Revelation 3

Read

 

Read Revelation 3 

Meditate on the whole chapter.

 

Reflect

 

Who do you think was speaking to the churches?

 

How did the person describe himself? For much can be learnt about him by the manner he describes himself.

 

How are the three churches mentioned in this passage different from one other? Which of them is closest to the model church and which is the dud one?

 

From the way the analysis was made, do you think it refersto the church or the individual members of the church? 

 

After all that has been said, is there a saving grace for the church concerned?

 

Relate

 

These letters to the churches were written by John under the direction of Christ, who is the undisputed Head of the Church. (Colossians 1: 18)

 

Written in the first century AD, these letters are as relevant today as they were back then. Carrying the apocalyptic messages of Christ to seven of the selected churches, each letter is spot on in its observation, and for that matter, appropriate for any church in any era of church history. The issues raised in the letters, therefore, still ring true for the churches today.

 

What's interesting is the manner in which Christ is depicted in the letters. He describes himself in a manner that is slightly different from the way the gospels describe him. What's more, the seven times that he addresses the seven different churches, a different aspect of himself is made known to the readers. If seven is taken to mean a perfect number, then the seven different descriptions would give a perfect picture when put together. Never will we find a more perfect head for the church.

 

But, even with a perfect head like Christ, and under the watch of an angel, the churches still fared poorly except for one or two. Even then, is it any wonder that they fail to live up to expectations?

 

It shows that churches are given free reins to do church the way they think that it should be done. However, in case we think that Christ is taking a backseat or hands - off approach, we couldn't be more wrong. As the head of the church, he has as much vested interest in the growth of the church than any of us, if not more. Besides, he has made it clear, in no uncertain terms, that he will be back for his church - the collective church, his bride.

 

Now, in the interim, he sends out a report detailing his observation of the seven representative churches clutteredaround the western part of Asia Minor, which is modern day Turkiye. He's saying to all the churches, without mincing words, to spiritually wake up. There is also a dollop of encouragement for the churches.

 

For that reason, any of today's church can see itself in one, or perhaps more than one, of the churches described, and learn from them their mistakes as well as their ystrengths. 

 

This chapter showcases the last three of the seven churches, completing what is probably the composite state of the Church at any one time. The significant bit about these last three churches is that while one is doing well, almost a model church if you will, another is almost as good a goner, with no hope of a possible revival. And there's still the third church, which lies somewhere in between in terms of passion and conviction. It's not called 'lukewarm' then for no good reason.

 

It's sad and scary that a church like the one in Sardis can be totally unaware of its true state. This happens when a church is misled by the superficial feedback it receives, causing it to think that it's doing well when, in fact, it isn't. The church could also have chosen to look the other way, preferring to believe in what it wants to believe rather than what it knows to be the real problem. What it needs is an attractive facade to keep the favours, reviews and support coming. Who cares if the church is not what it is so long as it is seen to be thriving. Such a church may not even know that it's in dire straits, let alone pray for a revival. For too long, it has buried its head in the sand to be able to differentiate sand from sense.

 

Then, there could also be a church like the one in Laodicea. Through lack of spirited attempts, half - baked ones if at all, it fails to rise above the mediocrity that it has unwittingly set for itself. Since it's not prepared to go further, it tries to play it safe. Being lukewarm becomes the best compromise it could come up with, which offers a comfortable approach to almost every matter of the Cross. In the church’s book, itseems like a win - win situation. But not in Christ's book. For that's not what the call of discipleship is about. 

 

Lastly, there could even be a church like the one in Philadelphia, which seems to get its act together. Its faithfulness shines through as a result. Christ is visibly won over by their adherence to the Word and complete allegiance to him. It's a church where matters of the Cross really matter. It's not hard to imagine how such a church is becoming of the church approved by Christ.

 

A church is a collective body as well as a composition of all its individual members. In that case, there will be members who do not fit the general description of the church. We need to be careful not to judge a person solely on the basis of the church that he or she belongs to. 

 

If all this has discouraged us, take heart that this is not the final report. We could do better for ourselves by taking heed of the remarks made by Christ and try to be the church or persons approved by him. It will be by his word, his grace and his spirit.

 

Rest

 

Lord, you have given us free rein to run your church, but you are still the one who holds the reins of power. May the church that you have entrusted to us bear the stamp of your approval. May it be recognisable by you from every angle and any distance as it stands ready to do your bidding. So, may it stay true to you, charged for you, and strong in you. Whatever. Whenever. Wherever.

Naville Chia