Here is from the Revelation Prophecy seminars ..."The Nicolaitans, mentioned in these verses, claimed to be Christians but believed obedience to God's law was unnecessary. Jesus used strong language about the Nicolaitans, saying He hated their "works" or lifestyle. Irenaeus, a second-century minister, said they called themselves Christians, but they considered it "a matter of indifference to practice adultery, and to eat things sacrificed to idols." "

This aforementioned group of people cited in Revelation felt that once they accepted Christ, they were spiritually entitled to eternal life. They were misled to believe, that what they did with their bodies had no baring on their salvation. Nicolas the proselyte from Antioch, one of the first deacons ordained (Acts 6:1-6), eventually broke off into a sect and taught this awful error of antinomianism.

Perhaps SDA have, by and large, drifted away from reading the Bible to believing all kinds of weird stuff: stuff such as that.

Jesus Christ Himself says explicitly what was the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. He said, "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." Rev. 2:14-15

The Nicolaitans were like Balaam, a type of Judas. They counted themselves to be Christians but, like Balaam, were wordly and held congress with kings insinuating that the church and the world, the pursuit of wealth, were not at variance. Their material progress made it VERY difficult for other Christians who would rather not but were strongly tempted to pursue the same path.

The doctrine was implied by Christ when he asked, "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?" Mark 8:36-37 Incidentally, this was the very problem plaguing the Laodiceans; and what did Christ say? "I will vomit you out of my mouth!" Rev. 3:16b

///

Interestingly enough, I was in numbers today and reviewed the sad story of Balaam. Jesus referred to Balam actually because he sent midianite women to intice the Israelites at camp to fornicate and adulterate. My context reflects Jesus’ context. Jesus made no implication regarding a reprimand for the desire to gain material wealth. Jesus reprimanded them concerning being holy and good stewards of their bodies. The body is the temple of The Holy Spirit. 1Corinthiams 6:19. God is direct and not wishy washy and wavering like man. You also need to go back and read other contributors’ references. It will give you a clearer understanding of where you have deviated from truth

And a warning James, you must keep scripture in its right context and never let pride have you deviate. Give God glory. Give no room for pride. God is taking account and judgement has begun and will not continue forever, but come to an end. We don’t have time now or ever to play with God and His servants.

“Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.” Proverbs 16:18

• Then you did NOT really read it. Here it is again, "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." Rev. 2:14-15
   
• The doctrine of Balaam (i.e. also of the Nicolaitans) was material gain (from the King Balak), in portraying himself as a friend of both the world and the church, by exposing and exploiting the human frailty of the latter. It was a Judas approach to life. People were selling out and others were falling prey to the strong temptation to follow suit.
   
• In fact, Jesus was not speaking about eating and having sex at all, but about this despicable betrayal (this doctrine of materialism), leaving his people extremely vulnerable.
  
  Smyrna was the city that housed the throne of Satan, the home of the church that lost Antipas, who in Jesus' own words, was "MY faithful martyr who was killed among you where Satan dwells." Wasn't Jesus also betrayed for money? Was He not also murdered because of that betrayal for money? Weren't the disciples tempted to follow Judas before Judas was proven to be false?

///

I did not read Numbers yesterday. But, I studied it and meditated on words that proceeded from the mourn of God. In my original response, I studied other related scripture and studied church history. Statements made that Jesus didn’t speak of eating things sacrificed to idols and having immoral sex in Rev 2:14-15 is a direct contradiction to God’s holy writ.

The response to my post erroneously attributes something to Smyrna that truthfully pertains to Pergamos instead: “
And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges; I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan’s seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein † Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth. But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught † Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate. Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. “ Rev 2:12-17

So, my advice in this case: “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” 2 Timothy 2:15 The Bible is clear and is analogous with otherwise legitimate, historical accounts. It interprets itself and doesn’t need help of others who would misrepresent it and lift up self at the same time.

1. *** Smyrna => Pergamos
    
2. Of course Jesus said, "eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual immorality;" but He also said, "will fight against them with the sword of My mouth." REALLY?!
    
3. The DOCTRINE OF BALAAM (i.e. also of the Nicolaitans) was this: "WHO TAUGHT BALAK (a king) to put a stumbling block before (tempt) Israel..." The Nicolaitans were the part of the church who were holding congress with royalty exposing the human weaknesses of the members. But why would they do that, except for material gain? In Pergamos, Antipas became a martyr; just like Jesus was at the hands of Judas.
    
4. We here in our time and place cannot fully comprehend the situation facing the Pergamos church. The experience was more akin to that of SDA during WW I. The denomination split over loyalty to the Fatherland. Read about the recent apology for yourself 1.

-----------------------
1 Inter alia: "A hundred years after World War I created a split among German Seventh-day Adventists that remains to this day, the church’s two unions in Germany have apologized for the combative stance taken by CHURCH LEADERS during the war and for their treatment of dissidents who left to create the Seventh-day Adventist Reform Movement." -- Adventist Review, MAY 30, 2014.

///

There is no need to try to save face by trivializing the plain truth of what Jesus said to the 7 churches. His whole purpose was to be clear in stating who he is, who they were, remind them of His promises, commend their good deeds and warn them to change the bad. Period. They understood and we understand when we rightly divide he word of truth. God is not mocked. God spoke literally when he said, “ Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.“. God speaks and it is so. He does not use carnal weapons like man.” Everyone in Christianson knows this, including those that were in the 7 churches. His word is like a two edged sword. It will accomplish what it is purposes to accomplish and will not return void. They studied this in the book of Isaiah, to which Jesus often referred in his teachings. “So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.” Isaiah 55:11


DOCTRINE OF BALAAM: “And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit WHOREDOM with the daughters of Moab. And they called the people unto the SACRIFICES of their GODS: and the people did EAT, and BOWED down to their gods. And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor: and the anger of the LORD was kindled against “ Israel. Numbers 25:1-3

Now, YOU are the one turning your head away from the word. It says in plain English, after translation, The DOCTRINE OF BALAAM (i.e. also of the Nicolaitans) was this: "WHO TAUGHT BALAK (a king) to put a stumbling block before (tempt) Israel (the people of God) ..." Revelation 2:14-15

The doctrine is not eating and fornication, but colluding with dignitaries to entice the righteous with offers of worldly things. A good example is suggesting to the CEO to introduce weekend work with double rates of remuneration and then watching to see what Christians would do.

///

[O.K. what is the "doctrine" of Balaam?



Indeed the fact that Balaam taught Balak to put a stumbling block before Israel is part of the Nicolaitan doctrine. But is it the whole "doctrine", or just one part of it. It's what Balaam did, and what people who believe Balaam's doctrine do.
But really, did Balaam actually believe that obedience was not necessary? Or was it a process, many follow into deceiving themselves and then in turn deceiving others?

Balaam was himself struggling with that concept.
He KNEW obedience was part of the relationship with God! That's why he spent so much time praying about going to the meeting with Balak. In Num.22:12 "And God said unto Balaam, Thou shalt not go with them" But he was praying to be released from obedience to God's answer.
He wanted to go, yes there were monetary rewards involved, and he wanted that. So he was praying, asking God to change His mind. So God let him go, but he could NOT curse Israel. Which was highly embarrassing to Balaam.

What I see here, is a man who KNEW obedience was necessary But was fighting against that concept. The very mercy of God in getting a donkey to speak to him instead of letting Balaam die right there on his journey of disobedience, seems to have emboldened Balaam to go ever deeper on his rebellious journey.

We see that today as well, it's those who KNOW the truth, who fight against it the hardest, and will try to lure the faithful away from obedience.

2 Peter 2:15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam [the son] of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;
2:16 But was rebuked for his iniquity: the a donkey speaking with man's voice forbad the madness of the prophet.
Jude 1:11 Woe unto them that ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward,

He knew the truth, but resented it, and fought against it, thinking it restricted his freedom to fulfil his dreams of riches and improvement.

Having fought against obedience himself, he then used his knowledge that God DOES require obedience, to destroy Israel.
rev. 2:14 Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.

He returns to Balak and explains that God is protecting Israel, because they have consecrated themselves to God and are following Him, BUT if Balak could get them to disobey God by openly disregarding God's laws, then God would not protect or help them anymore. So, infiltrate their camp, be friendly, seduce them into sin of Idolatry and fornication.

Balaam first fought against obedience to God himself, thinking obedience was restricting his freedom for improving his position in life. In doing this he was drifting away from the true source of life and freedom, till he ended up operating under satan's influence to lure God's people into sin and destruction, all in the hopes he would gain position and wealth in the process. He didn't gain anything from his "doctrine" but soon died in the battles.