In the United States
of America, mention can be made of the “city that never sleeps,” or “the windy
city.” Those that are accustomed to operating within the social context
of the United States, know that these are references to New York city and
Chicago. This is not limited to the United States, but is a common
practice the world over. One could use phrases such as “city of lights,”
or “the eternal city,” in full knowledge that the user is making reference to
Paris and Rome.
Singapore, in
southeast Asia, is sometimes referred to as “the fine country.” Upon
first glance, this appears to be a positive appellation, expressing a
subjective sentiment not unlike the way that is traditionally applied when
confronted with the “lukewarm” of Laodicea. However, upon further
examination, though Singapore is indeed a fine city-state, this use of “fine”
is connected to the fact that the government of Singapore, in its efforts to
keep the country clean, civil and highly organized, levies fines for littering,
spitting, or chewing gum in public.
An analogy here is
probably useful. In the United States, the city of Cleveland is roughly
the midway point between Chicago and New York (much like Laodicea is roughly
midway between Hierapolis and Colossae). If somebody wanted to address
the city of Cleveland, encouraging the residents to order their lives or engage
in activities more akin to the goings-on in New York or Chicago for which there
is a high level of notoriety (say in the area of theatre), one might write
something like, “I know your deeds, you are sleeping and lacking wind. I
wish you were either not asleep or windy! So because you are mistaken, I
am going to vomit you out of my mouth!” (“Mistaken” because one of the
not-so-flattering nicknames of Cleveland is “the mistake on the lake”)
Given proper context, the residents of Cleveland would take this as a message
that they needed to improve their offerings in the area of theatre, and would
most definitely not understand it to be an indication that they needed to sleep
less or construct windmills.
This initially
subjective usage that becomes, upon further examination, highly objective, is
quite similar to what has been discovered when it comes to the information
being conveyed in Revelation’s letter to Laodicea. Clearly, the terms in
use are not meant to convey any sense of morality or spiritual state, but are
common identifiers. On the other hand, there are nicknames that do have
negative connotations. One such nickname would be “sin city.” A
socially and culturally aware reader today (like that which would be expected
in first century Asia Minor) would immediately think “Las Vegas.” In the
time of Jesus and His apostles, “sin city” would have been the nickname of
Corinth, in Greece. These examples (Las Vegas and Corinth) have obvious
moral judgments attached to them, but one does not see that with the names
associated with New York, Chicago, Paris, or Rome.
So to put this lack
of moral judgment associated with city identifiers into the context of the
letter to Laodicea, which now seems to be pointing more logically towards
identifiable activities and practices within the churches of the region
(Hierapolis, Laodicea, and Colossae) that would have been well known to the
other churches (as information seemed to be able to flow freely between and
amongst those churches, as indicated by what Paul writes to the Colossians), it
would appear that one is no longer looking at a contrast. Rather, the
three temperature-related terms can now be understood as applying in reference
to what was taking place in those churches, with a certain activity of
Hierapolis and Colossae being approved by the Creator God, whereas the related
activity in Laodicea has Jesus indicating violent illness.
With this, it is now
possible to rightly discard any idea that “hot or cold” are in anyway related
to “good or bad” in a subjective or ethereal sense of spiritual condition.
It seems much more proper to think along the lines of both hot water and cold
water as useful (with specific and identifiable practices of the Hierapolis and
Colossae churches being useful within Christ’s kingdom and its proclamation),
whereas lukewarm water is useless (with a specifically identifiable practice of
the church at Laodicea failing to serve the purposes of the Christ as opposed
to what was rightly taking place in the “hot” or “cold” churches --- “I wish
you were either hot or cold”). Understanding the message in this way will
be far more useful, as believers will eventually end up not being left to
wonder whether they are hot, cold, or lukewarm based on either a subjective
self-examination or the subjective examination of a self-appointed (on both
ends of the relationship) spiritual authority that will generally be partially
informed and unfortunately biased.
