Nicolaitanes

[dignitized]

otto: you can say what you want about the Jesuits - I'm not RC so . . .

lol - GODS history is always evident in MANS history because NO ONE can hide the Truth. BTW - The BIBLE is not a history book.

 

[Rick Otto]

Yikes!

With the "Br." and the name Max, I figgered you fer a man, but then ya went & said ya had wore a "habit", & from my limited RC experience, my head spun a 180 for a minute. And NOW, if your a man wearin' a habit and you AIN't Catholic...
have you heard that song "I'm My Own Grandpa"?
I'm confused, Max. And NOW you've got me really interested. "What" may I ask ARE you?
-You know I've found that quote by St. Francis Xavier, but only in two far-from-origin sources.
It goes,"I would not even believe the Gospels were the Holy Church to forbid it."

True, the Bible ain't no history book, but that doesn't keep it from doing a pretty good job of focusing on a few essentials in terms of "the overall picture" of both history & future in eternity. Kindofa "site map" of God's "webpage".
That's a powerful image of Christ you're posting.
I'm a artist/musician. Except for the 15 years I spent in a non-denom Pentacostal/charismatic church, I've often wondered if I'm not indulging in "graven images" when I begin to gaze on His portraits. It can get kinda trance-inducing at times. I can get in touch with deep worship w/out paraphenalia much easier.
Got Beads? (LOL)
I once had a rosary made of olive seeds carved into rosebuds. I was an altar boy!
I haven't remembered that for awhile.

Anyway, Max, you know I found that quote from what I'm convinced was the catholic encyclopedia online, but it ain't there now. The guy who wrote it in a book called "Swarms Of Locusts" told me it has been removed from about 20 sites he knows of.
The other source I don't know personally, but it's an online article. I'll link it to ya when I get back to the machine I have it bookmarked on (if it isn't eaten by cyberworms).
I have a few bugs on my hardrive that Housecall.com can't scrub off.

 

[dignitized]

I am a Franciscan Brother in a NON-RC order. Do a google image search on francsican habit and you will see that the pictures that come up are all men. However - a quick look at my profile would clearly demonstrate that I am male TY.

For that matter a search of pontiff at M-w.com will show that it has nothing to do with being a priest but a bridge builder.

 

[Rick Otto]

So does that mean you know how to weld rivets and read blueprints?
Male, female, whatever, I never meant it to be an issue, if I need to insult you, I could find enough to content me about your ideology without considering your sexual identity. I figure if it was important, you'd be more obvious about it, but HEY, that's jus' me, right?
At any rate, I think it's highly commendable that you have a real job like Paul did, rather than livin' off tithes like a nicolaitane.

 

[dignitized]

rick: what could be more obvious than my name? Br. Max is fairly gender specific.

BTW - Scripture states that a preacher is worth his wages.

And the nicolaitanes were hedonists not clergy.

 

[Rick Otto]

I hadn't seen "Br," 'till now, & Maxine is plausable, besides the "habit as headgear" thingy.
Maybe it shouldn't be such an issue.
Does it say how much wages preachin' pays?

Even if some guy Nicholas was a perv, nicolaitanes divide & conquer the body of Christ.

 

[dignitized]

Even if some guy Nicholas was a perv, nicolaitanes divide & conquer the body of Christ.

rick otto: only according to those who espouse revisionist history. To those of us who espouse a HISTORICAL view of the church recognize that they were all a bunch of pervs trying to gain acceptance in the body of Christ for sexually deviant behavior - Kinda like a new bishop in New Hampshire.

 

[Rick Otto]

I've seen your sources for the HISTORICAL view.
I'll stick with the scriptural view for now.

 

[robnewbold]

Preachers, Ministers, etc. are servants, and servants are only supposed to get what they need, not what they want or desire. If they want extra money, they can work for it. Some of the things I see make me sick, like preachers with $300,000 homes and 4 cars, telling us to live a humble life. Blech!

 

[Chloe~]

The classic model of Nimrod's self-exaltation as the god is seen later in Rome's Caesars. All but one were committed Sodomites, but never mind, they were gods. Constantine, the last Caesar, used Nimrod's doctrine in about 320 AD when he crowned himself Pontificus Maximus. (FOOTNOTE 36 The first Pope was NOT Peter who never made it to Rome. In fact I Peter 5:13 indicates Peter took the Gospel to Babylon! If Peter was the first Pope, then the Vatican should be in Baghdad. Oh yes!) It saved Rome politically, and later, another Japhethite, Pope Leo XIII, finished the job when he said, "We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty," a claim that was appropriately called a Papal Bull. The priests of the Roman Catholic Church are also referred to as Alter Christos, another Christ, and many Roman Catholics seem to make no complaint. (FOOTNOTE 37: Dogmatic Canons and Decrees, Tan Books, Rockford, IL., p. 256 ) So, Nimrod was only projecting the lie of Satan and the Popes, "Ye shall be as God." (Genesis 3:5)

Babylon then was the capital of Nimrod's cult.

source

 

[Rick Otto]

Thanks Chloe.
I knew I read that but couldn't find it.
Is that from Tupper Saucy?
I think he references his sources pretty well
if I remember correctly.
I found out so much so fast, I'm still chillin' from
the culture shock & info overload, a bit.

 

[Chloe~]

You're welcome.
It is a text about Islamic god Allah, but it mentions other things. I put the source under the quote.

 

[Rick Otto]

Oh yeah,...duh.
I are a clever guy, huh?

 

[HappyGiraffe]

The conversation seems to have diverted from the original topic.

There are two reasons
[1] The historical evidence from
IRENAEUS [Against Heresies, 1.26.3] and TERTULLIAN [Prescription against Heretics, 46] make these followers of Nicolas.

[2] A view that I have heard is that Nicolaos (conqueror of the people) is the Greek version of Balaam, from Hebrew "Belang Am, "" Destroyer of the people." Revelation abounds in such duplicate Hebrew and Greek names: as Apollyon, Abaddon: Devil, Satan: Yea (Greek, " Nai".) This seems to be supported by verse 14 and 15.

Whatever I don't see any evidence or reason to suppose it is anti-clerical.
Im anti-clerical but I honestly dont see it here in this verse. There are numerous other verses that are though.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Preachers, Ministers, etc. are servants, and servants are only supposed to get what they need, not what they want or desire. If they want extra money, they can work for it. Some of the things I see make me sick, like preachers with $300,000 homes and 4 cars, telling us to live a humble life. Blech!

Where are you, Rob?

Where I live (Southern California) $300,000 buys a rather humble home. Where I used to live (near the Bay Area), it would only buy a run-down cabin or maybe a small condo in a gang-infested slum.

 

[Motor City Christian]

From what I have learned in Revelation class, the Nicolaitans were a group who practiced idol worship and sacrificed food to those idols. They also encouraged Christians to be active in pagan culture. Of course these points have been hinted upon in this thread.

 

[thaiv]

Br. Max,

As far as I know there is nothing in history that proves that Nicholas (Acts 6:5) was the first of the Nicolaitans. Please provide documentation from the early church fathers, mentioned earlier in this forum, that I can look up for myself. I would also like to know when these church fathers wrote about the Nicolaitans and why they wrote what they did along with any historical backing. From what I picked up from reading the forum was that a few centuries after the early church, the church fathers came up with a theory of who the Nicolaitans were. Please prove that this is not a mere theory. Although there may be some historical Nicolaitans, it is true that this word is composed of two Greek words that essentially say "conqueror of the common people." If you do not beleive this just read from a Greek New Testament or look it up in a concordanence. The root of these words cannot be denied regardless of how devoted you may be to the clergy-laity system. In Revelation 2:6 and 2:15 it speaks about the works of the Nicolaitans not the Nicolaitans themselves. According to the original Greek text these "works" must simply be the clergy-laity system which deprives the members of the Body of Christ of their function in the church. This interpretation of the Nicolaitans should not just be dusted off just because you do not agree with it. Actually this interpretation is accurate when looking at the New Testament as a whole. In Paul's epistles he makes it apparent that "each one has," and that we are the priesthood. As far as deacons and elders are concerned they are there for shepherding the saints, not ruling over them and depriving them of their function as a New Testament priest of God. Paul does not present elders and deacons as anything higher in rank than the regular beleivers. Plus, what is wrong with not having this system? Wouldn't the members be more built up if each one had something to say and speak to each other? Would this not strengthen their faith? You do not need to come prepared to a meeting that has a clergyman. All you have to do is sit quietly and listen. If the saints were encouraged to come prepared with something to say, would it not encourage them to get to know the Bible better and thus strengthen their faith? Please consider this and provide documentation from the early church fathers. Thanks.

 

[christian-only]

Although there may be some historical Nicolaitans, it is true that this word is composed of two Greek words that essentially say "conqueror of the common people."

May I suggest that the Nicolaitans were/are a combination of the proposed ideas: they were the "conquerors of the people," the embodiment of a clergy-laity division, but they were also immoral and did teach the people to perform idolatry and immorality. Isn't that what those who seek power over people generally do - tell them what they want to hear? The things said of them in this thread, such as "They also encouraged Christians to be active in pagan culture" still point to the clergy conquering the laity, seeing as how we know it was the clergy that brought idolatry and paganism into the church.

 

[thaiv]

Christian-only ---> good point

 

[TasManOfGod]

I would not dicount too readily the concept that the nicolaitans are those who suppress(conquer) the laity. To do so might well deprive or limit the Church of it's greatest asset- the power of God manefest in every believer

Tas