Posted on 03/17/2012 7:26:45 AM PDT by GonzoII
P.S. Nicolaitano has had a clear meaning in the Greek language for over three millenia. It has been used in various forms to deride tyranny of almost every kind.
You really should have selected a better example than Nicolatians to make your point since there is a significant amount of disagreements even among the Protestants as to what the term means. None of the concordances equate the term to what you are implying (see Strong's 3531). Even the few confabulated attempts to construct an indictment of the Church do so out of whole cloth.
"A person of average intelligence will easily understand the Bible IF THEY WANT TO UNDERSTAND"
Are you asking me to believe that anyone can will themselves to believe or solve anything? That implies that if you want to believe something bad enough it becomes your truth.
Note: "Nicolaitano" is not a Greek word.
You seem to be a very confused person.
Nicolaitano is very much a Greek word. In simplest terms it means Rule the people. It has also more complex connotations, depending on context.
There is no disagreement between honest people on its meaning in the context of Revelations. The deceivers of the RC church have a strong need to cover up the true meaning because it reveals Christ’s condemnation of their every day practices.
I won’t ask you to believe anything; I see the depths of denial that I would encounter in doing so, and will refrain from any attempt to have a sane sensible intelligent conversation.
Are you referring to Nicolaitan(s) or Nicolaitanes?
Nicolaitanes is the plural.
Yes, it can be found that way and as Nicolaitans, plural, and Nicolaitan, singular. I think Nicolaitano is an error spelling, and least that’s what searches indicate.
FWIW, this is what wikitionary entry:
English
Alternative forms
Nicholaitan
Etymology
From Nicolaite + -an.
Noun
Nicolaitan (plural Nicolaitans)
A member of an early Christian sect, said to participate in certain pagan ceremonies.
I sincerely hope you are not accusing me of being dishonest or less than reasonably educated for rejecting your interpretation of what or who the Nicoliatians mentioned in Revelations were. The Nicolatians were a Christian heresy.
The term “Nicolatians” was never recorded before it appeared in the Book of Revelations. The earliest writings, other than the introduction of the term in Revelation, was by the Early Church Fathers. St. Epiphanius of Salamis wrote that the term refers to a sect founded by Nicholas, one of the first seven Deacons of the Church. Hippolytus concurred. St. Irenaeus wrote that the characteristic tenets of Nicolatians were the lawfulness of promiscuous sexual intercourse with women, and of eating things offered to idols. St. Epiphanius of Salamis. St. Eusebius wrote substantially the same thing. Tertullian spoke of the Nicolaitanes as a branch of the Gnostic family that was already extinct.
The 17th century Lutheran Johann Lorenz von Mosheim wrote: "the questions about the Nicolaitanes have difficulties which cannot be solved." Johann Augustus Neander, the father of Protestant historiography, doubted whether the actual existence of such a sect can be proved, and thought that the name was symbolical and mystical like much of the Book of Revelation, to denote corrupters or seducers of the people, like Balaam. He proposed that the term relates not to a specific group, but to a type of person who enticed Christians to participate in the sacrificial feasts and orgies of the pagans, much just as the Old Testament Jews were led astray by the Moabites,
That wiki entry obviously was written by a catholic, bent on hiding what Christ clearly meant by it.
Nico is not Nicholas by any stretch.
The catholic “church’s” policy of hiding the word of God from the people is an extension of the practices of the Pharisees that founded it.
Anyway, this is wisdom: Don’t be a Wikipedophile!
.
Yes, Lutherans being an extension of the errors of the catholic ‘church’ would hold the sane interest in covering the express words of Christ.
Yes, Lutherans being an extension of the errors of the catholic ‘church’ would hold the same interest in covering the express words of Christ.
I’m sorry, I’m not finding what I *think* you’re alluding to or the ‘o’ spelling.
Perhaps a link to the spelling, etymology, exegesis you’re in agreement with?
The ‘o’ ending is singular.
I can’t find it by the spelling, only ‘an’ for singular.
Do you have a link to anything using that spelling?
Let’s put kindergarten in recess for the month.
For something that is supposed to be easy and self interpreting for the reasonable man this sure is complicated and confusing.
I really, really, really want to get to the truth. I closed my eyes real hard (like a Televangelist during the passing of the collection plate), clicked my heels three times, and looked for evidence to corroborate Editor's claim, but it still comes up hollow.
>> “For something that is supposed to be easy and self interpreting for the reasonable man this sure is complicated and confusing.” <<
.
Yes, as I posted to you previously, for those that prefer not to understand, the Lord sends strong delusion. That is the likely source of your confusion.
I'll give you credit for one thing, you put out an ink cloud that even an Architeuthis would be impressed by.
My purpose for participating on these threads is to try to ensure that an honest discussion takes place with respect to God word.
You said a few posts ago that you do not believe in Millenialism. I'm not going back to look it up, but I think you said nor does your Church. That you do not believe that Christ is literally going to return to this earth and reign for 1000 years. Please correct me if I've made a mistake as to what you or your Church believes. The reason I'm curious is what do you think the Millenial Kingdom is about? Is it just a spiritual kingdom, or is it a physical kingdom? ANd why would Christ want to return to this earth to set it up? In your opinion. Why not just have everything spiritually in heaven and nothing physically on this planet? (I'm asking you to put on your outside the RCC box thinking cap and think about what could be the reason for His second coming to this earth). Because, according to God's word, there IS a reason for Christ returning here. And His Millennial reign here. In fact, there are SEVERAL reasons for it. Literal return, and literal results.
That is correct. The Church, as revealed in Luke 1:33 in acknowledged in the Nicene Creed, believes that "His kingdom will have no end".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.