Randy's Ruminations

In the recent sermon on the letter of Jesus to the church at Laodicea, the focus was on what Jesus said about lukewarmness. In that context he says that it is better to be hot or cold, but to be lukewarm makes him sick.

The statement about hot and cold is often interpreted to mean that Jesus, obviously, wants us to be “hot” for God and his kingdom/mission. But the leap is then made that he would also prefer that we be “cold” rather than lukewarm – that we reject God, ignore his kingdom/mission or even oppose it rather than be lukewarm.

I suppose that has some merit in the sense of “stand for something” even if it is wrong. But it never made much sense to me that Jesus would be urging us to be “cold” toward God. There is another way to understand the statement about “hot and cold.”

We now understand enough of the historical setting and context to see that Jesus uses language and images that relate specifically to each of the seven cities to whom he speaks in the letters of Revelation 2 & 3. Laodicea did not have a local fresh water source, but had to pipe in water from a distance. These stone encased clay pipes have been found by archeologists. One can imagine that such water was stale and not good tasting by the time it reach town.

Laodicea had two sister cities in the Lycus River valley: Heirapolis and Colossae. Colossae had cool fresh water springs. Heirapolis had hot mineral springs. The cool water refreshed. The hot mineral water healed. Both were effective and of value. Both were to be desired. But in between the hot and the cold was the tepid, stale, lukewarm water of Laodicea.

This is the background to Jesus’ imagery. Both hot and cold are good. While “lukewarm” does address the spiritual condition of the Laodicean church, it does not automatically follow that Jesus prefers or condones spiritual coldness. He is calling them (and us) to spiritual effectiveness, to be healing and refreshing (“that times of refreshing may come from the Lord” Acts 3:19).

# posted by Randy @ 10:24 AM