Laodiceans, Has the church become Laodiceans?

[robert]

Originally Posted by Ronzo

The thought that God would rather us be cold or hot in the sense that he'd rather us be dead or alive is indicative of a messed up view of God.

God would rather we be dead spiritually? Really? Ya think? I'm glad I don't serve that 'god'?



In reality... cold water and hot water are useful for specific purposes. Lukewarm water is stagnant and full of damaging organisms. God would rather we be useful to him in reaching the world, and ministering to one another in His body, than be lukewarm and stagnant.

COLD - Cold water is useful for refreshment. God would like for us to bring refreshment to those who are weary and overburdened. When one is thirsty and hot, and one drinks cold water, one is refreshed from within. When one who is overheated is soaked with cold water, one is refreshed from the outside. Cold water is useful.


HOT - Hot water is useful for cleansing. God would like to use us to cleanse the world of the sin that separates this world from Him. Not in the "You're going to hell, sinner!" way, but in the way that is one on one, compassionately... helping to cleanse people from the things that stain them individually. Lovingly helping them to get past their hangups and hurts... helping them to get free from the stains that are all they can see... the stains that label them and prevent them from being whole in Him.

I like your analogy, different from mine, but makes sense. The lukewarm is the thing that all should be concerned with. Lukewarm to me means to compromise, straddle the fence, be a hypocrit, me religion, justification of a lifestyle not acceptable to God, etc... Lukewarm is something we should avoid like the plague. One on one with a sinner and saying they are going to hell is very unwise. Preaching hell to the church is not wrong or God would not have mentioned hell so mant times in the Bible. The threat of an exitent hell should not bother a true christian but serve as a reminder of how we must live to avoid going there. God loves you with a passion too.

[robert]

Originally Posted by robert

I've heard Political ideology described as left...middle...right. Also as liberal...moderate...conservative. The church has chosen it seems to use this same terminology. I can't understand why? Aren't we supposed to distance ourselves from the things of this world? Revelation may be where the world came up with these words...but Revelation says it like this, cold...lukewarm...hot. (Revelation 3:15-16) As God explains it...
cold is bad...lukewarm is the worst...hot is good. Fire is always used in a positive way, it purifies, it was used during the day of Pentecost Holy Ghost experience as a symbol of God's Spirit coming to God's people. Here is the point of this thread.
Is cold: liberal, left, bad.
Is lukewarm: middle, moderate, to be spued out.
Is hot: right, conservative, good.
People are using political terminology to state their position of belief. What is your preferance. liberal,moderate, conservative......left,middle,right....or cold, lukewarm, hot.

Revelation 3: 14-19...
And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write;These things sayeth the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot. I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increasing with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I council thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mightest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore and repent

.

[OneAccord]

Revelation 3: 14-19...
And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write;These things sayeth the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot. I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increasing with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I council thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mightest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore and repent

While reading this passage, we should keep in mind that this was written to ine of the CHURCHES in Asia Minor. I emphasize the word CHURCHES to underscore the fact that this message was intended to address the churches on a collective basis, and not on an individual basis. What I mean by that is that God's intent was to speak to thechurches as a whole and not on an individual "on-on-one basis". He did not say, "And unto the angel of ROBERT write..." or "Unto the messenger of ONE ACCORD write...". If we try to apply these words on an individual basis, then we lose the intent of the message, for no one can be hot, cold, and lukewarm at the same time. The message was to a group of individuals and not to a singular individual. The church is made up of many- some hot (on fire with God), some lukewarm (like Peter standing in the shadows warming his hands), and some cold (and indifferent) to the things of God.

Personally, I believe this message speaks of the times that we are in now. The church is in a lukewarm state, it is rich in material goods, and think it needs nothing (or no one). Thats how the church sees itself. But God sees it in a totally different light. How we view ourselves on an individual basis isn't the issue. How God sees the church as a whole is what we need to focus on.
The key to undertanding what God means by being "hot" is found in the last 4 words of that passage (in bold, above): A "hot" church is a zealous church, a church involved in evangelism. It is a repentant church-based on the model of 2 Chron. 7:14.

[robert]

Originally Posted by OneAccord

While reading this passage, we should keep in mind that this was written to ine of the CHURCHES in Asia Minor. I emphasize the word CHURCHES to underscore the fact that this message was intended to address the churches on a collective basis, and not on an individual basis. What I mean by that is that God's intent was to speak to thechurches as a whole and not on an individual "on-on-one basis". He did not say, "And unto the angel of ROBERT write..." or "Unto the messenger of ONE ACCORD write...". If we try to apply these words on an individual basis, then we lose the intent of the message, for no one can be hot, cold, and lukewarm at the same time. The message was to a group of individuals and not to a singular individual. The church is made up of many- some hot (on fire with God), some lukewarm (like Peter standing in the shadows warming his hands), and some cold (and indifferent) to the things of God.

Personally, I believe this message speaks of the times that we are in now. The church is in a lukewarm state, it is rich in material goods, and think it needs nothing (or no one). Thats how the church sees itself. But God sees it in a totally different light. How we view ourselves on an individual basis isn't the issue. How God sees the church as a whole is what we need to focus on.
The key to undertanding what God means by being "hot" is found in the last 4 words of that passage (in bold, above): A "hot" church is a zealous church, a church involved in evangelism. It is a repentant church-based on the model of 2 Chron. 7:14.

Thanks OneAccord,
Aren't individuals the church. I understand what you are saying but doesn't the individual have some responsibility to God to be the best they can be. God says we must walk in the Spirit not in the flesh. Isn't this going from one extreme to another. If we as children of God don't think it's our responsibility to be Spiritually minded and mind the things of the Spirit, won't that put us in a carnal nature, which I feel is being cold or lukewarm.

[Blaylock]

Originally Posted by robert

It doesn't really matter what we see ourselves as, what matters is what God see's us as. In the Laodicea church he saw cold, lukewarm, hot. These words are His words not mine. It reminds me of the story of the mail man. Every one hates the mail man when he brings unwelcome news to them not realizing he did not write the letter...He just delivers it.

So Robert how would you "label" me?

[OneAccord]

Originally Posted by robert

Thanks OneAccord,
Aren't individuals the church. I understand what you are saying but doesn't the individual have some responsibility to God to be the best they can be. God says we must walk in the Spirit not in the flesh. Isn't this going from one extreme to another. If we as children of God don't think it's our responsibility to be Spiritually minded and mind the things of the Spirit, won't that put us in a carnal nature, which I feel is being cold or lukewarm.

Collectively, yes, we are the church. Analogy- In a factory that employs 500 people... the boss calls everyone together and says "Somebody's been smoking in the break room". Everyone here is fired". That would be fair- not would it be in the company's best interest to can the entire production staff.

The message of Rev. 3, to the Laodiceans is a collective message, that speaks to the church in its entirety. Its up to the individuals to look at that message to see if it speaks to them on a one to one basis. Yes, there are "degrees" of being a Christian, but it isn't our place to say who fits where. The spiritually minded, as you said, minds the things of the Spirit, and doesn't take a lot of time thinking who is, and who is not, as "hot" for the Lord as they should be.

[SDG]

Some like it HOT ...

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the
kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in
heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in
thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done
many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye
that work iniquity.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by robert

I've heard Political ideology described as left...middle...right. Also as liberal...moderate...conservative. The church has chosen it seems to use this same terminology. I can't understand why? Aren't we supposed to distance ourselves from the things of this world? Revelation may be where the world came up with these words...but Revelation says it like this, cold...lukewarm...hot. (Revelation 3:15-16) As God explains it...
cold is bad...lukewarm is the worst...hot is good. Fire is always used in a positive way, it purifies, it was used during the day of Pentecost Holy Ghost experience as a symbol of God's Spirit coming to God's people. Here is the point of this thread.
Is cold: liberal, left, bad.
Is lukewarm: middle, moderate, to be spued out.
Is hot: right, conservative, good.
People are using political terminology to state their position of belief. I express myself as a conservative, right, hot...Apostolic, and I feel good about it. What is your preferance. liberal,moderate, conservative......left,middle,right....or cold, lukewarm, hot.

Revelation 3: 14-19...
And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write;These things sayeth the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot. I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increasing with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I council thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mightest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore and repent

No, cold does not equal liberal, Lukewarm does not equal moderate and hot does not equal conservative. How did you come to that conclusion? Who defines what is liberal or conservative or moderate anyways?

[SDG]

Robert, do you know what the problem in Laodicea was ....????

They were PRIGGISH .... LIKE YOUR POST ...

For you say, 'I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing.' You do not realize that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. Therefore I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire so that you may be rich; and white robes to clothe you and to keep the shame of your nakedness from being seen; and salve to anoint your eyes so that you may see. (NRSV)


Most theologians believe the words attributed to the Laodiceans obviously mark an ironic over-confidence in regard to spiritual wealth. They, unlike the Christ who knows, are unable to recognize their bankruptcy.

However, the image may also be drawing on the perceived worldly wealth of the city.

Either way they thought they were better than everyone else.

They weren't being chastised for being LESS APOSTOLIC.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by robert

I agree with your opinion that I did think this could be a possibility as to what is meant by these scriptures. Using political terminology as an analogy to cold, hot, and luke warm. You don't agree with my analogy, but do you at least agree with the scriptures. Doesn't God say to be one way or the other and not to be a compromiser.

No it does not say not to be a compromiser. But that is beside the point as we should not compromise the word of God. The PROBLEM is that you probably think anyone that does not believe like you is a compromiser because they are not your brand of conservative....but you might actually be the compromiser and not even realize it. Some of the MOST conservative people in the bible in Jesus's day were the Pharisees....they were Ultra Conservative AND they had compromised the word of God. Amazing eh?

Mar 7:6 And he said to them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, "'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me;
Mar 7:7 in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'
Mar 7:8 You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men."
Mar 7:9 And he said to them, "You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!
Mar 7:10 For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.'
Mar 7:11 But you say, 'If a man tells his father or his mother, Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban' (that is, given to God)--
Mar 7:12 then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother,
Mar 7:13 thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do."

It seems cold could be refering to sinners, lukewarm to hypocrits and hot to those that are trying with all of their ability to please and obey God.

That's pharisees problem though. They thought they could please God with THEIR ability.

God looks for a broken humble heart and faith. In fact a Moderate or a Liberal could just as much as you be trying to please God and obey God even though they don't agree with your view of things. Again....maybe you are the cold or the lukewarm? Think about it. A very conservative person in outward works can be deader than a door nail inwardly

One being on the low end, one being in the middle, and one being on the high end. He is using a church in these scriptures so can't we assume he could be talking to us as well.

The problem is you decided for yourself that he was talking about being liberal, moderate and conservative and that you put yourself in the best catagory.