22. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
Vs. 14-22.—It appears that in Paul's time a Christian church had been planted in Laodicea. (Col. ii. 1; iv. 16.) This church had the benefit of his ministry as well as that of Ephesus: and as both these churches were comparatively near to all the other five, we may suppose that a man of his zealous, active and persevering character and habits, would "impart unto them some spiritual gift." (Rom. i. 11.)
It is evident that this church had degenerated more than all the others. In her there is nothing to commend. Her officers and members are described in their real character by him who is the "Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the beginning of the creation of God." Each of these titles speaks the divine dignity of Christ. They are all to be understood in an absolute, not in a comparative sense. As "there is none good (absolutely so,) but one; that is, God," Matt. xix. 17; so Christ only is the "Amen" in such sense that he "cannot lie" as a "witness.'" He "speaks that which he has seen with his Father." (John viii. 38.) Jesus is, moreover, the "Beginning;" the author, owner and sovereign ruler of "the creation of God." This is clearly taught in Col. i. 15-18, where the same person, who (in v. 18) is called "the beginning," as here; is (in v. 17,) said to "be before all things;" by whom (v. 16,) "were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth."—Creation is a work proper to God only. But our Redeemer has "created all things." Now, according to Heb. iii. 4, "he that built all things is God;" therefore he of whom these things are spoken is "the Most High God." And so said the inspired prophet long ago, "For thy Maker is thine husband." (Isa. liv. 5.) In the language of Jeremiah, (x. 11,)—thus do we say to Arians, Socinians, and other self-styled Unitarians,—"The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens:" and their blinded votaries, "except they repent, shall all likewise perish."—However far the body of this church had declined, it does not appear that they had yet, as a community, gone the length of "denying the Lord that bought them."
Spiritual pride, self-sufficiency, seems to have been the prevailing sin among these degenerate professors. Like the Pharisee, they would boast of their riches, the spiritual gifts which they possessed, by which they flattered themselves that "they were not as other men." Possibly they might excel in knowledge, that "knowledge which puffeth up;" in utterance,—"great swelling words of vanity," by which they gained both "filthy lucre" and the admiration of an ignorant and carnal multitude. Such is too often the actual condition of ministers and people, when they are all the while under the power of sin, and wholly "blind" to their spiritual destitution. Self-deception is fatal; and it would be just in the Lord Jesus to give such persons up to their own hearts' lusts. So he threatens,—"I will spue thee out of my mouth," as a man's stomach loathes that which is nauseating. The like figure is used by Isaiah, (lxv. 5,) personating his Lord when describing similar characters:—"These are a smoke in my nose,"—intolerably offensive.—To us the case of this church would appear hopeless. It is not so, however: on the contrary, he assures them that these sharp rebukes proceed from love. "As many as I love, I rebuke, and chasten." (Heb. xii. 6-8.) And from the "counsel" which he gives, as farther evidence of his love, we learn wherein this church was lacking,—in grace, justifying righteousness, and the saving self searching illumination of the Holy Spirit. As this church had not the promise of exemption from the coming "temptation," (v. 10,) the "gold tried in the fire" of persecution will be indispensable to preserve any from apostacy, whereby their cloak of hypocrisy would be removed, and they be exposed to "shame."—Christ "stands and knocks."—If the church refuses him admittance, yet if but one will "hear his voice and open the door," he will certainly communicate such consolations,—the "joy of his salvation," that it may be said they sup together. (Song v. 1.)
This, as before, is the "hundred-fold," promised in this life, as a foretaste and pledge of heavenly felicity.—There is added, a participation in his honor and authority; for those who suffer with him shall also reign with him. (2 Tim. ii. 12.) Whilst "this honour is to all his saints," it is to be conferred upon them by Christ. This assertion may seem to contradict what Christ said to the mother of Zebedee's sons, (Matt. xx. 23,)—"to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give."—No, it is not his to give,—"but, except to them for whom it is prepared of his Father." Then it is his to give,—his right. Of the honor and felicity promised to such as "fight the good fight of faith," none can have an adequate conception without actual experience. (1 John iii. 2.)
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
Although the fundamental doctrine of the Trinity in Unity be not expressly taught or asserted in these epistles, it is nevertheless often and plainly presupposed. Each epistle begins and closes with express mention of two divine persons as equally the author. What Christ says, the Spirit says to these churches. But there is a third divine person often mentioned who is called "God," and "Father." (Ch. ii. 7, 18, 27, etc.;) and in the first verse of chapter third, one speaks who has the seven Spirits of God," where the Trinity is included. Thus, while in these epistles this important doctrine of the adorable Trinity,—a doctrine which lies at the very foundation of a sinner's hope, is obscurely revealed, as being clearly discovered in the preceding parts of the Holy Scriptures; the subsequent part of this book of Revelation is intended, among other objects, to demonstrate the distinct subsistence and economical actings of the co-equal and eternal Three, in the protection and salvation of the church, and in the control and moral government of the universe.
Again, on the groundless and chimerical assumption of those expositors who view these epistles as prophetical of seven successive periods of the destiny of the church general, the last estate would be worse than the first,—Laodicea being the worst of all. But this is obviously contrary to the description contained in ch. xx. 1-10, where the saints are represented as in possession and exercise of all their purchased and social rights. Neither does authentic history prove that the church of Christ was more prosperous under the "ten persecutions" by the heathen Roman emperors than in the apostolic age, as the superior condition of the church in Smyrna to that of Ephesus would require. The very contrary is true; and hence the groundlessness of such interpretation, however respectable the names of its authors. The object of our Saviour in all the instructions, counsels, warnings, rebukes and threatenings addressed to these several churches is doubtless the real benefit of his people in after generations;—just as his dealings with the church in Old Testament times, "were written for our admonition and learning." (Rom. xv. 4; 1 Cor. x. 11.) Moreover, some persons have inferred from our Lord's treatment of these churches, a divine warrant for the existence, and an imperative Christian duty for the charitable recognition, of all the conflicting and antagonistic organizations of our time, popularly styled Christian churches. But as the designation, "Christian churches," is in the apprehension of some too general, the term "evangelical" is used by them as restrictive of the term "Christian." Still the question will present itself,—What constitutes a church "evangelical?" And this question is still without any definite answer. Perhaps no two persons would include in one category the same denominations of professing Christians. For example,—Is a community to be considered a Christian church in which the "doctrine of Balaam" is taught? Does the law of charity require the recognition of an organization as a Christian church, in which a "Jezebel would be suffered to teach, and to seduce the servants of Christ?" Is that a Christian church which denies the supreme deity of Christ, and rejects the seals of the covenant of grace,—the only charter of the Christian church's existence, on earth? Or is that combination to be viewed as a Christian church which has no regular ministry, but expressly rejects the "pastors and teachers" of Christ's appointment and the morality of the sabbath? These, and many other questions of similar or analogous import, will suggest negative answers to all who fear God, respect his authority, and are free from the bewildering effects of popular error.
It ought to be considered that all these seven churches were one church, as originally constituted, having the same,—that, is, a divine, scriptural organization. And although in the divine forbearance, they were still owned by Christ, notwithstanding the errors, heresies and immoralities which had crept into them; yet it is manifest that he threatens some of them with divorce, total extinction in case of impenitence. He has indeed fulfilled his awful threats in making them a desolation. Is it reasonable to suppose that he would reorganize these, or recognise others which incorporate the same or the like corruptions in doctrine and practice for tolerating which he has "removed their candlestick," or "spued them out of his mouth?" (Absit blasphemia.) To say so, or write so, does not manifest the "charity which rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth." Alas! the present condition of the church general contains frequent evidences, that our Saviour's affectionate counsels, solemn warnings, and awful threatenings, are neither duly pondered nor dutifully regarded.