Is this true?

[Jayne]

I've always been a little confused by Jesus' statement to the church at Laodicea aabout being lukewarm.  I could rationalize a need for hot, but cold was never understandable as an analogy to me.  Preachers have always said that hot was serving God with all your might and lukewarm was namby pamby.  But they never addressed cold.

I looked this up on gotquestions and here is what they said.  

"In Revelation 3:14–21, the Lord is describing the “lukewarm” heart attitude of those in the Laodicean church, an attitude manifested by their deeds. The Laodiceans were neither cold nor hot in relation to God, just lukewarm. Hot water can cleanse and purify; cold water can refresh and enliven. But lukewarm water carries no similar value. The Laodiceans understood the Lord’s analogy because their city drinking water came over an aqueduct from a spring six miles to the south, and it arrived disgustingly lukewarm. Laodicean water was not hot like the nearby hot springs that people bathed in, nor was it refreshingly cold for drinking. It was lukewarm, good for nothing. In fact, it was nauseating, and that was the Lord’s response to the Laodiceans—they sickened Him, and He said, “I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (verse 16)."

It makes perfect sense to me, but only if the historical assertions are true.  Does anyone know anything about these aqueducts?  Gotquestions did not give a source.

[Guest shiloh357]

12 minutes ago, Jayne said:

I've always been a little confused by Jesus' statement to the church at Laodicea aabout being lukewarm.  I could rationalize a need for hot, but cold was never understandable as an analogy to me.  Preachers have always said that hot was serving God with all your might and lukewarm was namby pamby.  But they never addressed cold.

I looked this up on gotquestions and here is what they said.  

"In Revelation 3:14–21, the Lord is describing the “lukewarm” heart attitude of those in the Laodicean church, an attitude manifested by their deeds. The Laodiceans were neither cold nor hot in relation to God, just lukewarm. Hot water can cleanse and purify; cold water can refresh and enliven. But lukewarm water carries no similar value. The Laodiceans understood the Lord’s analogy because their city drinking water came over an aqueduct from a spring six miles to the south, and it arrived disgustingly lukewarm. Laodicean water was not hot like the nearby hot springs that people bathed in, nor was it refreshingly cold for drinking. It was lukewarm, good for nothing. In fact, it was nauseating, and that was the Lord’s response to the Laodiceans—they sickened Him, and He said, “I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (verse 16)."

It makes perfect sense to me, but only if the historical assertions are true.  Does anyone know anything about these aqueducts?  Gotquestions did not give a source.

They had aqueducts from Colosse  and Hyeropolis.  They had cold water from Colosse and hot water coming from Hyeropolis, but both sources ended Lukewarm by the time they got to Laodecia and the water was likely full of parasites by that time.  Lukewarm water is where bacteria and parasites thrive and that is what makes people ill from it, which is why Jesus used that imagery.   

I am also given to understand that ancient people did have a very basic understanding of parasites and germs and understood the need for boiling water to make it fit for human consumption. 

[tigger398]

Many of preachers and ministers are luke warm themselves, and cold well can't be good since it's the opposite of hot. Hot is good it's on fire. Many preachers in these last days are preaching new age stuff. People tend to explain your sins. but not explaining that you need to confess your sins.

[Deborah_]

30 minutes ago, Jayne said:

I've always been a little confused by Jesus' statement to the church at Laodicea aabout being lukewarm.  I could rationalize a need for hot, but cold was never understandable as an analogy to me.  Preachers have always said that hot was serving God with all your might and lukewarm was namby pamby.  But they never addressed cold.

I looked this up on gotquestions and here is what they said.  

"In Revelation 3:14–21, the Lord is describing the “lukewarm” heart attitude of those in the Laodicean church, an attitude manifested by their deeds. The Laodiceans were neither cold nor hot in relation to God, just lukewarm. Hot water can cleanse and purify; cold water can refresh and enliven. But lukewarm water carries no similar value. The Laodiceans understood the Lord’s analogy because their city drinking water came over an aqueduct from a spring six miles to the south, and it arrived disgustingly lukewarm. Laodicean water was not hot like the nearby hot springs that people bathed in, nor was it refreshingly cold for drinking. It was lukewarm, good for nothing. In fact, it was nauseating, and that was the Lord’s response to the Laodiceans—they sickened Him, and He said, “I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (verse 16)."

It makes perfect sense to me, but only if the historical assertions are true.  Does anyone know anything about these aqueducts?  Gotquestions did not give a source.

'Hot' is good (zealous for Christ); 'cold', the opposite, must be bad (doing nothing for Christ).

The startling thing is that Jesus would prefer us to be cold than to be lukewarm (half-hearted). Why? Perhaps because the lukewarm convince themselves that they are zealous; as He goes on to complain, the Laodicean Christians think (wrongly) that they have everything and are doing really well in their Christian walk. If they were 'cold', they wouldn't be able to deceive themselves and would be more ready to repent.

[GandalfTheWise]

1 hour ago, Jayne said:

I've always been a little confused by Jesus' statement to the church at Laodicea aabout being lukewarm.  I could rationalize a need for hot, but cold was never understandable as an analogy to me.  Preachers have always said that hot was serving God with all your might and lukewarm was namby pamby.  But they never addressed cold.

I looked this up on gotquestions and here is what they said.  

"In Revelation 3:14–21, the Lord is describing the “lukewarm” heart attitude of those in the Laodicean church, an attitude manifested by their deeds. The Laodiceans were neither cold nor hot in relation to God, just lukewarm. Hot water can cleanse and purify; cold water can refresh and enliven. But lukewarm water carries no similar value. The Laodiceans understood the Lord’s analogy because their city drinking water came over an aqueduct from a spring six miles to the south, and it arrived disgustingly lukewarm. Laodicean water was not hot like the nearby hot springs that people bathed in, nor was it refreshingly cold for drinking. It was lukewarm, good for nothing. In fact, it was nauseating, and that was the Lord’s response to the Laodiceans—they sickened Him, and He said, “I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (verse 16)."

It makes perfect sense to me, but only if the historical assertions are true.  Does anyone know anything about these aqueducts?  Gotquestions did not give a source.

15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.  16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.  17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: 18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.  Rev 3:15-18 KJV  

I found this article by Stanley Porter useful.  http://www.tyndalehouse.com/tynbul/library/TynBull_1987_38_06_Porter_LaodiceansRev3.pdf  I also skimmed through some more articles to check this out.

My sense is that historical writings and archeological evidence are currently inadequate to definitively state too much with regard to the water supply.  The best articles I could find all seemed to caution that some degree of conjecture was being used.  One of the big challenges with something like this is that Christians have a tendency to play "telephone" (the game where people whisper a message in each other's ear around a circle and you see how much it changes by the last person) with things like this.  What starts off with a few conjectures by a few commentators starts to be repeated and become more certain (and different and embellished) as it gets repeated.  What probably can be said with certainty is that the water supply was mediocre having neither the cold refreshing qualities of cold springs or mountain run off nor the hot refreshing qualities of hot springs.   Given the state of Roman engineering of aqueducts and their water supplies, I think it unlikely that a project of that magnitude would have delivered dangerous life-threatening water that literally made people sick.

In any event, I think that the reference to hot and cold versus lukewarmness is related to the usefulness of the liquid due to its temperature.  A few ancient Greek authors (Herodotus and Xenophon)  make references to the usefulness of water being related to its temperature.  Hot water and cold water had specific uses.  Lukewarm water did not.  There seemed to be a sense that the hotter or the colder the water, the more useful and desirable it was.  Lukewarm water was probably an annoyance to the residents of Laodicea.  I also caught a few references to beverages which were hot or cold being much more desirable than lukewarm ones.

There appear to be a few contrasts going on in this passage.  Laodicea was a rich city (which some articles claim was) known for banking, medicine, and wool (hence the buy gold/poor, eye salve/blind, and clothing/naked contrasts) as well as mediocre water.  The works of the church at Laodicea are not compared to what the city excels at but rather what is one of its weakest points.  Those things that the city were probably proud of were called out as spiritually bankrupt.

 

[Jayne]

1 minute ago, GandalfTheWise said:

"In any event, I think that the reference to hot and cold versus lukewarmness is related to the usefulness of the liquid due to its temperature.  A few ancient Greek authors (Herodotus and Xenophon)  make references to the usefulness of water being related to its temperature.  Hot water and cold water had specific uses.  Lukewarm water did not.  There seemed to be a sense that the hotter or the colder the water, the more useful and desirable it was.  Lukewarm water was probably an annoyance to the residents of Laodicea.  I also caught a few references to beverages which were hot or cold being much more desirable than lukewarm ones."

This makes more sense to me that leaving out an explanation of the cold.  

[4LdKHVCzRDj2]

2 hours ago, Jayne said:

I've always been a little confused by Jesus' statement to the church at Laodicea aabout being lukewarm.

People whose hearts are divided, they are unstable people.

"For let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord;
    he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways." - James 1:7-8

 

Or we are for Him, or we are against Him. There is no middle.

"He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad." - Matthew 12:30

 

People who do not take a position in their faith, but is divided between light and darkness.

"And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world,
    and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." - John 3:19

 

But with the Lord you cannot pretend to be in the faith; or you are in, or you are out. Truth and sincerity prevails.

"But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one." - Matthew 5:37

 

Repent, and surrender to the Lord Jesus Christ. Before it is too late!

"Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock:
and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock." - Matthew 7:24-25

 

Glory to God! Amen.

Edited March 17, 2018 by 4LdKHVCzRDj2

[frienduff thaylorde]

6 hours ago, 4LdKHVCzRDj2 said:

People whose hearts are divided, they are unstable people.

"For let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord;
    he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways." - James 1:7-8

 

Or we are for Him, or we are against Him. There is no middle.

"He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad." - Matthew 12:30

 

People who do not take a position in their faith, but is divided between light and darkness.

"And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world,
    and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." - John 3:19

 

But with the Lord you cannot pretend to be in the faith; or you are in, or you are out. Truth and sincerity prevails.

"But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one." - Matthew 5:37

 

Repent, and surrender to the Lord Jesus Christ. Before it is too late!

"Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock:
and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock." - Matthew 7:24-25

 

Glory to God! Amen.

Onward in the LORD ,   We either build our house on HIS sayings , digging deep and have hope .   or we fall by the sand of mens contrary teachings.

Their is no middle ground .   we are either HIS , or the worlds ,  we are held captive by his beautiful joy filled sayings or held captive to mens contrary ones.

THIER Is no middle ground ,   the middle ground is sand that will collapse at the shaking of the ground and that hole will swallow them up whole .

The foundation IS JESUS , and he said HIS SAYINGS we either hear and do   or we hear and don't do  and the latter of the two is death.  

[Neighbor]

21 hours ago, Jayne said:

I've always been a little confused by Jesus' statement to the church at Laodicea aabout being lukewarm.  I could rationalize a need for hot, but cold was never understandable as an analogy to me.  Preachers have always said that hot was serving God with all your might and lukewarm was namby pamby.  But they never addressed cold.

I looked this up on gotquestions and here is what they said.  

"In Revelation 3:14–21, the Lord is describing the “lukewarm” heart attitude of those in the Laodicean church, an attitude manifested by their deeds. The Laodiceans were neither cold nor hot in relation to God, just lukewarm. Hot water can cleanse and purify; cold water can refresh and enliven. But lukewarm water carries no similar value. The Laodiceans understood the Lord’s analogy because their city drinking water came over an aqueduct from a spring six miles to the south, and it arrived disgustingly lukewarm. Laodicean water was not hot like the nearby hot springs that people bathed in, nor was it refreshingly cold for drinking. It was lukewarm, good for nothing. In fact, it was nauseating, and that was the Lord’s response to the Laodiceans—they sickened Him, and He said, “I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (verse 16)."

It makes perfect sense to me, but only if the historical assertions are true.  Does anyone know anything about these aqueducts?  Gotquestions did not give a source.

Hi, Sure it is important to learn the setting and the culture of the original audience, but it is also important to be able to make application of the principles that are being taught. Elsewhere there is the parable of the seeds being planted and whether they flourish struggle or fail.

I personally reach the conclusion that it is easy to have great exhilarating highs just as  it is easy to fall into lows into the deep fathoms too. But- it is the  most difficult to grind it out through the dusty plains running the longest race the marathon, while counting all that gets into the sandals,  those burrs of life, as joy. For the victory of the finish, a well done good and faithful servant from our Lord and savior Jesus is the satisfaction of it to come, and I buy that by faith today.

Any one allegory, parable, or history lesson does not stand alone to build up what sustains to the end, it is instead done by the determination to commit to doing the will of God as shared by our Lord Jesus. That determined commitment is given from the Holy Spirit and by the Holy Spirit's reveal of Jesus and then one's individual submission to Jesus as Lord. That is built upon the word, the Bible, all of it combined.

[Guest Butero]

On ‎3‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 11:29 AM, Jayne said:

I've always been a little confused by Jesus' statement to the church at Laodicea aabout being lukewarm.  I could rationalize a need for hot, but cold was never understandable as an analogy to me.  Preachers have always said that hot was serving God with all your might and lukewarm was namby pamby.  But they never addressed cold.

I looked this up on gotquestions and here is what they said.  

"In Revelation 3:14–21, the Lord is describing the “lukewarm” heart attitude of those in the Laodicean church, an attitude manifested by their deeds. The Laodiceans were neither cold nor hot in relation to God, just lukewarm. Hot water can cleanse and purify; cold water can refresh and enliven. But lukewarm water carries no similar value. The Laodiceans understood the Lord’s analogy because their city drinking water came over an aqueduct from a spring six miles to the south, and it arrived disgustingly lukewarm. Laodicean water was not hot like the nearby hot springs that people bathed in, nor was it refreshingly cold for drinking. It was lukewarm, good for nothing. In fact, it was nauseating, and that was the Lord’s response to the Laodiceans—they sickened Him, and He said, “I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (verse 16)."

It makes perfect sense to me, but only if the historical assertions are true.  Does anyone know anything about these aqueducts?  Gotquestions did not give a source.

Hot means to be 100 percent sold out to Christ and putting him first.  Lukewarm is to be a professing Christian that is so much like the world, nobody would know you are saved.  Cold is living in open sin with no regard for God's Word.  Only those who are hot will have an inheritance in the Kingdom of God.