PHILADELPHIA
[p. 51] PHILADELPHIA
IF saints are to be encouraged the true way is to present Christ to them. Whatever the confusion in the church there is no change in Him, nor can there be. Many physical changes and disorders have taken place in the history of the earth, but these do not affect the sun. Clouds have enveloped the earth, but could we but get to the other side of such clouds we should find the sun shining as ever. It has thus been with Christ; the disloyalty and lawlessness which have marked the history of the church have not altered Him in the least degree; He is “the same yesterday, and today, and for ever”. Hebrews 13: 8. Not that He may not change in attitude and conduct, for He does, as the addresses to the churches clearly show; but all such changes of conduct and appearance are sure to be the outcome of what He is. The judicial habiliments in which He presents Himself in relation to the seven assemblies indicated a change in them, not in Him.
We can readily understand that this new attitude towards those that assumed to be His down here was far from congenial to Him, it did not savour of “with desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer”. Luke 22: 15. Ah, no there it was Himself simply, in all that affection and familiarity which ever marked His intercourse with those who shared His affliction and reproach in this world. But here all is changed; it is no longer, “ye have loved me”, John 16: 27, but “thou hast left thy first love”, Revelation 2: 4. Hence the external change in the Lord. It is one thing to enjoy the reciprocated affection of a loved object, and quite another to be conscious of having lost it, and in the endeavour to recover the loss to be under the painful necessity of [p. 52] issuing a threat of punishment, on account of the course entered on leading to certain wickedness. This is what the opening chapters of the Revelation present. But in the midst of the prevailing heartlessness it is most encouraging to find, that wherever the least spark of appreciation of Christ appears, the Lord always responds in terms which bespeak His changeless affection for His own, whatever the garb in which He may be attired.
This is verified in John’s case. All this judicial display was a new sight to “the disciple whom Jesus loved”. John had been accustomed to Jesus — the lowliest and most approachable of all men that ever trod the earth. We need not therefore wonder at his fear. But there was really no need for it, for the official dignity in which the Lord appeared had not any reference to him; there was nothing in his circumstances to call it forth; the trouble was not in Patmos, but in Asia Minor. John was in Patmos “for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus”. There was nothing in this to condemn, surely not. Hence the Lord is quick to assure and encourage His devoted servant. He says, “Fear not ... I am he that liveth and was dead”. It was as much as to say, ‘John, you have nothing to fear; I am He who died [John would well understand this] and I am alive for evermore’. He identified Himself to John in terms which involved His love; which involved Himself.
This also appears in the address to the assembly in Philadelphia. The Lord recognises in this assembly appreciation of Himself. That which He is about to judge is apostate Christendom, and He has ability to deal with it. Later on in the book of Revelation this corrupt system is seen riding upon the beast. This He repudiates; He destroys it root and branch. But in Philadelphia the Lord recognises affection for [p. 53] Himself and interest in His things. We are justified in assuming this from the character of the address; He speaks of Himself and of the things which related to Himself; and we may be certain He would not thus speak were it not that there was in those addressed an appreciation of what He said. We may further assume that the whole church was in His mind when He spoke to this local company at Philadelphia, and it is not conceivable that those who have “ears to hear” would have it otherwise. If the energy of the Spirit has become effectual in us we are sure to include all the saints in our affections, and we would not limit the Lord to anything less.
Following the course of the churches I take it Philadelphia is hidden from public view — well known to Christ, but practically hidden. The great public body is Thyatira, which continues to the end. Thyatira eventuates in the harlot who rides the beast; she courts publicity. But in Philadelphia (really the saints in the energy of the Spirit) one sees contentment in the knowledge that she is not hidden from Christ. She appreciates Him and He knows it; this was enough for her. Publicity would come in due time; then all would know that He loved her.
It is an immense thing to arrive at the understanding that the Lord is acquainted with and values the very tiniest spark of affection for Himself, wherever found. The fact is, if it is there at all He has placed it there, and He knows all about His own work. Peter recognised the Lord’s perfect knowledge of things. He says, “thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee”, John 21: 17. Others, perhaps, could not tell (Peter’s conduct had not indicated it), but the Lord knew all things, therefore He knew.
It is our wisdom to candidly admit the true condition of things, that that which has the responsibility [p. 54] of being the candlestick has not only left its first love, but is irrevocably committed to wickedness, and hence that it has been definitely given up by the Lord. This is seen in the address to the church at Thyatira. It is true the Lord does not state in His letter to this church that He will spue her out of His mouth, but His declaration that Jezebel would not repent, and His recognition of a remnant are to the exercised ear the announcement that the public body has been given up morally. The maintenance of God’s testimony must be looked for elsewhere; an unrepentant Jezebel and the testimony of the meek and rejected Jesus must stand widely apart. This the remnant understand. They do not, however, assume to be the candlestick; to do so would be ignorance and folly. If that which was set up here by the energy of apostolic testimony failed utterly in this, what hope was there for the few scattered saints of the middle ages, hidden, as one might say, in the shrubbery which surrounded the great Roman “tree”? He says, “I will put upon you none other burden, but that which ye have already hold fast till I come”. His coming was now the prospect, and they were, so to speak, to hold out till that epoch. His presence here would take the place of the candlestick. Here Luther missed the mark, it seems to me. Instead of accepting the ruin and looking for the Lord to come, and leaning on Him alone in the interim, he turned to ecclesiastical organisation. This made room for the world — hence Protestantism. But what the reformers missed is found in Philadelphia, and this, thank God, goes on to the end.
From what the Lord says to Philadelphia, and the promises to the overcomer there, we may gather that there was a very great advance on the state of the remnant in Thyatira. “The temple of my God”; “the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God”; and “my new name”, all indicated that on the part of the overcomer in this church there was appreciation of Christ personally, and intelligence in His things. They refer to what will be displayed in the coming age, which had now become the supreme interest of the faithful. May the Lord grant that it may be so with each one of us!