouldest set in order the things that are
wanting, and ordain presbyters in every city, as I had appointed thee; if any
be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of
riot or unruly. For a bishop must be blameless’ [Titus 1:5-7]…. In the Greek, the meaning
is still plainer, for the word used is ‘episkopos,’ that is to say, overseer or
bishop. Jerome definitely declared
that the word elder, which is the Greek word presbuteros, is synonymous with
the word bishop in the Bible. They both refer to the very same ministerial
office. The word elder or presbyter, when referring to the ministry, is used
only for the office of a bishop or pastor, it is never used for the office of a
deacon or any other office in the Bible or history.
Jerome continued: For what function [in the
Catholic priesthood], except ordination, belongs to a bishop that does not also
belong to a presbyter.... All alike are successors of the apostles.... Of the
names presbyter and bishop the first denotes age, the second rank. In writing
both Titus and to Timothy the apostle speaks of the ordination of bishops and
of deacons, but says not a word of the ordination of presbyters [or elders]; for the fact is, the word
bishops includes presbyters also. Again, when a man is promoted, it is from a
lower place to a higher. (Therefore)... if… it is the deacon that is ordained
presbyter, this latter should recognize that, although he may be less highly
paid than a deacon, he is superior to him in virtue of his priesthood. [50]
From Jerome’s unintentional confession,
we have learned that the apostles did not place one but several bishops over
each local congregation, and that bishops and elders were the very same office
in the church. It was the Catholic Nicolaitan Priesthood that changed the
Biblical order, for Jerome confessed that the Catholic priesthood of his day
had three orders of ministry, the Monarchian or Ruling Bishop, Presbyters, and
Deacons. He also confessed that these Nicolaitan Bishops claimed to have the
authority of an apostle over their congregation. This confirms everything I
have said about these Nicolaitans thus far.
Church historians have repeatedly confirmed the
apostles’ doctrine of many bishops over a local congregation in their histories
of the early Christian Church, which shared equal authority over the
congregation of God. Professor Arthur C. McGiffert in his book, A History Of
The Christian Church In The Apostolic Age, declared, during the age of the
apostles: the
churches, so far as we are acquainted with them, were ruled each by a number of
bishops.... They served the local congregation primarily, not the universal
church, and their official position gave them no rights in other congregations. [51]
Dr. Harnack spoke of Ignatius and the Nicolaitan Catholic Church, he stated: As early as the second
century the [Catholic] Church had conquered the
people.... By the opening of the third century [200 AD], no layman ventured any
longer to call ecclesiastics, ‘brethren.’ The layman is a layman because he has
not been set apart from the people by ordination…. After the close of the
second century [the Monarchical] bishops were the teachers, high priest, and judges
of the church. Ignatius already had compared their position in the individual
church to that of God in the church collective. [52]
Edward Gibbon in his history “The History of the
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” declared that Catholic and Protestant
institutions: have alike struggled to reduce the primitive and apostolic model [of each individual church], to the respective
standards of their own policy.... The public functions of religion were solely
entrusted to the established ministers of the church, the bishops and the
presbyters; two appellations which, in their first origin, appear to have
distinguished the same office and the same order of persons.... In proportion
to respective number of the faithful, a larger or smaller number of these
Episcopal Presbyters guided each infant congregation with equal authority and
with united counsels. [53]
Church historians have repeatedly confirmed the
apostles’ doctrine of many bishops over a local congregation, and the
priesthood of all believers, in their histories of the early Christian Church.
Professor Guignebert wrote: In the beginning the bishops - for each congregation
had several of them - did not trouble either to teach or to edify in any other
way than by their good example. They occupied themselves in maintaining and
confirming the Church in the practice of morality, and of the precepts of the
true faith, and exercised the upper hand in all matters relating to the
temporal concerns of the congregation.
[54]
Dr. Harnack spoke of the monarchical Bishop doctrine this way: It appeared more and more
fitting [in
Catholic Churches] to entrust one official, as chief leader, [that is, bishop] - superintendent of public
worship, - with the reception of gifts [of the Spirit] and their administration,
that is, to appoint one bishop instead of a number of bishops. [55]
In God’s primitive Apostolic Pentecostal Church, every born-again believer,
including pastors, were holy ministers or priests of God, who could minister to
the body of Christ. They all could preach, teach, and be used in the gifts of
the Spirit, providing they had a loving and humble spirit that could receive
correction.
Conclusion: The scriptural and historical evidence, my beloved
brethren, leave no room for doubt that God did not originate, ordained, or
approved of the Nicolaitan Monarchical Bishop doctrine that Catholicism has
brought to the entire church world of today and in the past. In fact, God has
told us through His Word that He hates it! I realize that God ordain pastors
and saints have followed this demonic system ignorantly, but the Word of God
declares: “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you
free” (Jn 8:32). Beloved of
the Lord let us not forget that our Lord and Savior commanded His children to:
“Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you”
(Jn 12:35). Ignorance of truth is
one thing, but continual willful disobedience to the clear teaching of God’s
Holy Word can only lead to our destruction! Dear brother pastor, God has placed
an awesome responsibility upon your shoulders, to perfect holiness in the lives
of His priesthood, and to develop their preaching and teaching skills, so that
they can become the men and women of God! The choice is your, what will you do?
The Biblical Account
of the Ministerial Structure of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Churches
The Word of God in NO place in the New Testament teaches the LORDSHIP of Bishops over a SINGLE congregation, or that God appointed just one
Bishop over an assembly. I realize that most of God’s holy Pastors and Saints
are NOT aware of this great truth today. This is why
Professor Schaff boldly proclaimed that NO
Church denomination or organization today can find any biblical or historical
evidence in the first century to support their ministerial structure, which
also included his own denomination! Those who teach Ignatius’ Nicolaitan
Monarchial Bishop doctrine is teaching a doctrine of devils, which God HATES! The Bible and Church History without dispute teach
that the ONE Church in each city had several Pastors that
held the God ordain office of Bishop, who shared equal authority
and hopefully worked in unity with each other!! Since it is MUCH easier for Satan to corrupt or mislead one
Bishop with pride, materialism, or other sins, I presume this is one of the
reasons why God placed several Bishops over each Church instead of one man. God
also made each Church autonomist with its own self-government; He did this no
doubt to make it harder for Satan to control each Church by an organization or
denomination, which men later formed. The first organization or denomination
was the demonic Roman Catholic Church, which satanic men formed between 90-100
AD. God knows what He is doing, and His way always works and brings His
blessings and power! God never established Church organizations or
denominations, men did!!
The Single Philippian
Church Had Several Bishops: Paul
greeted the church in the city of Philippi with these words: “Paul
and Timothy, bondservants of Jesus Christ, To all the saints in Christ Jesus
who are in Philippi, with the BISHOPS [episkopos] and
Deacons [diakonos]” (Phi 1:1). Let my
beloved readers take note that this one church in the city of Philippi
irrefutably had several pastors and not just one, who held the office of
Bishop in it. I may also mention that this is the only epistle in which
Paul even mentions Bishops in his salutation to a church; for he usually
addresses his epistles to the saints! The Greek noun episkopos (evpisko,poij) is in the dative case or an
indirect object, masculine gender, and PLURAL number. Dr. A.T. Robertson speaking about the word “Bishops”
in this passage of scripture wrote: It is an old word from episkeptomai, to look upon or after, to
inspect, so the Overseer or Superintendent. In the second century episxopoj [or episkopos] (Ignatius) came to mean one
superior to elders, but NOT SO the N.T. The two New Testament church officers
are here mentioned (Bishops or Elders and Deacons). The plural is here employed
because there was… one church in a city with several Pastors (Bishops, Elders).
The Single Ephesian
Church Had Several Bishops: When
Paul was in “Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called for
the ELDERS [presbuteros] of the church.” Paul told these bishops: “Therefore
take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has
made you OVERSEERS [episkopos], to SHEPHERD the Church [not Churches] of
God which He purchased with His own blood” (Acts 20:17, 28). Timothy may have been one of the Bishops who came
down from the single Church in Ephesus. He was probably the first Bishop, of
all the other Bishops, to be chosen as a Pastor of the Ephesian Church (2Ti 4:22). The apostle did not say “elder” or “overseer” as in
one, but “elders” or “overseers” as in many. In the fourth century, the
Catholic Bishop Jerome declared that there was only one Church in the city of
Ephesus in Paul’s day, and that one Church had several bishops in it. Jerome
wrote: In
the Acts of the Apostles, Paul thus speaks to the priests [or bishops] of a single church: ‘Take heed unto yourselves and to all the flock, in the
which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops [episkopos], to feed [Shepherd] the
Church [not Churches] of God, which He purchased with his own
blood’ (Acts 20:28). [56]
Professor Joseph Henry
Thayer of Harvard University in his lexicon entitled A Greek-English Lexicon of
the New Testament defined Presbuteros as: 1) Of
age… advanced in life, an elder, a senior…. 2) A term of rank or OFFICE;
as such borne by: A) Among the Jews, a. members
of the great council or Sanhedrin (because in early times the rulers of the
people, judges, etc…. THOSE who in the separate cities managed public
affairs and administered justice…. B) AMONG
CHRISTIANS, THOSE who PRESIDED over the assemblies (or churches):
Acts 11:30; 14:23; 15:2, 4, 6, 22f; 16:4; 21:18; 1 Tim. 5:17, 19; Titus 1:5; 2
John 1:1; 3 John 1:1; 1 Pet. 5:1, 5… Acts 20:17; James 5:14. That THEY did
NOT DIFFER at all from the (evpi,skopoi)
BISHOPS or OVERSEERS (as is acknowledged also by Jerome on Titus 1:5 (cf.
Lightfoot’s Commentary on Philippians, pp. 98f, 229f)) is evident from the fact
that the TWO WORD are used indiscriminately, Acts 20:17, 28; Titus 1:5, 7, and
that the DUTY of PRESBYTERS is described by the terms evpiskopei/n [BISHOPS], 1
Pet. 5:1f, and evpiskoph,,
Clement of Rome 1 Cor. 44, 1; accordingly only two ecclesiastical officers,
oi` evpi,skopoi [Bishop] and oi` dia,konoi [Deacon], are distinguished in
Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:1,8. The title evpi,skopoj [BISHOPS]
denotes the function, presbu,teroj
[PRESBYTERS] the dignity (#4388).
Dr. Thayer defined
Episkopos as: an OVERSEER, a man charged with the duty of seeing
that things to be done by others are done rightly, any curator, guardian, or
superintendent; the Septuagint for dyqiP', Judg.
9:28; Neh. 11:9,14,22; 2 Kings 11:15, etc.; 1 Macc. 1:51. The word has the same comprehensive
sense in Greek writings from Homer Odys. 8, 163; Iliad 22, 255 down; hence, in
the N. T. evpi,skopon tw/n yucw/n guardian
of souls, one who watches over their welfare: 1 Pet. 2:25… Heb. 13:17
specifically, the superintendent, head or OVERSEER of any Christian church;
Vulgate episcopus: Acts 20:28; Phil.
1:1; 1 Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:7 (#2112).
Dr. A. T. Robertson in his Word
Pictures in the Greek New Testament made the following comment on Act 20:17: The
ELDERS of the Church (tous presbuterous tês ekklêsias), the very
men whom Paul terms ‘BISHOPS’ (episkopous) in verse 28 just as in Tit
1:5, 7 where BOTH TERMS (presbuterous, ton episkopon) DESCRIBE the SAME
OFFICE. The term ‘Elder’ applied to Christian Ministers first appears in Ac
11:30 in Jerusalem and reappears in 15:4, 6, 22 in connection with the apostles
and the Church. The ‘ELDERS’… are ‘BISHOPS’ (cf. Php 1:1) and with ‘Deacons’
constitute the two classes of officers in the early churches….
EACH CHURCH, as in Jerusalem, Philippi, Ephesus, had a NUMBER of ‘ELDERS’
(‘BISHOPS’) in the ONE great city CHURCH…. Here Paul unbosoms himself to
the Ministers of the Church in Ephesus where he had spent three years (longer than
with any other Church). The Greek word
“episkopos” is used 7 times in the New Testament and the AV translated it 6
times as “Bishop” and 1 times as “Overseer.” “Presbuteros” is used 67 times and
the AV translated it 64 times as “elder.”
It is very evident
that the apostle Paul used the Greek words “presbuteros” and “episkopos” as synonyms,
when they were referring to an OFFICE
in the Church, that is, the office of a BISHOP or Pastor. Since elders or bishops supervised
every Jewish synagogue, it was very natural that every Jewish and Gentile
Christian congregation should at once adopt this form of government (Mt 16:21). This no doubt is the reason why
Dr. Luke found it unnecessary to give an account of the origin of the office of
elders or bishops, while he did give an account of the origin of the office of
deacons, which had no equivalence in the ministerial structure of the Jewish
synagogue.
The Single Church in
Antioch of Pisida, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe in Asia Minor Had Several Bishops
(Acts 13:14, 43; 14:1, 6, 20-21): Dr.
Luke stated that Paul and Barnabas: “appointed ELDERS [presbuteros – plural not
just one Elder] in EVERY [i.e. each individual] Church, and
prayed with fasting, [as] they
commended THEM [not him] to the Lord in whom THEY [not he] had believed” (Acts 14:23). Let my beloved readers take note, Paul ordained several
Bishops in every single congregation and not just one bishop. If Elders and
Bishops are not synonymous or identical terms, than why is there no place in
the apostle Paul’s epistles, or any other New Testament writings, any
qualifications given for this office? If Paul and Barnabas did not lay their
hands on these Elders or Bishops and ordained them to the office of a
Pastor, then what office did they ordain them to, and what are the duties of
this office?
Dr. Robertson made
this comment on the above verse of scripture: They selected the ELDERS in
each instance and Paul and Barnabas ‘ordained’ THEM…. Later Paul will give the
requirements [or qualifications] expected in these ‘ELDERS’ or ‘BISHOPS’ (Php
1:1) as in 1Ti 3:1-7; Tit 1:5-9. It is fairly certain that these ELDERS were
chosen to correspond in a general way with the Elders in the Jewish
synagogue after which the LOCAL Church was largely copied as to
organization and worship…. The use of the PLURAL here implies what was true at
Philippi (Php 1:1) and Ephesus (Ac 20:17, 28) that EACH Church (ONE in EACH
CITY) ‘had its COLLEGE of ELDERS’ (Hackett) as in Jerusalem (21:18). Elder
(presbuteros) was the Jewish name, and
Bishop (episkopos) the Greek name for the
SAME OFFICE. ‘Those who are called Elders in speaking of Jewish communities are
called Bishops in speaking of Gentile communities’ (Hackett).
The Churches on the
Island of Crete Had Several Bishops: Paul
gave both Titus and Timothy the power to ordain pastors in each city he sent
them. Paul told Titus: “For this reason I left you in Crete, that
you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint ELDERS [presbuteros plural not just
one Bishop]
in EVERY city as I commanded you.” Paul than goes on in the next two verses to give the
qualification of an elder or pastor, for Paul wrote: “A
Bishop [episkopos] must be blameless, as a steward of God, not
self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for
money” (Tit 1:5, 7). Let my
beloved readers take note, Paul did not instruct Timothy or Titus to ordain an
“elder,” as in one, in each city of Crete, but “elders,” as in many, in each
city. Also notice after the apostle gave instruction for the ordination of
pastors, he gave Titus the qualification that a man of God must possess to be a
bishop over the Church of God. Paul used the words “elder” and “bishop” as
synonyms terms, because they both referred to the same office of a “pastor.”
Crete is a Greek island in the eastern Mediterranean; it population is about
601,159 (2001) today; and its capital is Heraklion. It is noted for the remains
of the Minoan civilization, which flourished there in the 2nd
millennium BC. It fell to Rome in 67 BC and was subsequently ruled by
Byzantines, Venetians, and Turks.
The Single Thessalonian
Church Had Several Bishops: Paul
admonished this one church: “We urge you brethren [i.e. saints] to recognize
THOSE [not him] who
labor among you, and are OVER you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem
THEM [not
him] very highly in love for THEIR [not his] work’s
sake” (1Th 5:12-13). The
apostle told God’s Priestly Saints in the single Church in Thessalonica, which
also applies to all Churches in every other city, to know the character and
temperament of the Bishops who rule, lead, admonish, and correct them. He then
proceeded to tell them to love these Bishops for they are given the tremendous
responsibility of caring for their souls.
The Single Church in
Jerusalem Had Many Bishops, along with Twelve Apostles: In the following passage of scriptures, we learn that
the Church in Jerusalem had many bishops besides the apostles. The Church of
Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas “to Jerusalem, to the
Apostles and ELDERS [presbuteros - Bishops] about this
question”
of keeping certain ordinances of
the Law of Moses. “When they had come to Jerusalem, they were
received by the Church and the Apostles and the ELDERS [not just one Elder]…. Now the
Apostles and ELDERS [not just one Bishop] came together to
consider this matter…. It pleased the
Apostles and ELDERS [not just one Pastor], with the whole
Church [not
with all the churches in Jerusalem], to send chosen men of their own
company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas” to
confirm their decision against the gentile churches keeping the Law of Moses.
“They wrote this letter by them: The Apostles, the
ELDERS, and the Brethren, To the Brethren who are of the Gentiles
in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia” (Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 22-23). It is very
evident that the elders mention here were bishops, who ruled the Church in
Jerusalem along with the apostles, and that there were many pastors and not
just one in the single church in Jerusalem!
According to Dr. Luke, years later Paul returned: “to Jerusalem, [and] the brethren
received us gladly. On the following day Paul went in with us to James,
and ALL the ELDERS [presbuteros - i.e. Bishops] were present” (Acts 21:17-18). Years later, the single Church in
Jerusalem still had not only Apostles but also many Bishops to Pastor this
great Church. Years before this time:
“the disciples [i.e. Gentile Christians in various cities], each according to his ability, determined to send relief to the brethren
dwelling in Judea. This they also did, and sent it to the ELDERS [presbuteros - i.e.
Bishops] by the hands of Barnabas and Saul” (Acts
11:29-30). The apostle Paul told Jewish saints in each of the
cities of Judea: “Remember THOSE [not him] who
rule over you, who have spoken the Word of God to you, whose faith
follow, considering the outcome of THEIR [not his] conduct…. Obey
THOSE [meaning Bishops] who
rule over you, and be submissive, for THEY [not he] watch
out for your souls, as THOSE [not him] who must give account.
Let THEM [not him] do so with joy and not with grief, for that
would be unprofitable for you…. Greet ALL THOSE [not him] who
rule over you, and all the saints” (Heb 13:7, 17, 24). The apostle did not tell these Jewish Christians to obey
“him” as in one, but “them” as in many, who ruled in the office of a pastor
over each single Jewish Congregation in Judea.
James Writing to Jewish
Christians Who Were Scattered in All Churches throughout the World Wrote:
“Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the ELDERS [presbuteros] of the Church [not Churches], and let THEM
pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord” (Ja 5:14). James, like the apostles Peter and Paul, taught that
each Church had many pastors over it. James did not tell these saints to call
for the “elder or bishop” in their church, as in one, but the “Elders or
Bishops” as in many. Presbuteros is in the accusative case or a direct object,
masculine gender, and plural number.
It would be unthinkable that James would tell sick Christians to go on a
pilgrimage to the churches throughout the world, and have different pastors
pray for their healing, or for them to go to Jerusalem and have the bishops
there to anoint them with oil, or even to get all the bishops in their city
together, if there was more than one church in a city as some claim, and to lay
hands on them and anoint them. The Bible teaches me that everything a saint
needs from God can be found in the local Church (1Co 12).
Without doubt there
was one and only one Christian Church in every city. God does not work in
division but in unity; and God did not leave His people in the hands of one man
but several who would love them and minister to them; for where one pastor
would be lacking in wisdom, understanding, knowledge, judgment, discernment,
counseling skills, leadership ability, faith, or preaching and teaching skills,
the other pastors could supply! I believe that it would be much better for
several pastors to discipline a saint of God than just one pastor, who may
correct one saint for a certain sin and show bias toward another saint that may
be a relative or close friend of his, who had the very same problem. When it
comes to disciplining saints of God, pastors are in great danger of losing
their own souls, if they do it in the wrong spirit and not in the spirit of
love. Jesus said: “But whoso shall offend one of these little
ones which believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged
about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe unto the
world because of offences! For it must needs be that offences come; but woe to
that man by whom the offence cometh” (Mt 18:6-7, KJV)! Therefore, if any pastor
causes a saint of God to give up their faith, because of unjust or unfair
punishment, or being discipline in the wrong spirit, woe be to that Pastor, for
their soul is in danger of being lost.
Each Church in Asia Minor
or Turkey that Timothy Ordained Elders in Had Several Bishops: In Paul
instruction to Timothy, he declared that Bishops are rulers over each local
assembly. Paul proclaimed: “This
is a faithful saying: If a MAN [not a woman] desires the
position of a Bishop [episkopos], he desires a good work…. One who rules HIS [not her] own house
well, having HIS children in submission with all reverence (for if a MAN
[not a
woman] does not know how to rule HIS [not her] own house, how
will HE [not
she] take care of the Church of God…?) Let the ELDERS [not elder] who rule well
be counted worthy of double honor, especially THOSE [not he] who labor in
the word and doctrine” (1Ti 3:1, 4-5; 5:17).
Paul did not say the Bishop as singular who rules well in each congregation,
but Elders or Bishops PLURAL who rule well! Here again we see the apostle used
the words “Bishops” and “Elders” as synonymous terms. If “Bishops” and “Elders”
are not identical terms and do not refer to the same church office, then each
local assembly has two different sets of rulers. If this is true, then where
are the scriptures that reveal this unreasonable doctrine, and why is there
nothing said about the authority each group has over the church?
The Churches in Regions of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, and
Bithynia in Asia Minor Had Several Bishops: The
apostle Peter speaking to these churches wrote: “The ELDERS [presbuteros
not elder] who are among
you I exhort, who am also an Elder [presbuteros]…. SHEPHERD the flock of God
which is among you, serving as OVERSEERS [episkopeo not overseer as one], not by
compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly; NOR as being
LORDS [not lord as
one] OVER those
entrusted to you, but being EXAMPLES [not an example as one] to the flock” (1Pe
5:1-3). Let my readers take note again,
Peter told elders or bishops, as in many, in each congregation NOT to be lords,
as many, over God’s Priestly Saints whom God placed under them. Here again we
see that the words “elders” and “overseers” or “bishops” are
identical terms, which refer to the office of pastor! Let my readers take note,
Peter, like Paul, connected the word “elders,” as in many, with being pastors who shepherd the flock
of God (cp with Acts 20:17, 28).
A Very Brief Historical Examination of the Apostolic One God
Doctrine of the First Century, Compared with the Nicolaitan Catholic Doctrine of
Two-Unequal-gods: The ancient Apostolic Pentecostal Preachers of oneness
believed that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost were titles, offices, modes of
revelation of the one person in the Godhead. As the Father, the one God
revealed Himself as the Creator of man and the cosmos. As the Son of God, the
Father revealed Himself as the Savior of all mankind by becoming a man, and as
a man died for their sins. As the Holy Spirit, the Father revealed Himself as
the Regenerator of man, by comes in and dwelling in him for the purpose of
redeeming, empowering and transforming him into Christ’s likeness. Ignatius, Clement and all the other early
apostates, believed in two separate and distinct persons in the godhead. They
believed that God the Father created, begot or generated from his own substance
before time began, a second god, being, or person called the Logos, whom was
called the Son of God. They also believed that the Holy Spirit was just another
name for the Logos. Therefore, these heretics denied that Jesus was the only
sovereign, LORD (YHWH),
or supreme Deity, just as Paul, Peter, Jude, and John said they would (Col 2:8-9; 2Pe 2:1, Jude
1:4, 1Jn 4:3, also Isa 9:6 NIV)!
One of the major differences between the oneness and
the early Catholic believers was their belief concerning the identity of the
Logos. Now this is a very important point that my readers should keep in mind.
Who was the Logos of the Old Testament? Is He the same person as the Father, or
is He someone different from the Father? Is He the one and only God, who is the
Father, or is He a second god different from the Father, or is He someone less
than God? Is He an eternal being or is He a created being? If He is God, did He
retain His deity when He was born of Mary as a man? The entire godhead dispute
was over these issues until 381 AD when the Catholic Church officially adopted
the Babylonian Trinity. The Catholic Church in all their creeds did not teach a
Trinity of three separate persons in the godhead before this time. If it was
not for the early Catholic apologists’ pride, vanity and love of Greek
Philosophy, especially the writings of Plato and the corrupt Jewish writings of
Philo, their two god doctrine, which later developed into a three god doctrine,
would have never came into being. Let us briefly look at the affinity these men
had for the Greek philosophers and Mystery religion, so we can better
understand why they adopted all the other doctrines of Mystery Babylon or the
ancient Babylonian Religion.
The Catholic
theological school in Alexandria Egypt is where most of the damnable doctrines
of Catholicism were first formed. Professor Mead revealed that it was the
Catholic philosophers of the Alexandrian school that: First laid the first
foundations of general [Catholic] Christian theology; and that school owed its evolution to its contact
with Grecian thought. [57]
Professor Harnack included the Catholic apologists’ godhead doctrine in his
list of pagan teachings. He stated: It is not Judaeo-Christianity that lies behind the
Christianity and doctrines of the [Catholic] apologist, but Greek philosophy - Platonic
metaphysics, Logos doctrine of the Stoics, Platonic and Stoic ethics - the
Alexandrine-Jewish apologetics...particularly in that of Philo. [58]
Elgin Moyer, in his Who Was Who in Church History, revealed Philo’s role
in the development of the Trinity. He says that Philo was a: Jewish Hellenistic
philosopher.... As a philosopher he sought to reconcile Greek philosophy and
the Old Testament by means of allegorical interpretation.... Philo’s method of
allegorical interpretation had much influence on the allegorical method of
interpretation followed by the Alexandrian Church Fathers, especially Clement
and Origen. [59]
The Catholic Encyclopedia gave a fair explanation of the origin and differences
of belief between the Apostolic Modalist Monarchians and the early Gnostic
Catholics. It revealed that the Jesus’ Name Monarchians: regarded the Logos as a mere
name, or faculty, or attribute, and to have made the Son and the Holy Ghost
merely aspects or modes of existence of the Father, thus emphatically
identifying Christ with [the Father] the one God.... They spoke
of the Father as Spirit and the Son as flesh. This encyclopedia went on to reveal, that the Jesus’
Name Preachers were against the Catholic adoption of Plato and Philo two-god
doctrine, in others words: the learned philosophizing of the Christology of Catholicism. This to the simplicity of the
faithful looked too much like a mythology or a Gnostic emanationism. The
Monarchians emphatically declared that God is one, wholly and perfectly one,
and that Jesus Christ is God, wholly and perfectly God. This was right, and
even most necessary, and whilst it is easy to see why the theologians like Tertullian
and Hippolytus opposed them for their protest was precisely against the
Platonism which these theologians had inherited from Justin and the [other Alexandrian] Apologists. The Alexandrians alone insisted rightly on the
generation of the Son from all eternity; but thus the Unity of God was even
less manifest. The writers who thus theologize may often expressly teach the
traditional Unity in Trinity, but it hardly squares with the Platonism of their
philosophy. The [Catholic Gnostic] theologians were thus defending the doctrine of the
Logos at the expense of the two fundamental doctrines of Christianity, the
Unity of God, and the Divinity of Christ. They seemed to make the Unity of the
godhead split into two or even three, and to make Jesus Christ something less
than the supreme God the Father. This is eminently true of the chief opponents
of the Monarchians, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and Novatian. [60]
Doctor James Hastings, in his Encyclopedia of
Religion and Ethics, speaking about this controversy says Apostolic
Modalist Monarchianism: was powerfully supported by the critico-historical school of exegesis
which grew up at Antioch in opposition to the speculative, allegorizing school
of Alexandria. He went on to say
that on one side of this great battle was Monarchianism, the Antiochene
historico-critical school of interpretation, and rationalism, which opposed Catholicism, with its realistic view of
salvation, its allegorical interpretation, and its metaphysic of deity. [61]
Professor Harry A. Wolfson, in his book The Philosophy of the Church Fathers,
boldly declared the above truths when he said that Ignatius, Clement and all
the other apostate fathers, who started Catholicism, did not believe in a preexistent
Trinity.... Before His [Jesus’] birth there were only two preexistent beings, God and the Holy Spirit,
the latter identified with the preexistent Christ, and, if the term Logos is
used, it is identified with the Holy Spirit. He continued by saying, like Philo, the [Catholic] Fathers attributed to the Logos...two
stages of existence prior to the creation of the world, which according to Philo was the internal and
external Logos. [62]
No Three god Trinitarian Doctrine Before
381 AD: As I said before, my
readers should bear in mind, that none of the early fathers of Catholicism or
their heretical disciples, believed in a Trinity of three separate and equal
persons in the godhead before this time. Schaff speaking about this said: Even among the adherents of
the Nicene orthodoxy, an uncertainty still for a time prevailed, respecting the
doctrine of the third person of the Holy Trinity. Some held the [Holy] Spirit to be an impersonal
power or attributes of God; others, at farthest, would not go beyond the
expressions of the Scriptures.
Even as late as 375 AD, in the time of
Gregory of Nazianzus, most Catholics Bishops did not believe the Holy Spirit to
be a personal being. According to Schaff, Gregory said: Of the wise among us, some
consider the Holy Ghost an influence, other a creature [meaning an angel or a created
spirit being], others God himself, and others know not which way to decide. [63]
The New Catholic Encyclopedia confirmed the above truth. Under the
heading of the Trinity, the Catholic Church made a good and honest confession
about the development of their Trinitarian doctrine. It stated: In the last analysis, the
2nd century theological achievement was limited…. A Trinitarian solution was
still in the future. The Apologists spoke too haltingly of the Spirit; with a
measure of anticipation, one might say too impersonally.... On the eve of
Nicene 1 (325 AD), the Trinitarian problem raised more than a century earlier
was still far from settled. It was the problem of plurality within the single,
undivided Godhead. [64]
The First-Five
Persecutions of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Children by Pagan Roman
Emperors
The Reason Why
the Roman Emperors Persecuted God’s Churches During this Church Period: The cult of Mithra was the
State Religion of the pagan Roman Empire. Pagan religious and political leaders
all over the empire were complaining to the Emperor of this so-called godless
religion, which had no images of their God; who refuse to take part in any
military, governmental, and civil service duties that demanded worship of a
pagan god. They also would not take an oath by the genital of the Emperor, and
they would not offer a sacrifice to the Emperor as a god. They were also
branded as a secret society because they held gatherings at night without
permission from the state. The State and pagan societies of that day hated
Christians’ nonconformity and were deeply incensed against them.
The Roman Empire motto was unity, and there was
absolutely no way they could allow a religious society of men to act that way,
especially one which was rapidly increasing in number all over the empire.
As a
result, Pagan Priests with their mobs, like the Jewish Priests and their mobs
in the Bible, robbed and killed Christians, as they started riots in different
places in the Empire! Since Mithraism was the official Pagan State Religion of
the Roman Empire, the Emperors of Rome believed it should be promoted and
defended by all means. In view of these facts, Roman Emperors had to either
crush these acts of violence by these pagan multitudes, or appease them by
giving Decrees against Christianity, and in turn making their acts of violence
legal! As a result, the Emperors and Senate of Rome decreed that Christianity
was an Illegal Religion in the Empire.
Because of the great speed in which Christianity spread, the Roman Emperors,
who tried to stop the spread of Christianity in this Church Period, realized
that just putting them to death did not achieve their goal. Tertullian noted: The blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church. Therefore, these emperors decided to use torture as a means to stop it. Lucifer had to either destroy God’s People, or have a
nervous break down, for the One God Jesus’ Name Apostolic Christianity was
converting many of the pagans in the Roman Empire. According to Henry Halley’s
pocket Bible Handbook, spoke of Tertullian (200 AD) who declared: Tertullian wrote, ‘We have filled your
empire, your cities, your towns, your islands, your camps, castles, places,
assemblies, and senate.’ According
Professor Earle Cairns, in his Christianity Through the Centuries, Pliny
the Younger writing to the Roman Emperor Trajan, revealed Christianity had
nearly taken over the entire providence of Bithynia or Asia Minor.
Cairns in his synopsis revealed that Pliny told Trajan
(r.
98-117): Christianity had spread in the villages and rural areas as well as in
the larger cities to such an extent that the temples had been almost deserted
and the seller of sacrificial animals impoverished.” Cairns continued by saying: this was the first
organized persecution, which resulted from a definite governmental
policy. [65]
Halley speaking of the persecutions of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Churches in
this Church Period declared they were NOT GENERAL PERSECUTIONS, that is, where Christians were SOUGHT OUT or HUNTED.
Halley wrote: Christianity was regarded as an illegal religion, because Christians
refused to sacrifice to the roman gods or take part in Emperor-worship, and the
church was regarded as a secret society, which was forbidden. Christians
were NOT SOUGHT OUT, but when accused were punished…. Emperor Hadrian [r. 117-138] persecuted the Christians,
but in moderation…. Antoninus Pius [r. 138-161]… favored the Christians,
but felt he had to uphold the law.
[66]
The First through the Fifth Persecutions of the Church
Mentioned by the History of Severus: The
early Premillennialist Church Historian Sulpicius Severus (400 AD) in his Sacred
History declared the Early Church went through 9, not 10, persecutions,
by the Emperors of Rome. Severus, and some modern-day
Millennial interpreters of prophecy, counted the persecution of Nero to
be the First Persecution, but this cannot be, for this persecution began
and end long before the Book of Revelation was written; therefore, it would violate
the First Time Scripture. Consequently, it cannot be counted as a
persecution that took place in the Smyrna Church Period; neither can the minor
persecution of a few in the Church under Emperor Domitian, for this persecution
took place when the Book of Revelation was being written!
Historian Sulpicius
Severus wrote: Luke
made
known the doings of the apostles up to the time when Paul was brought to Rome
under the Emperor Nero. As to Nero [R. 54-68 AD], I shall not say that he
was the worst of kings, but that he was worthily held the basest of all
men, and even of wild beasts. It was he who First began a Persecution;
and I am not sure but he will be the last also to carry it on, if, indeed, we
admit, as MANY are inclined to believe, that he will yet appear
immediately before the coming of
Antichrist. After an interval, Domitian [R. 81-96 AD Second Persecution], the son of Vespasian,
persecuted the Christians. At this date, he banished John the Apostle
and Evangelist to the Island of Patmos. There he, secret
mysteries having been revealed to him, wrote and published his book of the
holy Revelation…. And with no great interval there then occurred the Third Persecution under Trojan
[i.e.
Trajan R. 98-117 AD]. A Fourth Persecution is reckoned
as having taken place under Adrian [i.e. Hadrian R. 117-138 AD], which, however, he
afterwards FORBADE to be carried on, declaring it to be unjust that
any one should be put on his trial without a charge being specified against
him. After Adrian, the churches had peace
under the rule of Antoninus Pius. Then the Fifth Persecution began
under Aurelius [i.e. Marcus Aurelius
R. 161-180 AD],
the son of Antoninus. And then, for the FIRST TIME,
martyrdoms were seen taking place in Gaul. [67]
The Persecutions of the Church Mentioned by the History of
Eusebius and Other Historians: Emperor Domitian (R. 81-93-96 AD): Eusebius of Caesarea (330
AD), an early
Church Historian and Bishop of Caesarea, spoke of the above persecutions this
way: Domitian… became a successor of Nero in his hatred
and enmity toward God. He was in fact the second that stirred up
a persecution against us, although his father Vespasian had undertaken nothing
prejudicial to us. [68] Domitian only persecuted some
Christians during the years of 93-96 AD.
Emperor
Trajan (R.
98-117 AD): Eusebius reveal that Trajan started a persecution
against the Church, but shortly after change his mind: And profound peace
being established in every Church, they remained until the reign of the Emperor
Trajan…. A persecution
was at that time opened against us in many places that Plinius Secundus,
one of the most noted of governors… informed him in his communication that he
had NOT heard of their doing anything profane
or contrary to the laws, except that they arose at dawn and sang hymns to
Christ as a God…; [and they] renounced adultery and murder and like criminal offenses, and did all
things in accordance with the laws. In reply to this Trajan. made the following decree: ‘that the race
of Christians should NOT be SOUGHT AFTER, but when
found should be punished. [69]
Plinius Secundus is better known
in history as Pliny the Younger, who was a Roman Senator and became the
governor of Pontus/Bithynia from 111-113 AD.
The following is
Pliny letter to Trajan and Trajan’s reply. Pliny to
the Emperor Trajan: It is
my practice, my lord, to refer to you all matters concerning which I am in
doubt. For who can better give guidance to my hesitation or inform my
ignorance? I have never participated in trials of Christians. I therefore do
not know what offenses it is the practice to punish or investigate, and to what
extent…. Meanwhile, in the case of those who were denounced
[i.e.
publicly declared] to me as
Christians, I have observed the following procedure: I interrogated these as to
whether they were Christians; those who confessed I interrogated a second and a
third time, threatening them with punishment; those who persisted I ordered
executed…. They
asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been
that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing
responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not
to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust,
nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over,
it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food--but
ordinary and innocent food…. For the matter seemed to me to warrant consulting
you, especially because of the number involved. For many persons of
every age, every rank, and also of both sexes are and will be endangered.
For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but
also to the villages and farms.
Trajan to Pliny: You observed proper procedure, my dear Pliny, in
sifting the cases of those who had been denounced to you as Christians.
For it is not possible to lay down any general rule to serve as a kind of fixed
standard. They are NOT to be SOUGHT OUT; if they are denounced and
proved guilty, they are to be punished, with this reservation, that whoever
denies that he is a Christian and really proves it--that is, by worshiping our
gods--even though he was under suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon
through repentance. But anonymously posted accusations [i.e.
unidentified people who post accusations] ought to have no place in any
prosecution. For this is… a dangerous kind of precedent (http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/texts/pliny.html).
Emperor
Hadrian (R.
117-138 AD): According to Eusebius, Hadrian:
having received from Serennius Granianus, a most distinguished governor, a
letter in behalf of the Christians, in which he stated that it was NOT just to
slay the Christians without a regular accusation and trial, merely for
the sake of gratifying the OUTCRIES of the POPULACE,
sent a rescript [i.e. an Edicit] to Minucius Fundanus, proconsul of Asia, compounding [instructing] him to condemn no one
without an indictment and a well-grounded accusation…. [Hadrian’s decree:] ‘To Minucius Fundanus. I have received an epistle,
written to me by Serennius Granianus, a most illustrious man, whom you have
succeeded. It does NOT seem right to me that the matter should be passed
by without examination, lest the men be harassed an opportunity be given to the
informers for practicing villainy. If, therefore, the inhabitants
of the province can clearly sustain this petition against the Christians so as
to give answer in a court of law, let them pursue this course alone, but let
them NOT have resort to men’s petitions and outcries….
But, by Hercules! If any one bring an accusation through mere calumny [i.e. false statements], decide in regard to his
criminality, and see to it that you inflict punishment.’ Such are the contents
of Adrian’s rescript. [70]
Emperor
Marcus Aurelius (R. 161-180 AD): Eusebius speaking of Aurelius’ decree for Christians
stated: The Emperor Caesar Marcus
Aurelius Antoninus Agustus, Armenicus, Pontifex Maximus… to the Common
Assembly of Asia, Greeting…. [You] oppress and persecute even
unto death the Christians who worship him [Jesus as God]. But in regard to these persons
[i.e.
Christains],
many of the governors of the provinces wrote also to our most
divine father [Hadrian], to whom he wrote in reply that they should NOT trouble
these people unless it should appear that they were attempting something
affecting the Roman government; and to ME also many have sent communications
concerning these men, but I have replied to them in the same way that MY
FATHER did. [71]
Aurelius’ Letter
and Decree forbidding any more Christian Persecution: Emperor Caesar Marcus
Aurelius Antoninus… to the People of Rome, and to the sacred
Senate greeting…: I was surrounded by the enemy; I myself, being shut up in
Carnuntum by seventy-four cohorts, nine miles off. And the enemy being at hand,
the scouts pointed out to us, and our general Pompeianus showed us that there
was close on us a mass of a mixed multitude of 977,000 men, which indeed we
saw; and I was shut up by this vast host, having with me only a battalion
composed of the first, tenth, double and marine legions. Having then examined
my own position, and my host, with respect to the vast mass of barbarians and
of the enemy, I quickly betook myself to prayer to the
gods of my country. But being disregarded by them, I summoned
those who among us go by the name of Christians. And having made inquiry, I discovered
a great number and vast host of them, and raged
against them, which was by no means becoming; for afterwards I learned
their power….
For having cast themselves on the ground,
they prayed not only for me, but also for the whole army as it stood, that they
might be delivered from the present thirst and famine. For during five days we
had got no water, because there was none; for we were in the heart of Germany,
and in the enemy’s territory. And simultaneously with their casting
themselves on the ground, and praying to God (a God of whom I am ignorant), water
poured from heaven, upon us most refreshingly cool, but upon the
enemies of Rome a withering hail. And immediately we recognized
the presence of God following on the prayer a God unconquerable and
indestructible. Founding upon this, then, let us pardon such as are Christians,
lest they pray for and obtain such a weapon against ourselves. And I counsel
that no such person be accused on the ground of his being a Christian. But if
any one be found laying to the charge of a Christian that he is a Christian, I
desire that it be made manifest that he who is accused as a Christian, and
acknowledges that he is one, is accused of nothing else than only this, that he
is a Christian; but that he who arraigns [i.e. call the
Christian before a court] him be burned alive.
And I further desire, that he who is entrusted with the government of the province
shall NOT compel the Christian, who confesses and certifies such a
matter, to retract; neither shall he commit [i.e.
imprison] him. And I desire that these things be
confirmed by a decree of the Senate. And I command this my edict to be
published in the Forum of Trajan, in order that it may be read. [72]
CHAPTER
2
THE SMYRNA CHURCH PERIOD, AD 200 TO 313
The
Salutation: “You
[John] write
OF the CHURCH, the MESSENGER in Smyrna. These things says the First and the Last, who was dead,
and came to life ” again (my translation). The Commendation: “I know your works,
tribulation, and poverty (but you are rich).” The Problem: “I know the blasphemy of those [the Catholic Nicolaitans] who
say they are Jews [Children of God] and
are not, but are a synagogue [church] of Satan.
Do not fear any of those things which you are about to suffer. Indeed, the
devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be
tested, and you will have tribulation TEN DAYS [hemera]. The
Promise: “Be
faithful until death, and I will give you the Crown of Life. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit
says to the churches. He who overcomes shall not be hurt by the
Second Death” (Rev 2: 8-11).
History of City: Smyrna was an ancient Greek city on the west coast of Asia Minor
in present-day Turkey. It was a seaport city on a inlet of the
Aegean Sea, and at the head
of a gulf that reaches 30 miles inland. It was about: 30 miles N of Ephesus, 45 miles West of Sardis, 75 miles
West of Philadelphia, and 45 miles SW of Pergamos. Smyrna was celebrated for its schools of science and
medicine, and for its handsome buildings. On the slope of Mt. Pagus was a
theater that seated 20,000 spectators. It was a seat of emperor-worship
with temple to Tiberius, with many Jews hostile to Christianity. Like many other cities of Asia Minor, it suffered
frequently from earthquakes, especially during the years 178-800 AD, but it
always escaped entire destruction. Modern-day Smyrna is now called Ismir and it has a Turkish naval base there. It is
the third-largest city in Turkey with a population of about 2,322,500 (est 2002). [73]
The Salutation: “You [John] write
OF the CHURCH, the MESSENGER in Smyrna. These things says the First and the Last, who was
dead, and came to life ” again (my translation). Jesus began His greeting to His Apostolic
Pentecostal Church by reminded them He had “died and came to life again”, thus just as He overcame death so could they. In
other words, their Savior greeted them with the message of the resurrection.
The Commendation: “I
know your works, tribulation, and poverty (but you are rich).” Our Lord praises them on their works for Him;
for they tenaciously held on to the truth of His godhead and His New Birth
message of salvation. These Christians continued to love Him, even in the midst
of their sufferings, confiscation and thief of their goods, and even through
their martyrdom. Therefore, they were rich in faith and good
works, but poor materially. They, like the God’s Apostolic Philadelphian
Children, were active Evangelist who made in all out effort in winning souls to
their loving God and Savior! This is the main reason why the Lord Jesus Christ
had nothing but praise for His Children in these two Church Periods.
The Problem: “I know the blasphemy of those [the Catholic Nicolaitans] who
say they are Jews [Children of God] and
are not, but are a synagogue [church] of Satan.
Do not fear any of those things which you are about to suffer. Indeed, the
devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be
tested, and you will have tribulation TEN DAYS [hemera]. The First Problem: Smyrna had a
Jewish congregation and Nicolaitan Catholic congregation, who claimed to
be the true Children of God, who hated and persecuted God’s Apostolic Pentecostal
Church. These heretical congregations obviously blasphemed
against God by claiming to be God’s Children, while both taught heretical
doctrines. The natural born Jews claimed God was their Father, but because of
their rejection of their Messiah, our Lord told them: “You
do the deeds of your father.’ Then they said to Him, ‘We were not born of
fornication; we have one Father -- God.’ Jesus said to them, ‘If God were your
Father, you would love Me…. You are of your father
the DEVIL, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer
from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no
truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for
he is a liar and the father of it” (Jn 8:41-44).
The Jewish Christian apostle Paul stated
the same truth about natural Jews this way: “For
he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that
which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly;
and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter;
whose praise is not from men but from God” (Rom 2:28-29); and “For in Christ Jesus neither
circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a New Creation” (Ga 6:15). Therefore, since the natural born Jews through their
rejection of their Messiah, their Passover Lamb and Sin Sacrifice on the Day of
Atonement, they did not enter into the New Covenant and lost the promise of
Eternal Life. As a result, these Jews became heretics and their Synagogues were
the Churches of Satan! Let us not forget that the apostles of the Lamb of God
not only fought and wrote against Jews who were in Judaism, but also Christian
Nicolaitan-Pharisaical Jews who brought Judaism into Christianity. Paul wrote
many things against Christian Jews who taught the Law of Moses for salvation in
his Epistles to the Romans, Corinthian, and Galatians. It ended up in a big
debate held in Jerusalem, the First Church Council, which Dr. Luke spoke of in
the Book of Acts.
Luke wrote: “And certain men [i.e. Pharisaical Christians] came
down from Judea and taught the brethren, ‘Unless you are circumcised according
to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.’ Therefore… Paul and
Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them…. And when they had come
to Jerusalem… some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose
up, saying, ‘It is necessary to circumcise them [i.e. the Gentile Chrisitans], and to command them to
keep the Law of Moses.’ Now the apostles and elders came together to consider
this matter”
(Acts 15:1-6). God’s apostles rejected
the teaching of these Nicolaitan-Pharisaical Christians. They wrote to
the Gentile Churches saying: “Since we have heard that
some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls,
saying, ‘You must be circumcised and keep the law’ -- to whom we gave no
such commandment… it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay
upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from
things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual
immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell” (Acts 15:24-29).
Sometime after this Church Council, some of the
Nicolaitan-Pharisaical Christians left the Church and started their own so-called
Christian Church. These Pharisaical Christians became known as Ebionite.
They became the first sect of Antichrists in history who denied the Virgin
Birth of Christ and His Deity. They also hated the apostle Paul and denounced
all of his Epistles as heresy. Professor Philip Schaff in his History of the
Christian Church spoke of these Nicolaitan Ebionites this way: According to Epiphanius, EBION [a Jewish heretical Christian] spread
his error FIRST in the company of Christians, which fled to Pella AFTER
the destruction of Jerusalem. According to Hegesippus in Eusebius, one
Thebutis, after the death of the bishop Symeon of Jerusalem, about 107, made schism
among the Jewish Christians, and led many of them to apostatize, because
he himself was not elected to the bishopric. We find the sect of the
Ebionites in Palestine and the surrounding regions, on the island of Cyprus, in
Asia Minor, and even in Rome….
The common Ebionites, who were by far the more numerous, embodied the Pharisaic legalism…. Their doctrine may be reduced to the following propositions: (a) Jesus is, indeed, the promised Messiah, the son of David, and the supreme lawgiver, yet a MERE MAN, like Moses and David, sprung by natural generation from Joseph and Mary…. [They also taught] circumcision and the observance of the WHOLE RITUAL LAW of Moses are necessary to salvation for all men…. Paul is an apostate and heretic, and all his epistles are to be DISCARDED. [74] If my beloved readers would like to read a history of these Nicolaitan Catholic Ebionites, I invite you to read my book The Heresies of the Pharisaical Jewish Ebionites. Therefore, these Catholic Nicolaitan Ebionite Jews, also claimed to be Children of God, but they were heretics and their Synagogues were the Churches of Satan!
With the above truths in mind, let us briefly analyze
the different ways the Nicolaitan Catholic Church blasphemed against God and
His Suffering Holiness Church during this Church Period. Not only did the
entire Catholic Church adopted Ignatius’ Monarchical Bishop Doctrine, his
Special Paid Priesthood Ministry Doctrine, but also many of the doctrines of
Mystery Babylon (the Babylonian Religion). The following paragraphs name a few
of the beliefs of Mystery Babylon the Catholic Church Christianized before the
end of the third century: Professor Harnack speaking of the Catholic Nicolaitan
Doctrine wrote: As early as the second century the [Catholic] Church had Conquered
the People [i.e. took away their Priesthood
Ministry]....
By the opening of the third century [AD 200], no layman ventured any longer to call
ecclesiastics, ‘brethren.’ The layman is a layman because he has not
been set apart from the people by ordination…. After the close of
the second century [the Monarchical] bishops were the teachers, high priest, and judges
of the Church. Ignatius already had compared their position in the
individual Church to that of God in the Church collective. [75]
Because God hated the Catholic Nicolaitan Monarchical
Bishop Doctrine and their Special Paid Priesthood Ministry Doctrine, God cursed
these Catholic Churches of Satan, which resulted in them going deeper into
apostasy. As a result, they compromised the True Doctrines of Christianity and
their holiness standards to get pagans to join their churches. Dr. Harnack
speaking of their apostasy declared: The most momentous result was the gradual
assimilation of the entire [Catholic] Christian worship to the nature of the Ancient
Mysteries. By the third century [AD 200] it could already rival the most imposing cultus in
all paganism, with its solemn and exact ritual, its priests, its sacrifices,
and its holy ceremonies. [76]
Dr. Harnack, in another history entitled What Is
Christianity, spoke of the difference between the Catholic priesthood and
the laity this way: The distinction between priest and laymen is a well-marked
characteristic of this [Catholic Nicolaitan] institution…. The worshipper can only get to God by
the priests’ mediation…. Living faith was transformed into deification….
Miracles and miraculous cures disappear altogether, or else are by priestly
devices…. Fervent prayers become solemn hymns and litanies…. The Spirit becomes
law and compulsion. In its external form as a whole this [Nicolaitan] Church is nothing more than
a continuation of the history of Greek Religion under the alien influence of
Christianity, parallel to the many other alien influences which have affected
it... It takes the form, not of a Christian product in a Greek dress, but of a
Greek product in a Christian dress…. No one can look at this Church from
outside, with its forms of worship, its solemn ritual, the number of its
ceremonies, its relics, pictures, priest, monks and compare it on the one hand
with the [Apostolic
Pentecostal] Church of the first century.
[77]
Professor Guignebert also speaking of Catholicism
absorption of pagan doctrines, ceremonies and rituals says: In the third century it [the Nicolaitan-Babylonian
Church]
could meet and overcome the entire pagan syncretism, because it had itself
become a syncretism in which all the fertile ideas and the essential
rites of pagan religiousness were blended. It combined and harmonized them
in a way that enabled it to stand alone, facing all the inchoate beliefs and
practices of its adversaries without appearing their inferior on any vital
point. This extensive work of absorption, which helps us to understand,
that a moment came when [Nicolaitan] Christianity was able to arouse favorable attention to itself on the
part of the manifold sympathies active in the Greco-Roman world. [78]
Stephen Jones in his work The Babylonian Connection boldly told the
truth and did not try to water it down. He stated that Catholicism: Began to be paganized or, as
some prefer, paganism was Christianized. [79]
Arkon Daraul in his book entitled Secret Societies
compared the old pagan religions such as Mithraism with that of Catholicism,
and has this to say: It is claimed by those who still believe in its Mysteries and celebrate
them, that [Catholic] Christianity did not so
much supplant Mithraism as absorb it. [80]
Guignebert informs us that: Mithra is a solar deity,
and his birth occurs upon the 25th of December, i.e. the winter solstice. [81]
One of the most diabolical Roman Catholic Church’s doctrine was adoption of the
ancient pagan worship of Ashtaroth, who was worshipped as the “Mother of God” and the “Queen of Heaven” 1Sa 7:3,4; Jer 44:17-25. She was original know as Semiramis, the mother and
wife of Nimrod, who was the first deified man in history. She also was the
mother of Tammuz. He was her illegitimate son, whom she claimed was Nimrod
reincarnated. This is how she received the title as the Mother of the gods. The
Catholic Church identified this demonic woman with Mary the holy mother of the
Humanity of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Ed Mitchell and Jody Scharf, in their book The
Mystery of the Babylon Revealed, spoke of the origin of this doctrine.
Speaking about the ancient Babylonian Religion, they said: Satan changed his plan from
open devil worship to a subtle, hidden way of getting people to worship him.
With Nimrod gone [dead], Satan worked through his wife/mother, Semiramis, to unleash the most
insidious, diabolical scheme ever. After Nimrod’s death, Semiramis announced
that Nimrod was now a god - the sun god, Baal, and she set up Baal worship.
Semiramis declared herself a goddess and called herself Queen of Heaven, whose
symbol was the moon.... Statues appeared all over Babylon of Semiramis holding
her son Nimrod, and thus was initiated the supernatural exaltation and worship
of motherhood. [82]
John MacCulloch, in his book The Mythology of All Races, speaks of this
demonic woman under two of her defied names says: Ninlil, great queen, far-famed
queen merciful mother, who sits in the house of the world, the revered....’ An
Assyrian text describes her as follows, ‘In her left arm she carries a child,
which feeds at her breast; with her right arm she caresses it....’ Particularly
beautiful are the Sumerian and Babylonian hymns addressed to the ‘Queen of
Heaven.... To the pre flame that fills the heavens, To the light of Heaven,
Ishtar, who shines like the sun, To the mighty Queen of Heaven, Ishtar. [83]
In Charles Heckethorn’s book, The Secret Societies,
we can find some of the other pagan doctrines the Catholic Church adopted from
Mystery Babylon and all of her harlot pagan daughters. Heckethorn says: The festival of the 25th of
December was celebrated... to announce the birth-day of the god Sol.... This
festival indeed was kept not only by the Druids, but throughout the ancient
world…. The early [Nicolaitan Catholic] Christians judiciously adopted not only the
festival days of the pagans, but the mode of keeping them. Ronald Holmes in his book Witchcraft in History
revealed some of the pagan doctrines Roman Catholicism adopted when she join
hands with Religious or Mystery Babylon and her harlot daughters in marriage.
He wrote: The
early [Catholic] Christians had tried to be
as flexible as possible in their spreading of the gospel in order to provide
further links for potential converts between Christian and non-Christian
beliefs. But what was perhaps the
master‑stroke in this approach…
[was] when the [Catholic] Church Fathers declared the birth day of Christ to
be December 25.... By this stratagem Christ was made identifiable in the minds
of many pagans with the particular sun-god [Baal] they worshipped, and a
connection was supplied which serve as a strong bridge to [Pagan Catholic] Christianity. [84]
Let my readers make a deep mental note of the doctrine
of hell which became the master link that united pagans of all countries with
Pagan Roman Catholicism, it was by transforming the birthday of Baal the
sun-god into the birthday of Christ. The Winter Solstice falls on the 21st day of
December, which is the shortest
day of the year. On the 25th of December the days
begin to lengthen again, therefore what you have is a type of the sun dying
on the twenty
first day and resurrecting
or starting a New Birth on the 25th. In a sense, it was Nimrod the Father, as the sun god Baal, dying on
the twenty-first
day of December and his soul
becoming reborn or reincarnated in Tammuz the Son on the 25th.
The Catholics took Lucifer’s holy day, the 25 of December, which witches and pagans of all religious societies
in every age cherished, and they used this day to desecrated Jesus by claiming
He was born on that day.
It is obvious to me that the pagans thought Jesus
Christ was just another name for Baal, because this sun god was called by
different names in every country. These statements alone should be enough, to
stir up every Bible believing Christian, to make a sincere doctrinal study on
their belief system. I do not believe true Children of God would purposely sin
by celebrate Baal’s birthday after they have seen the origin of this demonic
tradition. Christmas does not bring honor and glory to our dear Savior. If one
desires to celebrate Christ’s Birth, why not pick April 19th, for that is the
day He was born in 1 BC (see my book: A Calendar of Biblical Dates and Events, Beginning
with the Creation of Adam). Now you know why emperor Constantine made the Catholic Church his bride even
though it was in the vast minority, while God’s Jesus Name Churches were
in the vast majority, which I will prove shortly in the next section of
this chapter.
So, as my readers can perceive by now, God’s Apostolic
Pentecostal Churches had a real problem with Lucifer’s Nicolaitan Catholic Churches,
who blasphemed Christ by calling themselves Christians or Churches of the Lord
Jesus Christ. I believe their greatest blasphemy of the third centuries was
when they paganized God’s New Birth Message. It started with the notorious
Catholic apologist Justin Martyr (150 AD),
who changed the apostolic mode and formula of baptism from one immersion in the
name of the Lord Jesus Christ to the pagan trine immersions with one Name and
two Titles. In the first immersion, Justin baptized in the name of God the
Father, the second in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the third in the
name of the Holy Ghost. This was a historic moment for Catholicism, for from
that time on, the Catholic Church adopted Justin’s Trinitarian formula and
trine immersion for water baptism. It was not until Catholic Bishop Cyprian (255 AD), and other Bishops of Africa, that the saving and sin
cleansing Name of the Lord Jesus Christ was taken out of the second immersion,
and the title Son of God was substituted, which at the Council of Nicaea (325 AD) became the official baptismal formula for the entire
Catholic Church. As a result, the Spirit of God left the Catholic Church and
the Gifts of the Spirit were done away with (see my books: What Do
You Mean I Must Be Born Again and Preacher, What Must I Do to Receive
Eternal Life.)
The Second Problem: God told His Children that they would definitely
experience physical persecution in this Church Period, which will require them
to die a martyr’s death. Jesus said this persecution would last for 10 days.
Since Smyrna was a seat of emperor-worship, with a temple to Tiberius, the main thrust of the persecution would come from
the Roman Empire. Now some prophetic interpreters believe the 10 days
refers to 10 separate persecutions God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Church
experienced from Pagan Rome; others, like myself, believe it meant the last
Roman’s persecution, which lasted 10 years (AD 303-313). The Greek noun “hemera” (day) is never used in Scripture to refer to “separate time
events” such as “ten separate times of persecution” or “ten
separate persecutions.”
In Bible Prophesy, a “day” could equal to “one
thousand years” (2Pe 3:8), but a ten thousand year persecution would be
ridiculous! A “day” could also equal to “one year”, for example, because of Israel sin the
Lord told Moses: “According to the number of the days in which
you spied out the land, forty days, for EACH DAY you shall bear your
guilt ONE YEAR, namely forty years, and you shall know My rejection” (Num
14:34); and
again because of Israel’s sin the Lord told the prophet Ezekiel: “Lie also on your left side, and lay the iniquity of the
house of Israel upon it. According to the number of the DAYS that
you lie on it, you shall bear their iniquity. For I have laid on you the
YEARS of their iniquity, according to the number of the DAYS, three
hundred and ninety days; so you shall bear the iniquity of the house
of Israel. And when you have completed them, lie again on your right side; then
you shall bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days. I
have laid on you a DAY for EACH YEAR” (Eze 4:4-6). Therefore,
I personally believe the ten days refers to ten years.
In Daniel’s prophecy of Seventy Weeks of Years each
day equaled to one year (i.e. 70 weeks of years X 7 days = 490 years; Daniel
9:24-27). Julius Africanus (240 AD) speaking of Daniel’s Seventy Weeks stated: The passage speaks then of…
seventy weeks, is evident…. And the beginning of the numbers, that is,
of the seventy weeks which make up 490 years. [85] Therefore, if we allow
the Bible to interpret the word “day” or “hemera” it must be referring to “years,” that is, “ten
years” of
Persecution. The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament by Drs, R. Laird Harris, Gleason
L. Archer Jr., Bruce K. Waltke defined “shabuwa” as: While in Deut 16:9,
discussed above, sh¹b¥±a represents
a period of seven days, in Dan 9:24, 25, 26, 27 it denotes a period of SEVEN
YEARS in each of its appearances in these four verses. This is proven by the
context wherein Daniel recognizes that the SEVENTY-YEARS period of captivity
is almost over. The land had been fallow for SEVENTY YEARS and thus repaid the
Lord the SEVENTY SABBATICAL YEARS owed to him for the prior SEVENTY PERIODS of
SEVEN YEARS (Dan 9:2; Jer 25:12; cf. 2Chr 36:21). Just as Daniel is in prayer
concerning this matter, the angel Gabriel appears and informs him that Israel's
restoration will not be complete until she goes through another SEVENTY
PERIODS-of-SEVEN, sh¹bûa± (Dan 9:24ff)!
Note also the apparent reference in Dan 12:1 to half of Daniel's last seventy
(Dan 9:27); it is 1290 days, approximately three
and a half years. Thus, here it means YEARS (#2318d).
The Promise: “Be faithful until death, and I will give you the Crown
of Life. He who has an
ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes
shall not be hurt by the Second Death.” Our Lord told His
Children to be faithful to Him in their tribulation unto death, and He would
give them Eternal Life, therefore and they would experience the Second Death in
the Lake of Fire. The Smyrna and Philadelphian Church Periods are the only two periods of the Church
Age in which God did not give one reproof to His Priesthood of all Believers.
The churches in the Smyrna Church Period evidently experienced much suffering
for their glorious Savior.
The Six-Ninth
Persecutions of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Children by Pagan Roman Emperors
Let us examine the
second problem God’s people experienced in the Smyrna Church Period. The Lord
Jesus Christ declared that Satan would bring a great physical persecution
against His Apostolic Pentecostal Churches, and He admonishes His Children to
be faithful unto death. The root meaning of “Smyrna” is “myrrh.”
[86]
Myrrh is a perfumed oil or ointment that is used in embalming (Jn 19:39), and it has a very bitter taste (Mk 15:23). Therefore, Smyrna is associated with a bitter death
or the bitterness of dead. God’s people in this Church Period go through
social, economic and physical persecution. They lived in a state of poverty.
They were beaten, robbed, thrown in prison, tortured, and put to death. Smyrna
is definitely the suffering Church. Satan crushed their spirit, and he did his
best to physically destroy them, so he could stop the Gospel of Christ from
converting the world. Even though God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Children were
persecuted in the Church Periods after this one, only in this Church Period
God’s People face their persecution with absolute boldness and an overwhelming
spirit of Evangelism. Nothing Lucifer could do to them could stop them from
evangelizing their world!
In the Ephesus Church Period Satan tried to pollute
God’s Churches with his Nicolaitan Doctrines of two separate beings or gods in
the godhead, his Monarchian Bishop doctrine, and His attempt to destroy the
Priesthood Ministry of all Born-Again Believers in Christ. However, when the
majority of God’s Children did not accept his demonic doctrines, he brought
into being his rival church, the Catholic Church with its specialized
Priesthood, the Mass, and Christ dying daily through the Eucharist. In this
Church Period, even thought Christians were NOT SOUGHT OUT, if accused and discovered of being a Christian they
were imprisoned and killed, but I find NO
place in history where they were TORTURED,
to get them to deny their faith in Christ. In the Smyrna Church Period,
Lucifer’s persecution against God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Children changes to
an active and continuous persecution.
Hailey says: By the end of the Imperial Persecution, 313,
Christians numbered about One-Half the population of the Roman Empire,
…[which] extended from the Atlantic
to the Euphrates and from the North Sea to the African Desert, [with a] population about 12,000,000. [87]
According to one
historian, the Growth of the Church in Numbers was as following: First
Century 500,000; Second Century 2,000,000; Third Century 5,000,000; Fourth
Century 10,000,000. [88] Now you can see why Lucifer was having a nervous break
down. Who were these Christians that lived and died as martyrs during this
Church Period? Were they Oneness Apostolics or Catholics? Without dispute the
majority of the Christians, who were tortured and put to death, were Oneness
Pentecostals! The following brief ancient histories and modern-day histories
prove this truth!
Historical Proof that the Vast Majority of Martyrs in the
Ephesian and Smyrna Church Periods Were God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Children: The Testimony of Catholic Cardinal Newman: In his work entitled Essays and Sketches,
professor Newman made a very great and bold confession when he was scolding the
Protestants about Luther's protest. This Catholic professor referred them to
the protest that was made by the one God Jesus’ Name Apostolic Christians, who
believed all the godhead, i.e. the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, dwelt totally
in one person, the Lord Jesus Christ. Catholic Cardinal Newman stated: Praxeas, Noetus, and
Sabellius in the [early part of] third century protested against the Catholic or Athanasian doctrine of
the Holy Trinity.... Noetus was in Asia Minor, Praxeas taught in Rome,
Sabellius in Africa. Nay we read… their doctrine prevailed among the
common people, then and at an earlier date, to a very great extent,
and the true faith [i.e. Catholicism] was hardly preached in the churches. [89]
This is the greatest confession of truth, I have ever read from any Catholic or
Protestant theologian of historian. Newman clearly stated that the Catholic
Churches were in the vast minority for the first three hundred years, and the
Modalist Monarchian Pentecostal Churches were in the majority. The truth is
they were in the vast majority for almost four hundred years. Now, were did
Newman read this about the true believers? He did not say.
The Testimony of Protestant Professor Adolf
Harnack: this doctor of Theology
and Church History agreed with Newman that the Modalistic Monarchian Churches
were in the majority during this time. He says: The real dangerous opponent
of the Logos Christology… was not Adoptianism, but the doctrine which saw the
Deity Himself incarnate in Christ, and conceived Christ to be God in a human
body, the Father becoming flesh…. Hippolytus tells us in the Philosophumena,
that at that time the Monarchian controversy agitated the whole [Catholic] Church, and Tertullian and
Origen testified, that in their day the ‘economic’ trinity, and the technical
application of the conception of the Logos to Christ, were regarded by
the mass of Christians with suspicion.
Modalism as we now know from the Philosoph.,
was… the official theory in Rome… The Modalistic
doctrine, which sought to exclude every other, …was embraced by the great majority of
all Christians before the Nicene
Council. [90]
The Testimony of Doctors John M’Clintock
and James Strong: They informs us
in their Cyclopedia of Biblical Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature,
that the apostolic one God doctrine was definitely preached in the first century
by both Jewish and Gentile Christians. They declared: Modalist Monarchianism is generally
supposed to have originated about the end of the second century. It seems to
us, however, that… [it] may be traced to the very earliest times of Christianity.
Justin Martyr [150 AD] expressly denounces it…. He condemns the [Christian] Jews for thinking that,
when God was said to have appeared to the patriarchs, it was God the Father who
appeared. Such, he says, are justly convicted of knowing neither the Father nor
the Son; for they… say that the ‘Son is the Father…. In the Dialogue with
Trypho, he handles the same topic, and extends the charge to the [Gentile] Christians. ‘I am aware
that there are some who wish to meet this by saying that the power which appeared
from the Father of the universe to Moses, or Abraham or Jacob... is unseparated
and undivided from the Father’ (Cc. 1227,128.). [91]
The Testimony of Doctor James Hastings: According to Hastings, Tertullian sums up his case
against the Latin and Greek Modalist Monarchians by saying: The Latins take pains to
pronounce monarchia, the Greeks refuse to understand aeconomia…. For extolling
the monarchia at the expense of the aeconomia, they contend for the identity
of Father, Son, and Spirit. [92]
The Testimony of Tertullian (200 AD): Tertullian wrote against Praxeas, who was one most noted one God
Apostolic Preachers on his day. Tertullian wrote: The older heretics
much more before Praxeas, a pretender of yesterday... [who preaches] this heresy, which supposes
itself to possess the pure truth, in thinking that one cannot believe in the
one only God in any other way than by saying that the Father, the Son, and the
Holy Ghost are the very selfsame person.... The simple, indeed, I will not call
them unwise and unlearned, who always constitute the majority of believers….
They are constantly throwing out against us, that we are preachers of two gods
and three gods, while they take to themselves pre-eminently the credit of being
worshippers of the one God. [93] Tertullian definitely confessed, beyond all
argumentation, that the Modalist Monarchian Pentecostals were not only in the
majority during his time, but their proud history went back a long time before
Praxeas.
The Testimony of Hippolytus (225 AD): Hippolytus wrote
against Noetus, Cleomenes, Zephyrinus, and Callistus, who were all very
powerful one God Apostolic Preachers. Hippolytus speaking of Callistus teaching
on the godhead in Christ says he taught: There is one Father and God, namely, the
Creator…. In substance He is one Spirit. For Spirit, as the Deity,’ he says,
‘is not any being different from the Logos, or the Logos from the Deity;’
therefore this one person, according to Callistus, is divided nominally, but
substantially not so. He supposes this one Logos
to be God, and affirms that there was in the case of the Word an incarnation.
And he is disposed to maintain, that He who was seen in the flesh and was
crucified is the Son, but that the Father it is who dwells in Him….
All [Christians] consented to his hypocrisy
[or
belief in the godhead], we however did not do so and [they] called us worshippers of two gods…. This
Callistus became a martyr at the period when
Fuscianus was Prefect of Rome. [94]
Let my readers notice, that the true believers greatly
out numbered the Catholics. These zealous Apostolic Pentecostal Modalistic
Monarchians also accused the Catholics of believing in two separate persons or
gods in the godhead. They did not accuse them of being Trinitarians, which is
the belief in three separate persons or gods. The early Catholic apostates and
their deceive followers, as I have said before, did not believe the Holy Ghost
to be a person. Most believed that it was another title of the Lord Jesus
Christ. These early Catholics, who taught two-unequal-gods, denied that Jesus
is the only LORD (YHWH), Sovereign,
and God just as Paul, Peter, Jude, and John said they would (Col 2:8-9; 2Pe 2:1, Jude
1:4, 1Jn 4:3, also Isa 9:6 NIV)!
Therefore, according to these indisputable historical documents, the majority
of Christians, who were tortured to death for the faith in the Lord Jesus
Christ, were the One God, Jesus Name, Apostolic, Tongue Talking Pentecostals!
The Ten Days of
Persecution:
Eliphas Levi, in his book The
History of Magic, gives us some insight into why the Emperors wanted to be
the High Priest over all religions in the Roman Empire. He says Semiramis the
mother and wife of Nimrod, who helped her son to start the Babylonian Religion:
Made
religion subservient to politics and conquests.... The priesthood
became secondary to the empire as the result of an attempt to materialize its
own power. The fall of the one was bound to involve the other; [95]
this way probably the major reason why the Emperors of Rome persecuted God’s
Church. Tertullian
speaking of the Ten Days of Persecution in his discourse concerning martyrs
stated: For
indeed the Spirit had sent the injunction to… the Church in Smyrna: ‘Behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that
ye may be TRIED TEN DAYS [h`merw/n - hemera]. Be
thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a Crown of Life.’
[96]
As stated above, some prophetic
interpreters believe the 10 days refers to 10 separate persecutions God’s
Apostolic Pentecostal Church experienced from Pagan Rome; others, like myself, believe
it meant the last Roman’s persecution, which lasted
10 years (AD 303-313). According to Church History, there were Nine Roman
Persecutions, but only the ninth one had an objective or goal of a complete
destruction of Christians and Christianity out of the Roman Empire. We have
already discussed the first five persecutions of God Church in the Ephesus
Church Period, let us now examine sixth through the ninth persecution.
The Sixth through the
Ninth Persecutions of the Church Mentioned by the History of Severus: As stated before, Sulpicius Severus in his Sacred
History declared the Early Church went through 9, not 10, persecutions,
by the Emperors of Rome. He believed the tenth persecution would come at
the end of the world by the Antichrist. Therefore, he
believed that the TEN DAYS mention by John
refers to Ten Persecutions God Church would suffer in the World. I might
mention the fact, that the Diocletian Persecution was the only
persecution Severus mentions, which was a General Persecution
that lasted for 10 Continuous Years; and it was a Persecution that was
determine to annihilate Christians and Christianity out of the Roman
Empire. Therefore, I believe that only this Persecution can Biblical qualify
as the persecution of Ten Days or Ten Years our Lord spoke of
that would take place in the Smyrna Church Period.
According to
Severus: The
Sixth Persecution of the Christians took place under the Emperor Severus
[i.e.
Septimius Severus R. 193-211 AD]…. Then, during an interval of
thirty-eight years, the Christians enjoyed peace, except that at the middle of
that time Maximinus [i.e. Gaius Julius Verus Maximinus R. 235-238 AD] persecuted the clerics
of some churches.... Ere [i.e. Before] long, under Decius [i.e. Gaius Messius Quintus
Trajanus R. 249-251 AD] as Emperor, the Seventh bloody Persecution broke
out against the Christians. Next, Valerian [i.e. Publius Licinius
Valerianius R. 253-260 AD] proved himself the Eighth
[Persecution] enemy of the saints. After him, with an interval of about fifty
years, there arose, under the Emperors Diocletian [i.e. Gaius Aurelius
Valerius Diocletianus R. 284-305 AD] and Maximian [i.e. Marcus Aurelius Valerius
Maximianus R. 286-305 & 306-08], a MOST BITTER Persecution [i.e. the Ninth Persecution] which, for TEN CONTINUOUS
YEARS, wasted the people of God. At this period, almost the whole
world was stained with the sacred blood of the martyrs.
In fact, they vied [i.e. competed eagerly] with each other in rushing upon these
glorious struggles, and martyrdom by glorious deaths was then much more
keenly sought after than bishoprics….
We showed that we could not be conquered by the slaughters
of TEN LONG YEARS. WELL, the END of the persecutions
was reached eighty-eight years ago, at which date the emperors began
to be Christians. For Constantine then obtained the sovereignty, and he
was the first Christian of all the Roman Rulers…. From that time,
we have continued to enjoy tranquillity; nor do I believe that there
will be any further persecutions, except that which Antichrist
will carry on just before the End of the World. For it has been proclaimed
in divine words, that the world was to be visited by TEN
AFFLICTIONS; and since nine of these have already been endured,
the one which remains must be the last (N&PNF, series 2, vol 11, Sulpitus
Severus, Sacred History, bk 2, chp 31-33, pp 242-244). It is very evident that Severus, and many others in
his day, believed the Ten Days of Tribulation referred to Ten separate
Persecutions of the Church.
The Sixth through the
Ninth Persecutions of the Church Mentioned by the History of Eusebius and Other
Historians: According to Eusebius, Emperor Septimius Severus (R. 193-211 AD): began to persecute the churches… [in] the tenth year of
the reign of Severus [201 AD], while Laetus was governor of Alexandria and the
rest of EGYPT…. As the flame of persecution had been kindled greatly,
and multitudes had gained the crown of martyrdom. [97]
Emperor Gaius Julius
Verus Maximinus (R. 235-238 AD):
Eusebius reveals that Verus decreed
that only the Bishops should be put to death: On account of
his hatred toward the household of Alexander [i.e. the former Emperor], which contained many
believers, he began a persecution, commanding that only the
rulers of the churches should be put to death… during the
reign of Maximinus, which lasted but three years. [98]
Tertullain
in his letter to the Emperor and Senate of Rome wrote concerning various
persecutions of the Church: Rulers of the Roman
Empire… Consult your histories; you will there find that Nero was the first
who assailed with the imperial sword the Christian sect…. [and
nothing brought] on it Nero’s condemnation. Domitian,
too, a man of Nero’s type in cruelty, tried his hand at persecution; but
as he had something of the human in him, he soon put an end to what he
had begun, even restoring again those whom he had banished…. What sort of laws
are these which the impious alone execute against us…. Trajan to some extent made naught by forbidding
Christians to be sought after; which neither a Hadrian, …nor
a Pius [i.e. Antoninus Pius], nor a Verus [Gaius Julius Verus Maximinus],
ever enforced. [99]
Emperor Decius (R. 249-251 AD): He was the FIRST Emperor to promote a systematic
persecution of the Christians in the empire. According to the International
Standard Bible Encyclopedia: The
persecution inaugurated by the emperor Decius in 250 AD was particularly
severe. There was hardly a province in the empire where there were no
martyrs; but there were also many who abandoned their faith and rushed to
the magistrates to obtain their libelli, or certificates that
they had offered heathen sacrifice (#6766,
heading Persecution, sec 24 The Decian Persecution). Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia 99, revealed that this vile man was: best known as the instigator
of the FIRST thoroughgoing persecutions of the Christians…. He
persecuted the Christians by ordering all inhabitants of the Roman
Empire to signify their willingness to worship the pagan gods. [100]
Eusebius quoting Dionysius’ description
of the Martyrs of Alexandria Egypt under the persecution of Decius stated: ‘There was no street, nor
public road, nor lane open to us, by night or day; for always and everywhere,
all of them cried out that if any one would not repeat their impious words, he
should immediately be dragged away and burned…. All truly were affrighted.
And many of the more eminent in their fear came forward immediately… and
as their names were called they approached the impure and impious sacrifices.’ [101]
Emperor Gaius Vibius
Trebonianus Gallus (R. 251-253 AD): Eusebius in giving the persecution of
Gallus quoted Dionysius again. Eusebius declared: When Decius had reigned not quite two years, he was slain with
his children, and Gallus succeeded him…. Dionysius, writing to
Hermammon, speaks as follows of Gallus: ‘Gallus neither recognized the
wickedness of Decius, nor considered what had destroyed him; but stumbled on
the same stone, though it lay before his eyes. For when his reign was
prosperous and affairs were proceeding according to his mind, he
attacked the holy men’ probably
Bishops. [102]
Emperor Publius Licinius Valerianus (Valerian R. 253-60 AD): It appears that
Valerian persecuted only Bishops according to Eusebius, who says: Gallus and the other
rulers, having held the government less than two years, were overthrown, and Valerian,
with his son Gallienus, received the empire. The circumstances which Dionysius
relates of him…. Valerian… had been mild and friendly toward the Men of God [Bishops], for none of the
emperors before him had treated them so kindly and
favorably…. For his entire house was filled with pious persons and was a
Church of God. But the teacher and ruler of the synagogue of the Magi
from Egypt persuaded him to change his course, urging him to slay and persecute
pure and holy men [Bishops] because they opposed and hindered the corrupt and abominable
incantations.’ [103]
Emperor Publius Licinius Egnatius Gallienus (R. 253-268 AD): This Emperor
stopped the persecution of Bishops and made Christianity a Religio
Licita, that is, a Lawful Religion of the Empire: Shortly after this Valerian was
reduced to slavery by the barbarians, and his son having become sole ruler,
conducted the government more prudently. He immediately restrained the
persecution against us by public proclamations, and directed the bishops to perform in freedom their customary
duties, in a rescript which ran as follows: ‘The Emperor Caesar Publius
Licinius. Gallienus, Pius, Felix, Augustus, to Dionysius, Pinnas, Demetrius,
and the other bishops. I have ordered the bounty of my gift to be
declared through all the world…. And for
this purpose you [BISHOPS] may use this copy of my rescript, that no one may molest
you. And this which you
are now enabled
LAWFULLY to do.’ [104]
Emperors Gaius Aurelius Valerius
Diocletianus (Diocletian R. 284-305 or 306 AD): The LAST and GREATEST PERSECUTION of God’s Apostolic
Pentecostal Churches was this horrible Persecution, for it lasted for Ten Continuous Years (303-313 AD)! It was started with the Decree of Diocletian and
Maximian. Diocletian in 286 AD made Marcus Aurelius Valerius Maximianus (Maximian R. 286-305 or 306)
a
co-Emperor. Diocletian ruled over the Eastern half of the Empire, while
Maximian ruled over Western half. Three years later Diocletian
retired and abdicated his throne and forced Maximian to
do the same. Soon afterward Four Emperors
emerged Marcus Maxentius (306-312 AD) and his father
Maximian (306-308 AD), who gladly came out of retirement and
ruled with him, were the emperors of the West, and Constantine was named Caesar
under them. Gaius Galerius Valerius Maximinus (308-313 AD) and Valerius
Licinianus Licinius (308-324 AD) became the emperors of the East, and Maximin Caesar under
them. The persecution of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Churches was during the
reign of these emperors.
The persecution of
God’s Churches began with Diocletian and Maximian’s Decree on the 24th of February, 303 AD. It was a Persecution with one designed in mind,
which was the total annihilation of Christians and Christianity out of
the Roman Empire. Eusebius spoke of this persecution this way: It was in the nineteenth
year of the reign of Diocletian, in the month Dystrus… that royal edicts were
published everywhere, commanding that the churches be leveled to the ground and
the Scriptures be destroyed by fire, and ordering that those who held places of
honor be degraded, and that the household servants, if they persisted in the
profession of Christianity, be deprived of freedom. Such was the FIRST EDICT
against us. [105]
In 304 AD, Maximian
the author of the infamous “Fourth Edict”. Schaff spoke of this ten year Persecution of God’s Apostolic Pentecostal Church this way: All former persecutions of the faith were forgotten in
the horror with which men looked back upon the last and greatest. [106]
Halley
recorded this persecution this way: The last Imperial
Persecutions, and the most severe; coextensive with the Empire.
For TEN YEARS Christians were HUNTED in cave and forest; they were burned,
thrown to wild beasts, put to death by every torture
cruelty could devise. It was a resolute determined, systematic effort to
abolish the Christian name. [107] According to Eusebius: From the beginning of the GENERAL PERSECUTION…
during the entire TEN YEARS of the persecution, the Roman Emperors were determined in their
annihilation scheme to destroy Christianity out of the Roman Empire. Eusebius
concluded by saying: In the TENTH YEAR through the grace of God, it ceased altogether.
[108]
This ended the Ten Days or Ten
Years of Persecution that took place in the Church Period Smyrna.
According to
Eusebius’ introduction to “the Life of Constantine,” in 313 AD after Maxentius was defeated,
Emperors Constantine and the vile murderous
Licinius ended all physical persecution of God’s Church when they signed
the Edict of Milan: ‘Constantine was now sole Emperor in the West…. After a very brief stay
in Rome he returned to Milan (Lact. 100:45), where Licinius [i.e. the Emperor of the
East] met
him…. It had become of mutual advantage to these emperors to join alliance. So
a betrothal had been made, and now the marriage of Licinius to
the sister of Constantine was celebrated…. At the same time the
famous Second Edict or Edict of Milan was drawn up by the TWO
Emperors (Euseb. H. E. 10. 5; Lact. 100:48)’ [109]
CHAPTER 3
THE PERGAMOS CHURCH PERIOD, AD 313 TO 1200
The
Salutation: “You [John] write
OF the CHURCH, the MESSENGER in Pergamos. These things says He who has the Sharp Two-Edged
Sword”
(my translation). The
Commendation: “I know your works, and where you dwell, where Satan’s
throne is. And you hold fast to MY NAME, and did not deny MY
FAITH even in the days in which Antipas was My faithful martyr,
who was killed among you, where Satan dwells.” The Problem: “But I have a few
things against you, because you have there those who hold the doctrine
of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the children
of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual
immorality. Thus you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans,
which thing I hate.” The Reproof: “Repent, or else I will come to you quickly and will fight
against them with the sword of My mouth.” The
Promise: “He 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 to eat. And I will give him a white stone,
and on the stone a new name written which no one knows except him who receives it” (Rev 2:13-17).
History of City: Pergamos was an ancient Greek city near the west coast of Asia
Minor in present-day Turkey. It was about: 15 miles East of the Aegean Sea, 45 miles NE of Smyrna, and 40 miles NW of Thyatira. It was in the Caicus Valley on a lofty hill, 3 miles from the
river. King Attalus I (241-197 BC) adorn the city with beautiful
buildings and it became one of the greatest city of the East. It had a library
of 200,000 volumes, which Antony gave to Cleopatra. Of the structures that
adorned the city, the most renowned was the altar of Zeus, which was 40 ft. in
height and was one of the wonders of the ancient world. There were also other
temples built to the other gods, such as: Aesculapius (Askelpios), Aphrodite
Apollo, Athene, Dionysus, and Zeus. Aesculapius (Askelpios) was the Greek god
of Medicine, a healing god, who was called the “savior of Pergamum”.
Aesculapius was the god of the Kingdom of Pergamum, whose idol was made in the
image of a SERPENT.
After the Babylonian Empire was defeated by the Persians,
the Babylonian High Priest settled in Pergamos. Therefore, the Babylonian High
Priesthood became a legacy of the Kings of Pergamum. As a result, Satan’s
Throne was moved from the City of Babylon to the City of Pergamos. In 133 BC
Attalus III died, who was the last King-Priest of the Grecian dynasty of the Attalid kings. This
King-Priest bequeathed his kingdom and His High Priesthood to the Roman Senate,
who later bequeathed it to the Emperor of Rome. Therefore, the Kingdom of
Pergamum became a Roman Province and the City of ROME became
the new center, or headquarters, or Throne of Satan, that is, for the teaching
and spreading of the Mysteries of the Babylonian Religion; and the Emperors of
Rome became Satan’s New High Priest.
Pergamos became the FIRST CITY in Asia
(29 AD) with a temple for Emperor-Worship, that is, a temple to
worship the Roman Emperor Augustus Octavius Caesar. In fact, in
this city three temples were built to the Roman Emperors, in which the Emperors
were worshipped as gods. Pergamos was an extremely idolatrous city and it was
filled with many pagan temples to pagan gods. Therefore, it was definitely one of
the greatest political and religious centers in Asia. In fact,
the idolatrous spirit in that city was so great that many of Jews
who lived there, and there was a large number of them,
became heretics and assimilated the Greek Religion into Judaism, just as
the Catholic Church did before it became the State Religion of the Roman
Empire. Bergama is the modern-day name of Pergamos today. [110]
The Salutation: “You [John] write OF the CHURCH, the MESSENGER in Pergamos. These things says He who has the Sharp Two-Edged
Sword”
(my translation). Jesus greets His
Apostolic Pentecostal Churches in this Church Period with a very strong
reminded that He is One who is “the Word of God”, and His Word “is living and
active and sharper than any two-edged sword” (Heb 4:12,
NAS), and out of “His mouth comes” this “sharp
sword” that He will use to “smite the nations”
(Rev 19:15, NAS; also Eph 6:17). Therefore, Jesus
reminds His Children that His Word, being a Sharp Two-Edged Sword can cut,
destroy, and send to Hell all heretics in the Church, who pervert and
compromise the TEACHINGS His Word,
or It can heal and bring Eternal Life to all who love, obey, and keep it
precepts!
The Commendation: “I know your works,
and where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is. And you hold
fast to MY NAME, and did not deny MY FAITH even in the days
in which Antipas was My faithful martyr, who was killed among you, where
Satan dwells.” Our
Savior praises His Children that most of them in this Church Period did not
compromise the TRUTH not only during
Persecutions of Pagan Roman Emperors, but also during the Persecutions of the
Roman Catholic Emperors. God’s Church evidently held fast to Jesus’ Name
Baptism in God’s New Birth Message, Jesus’ Supreme Deity, and Holiness to the
Lord. Antipas was probably one of the Bishops in the city of Pergamos during
this time and he evidently died as a martyr.
Larkin speaking
Satan’s Throne wrote: Pergamos is spoken as ‘Satan’s Seat.’ When Attalus III, the
Priest-King of the Chaldean Hierarchy, fled before the conquering Persians to
Pergamos, and settled there, Satan shifted his capital from Babylon to Pergamos. [111]
Thus, Satan’s Babylonian Religion moved from the city of Babylon in Iraq to
Pergamos in Turkey. Therefore, Pergamos became Satan’s New Capitol. In fact,
the word “Pergamos” means: a wealth marriage. It come comes from two Greek words, “Per” which means: abundance, and “gamos”
which means: marriage. [112]
Larkin declared: the word ‘Pergamos’ means ‘Marriage,’ and it referred to the Catholic Church entered into a union
with the State. [113]
Therefore, it was during this Church Period that the Catholic
Nicolaitan-Balaamite Churches joined hands in matrimony with the Roman Empire
and became its Harlot-Babylonian-Mistress, that is, the State Religion of the
Roman Empire. Therefore, the so-called Saint Peter’s Chair in the Palace of the
Vatican in Rome became Lucifer’s Throne. It becomes evident that some of God’s
Churches, and all the Catholic Churches, united in an unholy marriage with the
Pagan Roman Empire. This resulted in God departing from His Churches that
united with the Roman Empire!
When Satan saw that
he could not destroy God’s Church through Pagan Roman Persecution, or from the
pollution of the doctrines of the Catholic Nicolaitan Ante Nicene Priests and
Apologists, he decided to change his military strategy. He decided to marry the
Emperors of the Roman Empire, and later the Kings of Europe who replaced the
Emperors after the fall of the Roman Empire, with the Nicolaitan Catholic
Church. This Church Period is characterized by the Emperors and Kings of Europe
giving their Imperial Edicts calling for persecution against God’s Children as
heretics. Most of this persecution was not death or torture, but loss of goods,
property, wealth, position, and in some cases loss of freedom, whereby they
became slaves. These Emperors and Kings were under the control of the Lucifer’s
Popes who were over Lucifer’s New Babylonian Religion, which was now called the
Roman Catholic Church.
The Problem: “But I have a few
things against you, because you have there those who hold the doctrine
of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the Children
of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual
immorality. Thus you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans,
which thing I hate.” God
informs His Church that the practice of a few apostate Nicolaitan-Balaamite
Bishops and Ministers in the Ephesus Church Period has now become an
established doctrine in some of His Churches, as well as Lucifer’s
Catholic Churches. In other words, Jesus told us that some of His
Apostolic Pentecostal Churches and all of Satan’s Catholic Churches have joined
together in an unholy union with the Roman Empire, thereby creating a stumbling
block that will caused some of His Children to fall into sin and be lost!
Now, if my beloved
readers will recall, the Nicolaitan Doctrine was the Monarchy Bishop Doctrine,
whereby one Bishop, instead of several Bishops, led and ruled each
congregation. This satanic doctrine also declared that this one Bishop was the
supreme ruler over the congregation, and he stood in the place of God in the
Church, and his Presbyters stood in the place of the
apostles. The thing that God and His Church hated the most about this doctrine
is that it robbed God’s Children of their Priesthood Ministry, and established
a special Paid Priesthood, which consisted of the Monarchy Bishop, the
Presbyters, and Deacons. These paid hirelings became the sole teachers and
ministers in the Church!
The apostle Peter defined the doctrine of Balaam as “False
Prophets” in the Church who
“have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray following
the way of Balaam the son of Beor, who loved the WAGES of unrighteousness”
(2Pe 2:1-3, 15). Jude defined it as, “False
Ministers” in the Church
who ran “greedily after the
error of Balaam for REWARD” (Jude 1:4, 10-11). Moses told the Children of Israel: “They
HIRED against you Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse
you. Nevertheless the LORD your God would not listen to Balaam, but the LORD
your God turned the curse into a blessing for you, because the LORD your God
loves you” (Deu 23:4-5).
Balaam also promoted an unholy union between the pagans and God’s
Children, which resulted in God destroying all His Children who sinned. This
can be seen when Moses told the people: “these [Moabite women who] cause
the Children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit
trespass against the Lord” (Num 31:15-16). What was this trespass? “While
Israel was staying in Shittim, the men began to indulge in sexual immorality
with [pagan] Moabite
women, who invited them to the sacrifices to their gods. The people ate and
bowed down before these gods. So Israel joined in worshipping the [god] Baal of Peor” (Num 25:1-9, NIV).
Therefore, one aspect of the doctrine of Balaam can be
Biblical define as greedy, materialistic minded Ministers selling their God
given talents for material rewards or wages; and another aspect of this
doctrine is uniting the holy with the unholy in an idolatrous union, in order
to get God to curse or depart from His people. Schaff speaking about the
Catholic Church adoption of pagan Idol worship during this Church Period
stated: After
the middle of the fourth century it [Satan’s Church]… transformed the ‘mother of
the Lord’ into a ‘Mother of God,’ the humble ‘handmaid of the Lord’ into a
‘Queen of Heaven...’ a sinless holy co-redeemer. At first she was acquitted
only of actual sin, afterward even of original. Schaff continued his comments on pagan worship
introduced into Catholicism: The VENERATION [i.e. WORSHIP] of RELICS [i.e. IDOLS] simultaneously with the
worship of the saints, assumed a decidedly superstitious and idolatrous
character. [114]
Lucifer Marries His Pagan Roman Empire to His Pagan Catholic Church
In 313 AD, some of God’s bishops and ministers apostatized, joined hands with the priests of Catholicism, and became Catholics. The Catholic Church then joined hands in marriage with the Pagan Roman Empire. Let us examine the marriage contract between these two lovers; for every marriage must have some kind of mutual agreement between parties for it to be a binding agreement. The first question we might ask is, why would some of God’s Churches, and all the Catholic Nicolaitan Church, who are suppose to be married to the Lord Jesus Christ, want to marry a murdering, idolatrous, pagan state? Second, why would Pagan Rome want to marry Catholicism? What would they both gain from such a union? Let my readers keep these thoughts in mind as we examine the facts to see what was lost and gain by both parties.
Why did Constantine choose Catholicism to be the bride
of the State? Constantine, like all other Emperors before him, desired a united
empire. The empire Constantine inherited was a divided empire with many
different political and religious fractions. Mithraism, even though it was the
religion of the empire, never shows signs of having the power to become a
universal religion. Constantine greatly desired a religion whose doctrines
could appeal to the masses and unite them into one religion, and thereby unite
the empire; a religion that would be flexible enough to bend to his will
whenever he so desired; a religion that would allow him to maintain his
position as the High Priest or the Supreme Head.
The entire world had witness the noble suffering of
God’s people, and through it became attracted to Church. The Roman Emperors
discovered that no amount of threats could get the majority of God’s people to
compromise their convictions. Even though Constantine knew that the one God,
Jesus’ Name Churches were in the vast majority, he knew he would never be able
to control them. However, when he looked at Catholicism, he saw a religion that
he knew he could control. He knew that the entire history of Catholicism was
one of compromise; one that had already adopted most of the teachings of
paganism; one who compromised with the state during the Roman persecutions.
Yes, one who had the potential of becoming a universal religion. It already
went under the name of Christianity, and with a little persuasion from him he could
get the masses of pagans to join it.
In The Cambridge Medieval History, we can read
of Constantine dreams for Catholicism. It stated: The [Catholic] Church was not quite what
Constantine wanted it to be. He was not more attracted to it by its [so-called] lofty monotheism than by
the imposing unity, which promised new life to the weary State. For six hundred
years the world had been in quest of a universal religion.... If the Church was
divided against itself, it could not help the Empire. Worse than this; it could
hardly be divided against itself without being also divided against the Empire. [115]
Guignebert speaking of Catholicism’s political compromise with the state during
Roman persecutions wrote: Nicolaitan Christians no longer expected the end of the world
form one day to the next; they conformed to current customs and even to current
prejudice. Christians joined the army and served in the administration, and the
ecclesiastical authorities made no objection. [Catholic] Christian ethics and
Christian resignation to the world’s continuance had reaffirmed allegiance to
all social regulations. Above all a community of believers, united, disciplined
and directed by leaders whom they obeyed [as gods], presented to the State a cheering spectacle
of order, the product of a well-administered government, which already shows
signs of developing a political consciousness.... It was time for both State
and [Nicolaitan] Christianity to think of a
compromise. [116]
By now my dear readers should be able to understand why
Constantine chose Catholicism to be his bride. Now, why did the Catholic Church
want this marriage? The Cambridge Medieval History again gives us the
answer. When Constantine gave the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, he exempted the clergy of the
Catholic Church - not those of the sects [meaning God’s Apostolic Church] - from the decurionate
and other burdens, he gave them only the privileges already enjoyed by some
of the heathen priests and teachers. But the relief was great enough to cause
an ungodly rush for holy Orders into Catholic
Balaamite Christianity. [117]
Money and power has always been the prime motivating factor behind all that
Catholicism has done throughout the centuries.
According to Hastings: Constantine and his successors,
and above all, the Emperor Justinian (527‑565 AD) saw themselves in their
Roman capacity as the legitimate heirs of the ancient pagan Caesars, but at the
same time in their Christian capacity as equals to the apostles….
Contemporary historians tell us that it was the Emperor Constantine, who came
up with the formula one in being (homoousios) with the Father, which resolved
at the Council of Nicene in 325, the dispute over the metaphysical relation
between Christ and God. [118]
Therefore, Constantine could see in this Church of Satan all of his hopes and
dreams being fulfilled. It was no doubt for all of the above reasons, why
Constantine greatly desired to join his hand in marriage with the Catholic
Church! Now Lucifer, who controlled both Constantine and Catholicism, saw His
chance to now destroy God’s Church by persecuting them as heretics, in hopes he
could deceive them into believing that God’s blessing were on the
Nicolaitan-Balaamite Catholic Church, whereby they would apostate and join
Lucifer’s Church.
Emperor Pope Constantine and
His Catholic Council of Nicaea: I
must acknowledge that at the Nicene Council the Catholic Church made it final
departure from God, for it was here they adopted the Trinitarian Formula for
Baptism. By this act, they excommunicated themselves and the Catholic People
from God’s Salvation. When they removed the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ from
their Second Immersion and substituted the title Son in its place, they no
longer could enter into Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection through God’s
New Birth! Therefore, they were lost and without any hope of receiving Eternal
Life. Thomas Weisser, a One God Jesus’ Name theologian and historian, in his
work entitled Jesus’ Name Baptism Through The Centuries quoted Robert
Robinson’s book entitled Ecclesiastical Researches concerning the Nicene
Council. Robinson wrote: All the classes, who did not hold the doctrine of a
Trinity of persons in God, whether called Aretemonites, Paulianists, Arians,
Monarchians, Patripassians, Sabellians, or by any other name, [whom] administered baptism in the
name of Christ, with a single
immersion, these
were the people whom the Council of Nicaea required to be rebaptized. [119]
As I stated before, one of the doctrines the Catholic Church adopted from pagans was their doctrine of two-unequal-gods. Ignatius was the first to bring this doctrine of hell into Christianity. At the Council of Nicaea, emperor Constantine developed this doctrine into a doctrine of two-equal-gods, which was closer to his Babylonian Trinity of father, mother, and son, that is, Baal, Ashtoreth (Astarte), and Tammuz. Therefore, let us briefly examine this Council inspired by Lucifer and his faithful disciple Emperor Constantine. <