What is being said in REV:2:1-7?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nancy_dalrymple
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

nancy_dalrymple

Guest
I would like to hear a few opinions on what the verse to go back to your first love is ment? Thank You Nancy
 
Here is what the Haydock Commentary had to say about Apocalypse 2:1-7(Douay-Rheims) Revelation in modern Bibles

Ver. 1-7. To the Angel of the church of Ephesus. The great St. Timothy, who was bishop of Ephesus, died a glorious martyr about this time. But as for the admonitions and reprehensions given in these letters, we must take notice, that they are given to the faithful of each church, and not only to the bishops, as it appears by the words so often repeated. (Witham) — Angel. This could have been no other than St. Timothy, who was then bishop of Ephesus. We must not suppose the faults, which are reproved by St. John, to belong individually to St. Timothy, but to some members of the Church. (Bossuet, and others) — These things, with he who holdeth, &c. That is, Christ, or the Angel, who represented Christ, as appeareth by his titles repeated out of the last chapter. — And hast not failed, or fainted, in opposing the teachers of false doctrine. — Thou has left thy first charity, or first fervour, a common, yet a very dangerous disposition, and especially in a bishop, charged with the care of those under him. — Do penance…practise the first works, return to thy first fervour, or I will remove thy candlestick out of its place. The church of Ephesus is threatened, as in danger to lose its faith, which faith should be transplanted and received in other places. It is said what God has divers times permitted, that churches flourishing in the profession of the true Christian faith should be perverted by infidelity and heresy, while the faith hath been planted in other kingdoms of the world. I need not bring instances, where candlesticks have been removed out of their places. (Witham) — The Nicolaites were an infamous sect, who disturbed the rising Church by the superstitions and all the impurities of paganism. See St. Augustine, de hæresib. — To him, to every one that overcometh, I will give to eat of the tree of life, (that is, eternal happiness, differently expressed in these letters) which is in the paradise of my God. It is spoke in the person of Christ, as man. (Witham)

to me it is hard to break some this down because I would say basically the same thing in my own words
 
I would like to hear a few opinions on what the verse to go back to your first love is ment? Thank You Nancy
They have become less fervent in their worship. They are called to go back to how they were when they first heard the Word.
 
They have become less fervent in their worship. They are called to go back to how they were when they first heard the Word.
Are you realy sure?Please pray for me,that the Lord will reveal to me soon,in Christ name,I pray Thank You I felt that too but have to be sure. Tomorrow I will talk to a priest if i can find one are their any on line to talk to? Get Back Nancy:)
 
I would like to hear a few opinions on what the verse to go back to your first love is ment? Thank You Nancy
I view this passage in light of St. John’s Epistle (“God is love.”), Jesus’ offering of the greatest Commandment (“Love God above all and your neighbor as yourself…”), and His cautionary words for the end of times (“for I was hungry…”); that very joy of worshiping God through serving others in Love loses luster as we are exhausted by both those we seek to serve and our apparent failure to achieve any success… soon our struggle is within as we toil for the sake of the quest rather than to Love God and share His Love with others. That first Love, the one that bring us Life, escapes us even as we hold on to the rest of our Christian values and obligations.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Their first love is Jesus Christ. He’s asking them to come back to Him.
 
Their first love is Jesus Christ. He’s asking them to come back to Him.
🙂 Hi Dan 86 But who is he talking to? who was there at the time? or was it for the latter day’s and if it was for the latter days then REV. must not have happened yet? Most people think it is all symbolic and it only pertained to those day’s. Nancy God Bless
 
He is speaking to the congregation in Ephesus, which was established by the apostle Paul on his 2nd missionary journey. (Acts 18-20)

Reread (Rev 2:1-7) and compair it to this.

Keep watch over yourselves and over the whole flock of which the holy Spirit has appointed you overseers, in which you tend the church of God that he acquired with his own blood. I know that after my departure savage wolves will come among you, and they will not spare the flock. And from your own group, men will come forward perverting the truth to draw the disciples away after them. So be vigilant and remember that for three years, night and day, I unceasingly admonished each of you with tears. And now I commend you to God and to that gracious word of his that can build you up and give you the inheritance among all who are consecrated. (Acts 20:28-32)

And there is Paul’s letter to the Ephesians also.
 
In Biblical interpretation, there’s an application for the passage in question that would be for the time it is originally written and also one for the time in which it is being read. So, it would be Ephesus (when it was written) and for us (as we read it now).

For us now reading it, you might say that to return to our first love would be similar to the Ephesians: a renewal of faith and a return to living a godly life. (Just my opinion).
 
In Biblical interpretation, there’s an application for the passage in question that would be for the time it is originally written and also one for the time in which it is being read. So, it would be Ephesus (when it was written) and for us (as we read it now).

For us now reading it, you might say that to return to our first love would be similar to the Ephesians: a renewal of faith and a return to living a godly life. (Just my opinion).
Agreed!
 
You know I think you people are right,was there a church before Peter? If not then what was the group that the 12 and 70 and all the others were in called?Any documentation at all? How about history before that was the Monks from the Orient first?Anybody? Nancy Thank You:)
 
I’d say it’s because they had become lukewarm meaning they had lost their fervent love for Jesus.

Gary
 
I’d say it’s because they had become lukewarm meaning they had lost their fervent love for Jesus.

Gary
🙂 Hi John was the last of the decipals of that group,he was 90 when he died and Polycarp and Ignatiuos helped him penn Rev.a few times to send to the other churches. I realy think that book was ment for these day’s,or why barther writing it at all?There are so many unbelievers today and some were believers. Nancy:)
 
🙂 Hi John was the last of the decipals of that group,he was 90 when he died and Polycarp and Ignatiuos helped him penn Rev.a few times to send to the other churches. I realy think that book was ment for these day’s,or why barther writing it at all?There are so many unbelievers today and some were believers. Nancy:)
I’m certain Revelation did have meaning to people of that time. That doesn’t mean it has nothing to say to us.

Gary
 
🙂 Hi Dan 86 But who is he talking to? who was there at the time? or was it for the latter day’s and if it was for the latter days then REV. must not have happened yet? Most people think it is all symbolic and it only pertained to those day’s. Nancy God Bless
I think that you have hit it right–if we are to read through these passages we find that there are only seven Churches being addressed (interestingly enough 7 is a very significan number); would Christ be ignoring all of the other communities or would only these 7 require His attention? I believe that Christ is speaking to the Church throughout time; the Church’s own history demonstrates that during various episodes of her existence she has behaved in the various manners depicted in Apocalypse 1:4 through 3:22.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
You know I think you people are right,was there a church before Peter? If not then what was the group that the 12 and 70 and all the others were in called?Any documentation at all? How about history before that was the Monks from the Orient first?Anybody? Nancy Thank You:)
The Jews refused to let Jesus name be spoken so at the Church’s infancy Jesus’ disciples were simply known as the Way or those who followed the Way (Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14,22); it was only after Saul’s conversion and mission (1 year or so later) that Christ’s disciples were called Christians (Acts 11:25-26).

…there existed prior to Jesus’ founding of the Church priests and priestesses that worship various gods–everything from forces of nature to animals and even insects; these, of course, have nothing to do with Yahweh God.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
🙂 Hi John was the last of the decipals of that group,he was 90 when he died and Polycarp and Ignatiuos helped him penn Rev.a few times to send to the other churches. I realy think that book was ment for these day’s,or why barther writing it at all?There are so many unbelievers today and some were believers. Nancy:)
Of course the Apocalypse means something today. I think of it this way. The book of Daniel is prophetic concerning the Babylonian exile. (Dan 9:27; 12:11) describes the desolating abomination of Antiochus and the Temple.

Jesus refers to Daniel’s desolating abomination (Mat 24:15) six hundred years later applying it to the second Temple (70 A.D.). So, does it apply to these days? YES! (even if a third Temple is never built).

Suppose the first 19 chapters of Rev are fulfilled in the first century. Then suppose there is a very long time (1,000 years) Christ reigns from his kingdom in heaven (Rev 20:4) and his kingdom the Church. Now imagine (Rev 20:7) starts next week. When the thousand years are completed, Satan will be released from his prison.

It is entirely possible that everything in the first 19 chapters repeats in (Rev 20:7-10) somehow. Who knows if this will happen. If you are following me this far and want me to continue, let me know (Or I would probably sit hear and never stop typing). 😛

Peace 🙂
 
Of course the Apocalypse means something today. I think of it this way. The book of Daniel is prophetic concerning the Babylonian exile. (Dan 9:27; 12:11) describes the desolating abomination of Antiochus and the Temple.

Jesus refers to Daniel’s desolating abomination (Mat 24:15) six hundred years later applying it to the second Temple (70 A.D.). So, does it apply to these days? YES! (even if a third Temple is never built).

Suppose the first 19 chapters of Rev are fulfilled in the first century. Then suppose there is a very long time (1,000 years) Christ reigns from his kingdom in heaven (Rev 20:4) and his kingdom the Church. Now imagine (Rev 20:7) starts next week. When the thousand years are completed, Satan will be released from his prison.

It is entirely possible that everything in the first 19 chapters repeats in (Rev 20:7-10) somehow. Who knows if this will happen. If you are following me this far and want me to continue, let me know (Or I would probably sit hear and never stop typing). 😛
:confused: Hi Ryan if that is so then Rev.:12 would be invalid,an I cannot see the Lord repeating anything. He will not destroy the earth by water again,and if satan was in prison there would have been peace for a thousand years and that hasn’t happened yet has it?And why would only Rev. repeat and not any other book? Also Rev.:13:7-10 hasn’t happened yet where the whole world was captive and forced to take the Mark (but it’s going to) Love of Christ Nancy 😉
Peace 🙂
 
There is another theory about Chapters 1-3 of Revelation that I found interesting. Those three chapters are markedly different from the rest of Revelation; they are the letters to the churches. The rest of Revelation is the apocalyptic endtimes material.

According to this theory, originally, the letters to the churches were a book in themselves or at least a fragment of a book that is now lost. At some time during the process of putting together the NT, these letters were attached to the main book of Revelation.

I’m not saying I agree with this or anything, but I found it interesting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top