RSS

Jezebel’s Judgment and Killing with Death

16 Apr
Kill with Death

From Google Images

In Revelation 2:21 the Lord is still speaking to the leader of the church at Thyatira, and he is speaking about that Jezebel he mentioned in the previous verse. Jezebel is a name for those who claim to be Jews, but are not. That is, they claim to be the people of God, but they don’t obey him. They are the Jews who crucified the Lord. She was given time to repent, probably the time between Jesus’ resurrection and Stephen’s death (cir. 3 1/2 years), but they didn’t. This period was a period of relative safety granted the elect believers, as mentioned in Revelation 12:14. It culminated in spilling righteous blood, so the Jerusalem authorities simply wouldn’t repent.

Jesus said he planned to cast her into a bed (G2825), which represented the kind of bed or couch one reclined upon to eat at a table in ancient Judea (cf. Luke 17:34). It was also the type of bed one would lay upon when sick (cf. Luke 5:18), which was light enough for one man to carry (Luke 5:24). Perhaps, Jesus’ point has to do with her being sick, and she will never recover, or she will lie upon a couch and be forced to partake of the wrath of God. The latter seems to be closest to the truth, for she had been drunk with the blood of the saints (Revelation 17:6), with which she had also made others drunk (cf. Revelation 17:2), so it is fitting that she should partake (eat) of God’s wrath.

Jesus claimed that this Jezebel was given time to repent but didn’t, and now repentance would not be offered (Revelation 2:21), but repentance is offered to those of the church who still partake of her doctrines (Revelation 2:22; cf. 18:4). If the church wouldn’t repent (Revelation 2:22), Jesus said they, who continue to commit fornication with her, will also partake of her judgment, which includes being thrown upon a bed (G2825) and forced to partake of the wrath of God (cf. Revelation 18:4-8).

As mentioned in a previous study, committing fornication in this context involves having a relationship with the enemies of God, and in this context that would be the Jerusalem authorities. Those, who indulge in a spiritual relationship with them, partake of (eat of, live off of) their teachings, which often made the word of God of no effect (cf. Galatians 5:2, 4; Romans 9:31-32). One cannot live by the Law (works / flesh) and by Christ (grace – Romans 10:3-5).

The children of Jezebel (Revelation 2:23) are those people who believe what is preached by the Jerusalem authorities, and that includes her representatives in Asia Minor. Any disciples who were made by her, or her representatives, are not disciples of Christ. They are disciples / children of Jezebel, the Jerusalem authorities. We need to keep in mind at this point that Jesus claimed such disciples are twice the child of hell (Gehenna – G1067; see Matthew 23:15). That is, they are the more zealous (cf. Philippians 3:6) for the teaching of their mother, Jerusalem, (Jezebel) and are twice as worthy of judgment.

Jesus said he would “kill her children with death,” which is an odd way to put that. One may kill with a sword, but to kill with death seems redundant. If one is killed, how would  death, itself, be the means of death? I believe what is meant here has to do with the first death and the second death (cf. Revelation 2:11; 20:6, 14).

By mentioning a second death, it is implied there is a first death. The two are not the same thing. In a previous study I showed that the second death is physical death. We all die, but believers are not hurt by physical death, because we are given eternal life. The first death, which is implied by the fact that a second death is mentioned (cf. Revelation 2:11), must, therefore, concern spiritual death, from which we need a resurrection, or as Jesus described it: we must be born again (John 3:3, 7). So, Jesus claimed that any disciples made through a union of his people with Jezebel would not be his disciples. Rather, they would have no spiritual life at all. In other words, the labor or works (G2041 – cf. Revelation 2:19) of those believers, who preached in the name of Jerusalem (or the Law), would be labor spent in vain. This, no doubt, is reflected in the work of the ‘wicked servant’ mentioned in Luke’s Parable of the Pounds and Matthew’s Parable of the Talents.

Everything that Jesus said he intended to do in Revelation 2:23 was done so that the churches (the whole church) would know and understand that he, Jesus, searches the hearts of his people (i.e. he is God – Jeremiah 17:10) and rewards everyone according to his works. What he says, therefore, is both a reason for hope and a warning. Jesus’ words represent hope for those who labor according to their faith, as is seen in Matthew 25:16-17, because his disciples will be rewarded according to their works (Matthew 25:19-23). On the other hand, he, who casts aside his faith in Christ (Matthew 25:18) and labors according to the Law or the flesh, labors in his own strength. He would have even what was given him taken away, and he would be cast out into outer darkness, i.e. spiritual death (Matthew 25:24-30). That is, Jesus will slay him with spiritual death, just as Adam and Eve were slain in Genesis 3.

 

Advertisements
 
4 Comments

Posted by on April 16, 2019 in Apocalypse, Book of Revelation

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

4 responses to “Jezebel’s Judgment and Killing with Death

  1. Patricia Watkins

    April 16, 2019 at 13:29

    Hi again Eddie,

    You have said that Simon Magus couldn’t have commanded a great influence on the church in so short a time prior to 70 AD. Acts 8:9-11 describes Simon Magus’ history. “But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was SOME GREAT ONE: To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God. And to him they had regard, because that OF LONG TIME he had bewitched them with sorceries.”

    This “long time” in Acts 8:11 that Simon had been deceiving the Samaritans goes back even prior to the time when Christ made a trip through Samaria, and spoke to the Samaritan woman. The scripture says that Christ “must NEEDS go through Samaria”, in John 4:4. Why was it especially NECESSARY for Christ to go through Samaria at that time? I think there was more purpose behind Christ’s visit to this city than simply His travels making it a stopover that he could not avoid because of the lay of the land. There was real design and intention in His stop at Samaria. And real results afterward. He told the Samaritan woman that “Ye worship ye know not what…” Is it possible that Christ was referring to the misplaced worshipful regard of Simon that had already been going on for a “LONG TIME” as of Acts 8:11? This is quite probable, given the description of Simon’s reputation in Acts 8.

    As for Helen / “Jezebel”, who was teaching the doctrine of Balaam, she was given a space of time to repent before Revelation 2 was written, but it is not anywhere written or implied that she was ever converted. She was an evil influence on the church members of the first-century, and was actually a teacher among them. However, this woman, (the one who called herself a prophetess), is nowhere said to have been a genuine believer in Christ. She is linked with the category of those who had “known the depths of Satan” (Rev. 2:24), as opposed to those believers who were NOT in that category.

    I’m not regarding your position as a kind of “stronghold” that needs to be destroyed, Eddie. There is no need to separate the simultaneous persecution of the church by the Jewish leadership in Asia Minor from this corruption of church doctrine that had grown up from within it during the same time period. Remember, Peter said that judgment must FIRST begin at the house of God (I Peter 4:17). The corruption that had grown up swiftly in the early church needed to be purged from it (for example, the doctrine of Balaam issue), just as much as those Jews still rejecting Christ as the Messiah needed to repent. God often expects His believing church to repent FIRST, before He begins to judge those who are not His. He expects more of us, because we have been given much.

    I’ve read one of the studies you listed above, but will also go back and review the others as well to catch your entire perspective on this subject.

     
    • Eddie

      April 16, 2019 at 21:57

      Greetings Patricia and thank you for your continued interest in this discussion.

      “You have said that Simon Magus couldn’t have commanded a great influence on the church in so short a time prior to 70 AD. Acts 8:9-11 describes Simon Magus’ history. “But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was SOME GREAT ONE: To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God. And to him they had regard, because that OF LONG TIME he had bewitched them with sorceries.””

      So what! Simon Magus was a big man in Samaria, a city. That’s a long way from having influence in Asia Minor 25 years later, with most of the Apostles still alive. Plus, if I am correct about the date of the writing of the Apocalypse, you can cut that 25 years down to less than half.

      “This “long time” in Acts 8:11 that Simon had been deceiving the Samaritans goes back even prior to the time when Christ made a trip through Samaria, and spoke to the Samaritan woman. The scripture says that Christ “must NEEDS go through Samaria”, in John 4:4. Why was it especially NECESSARY for Christ to go through Samaria at that time? I think there was more purpose behind Christ’s visit to this city than simply His travels making it a stopover that he could not avoid because of the lay of the land. There was real design and intention in His stop at Samaria. And real results afterward. He told the Samaritan woman that “Ye worship ye know not what…” Is it possible that Christ was referring to the misplaced worshipful regard of Simon that had already been going on for a “LONG TIME” as of Acts 8:11? This is quite probable, given the description of Simon’s reputation in Acts 8.”

      You are reading your “Simon Magus” importance into the text. The Gospels mention **nothing** about him, nor do they make an implication toward a mysterious figure. Jesus was forced to go through Samaria as a safety precaution. John had just been cast into prison through the efforts of the chief priests and Pharisees, and the trouble concerned his baptism (John 3:23-25). We know John was shortly cast into prison after Jesus’ first Passover (John 2:13; cp. 3:24), because when he returned to Galilee John was already in prison (Matthew 4:12; Mark 1:14). His trip back to Galilee was instigated by learning that the Pharisees had learned that Jesus’ disciples baptized more folks than John the Baptist (John 4:1-3), and he chose Samaria, because the Jews, especially the Pharisees, made a wide birth of Samaria, when they traveled north, because they considered the land unclean (cp. John 4:9).

      Your remarks concerning “Helen” being “Jezebel” have no support in Scripture. You are making your case by simply telling a story and applying that story to Scripture.

      “There is no need to separate the simultaneous persecution of the church by the Jewish leadership in Asia Minor from this corruption of church doctrine that had grown up from within it during the same time period.”

      How could Simon Magus—a magician—gain influence in Asia Minor during Paul’s ministry there? The authorities in Jerusalem couldn’t break through Paul’s influence until they had him caged in Caesarea for 3-4 years. Simon Magus is a figure in the 30s AD. The persecution in Asia Minor took place in the 60s AD. Paul was there from about from cir 51-54 AD, preaching the Gospel throughout the whole area. The only people who could have gotten influence in the vicinity would be the Jerusalem authorities. While Paul couldn’t preach in their synagogues, they could come from Jerusalem and preach in the churches, which were largely Jewish. This is what occurred in Galatia earlier, which Paul had to combat with his epistle to Galatia and then with the letters from James, explaining the matter, and showing that the Jews who upset the churches in Galatia did so without apostolic support. There was **always** a threat from Jerusalem during the early period of the Church. The first three persecutions were begun by Jerusalem authorities and all when a son of Annas was high priest.

      Your **story** about Simon and Helen takes us away from the truth, and keeps us from applying that truth in today’s worship service and doctrine. What I believe here is indeed a ‘stronghold’ in Christ. I have supported this understanding in about a dozen other studies about Balaam, not to mention my verse-by-verse study in the Book of Acts that exposes the spying and subversive activity done by the Jerusalem authorities. “Jezebel” in Revelation 2:20 is 1st century Jerusalem. Just as the Old Covenant Jezebel used false prophets and scattered them throughout the land, so the 1st century AD Jezebel did similarly, something which Paul, himself, testified of in Galatians 2:4.

      May the Lord bless you as your interest in this matter takes you to the Scriptures.

       
  2. Patricia Watkins

    April 16, 2019 at 08:38

    Hi Eddie,

    The woman giving herself the title of “prophetess”, with the moniker of “Jezebel” in Revelation 2:20, was an actual woman – a single female leader in the early church who had “children” (or members of her church who followed her). This “Jezebel” is spoken of in a couple other places, such as II Peter 2:14, where the followers of this pernicious “doctrine of Balaam” in that text are said to be “having eyes full of AN ADULTERESS”. The KJV says they had eyes full of “adultery”, but the Interlinear version points to a single “adulterESS”, who was visually enticing these who followed the doctrine of Balaam.

    She is also obliquely referred to in II Peter 2:22 as the one called “the SOW that was washed” who had returned to her “wallowing in the mire”. This is reflective of Proverbs 11:22, which calls a beautiful woman who is without discretion by the insulting name of a pig with a jewel of gold in her snout.

    We find the actual name of this woman in Eusebius’ history. Her name was Helen, a woman who came from a brothel in Tyre originally (just as the Old Testament Queen Jezebel had come from Tyre in her youth – I Kings 16:31). Helen was the “sow” whose part of deception in the doctrine of Balaam made her return to her old habits of prostitution by “wallowing in the mire” of actual fornication as part of a nominal Christian worship practice in the early church.

    Helen was the sensual consort who ended up joining Simon Magus and becoming his “sidekick”, so to speak. She provided an alluring, visual distraction to help deceive people by the “doctrine of Balaam” which Simon developed to gain a considerable following in the churches of the first century.

    II Timothy 3:4-9 speaks of those who crept into houses (which were house church assemblies), and who would “lead captive silly women, laden with divers lusts…”. Jude 11 also refers to the particularly lust-filled followers of the doctrine of Balaam. Sexual appeal apparently has always been a useful tool to enhance a corrupting influence in the church’s teaching. It’s a practice as old as the Israelites falling for this temptation in Baal-peor, by which this Revelation 2 “doctrine of Balaam” got its name.

    Peter knew very well just how corrupting Simon Magus’ influence would become. He prophetically stated that Simon was set to be for “a gall of bitterness, and a bond of iniquity” for the church in Acts 8:23. Eusebius confirms this, by his comments on Simon Magus’ corrupting influence, along with Helen his consort.

    Referring to Justin Martyr from his first “Defense” of our doctrines to Antoninus [Pius], Eusebius quotes:

    “After the Lord’s ascension, the demons presented men who claimed to be gods, and they not only escaped being persecuted by you but even became objects of worship. Simon, a Samaritan from a village called Gittho, worked wonders through magic in Claudius’s time, thanks to the demons who possessed him…Nearly all Samaritans and a few in other nations also acknowledge him as their chief deity and worship him. And A WOMAN NAMED HELEN, who traveled around with him but had previously lived in a brothel [at Tyre], they call the First Emanation from him.” (emphasis mine)

    Eusebius then goes on to say:

    “This is Justin’s version, and Irenaeus agrees with him in Book 1 of his Against Heresies, where he collects stories about Simon and his foul and sordid teaching that are available to any interested. According to tradition, Simon was the original author of all heresies. From his time down to ours, his followers, while pretending Christianity, prostrate themselves before pictures and images of Simon and Helen, worshiping them with incense, sacrifices, and libations. Their more secret rites are so full of frenzy, madness, and degradation that they cannot be reported in writing or words. Whatever is more disgusting than the foulest crime imaginable is surpassed by the utterly repulsive heresy of these men, who, drenched in vice, make sport of wretched women. Of such evil Simon was the father…”

    This sounds exactly like Paul’s warning in II Timothy 3:4-9 against those who would “lead captive silly women, laden with divers lusts…”

    You may not agree with this historical connection of Helen to “Jezebel”, Eddie, but at least it shows you an alternative that is a plausible interpretation, and that synchronizes with other scripture content.

    I covered the topic of who “Jezebel” is at some length at the two following links, if you are interested:

    http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/theology/what-is-the-spirit-if-jezebel-seriously/67/ comments #67 and #76

    https://adammaarschalk.com/2014/08/31/wormwood-revelation-8-an-ot-based-judgment-upon-unfaithful-israel/
    comment from Dec. 25, 2016

     
    • Eddie

      April 16, 2019 at 10:18

      Greetings Patricia, and welcome. Thank you for your take on the subject of Jezebel, and your are correct in that you connect her deeds with the doctrine of Balaam. However, we disagree as to her identity, and as to the scope of Simon Magus’ threat prior to 70 AD. He simply couldn’t have commanded so great an influence in so short a time. The Church’s influence had the blessing of heaven, Simon did not.

      Moreover, as it pertains to Helen, when was she given a time to repent (Revelation 2:21), and when was she ever considered by God to be one of his? Helen is not a very good fit here, but you are welcome to believe as you think best. Some people believe because a trusted evangelist tells them what occurred, and they believe him (or her). Others believe what they have found out themselves. They do the digging, and they trust what they have found. Yet, no matter how one comes to believe as one does, in order to convince that one otherwise, another must successfully show why the trusted evangelist is in error (almost impossible for one dependent upon personalities) or completely undermine the system of doctrines one has built up as one’s stronghold in the faith (another seemingly impossible task). However, personally, I’ve had by ‘stronghold’ destroyed twice during my walk with the Lord, twice as a young man in my twenties. I vowed to God that I would never let another man believe **for** me again. So, simply saying ‘Helen’ is Jezebel and supporting your understanding with a few Scriptures that do not support your case when other Scriptures are taken into consideration, simply will not sway me.

      I recently published my understanding of the Doctrine of Balaam, which you may read if you so desire. Two years ago I published another study concerning The Way of Balaam, and I tied it in with The Persecution in Asia Minor, which occurred about the middle of the first century AD. All these things are interconnected (and supported by at least a dozen other studies), so to speak against one is to speak against all. Therefore, in order for you or anyone else to bring down my ‘stronghold’ of doctrine, the whole, not the part, must be destroyed.

      Have a good day Patricia, and Lord bless you in your studies.

       

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: