Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible

and Theology
http://btb.sagepub.com

The Social Implication of Idolatry in Revelation 2:14: Christ or Caesar?

Panayotis Coutsoumpos
Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible and Theology 1997; 27; 23
DOI: 10.1177/014610799702700105

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://btb.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/27/1/23

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Biblical Theology Bulletin Inc.

Additional services and information for Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible and Theology can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://btb.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://btb.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations http://btb.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/27/1/23

Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009

 The Social Implication of Idolatry in Revelation 2:14:
Christ or Caesar?

Panayotis Coutsoumpos

Abstract

The prohibition of eating meat sacrificed to idols appears in various passages in the Second Testament and
also in the Apostolic Teachings (Aune: 16-32). Paul treated the issue of food sacrificed to idols in 1 Corinthians
8:1-13 and 10:19-22. It was of course essential to the apostolic decrees of Acts 15:20 and 29. The word is also
found in Revelation 2:14 and 20. In this article I seek to work out more clearly the social setting of the problem.
I argue that the dilemma is not over the idolatry issue only, but over the attitude toward socio-cultural and
religious concessions on the part of the Christians in Pergamum.

p
ergamum was presumably the seat of the Roman govern-
ment in the province of Asia atJohn’s time and the center
citizens executed or banished, who refused to accord them.
When he appeared in public, the crowds were urged to
of the cult to the emperor. The first temple for the imperial shout: &dquo;All hail to our Lord (Kyrios, the same word used to
cult in honor of Rome and Augustus was built there around refer to Jesus in the Second Testament) and to his Lady.&dquo;
29 BCE (Caird: 37). Consequently, Pergamum became the Anyone who addressed him in speech or in writing had to
first city in Asia to support the cult to the emperor. This start with the words: &dquo;Lord and God&dquo; (Jones: 1033).

imperial cult was the test of political loyalty to Rome rather
than worship of a divine emperor. Ladd rightly observes that
the city of Pergamum was a stronghold of heathen religion
and the imperial cult (45). It is highly probable that this is
why John spoke of Pergamum as the place where Satan had
his throne (Rev 2:13). Further, Pergamum was also the
center for the worship of Asclepius, the serpent-god who
presided over the art of healing and was one of the emblems
of the city (Hemer: 85).
Another of the city’s patron deities was Zeus Soter,
whose immense altar dominated the city from the center of
the acropolis. The church did not have to fear this popular
cult as much as the patriotic religion of worship, rejection of
which was considered as godlessness and subversion in the
eyes of the Roman magistrates and the public in general
(Thompson: 160).
According to Dio Cassius, the Emperor Domitian de-
creed that all government proclamation must start with
&dquo;Our Lord and Godcommands....&dquo; Domitian had many
executed for &dquo;atheism&dquo; because they failed to worship him
as one of the gods of Rome (ROMAN HISTORY, 67.14).
On the one hand, some scholars argue that there was
no evidence of a universal or local persecution on the part
According to Clement there was a persecution against
Christians around 96 CE ( 1:1; 59:4)). Tertullian gives sev-
eral good reasons why the Christians might, in Domitian’s
time, have been considered &dquo;public enemies&dquo; (Apol. 35.1).
The book of Revelation, at any rate, certainly seems to
corroborate the fact that there was persecution. Christians
in the time of Domitian were accused of &dquo;hatred against the
human race,&dquo; of &dquo;atheism,&dquo; and of supporting a &dquo;mischievous
superstition.&dquo; The popular cry, &dquo;Away with the atheists,&dquo;
demonstrated the contempt in which Christians were held
by the pagans (Mart. Polycarp. 3.2; 9.2). The only offense on
the part of the Christians seems to have been their firm
position against polytheism and the worship of the emperor,
which was an integral part of life in the empire of that period.
Rome was tolerant of foreign cults, as long as they did
not cause social unrest. But in the time of Trajan (about 111I
CE), Christians were executed by Pliny (Trajan’s repre-
sentative in Pontus and Bithynia) simply because they were
Christians. Pliny apparently found the Christians guilty of
no violation, but only a &dquo;depraved and extravagant supersti-
tion.&dquo; The Pergamum church member faced direct pressure

of Domitian. But there is no doubt concerning Domitian’s
persecution of the Christians. The notion of the divine
emperor took on new life in Domitian’s reign (81-96). He
always expected divine honors, and he even had leading
Panayotis Coutsoumpos, Ph.D. (Sheffield), is the author of two
book reviews published in JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT (1992) AND ANDREWS UNIVERSITY SEMINARY STUD-
IES (1994). He resides at 8818-2 Grove Street, Berrien Springs, MI
49103; e-mail otisc@andrews.edu.

23
Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009
and temptation to idolatry, especially in the form of the
imperial cult (10.96).
The majority of Christians in Pergamum were converts
from paganism, and without doubt the social and religious
pressure to deny Christ and to return to their old customs
were severe (Rev 2:13). Although idolatry was most likely
the main problem in Pergamum, immorality was the problem
in Thyatira-immorality, whether in the literal sense, or as
a figure related to apostasy (Hemer: 91).
The Teaching of Balaam and the Nicolaitans
On the similarities between beliefs and the teachings of
Balaam, the Nicolaitans, and Jezebel, the approach taken
normally yielded nothing convincing (Mackay: 111-15).
Most interpreters bracket them with other heresies and
teachings referred to in the letters to the seven churches in
Revelation. A brief definition of these groups will help to
identify their common characteristic.
1. Balaam. A prophet summoned by Balak, king of
Moab, to curse Israel prior to its entrance into Canaan.
Balaam’s story appears in Num 22-24. A common practice
has been to connect the Balaamites mentioned in the letter
to Pergamum with the Nicolaitans mentioned in the same
letter, making their teaching similar.
2. Nicolaitans. A group mentioned in Revelation in the
letters to Ephesus (Rev 2:6) and Pergamum (Rev 2:15).
Their teaching is like that of Balaam and Jewish tradition:
eating food sacrificed to idols, and immorality (Num 25:1-2;
31:16). Since the same sins are mentioned in the letter to
Thyatira as the teaching of a self-proclaimed prophetess
named Jezebel (Rev. 2:20-25), the Nicolaitans were prob-
ably present there also, and Jezebel was most likely a Nico-
laitan prophetess.
3. Jezebel. The daughter of Ethbaal, king of the Sidoni-
ans, and wife of Ahad, the son of Omir, king of Israel (1 Kgs
16:29-31). The biblical passages present a negative picture
of this undoubtedly powerful woman. Jezebel became the
influential queen of the northern kingdom as the foreign wife
of Ahad. A prophetess in the church of Thyatira who
according to Rev 2:20-23 &dquo;beguiles the congregation to
practice immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols,&dquo; she
fostered the worship of the Canaanites. She was probably a
real person, but her name also appears to be symbolic (Freed-
man : 569, 849, 1107).
In the letter sent to the church at Pergamum there is an
allusion to those who retained the teaching of Balaam (Rev
2:14). The teaching in question may be related to that of the
Nicolaitans mentioned in Rev 2:15. Further, it is most likely
that Nicolaitan (&dquo;conqueror of the laity, the people&dquo;) may,
like Balaam and Jezebel, be the symbolic name John used for
24
Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009
his opponents, since &dquo;conquer&dquo; is the main word in his
theology and since &dquo;Nicolas&dquo; is the rough equivalent of the
Hebrew &dquo;Balaam&dquo; (ruler of the people) (Boring: 92). The
letter sent to Ephesus mentions the works of the Nicolaitans
and the way they are reproved (Rev 2:6). The connection
with immoral practices and idolatry and the reference to
Balaam and the incident in Baal Peor mentioned in 1 Cor
10:8 is noteworthy. Although they are mentioned in only
two instances, the similarities between the Pergamum text
and the teaching of Jezebel at Thyatira (Rev 2:20ff) show
that she represented an identical phenomenon (Barrett: 40).
Furthermore, the eating is linked with immoral prac-
tices and with First Testament precedent, even though the
figure of Jezebel is changed for that of Balaam. &dquo;Jezebel is
described at 3 Reg. 16:31 as leading her husband into idola-
try, and at 4 Reg. 9.22 as guilty of fornication; see also 3 Reg.
18.19&dquo; (Bousset: 200-06). The Nicolaitans, Balaam, and
Jezebel all fostered accommodation to the surrounding cul-
ture. As Balaam misled the Israelites into committing idola-
try and immoral practices, so the Nicolaitans misled some
members of the community with their false teaching.
Thompson rightly points out that &dquo;the offense of the Nico-
laitans and Jezebel is great in the eyes of the seer-they are
called upon to repent, but their evil behavior is not of such
magnitude that he refuses to recognize them as members of
the churches.&dquo; Obviously, in this context, eating meat sac-
rificed to idols is an act of idolatry and also an act of homage
to the pagan deities (Thompson: 122). The evil behavior of
the Nicolaitans and Jezebel therefore centers on the issue of
eating meat sacrificed to the idols and what that practice
implies. The Nicolaitans were probably a Christian libertine
group within Ephesus, Pergamum, and Thyatira. It is ques-
tionable, though, that they were &dquo;just secularized Gentile
Christians and nothing else&dquo; (Beckwith: 459).
Irenaeus described the Nicolaitans as Gnostic because
of their specific gnostic teachings (Adv. Haer. 3.11.1). But
according to Beckwith they preached a practical error (460).
The letters to Pergamum and Thyatira, moreover, seem to
oppose practical error rather than speculative doctrine, and
the judgment that &dquo;they have not known the deep things of
Satan&dquo; (Rev 2:24) supports the same conclusion. The Nico-
laitans, at any rate, claimed to know the deep mysteries of
God. The true Gnostic (spiritual person-Schussler
Fiorenza: 116), who has &dquo;gnosis&dquo; of the true being of God or
Satan, is by this gnosis freed from the world and its power.
This gnostic liberty can be expressed either in rigid asceti-
cism or an egregious libertinism.
From the foregoing we may conclude that the teachings
of Balaam (Rev 2:14) and Jezebel the false prophetess (Rev
2:20) were linked with the same mistaken doctrines. It is also
obvious that John looked on this group and its doctrine with
displeasure. But who, precisely, were the Nicolaitans? As
Barrett succinctly observes, &dquo;the short and correct answer is:
we do not know.&dquo; There is simply not enough informa-
tion-all we know is what we find in the book of Revelation
(Caird: 36). We may assume that John’s dispute with them
centered about their lax attitude toward pagan religion and
society.
The evidence available from patristic sources likewise
rests on the references in Revelation, but Brox thinks much
of it is conjecture (30). Irenaeus also argued that the Nico-
laitans were followers of one Nicolas, who lived, practiced,
and taught immoral doctrines (Adv. haer. 1.26.3). For them
it was a matter of indifference to practice fornication and to
eat food offered to idols. The Nicolaitans are likened to
Balaam in Rev 2:14, and the use of &dquo;so&dquo; or &dquo;thus&dquo; at the
beginning of Rev 2:15 links Balaam’s practice with the
Nicolaitans’ teaching, thereby suggesting that they shared
the same immoral practices.
Jezebel and the Nicolaitans represent liberal winds in
the ancient churches. Whereas they seem to be very influ-
ential in the churches of Pergamum and Thyatira, however,
they seem to have been almost unsuccessful in the church
at Ephesus. The majority of church members appear not to
have embraced their teachings; so John clearly had some
allies in the churches of Ephesus, Smyrna, and Philadelphia,
probably some in Thyatira (Rev 2:24ff), and most likely a
few in Pergamum, Sardis (Rev 3:4), and Laodicea. John’s
sharp opposition to Balaam’s teaching, to Jezebel, and to the
Nicolaitans seems to have been directed, not only against
the pagan customs they encouraged, but also against the
prophetic role they claimed in the attempt to legitimate their
conduct.
It is highly probable that the Nicolaitans’ teaching is
based on a wrong interpretation of Paul’s view of freedom.
Paul had seemed not to impose the terms of the Apostolic
Decree on the Gentile churches in Galatia. In Corinth, too,
he seemed to prefer to leave the question of food sacrificed
to idols to individual judgment and the social responsibility
of each church member. Under the new pressure, therefore,
the libertines might claim that since Paul’s restriction was
invalid, they were free to participate. All such things (idola-
try and fornication) belong to the sphere of the body, the
earth, the flesh; so Christians could not be affected if they
indulged in them (Hemer: 93).
The question of a possible link with the references to
Balaam in Jude 11 and 2 Peter 2:15 is difficult to resolve,
because the internal evidence for the dating of both epistles
can be interpreted in different ways. It is possible, for exam-
ple, that &dquo;Balaam&dquo; in Jude 11 and 2 Peter refers to a move-
ment, perhaps similar to the Nicolaitans’ sect. The false
teachers in Jude and 2 Peter were obviously antinomians.
Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009
The mention of Paul in 2 Peter 3:15-17 probably indicates
that the author is combating views that appealed to a cor-
ruption of his teachings. But as Hemer observes, we cannot
assume that the opposition referred to in both epistles is the
same group or even contemporaneous (93). It is plausible
that atechnical sense of the name Balaam may have arisen
from an earlier text, which may very well have been Jude or
even 2 Peter.
In light of the foregoing, we must now consider the issue
of Gnosticism referred to at the outset. It seems evident that
the false teacher referred to in both epistles propounded
some speculative teaching, but the data do not admit of any
more specific explanation. It may be argued that the false
teachers were no more than antinomian libertines ready to
use such teachings to justify their position. Furthermore,
&dquo;cosmological speculation was already rife in Pauline
churches, to judge from Col 1:15-17 (cf. 2 Peter 3:5)&dquo; (von
Hamack: 413).
According to von Harnack the Nicolaitans were essen-
tially a Gnostic group, but some of von Harnack’s hypotheses
are unwarranted. He believes, e.g., that the teaching of
Jezebel was the standard, and so he makes the letter sent to
the church at Thyatira the main source for the Gnostic
teachings of the Nicolaitans. He argues also that John’s
dislike of the Nicolaitans may have been due to their being
worshipers of Satan or radical dualists (415). Both conten-
tions, based on secondary-source interpretations of the letter
to Thyatira are surely wrong.
The Social Setting of Idolatry ,
In contrast to the church at Ephesus, the church of
Pergamum appears to have tolerated those who adhered to
the teachings of Balaam and the Nicolaitans. In all prob-
ability the Nicolaitans agreed with the strong Christians at
Corinth that pagan deities did not really exist and that a
Christian might without scruple participate fully in the
&dquo;social life, commerce, and politics of a great pagan city.&dquo;
John did not specifically describe their doctrine, but focused
on their conduct. They ate meat sacrificed to idols and
practiced immorality.
To understand the social meaning of this activity, we
may examine the same issue in the Corinthian church (1 Cor
8:1-13; 10:23-11:1). It was customary in Graeco-Roman
times for people to eat meat in public festivities such as
funerals, birthdays, and common festivals, as well as at more
private occasions-at clubs and associations, guilds, and
private banquets in a temple. As Theissen points out, &dquo;These
banquets and parties express social connections and com-
mon causes, whether province, the whole city, a specific
group&dquo; ( 127-28) . Consequently, the eating of food in a cultic
25
environment posed a very significant question as to how
Christians should relate to the social custom in professional
and civic circles. Wealthy Christians were involved in all
kinds of social and economic responsibilities, in the course
of which they joined their partners in eating food sacrificed
to the gods.
There was no agreement among Christian leaders con-
cerning the eating of food in a cultic setting and its signifi-
cance for a Christian. All apparently agreed that there is but
one true God and that all other cults involved the worship
of idols (1 Cor 8:4-6). It may be assumed also that John
objected to Christians participating in professional and civic
life-he was, as has been said, against any kind of social
accommodation on the part of the Christians at Pergamum.
Barrett observes that it is not difficult to assume that
the Apostolic Decree was current in the circles in which the
book of Revelation arose. Most meat that could be pur-
chased in the market had been offered symbolically by the
butcher to some deity (42). A unique problem would have
been posed by numerous trade guilds at Ephesus, Pergamum,
and Thyatira, for membership in these guilds involved par-
ticipation in religious ceremonies that were merely part of
normal social life for some church members in Asia Minor.
Such was the case with the famous trade guilds in
Thyatira, whose membership included Christians. Beckwith
does not agree with Ramsay’s view that John asked the
Christians to cancel their membership in the trade guilds
(464-65), maintaining instead that John asked them only to
avoid compromising their faith while continuing to be mem-
bers of the trade guilds. Collins, on the contrary, argues that
such a stance is improbable unless John had changed his
mind. Unlike Paul, John did insist that food offered to idols
must be avoided, even though the Nicolaitans, &dquo;Balaam,&dquo;
and &dquo;Jezebel&dquo; thought the Christians ought not to be so
exclusive (Collins: 87-88).
In the case of the church at Pergamum, the implications
seem to have a similar social-ethical background but differ-
ent connotations: (1) the church at Pergamum is criticized
for accepting those who hold the doctrine of Balaam and the
Nicolaitans, (2) the issues of eating meat sacrificed to idols
and practicing immorality seem to be related to personal
ethics, and (3) for some the strict avoidance of idolatry
would mean a separatist position for the Christian commu-
nity (Schissler Fiorenza: 115).
From our perspective John’s exhortation against cul-
tural accommodation (Rev 2:14) seems strange because we
assume that all Christians have and live a high moral stand-
ard. But this was not true in the ancient world. In Antioch,
for instance, where the first gentile Christian congregation
arose, there was a temple dedicated to Apollo and Diana.
26
Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009
This temple became the favorite retreat for the wealthy
citizens of Antioch, and even Roman governors frequented
it. The immoral customs led to the place being called Daph-
nici mores. In this kind of pagan social setting, it is most likely
that a faction in the Pergamum church arose, advocating a
free attitude toward pagan customs, temple banquets, and
immoral practices. Porneusai, moreover, represented idolatry
in Jewish tradition (Collins: 88).
This created a conflict over the basic issue of social
assimilation. Such a position would involve a radical critique
of the social-religious life of the Roman empire and the
rejection of the whole Roman social system as well. Under
these circumstances the church at Pergamum faced internal
controversy and the attacks of these false teachers (Balaam,
Jezebel, and the Nicolaitans) against all that the Christian
faith and community stood for. If the Pergamenes accepted
.
the Nicolaitans’ view advocating conformity to all the social
customs of the Roman empire, the door would of course be
open to syncretism and religious compromise as well.
On the other hand, how could Christians withdraw
from all aspects of social life? Was it necessary to adopt such
a rigid stand in social matters? Did John in fact call for
complete withdrawal from society? It seems clear that he
praised the faithful Christians in Pergamum, like those in
Ephesus (Rev 2:3), because they avoided idolatry in the form
of worshiping Caesar (Antipas, e.g., was executed for refus-
ing to deny his faith) .Thompson, however, suggests that
Rome did not yet engage in a policy of systematic persecu-
tion-did not yet seek out those who refused to worship the
emperor (164).
The fidelity of the Christians at Pergamum was praised
because they remained faithful even in the midst of such an
idolatrous society, a city full of gods and the seat of emperor-
worship. At least some of the Christians at Pergamum, then,
did not give in to the pressure of idolatry in the form of
Caesar worship (Boring: 21 ) .
Conclusion
It is most likely that the Nicolaitans formed an anti-
nomian group whose tenets stemmed from a misunderstand-
ing of Paul’s idea of freedom. They expressed their freedom
in libertine behavior. This behavior allowed them to become
part of their syncretistic pagan society and without reserva-
tion to participate in the Roman civil religion. As Balaam
misled the Israelites into idolatry and immoral practices, so
the Nicolaitans misled some Christians with their false
teaching. Since that teaching seems to have been the alter-
native, in diametric opposition, to John’s, his sharp rejection
of it is perfectly understandable.
 John was, then, adamantly opposed to cultural accom-
modation on the part of the Christians at Pergamum-not
only to immoral practices and idolatry, but to all the social,
cultural, and religious agreements which these practices
symbolized for the Christians. John strongly opposed the
influence of the dominant alien culture and encouraged
Christians not to conform to the idolatrous worship of
Caesar. The Christians at Pergamum in Asia Minor during
the first century were obviously under heavy political, eco-
nomic, and especially social and religious pressure to vener-
ate and worship the image of Caesar or face the
consequences. John’s message to them was that they should
not compromise with the practices of the pagan society, and
in no way accommodate themselves to the cultural values of
the Roman social world.
Works Cited
Aune, David E. 1981. The Social Matrix of the Apocalypse of John,
BIBLICAL RESEARCH 26: 35-41.
Barrett, C. K. 1982. Things Sacrificed to Idols, ESSAYS ON
Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press.
Bethwick, I. T 1967. THE APOCALYPSE OF JOHN. Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker Book House.
Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009
Boring, M. Eugene. 1989. REVELATION. Louisville, KY: John Knox
Press.
Boussett, W 1906. DIE OFFENBARUNG JOHANNIS. Göttingen: Van-
dehoeck & Ruprecht.
Caird, G. B. 1987. THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE.
Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers.
Freedman, David Noel. 1992. THE ANCHOR BIBLE DICTIONARY,
vols. 1-3. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Harnack, A. von—. 1965. The Sect of the Nicolaitans and Nicolaus,
the Deacon of Jerusalem, JOURNAL OF RELIGION 3: 413-22.
Hemer, Colin J. 1986. THE LETTERS TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES OF
ASIA IN THEIR LOCAL SETTING. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Aca-
demic Press.
Jones, Donald L. 1980. Christianity and the Roman Imperial Cult,
AUFSTEIG UND NIEDERGANG DER ROMISCHEN WELT 23:2.
New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter.
Ladd, George E. 1979. THE REVELATION OF JOHN. Grand Rapids,
MI: William B. Eerdmans.
McKay, W M. 1973. Another Look at the Nicolaitans, EVANGELICAL
QUARTERLY 45: 111-15.
Schüssler Fiorenza, E. 1985. THE BOOK OF REVELATION: JUSTICE
AND JUDGMENT. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press.
PAUL. Thompson, Leonard L. 1990. THE BOOK OF REVELATION: APOCA-
LYPSE AND EMPIRE. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Webster, T B. L. 1964. HELLENISTIC POETRY AND ART. New York,
NY Bames & Noble.
27