Rev 3:1-6 Sardis

Background

Audience

Capital of ancient Lydia (greatest of foreign powers encountered by Greeks). Very wealthy. Almost impregnable fortress-citadel. It never regained spectacular prominence under Roman rule. (just a small village there now named Sart). Cyrus scaled cliffs and entered weak point at dark (546 BC). Antiochus did same (214 BC).

City famous for luxury clothing trade (symbol of white garments). Place where dying wool was discovered.

Resting on past reputation and without any present achievement.

Important words, definitions

Seven Spirits

The seven angels, representative or responsible for each church.

Seven stars

Seven stars represent the seven angels. 1:20

Reputation

Name. What people know you as.

Alive

Vitality, the nature or manner which characterizes all living creatures. Most commonly defined as movement in the broadest sense.

Things that are alive do things.

Spiritual life? life in Jesus?

dead

Dead. Inanimate. Straight opposite of living.

Wake up

Become (imperative) Keeping awake Ones! Vigilant, alert. Be alive!

Middle imperative (passive with active participation).

Keep on becoming. Constant and continuing alertness

Thief

Emphasis is on the unexpected (not the taking). Jesus' words in Matt 24:23

Soiled their garments :D

Make dirty, soil, stain, defile, make impure. Poop your pants?

Usually soiled by fornication and adultery

Pollute their pants.

Works complete

Fulfillment, come to end, full.

Wearing white

Unsoiled. Associated with celebration, festivity, and victory.

Clarify Grammar

Verse 2: Become awake ones. Middle Imperative tied to Active Present Participle.

Paraphrase

Other people may think you are an active church, but I know you are really dead. You are not done, so WAKE UP, become alive again, or I will sneak upon you in judgment. The few who are still pure, and those who repent, are secure and mine for eternity.

Important Ideas

What does this text say about the nature of God?

God discerns the difference between reputation or appearance of and actual spiritual life.

What does it say about the nature of man?

Man can fall asleep / die spiritually trying to ride on past growth or successes.

Constant vigilance is necessary to spiritual life.

What does it say about man’s relationship with God?

The relationship is never stagnant, it is either growing together or apart. (just like a marriage, friendship, etc...)

It atrophies in disuse (like a muscle).

What does it say about man’s relationship with others?

Wake up those around us for their sakes. Don't soil your own garments (for our sakes).

What does it say about how should we live as Christians?

We should live as people who are alive!

Elsewhere in Scripture

Resurrection. (kind of a big deal). God is in the business of waking up the dead.

Disciples sleeping while Jesus was in the Garden of Gethsemane

Pharisees - white-washed tombs. Alive and clean on the outside, dead on the inside.

Exegetical Idea/Sentence

Spiritual life is measured in the eyes of God, not men.

Spiritual lethargy leads to spiritual death which leads to surprise judgment.

Homiletical

Prosperity and popularity is as dangerous to the Christian as persecution.

There is no such thing as an off-duty Christian.

There is no such thing as an in-active Christian. (I like this as active = life in Greek thought)

Commentaries

Application

1.What was <audience> supposed to know?

1.What did he know?

2.What was he supposed to be in his relationship to God and others?

2.What was he in his relationship to God and others?

3.What was he supposed to do?

3.What was he actually doing?

To Me

1.What was am I supposed to know?

1.What do I know?

2.What am I supposed to be in my relationship to God and others?

2.What am I in my relationship to God and others?

3.What am I supposed to do?

3.What am I actually doing?

To Others

1.What are they supposed to know?

1.What do they know?

2.What are they supposed to be in their relationship to God and others?

2.What are they in their relationship to God and others?

3.What are they supposed to do?

3.What are they actually doing?

Big Application Questions

Who is Jezebel today?

Those who have made a deliberate compromise with convicted sin. (It is the Holy Spirit that convicts of sin).

Homosexual Christians.

The sex-outside-of-marriage Christians.

Idolatrous lifestyles (consistently and purposefully putting something in the place of God).

What does this look like in the church today when someone can (will) just walk down the street to another church?

What does this look like in my circle of friends?

What does this look like in my family? Now? Later?

BECNT

5. Letter to Sardis (3:1–6)

Thirty to forty miles southeast of Thyatira, Sardis was one of the most glorious cities in Asia, but much of its splendor lay in the past. It was certainly one of the most ancient; founded perhaps about 1200 b.c., it became the capital of the wealthy and powerful Lydian kingdom. It was situated in the Hermus basin on one of the alluvial hills between the plain and Mount Tmolus. The acropolis lay partly at the top of one of those hills with a fifteen-hundred-foot precipice on three sides and a steep approach on the south side that connected it to the mountain. From the beginning it was an almost impregnable military stronghold. It also developed on the plain to the north and west of the hill.

One of the most famous early kings was Gyges in the seventh century b.c. He established the city’s wealth and power and was known to the Assyrians as “Gugu”; some even say he was the prototype of “Gog” in Ezek. 38–39 (so Hemer 1986: 131). At any rate the city was a military power that rarely lost a battle and was feared by all. The city also attained great wealth through commerce and trade. Legend stated that Midas left his gold in the springs of Pactolus that ran through the city, and that legend may have come from the presence of gold dust in the springs that added to their wealth (Hemer 1986: 130–31). Sardis was the first to mint gold and silver coins. Gyges’s son, Croesus, was so powerful that he thought to attack Cyrus of Persia. After an initial battle, he retired back to Sardis for the winter, expecting Cyrus also to return home. However, Cyrus pursued Croesus and surprised him, destroying his vaunted cavalry. Croesus then went into his fortress and prepared for a siege. However, one of Cyrus’s troops climbed up a crevice on the “unscalable” cliff at an unobserved point and opened the gates. Sardis fell after only fourteen days of the siege in 546 b.c. This so astounded the Greek world that “capturing Sardis” became a saying for achieving the impossible.

However, this feat was to be repeated. Sardis became the headquarters of the Persian governor, but over the next three hundred years there were several military debacles, such as a Lydian revolt a few years later, the burning of the lower city by the Ionians in 499 b.c., the use of the city as a military base by Xerxes, and the surrender of Sardis to Alexander without a fight. The second major defeat, however, occurred when Antiochus III invaded in 214 b.c. to crush a rebellion. Again, a Cretan named Lagoras climbed the cliff at an unguarded spot accompanied by fifteen men (while the soldiers of Sardis carelessly watched only the major pass to the city) and opened the gates. After that Sardis surrendered its importance to Pergamum. It still continued in its wealth and commercial prosperity (it claimed to have invented the process for dyeing wool and was a center of that industry) but now lived mostly in the past.

In a.d. 17 a terrible earthquake devastated Sardis and Philadelphia; Pliny called this the worst disaster in human memory. Sardis was rebuilt after extensive aid from Emperor Augustus. To express their appreciation, the citizens of Sardis created a coin with his likeness and inscribed it “Caesarean Sardis.” In a.d. 26 they appealed to Rome for the honor of erecting a temple to Caesar, but the privilege was awarded to Smyrna. In addition, there was a huge (but unfinished) temple to Artemis that rivaled the temple in Ephesus. Known also as the Anatolian goddess Cybele, Artemis was the patron goddess of Sardis. The people of Sardis had a special interest in death and immortality, and much of their religious life was nature worship focusing on the fertility cycle and bringing life out of death. A sacred hot springs two miles from the city seems to have been connected with the god of the underworld and these same themes.

Sardis had a large Jewish community that dated from the fifth or fourth century b.c. Antiochus III placed two thousand Jewish citizens in the area, and there is evidence that many Jews in Sardis retained Roman citizenship. Josephus speaks of a large, wealthy Jewish community there. One of the largest synagogues ever excavated was built there in the second century a.d. Since it is part of a gymnasium complex, it seems Jewish and Hellenistic life had a remarkable confluence there, and Hemer (1986: 137) thinks this may demonstrate a Jewish and Christian accommodation to pagan surroundings, a syncretism with the local culture. While Christian syncretism cannot be known from outside sources, there are some indications in this letter that would support such a conclusion.1

a. Address and prophetic messenger formula (3:1a)

b. “Strength” (3:1b)

c. Solution (3:2–3)

d. Promise and challenge to the overcomers (3:4–6)

Exegesis and Exposition

1To the angel of the church in Sardis, write: “This is what the one who has the sevenfold Spirit of God and the seven stars says: ‘I know your deeds, that you have a name, “Alive,” but you are actually “Dead.” 2Show yourselves to be watchful and start to strengthen what survives, what is about to die, for I have not found ❐any of❒ your works to be complete in the sight of my God. 3Therefore, continue to remember what you have received and heard. Keep it and repent. Unless you become watchful, I will come like a thief, and you will never know what time I will come upon you. 4But you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their garments. They will walk with me in white, for they are worthy. 5❐In the same way❒ the one who overcomes is going to walk in white garments. I will never erase their name from the book of life. I will confess their name before my Father and his angels. 6Let the one who has an ear heed what the Spirit says to the churches.’ ”

a. Address and Prophetic Messenger Formula (3:1a)

The address to the angel of Sardis follows the formula of 2:1, 8, 18 and has the same purpose, demonstrating the eschatological importance of this message by sending it to the church via its guardian angel (cf. the place of an angel in the original revelation to John in 1:1). As in every letter, the names of Christ adduced here are critical to Sardis. First, Jesus “holds” (ἔχων, echōn, connotes divine control, as in 1:16, 18) the “seven spirits,” a likely reference to the “sevenfold Holy Spirit” (from Zech. 4:2, 10) as discussed in Rev. 1:4 (cf. 4:5; 5:6). As in 1:4, this details the complete and adequate work of the Spirit in the community. The church of Sardis, nearly dead (3:1–2), can be revived only if the Spirit takes over, and Christ has the power of the Spirit available for them. The seven lamps of Zech. 4:2 and the seven eyes of Zech. 4:10 are upon the Sardis church in the person of the Holy Spirit (Moyise 1995: 33). Also, Christ controls the “seven stars,” which in Rev. 1:20 refers to “the seven angels of the churches.” Christ’s controlling the seven stars (angels) suggests that through their angel Christ controls the church, and it must answer to him alone. Like the church at Ephesus (2:1, “who holds the seven stars in his right hand”), the Sardians had to understand who was sovereign in this situation.

b. “Strength” (3:1b)

This is the one place in the seven letters where the normal formula for what they are doing right (“I know your deeds”) actually details their key weakness. Therefore, it is ironic here, for there is little good to say about the church. There is no need for a section on weaknesses (“But I hold this against you”), for their “strength” is their weakness! Only the “righteous remnant” (3:4), an obvious minority, can be given any encouragement, and they are placed in direct proximity to the promise given to the “overcomer” (3:5). Their “works” are defined in a strange way—ὄνομα ἔχεις (onoma echeis, you have a name), further irony, for they claim the Christian “name,”2 “Life,” but3 actually retain the pagan name, “Death.”4 It is a sad thing when the only accomplishment (“deed”) of a church is what it names itself, especially if the reality shows that name to be a lie, as here. Their past deeds gave them a reputation among other churches for being alive for Christ, but their present deeds show a quite different picture (in accordance with their city’s history). The “life/death” antithesis, as said above, was especially relevant to Sardis, where religious speculation centered on this question. Just outside their city was a famous necropolis, or cemetery, with the graves of long-dead kings. The assembly at Sardis represented that cemetery more than a living church. If they wanted to live, they had to turn from their false deeds to the life-giving Spirit. That is the subject of the next section.

c. Solution (3:2–3)

Five imperatives occur in these verses, all of them focusing on the need for spiritual vigilance. The church is like the city. Twice before, the city had fallen because the watchmen were not on the walls and assailants had climbed the cliffs to let in invaders. The church is being rebuked for the same lack of vigilance. The first command is γίνου γρηγορῶν (ginou grēgorōn). While it could be translated “be watchful,” with γίνου equivalent to εἶναι (einai, to be), most (e.g., Hort, Beckwith, Hemer, Mounce) agree that it more properly means “show yourself to be watchful.” In other words, they have to change their ways and “prove” that they are vigilant. They have fallen asleep spiritually and must “wake up.” Γρηγορῶν is often used eschatologically to depict the spiritual watchfulness that is necessary to be ready for Christ’s return (Mark 13:35, 37; Matt. 24:42; 25:13; Luke 12:36–38; 1 Thess. 5:6), and it speaks of the “danger of [believers] reducing their full commitment to God through Christ and of allowing themselves to be seized by things of lesser value” (Nützel, EDNT 1:265).

Second, the church must στήρισον τὰ λοιπά (stērison ta loipa, strengthen what survives). The church as a whole was “dead” (3:1), but there was still a little that “survived.”5 As R. Charles (1920: 1.79) points out, the neuter includes both people and spiritual characteristics: both the minority that showed a little life and spiritual issues needed to be “strengthened,” with στήρισον a good example of an ingressive aorist imperative, “start to strengthen.”6 Their weakness in this area was destroying their church. The verb itself means to “support” or “stand something on its feet” and has the idea of establishing a thing by making it strong (cf. Acts 14:22; 1 Thess. 3:2–3; 1 Pet. 5:10; cf. Harder, TDNT 7:653–57). The reason for the desperate need to strengthen the church was that even the little that remained ἔμελλον ἀποθανεῖν (emellon apothanein, was about to die). Most commentators (R. Charles, Swete, Hemer, Thomas) take the imperfect to be epistolary, that is, looking at the action from the standpoint of the writer, but it might be better to state that this process of dying had been going on for some time and that the culmination (their death) was around the corner.7 There was hardly any time left, and they had to act quickly or die. When this verse is combined with 3:1 (their name is “Death”), the message is that most of the church is dead but a small minority remains with some life. However, even that small bit is on the verge of dying. Act fast while there is still time!

The reason for this command (γάρ, gar, for) is their inadequate “works,” though as I argue in the additional notes, it is better to render this “any of your works.” None of their deeds has been sufficient. In this book, εὕρηκα (heurēka, I have found)8 often has juridical force (2:2; 5:4; 12:8; 14:5; 20:15). As Pedersen (EDNT 2:84) says, in forensic passages this verb “relates the conclusion of an investigation into the facts of a charge.” That is the sense here; they have been tried and found wanting. The problem is, their works (possibly the same ones from 2:19—love, faith, service, endurance—but undoubtedly others as well) were not “complete in the sight of my God.” God is the judge on the throne, and he has found their deeds “incomplete,” not just in quantity but even more in quality. Πληρόω (plēroō, I complete) in its many forms is common in the Johannine corpus for “full” or “complete,” as in “that your joy might be full” (John 16:24; cf. John 3:29; 12:3; 15:11; 17:13; 1 John 1:4). The idea here is to meet God’s standards (“in the sight of my God”), and in that the church is not only inadequate but under indictment. In the eyes of their contemporaries, they may have been more than sufficient, but not in the eyes of God. Christ has judged them, and now God is judging them. The great temple of Artemis in Sardis was unfinished, and perhaps John is saying that they resemble that building—unfinished and worthless. Christ calls the Father “my God” in Mark 15:34 and John 20:17 and four times in Rev. 3:12

The final three imperatives in 3:3 flow out of the church’s inadequacy from the previous verse. There is an ABA pattern in 3:2–3, with the first two imperatives and the last three framing the statement regarding their incomplete works. The solution for spiritual inadequacy is to remember (and keep) and repent. This is similar to the solution for Ephesus (2:5, “remember … and repent”). Since both had a lack of love and inadequate works, it is natural that both should be told the same thing. As stated in 2:5, the present imperative μνημόνευε (mnēmoneue, continue to remember) demands a continual recall and actualization of the past truths they had been taught. It is not just bringing these realities to mind but putting them into practice in their lives. That which they are to “remember” is πῶς εἴληφας καὶ ἤκουσας (pōs eilēphas kai ēkousas, what you have received and heard). The two verbs tell the two ways these truths came to them, through apostolic tradition (“received”) and the teaching of the church (“heard”). “Received” is often a code word for the reception of tradition (cf. 1 Cor. 15:3, where it is παρέλαβον, parelabon). “Heard,” as in the call-to-listen formula (2:7, 11, 17, 29), usually means not just to listen but to believe and act on the teaching. The Christians of Sardis had not only been taught the Christian truths but had exemplified them in the past. Now they were in danger of losing it all.

The concomitant to remembering is “keeping” (τήρει, tērei, keep; again a present imperative commanding continual action). The strange thing is that there is no accusative, so one must supply an object to be “kept.” The most likely are the Christian truths “received and heard” from the establishing of the church. The verb itself means not only to “keep” or “guard” but to “obey.” Spiritual vigilance is seen in perseverance and obedient living of these spiritual realities. Finally, and that which sums up all the others, the church must μετανόησον (metanoēson, repent; a global aorist that covers all the other four imperatives). In every way, they needed to “change” their downward spiral and get right with God and Christ (cf. 2:5, 16; 3:19).

The urgent call for repentance is linked to the likelihood of an imminent end (so Behm, TDNT 4:1004). After the commands to get right with God, Christ gives a second reason (the second οὖν, oun, therefore, of 3:2–3) for the need of the Sardians to turn their lives around. The first told how; the second tells why. The ἐὰν μή (ean mē, if not) that introduces the challenge makes no assumption regarding their response and should be translated “unless” (BAGD 211; cf. 2:22, “unless they repent of her works”). It is more warning than condition. The verb γρηγορήσῃς (grēgorēsēs, watch) repeats the first imperative and shows it is the main idea of the section. They must return to a constant state of spiritual vigilance9 if revival is ever to come.

If they should fail to maintain watchfulness, the same fate will happen to them as happened to Sardis with both Cyrus and Antiochus III: a “thief” will come and destroy them. The background to this warning in the history of the city has long been recognized, but it has special force in light of its presence elsewhere in the NT. This image goes back to Jesus, who used κλέπτης (kleptēs, thief) in an apocalyptic parable to warn of the dangers of lack of vigilance. Matthew 24:43 (par. Luke 12:39) says, “But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into” (Bauckham 1993b: 106–9 believes this parousia parable is primarily behind the image here). Paul uses the same image in 1 Thess. 5:2–4 to contrast those who are ready with those who are not and will be caught unawares. In 2 Pet. 3:10, where a similar syncretistic heresy is being fought, the sudden and unexpected nature of the parousia is stressed.10 Finally, Rev. 16:15 is the other place this simile is used in this book,11 coming after the sixth bowl as a warning to the readers, and here too it is connected with spiritual vigilance (“Blessed is the one who keeps awake”). Therefore, there is a rich background, both in Sardis and in NT theology, for this image.

As a midrashic comment on the “thief” theology, Jesus adds, “You will never know what time I am coming upon you.”12 Each term is filled with a powerful message. First, οὐ μὴ γνῷς (ou mē gnōs, you will never know) is a grammatically emphatic future negation. While some have doubted the emphatic nature of this construction in the NT (see Zerwick 1963: §444), its use in John in an eschatological context is usually emphatic (e.g., John 6:35, 37; 10:28; 11:26; Rev. 18:7; 21:25). There is no way they can be ready unless they return to a state of vigilance. The next phrase, ποίαν13 ὥραν (poian hōran, what time), shows that the coming will be sudden and unexpected, and it will be the harbinger of the final judgment. Again there is a parallel with Ephesus; they are warned that Christ would “remove their lampstand” if they did not change their ways (2:5). God will judge not only the pagans but also the churches for the extent to which they have not remained true to Christ (cf. 16:15; 20:12–13; 21:7–8). As many have noted (Caird, Beasley-Murray, Mounce, Giesen, Aune, Beale), this is not the second coming here but a historical visitation in judgment. The second coming is taught in 2:25; 3:11; and 16:15, but this is a warning that Christ will visit the church in judgment now if they do not repent.

d. Promise and Challenge to the Overcomers (3:4–6)

Christ precedes his promise (3:5) with a word of encouragement to the righteous remnant in Sardis (3:4). The introductory ἀλλά (alla, but) contrasts this group with the unfaithful in 3:2–3. The very way Christ describes this minority (“not soiled their garments”) summarizes the sins of the rest of the church. A “few people”14 in Sardis “have not soiled their garments.” The imagery builds on one of the major sources of wealth at Sardis, its wool industry. Unlike the garments they make, their spiritual garments are “soiled.” The term means “unwashed” and can have a strong religious connotation of one “defiled,” for instance by eating meat sacrificed to idols (1 Cor. 8:7) or by immorality (Rev. 14:4). Moffatt (1983: 364) speaks of “votive inscriptions in Asia Minor, where soiled clothes disqualified the worshipper and dishonored the god.” By accommodating themselves to their pagan environment, the Sardis church had contaminated themselves and become “unclean.”

Those who had resisted this temptation are promised that they περιπατήσουσιν μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἐν λευκοῖς (peripatēsousin met’ emou en leukois, will walk with me in white). Continuing the imagery of garments as a symbol for the spiritual life, Christ promises a new life (“walk” as a symbol for one’s life) of purity (“white”). There are several possibilities for the background of this metaphor (from Hemer 1986: 146–47): the garment industry of Sardis (Moffatt 1983: 365); heavenly clothing, thus stressing victory, glory, and the heavenly state (R. Charles, Swete, Giesen); the filthy garments of Joshua the high priest replaced with clean in Zech. 3:1–10 (Alford, Moffatt, Thomas), thus priestly righteousness; the wedding garment, thus imputed righteousness (Trench); baptismal robes (Krodel, Roloff); and the Roman triumph, when citizens wore white robes in celebration of military victories (Ramsay, Ford, Hemer, Beale). Of these, the last fits the context best. In a city and a church that has primarily known defeat and only the bitter memory of past triumph, it would be exciting to think of oneself as part of the few “who would walk with Christ in the triumphal procession of his final victory” (Hemer: 1986: 147).

While the imagery of “walking” could go back to Christ’s itinerant ministry (Swete) or even to Enoch, who “walked with God” (Gen. 5:22, mentioned by Mounce), it best fits the triumphal procession imagery. Yet there is more than this, especially in the meaning of λευκός (leukos, white) in apocalyptic. It occurs fourteen times in this book (of twenty-three in the NT) and signifies not just victory but purity, holiness, glory, and celebration. Several (e.g., Mounce, Morris, Roloff, Beale) connect it strongly to the idea of justification in the book. In the transfiguration of Jesus (Mark 9:3 par.), it depicts the “radiance” of heavenly glory. While victory is the emphasis in Rev. 14:14 and 19:11 and part of the picture here, the primary thrust (especially due to the “soiled garment” earlier in the verse) is purity and holiness. They are victorious by remaining pure in a church that has increasingly gone apostate. The reason they can “walk in white” is ὅτι ἄξιοί εἰσιν (hoti axioi eisin, because they are worthy). Their “worthiness” is due to the fact that they have remained pure and their works are complete. Elsewhere in this book ἄξιος is predicated of God (4:11) or Christ (5:2, 4, 9, 12), though in 16:6 it is used of the earth-dwellers (who are “worthy” of judgment) and here of the saints (“worthy” of reward; cf. Luke 20:35; Eph. 4:1; Phil. 1:27; 1 Thess. 2:12). The faithful few in Sardis are called to emulate God and Christ, not the pagans.

This promise leads naturally into the eschatological gift for ὁ νικῶν (ho nikōn, the overcomer) in 3:5. As already discussed (2:7), the “conqueror” is the person who perseveres and remains faithful in the midst of external pressure from the pagans and internal pressure from false “Christian” movements. In this context, it means to refuse to accommodate the Christian walk to pagan demands, that is, to refuse to “soil your garments.” Thus Christ is saying the Sardian faithful of 3:4 are “overcomers” and will receive the rewards promised to the victorious (3:5).

There are three rewards. The first repeats the promise of 3:4, using a futuristic present (περιβαλεῖται, peribaleitai, going to walk) to make more emphatic the future “will walk” of that verse. As victorious conquerors, they will participate in Christ’s triumphant procession at the eschaton, wearing the “white” of 2:4. Second, as forgiven and kept secure, their “name will never be erased from the book of life.” The concept of the “book of life” is drawn from both the OT and Hellenistic worlds. The first mention in the OT is Exod. 32:32–33. After the golden calf incident, Moses begs God for forgiveness for Israel, stating that if God will not, “then blot me out of the book you have written.” Behind this was the register of the citizens of Israel (cf. Ps. 9:5; 87:6; Isa. 4:3). This came to be a heavenly book in which the names of the righteous were kept (Ps. 69:28; Dan. 12:1). Other heavenly tablets recorded tribulations (Ps. 56:8), judgment (Dan. 7:10), acts of faithfulness (Mal. 3:16), and one’s destiny (Ps. 139:16). It is likely that this refers to the same scroll detailing deeds and rewards/judgment for one’s conduct. Later apocalyptic ideas associated this register with eternal life and fellowship with God (1QM 12.3; Jub. 19.9; 36.10). In the pagan world the same imagery developed, beginning with the record of citizens in a city-state or country and moving to the records of the gods. This would have special meaning for Sardis, for a long time the capital of the Persian and Seleucid empires and thus a repository of such records (see Hemer 1986: 148). Moffatt (1983: 365) and Fuller (1983: 299–300) point out that in both Jewish and Hellenistic worlds the erasure of a name meant exclusion from the commonwealth or community. When Greeks were convicted of a serious crime, their names were removed from the civic register. In the OT removal of a name was associated with capital punishment (Deut. 29:20) and erasure from the national memory (Amalek in Exod. 17:14; Deut. 25:19

This image continued in the NT. In Luke 10:20 Jesus says, “Rejoice that your names are written in heaven,” and both Phil. 4:3 (“fellow workers, whose names are written in the book of life”) and Heb. 12:23 (“the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven”) make use of this theme. In Revelation it is a major motif, linked with predestination (“from the foundation of the world,” 13:8; 17:8), the record of one’s deeds (20:12), and eternal reward or punishment (20:15). Revelation 21:27 refers to it as “the Lamb’s book of life,” and 13:8 links it also with the cross. In other words, participation depends on Christ’s sacrificial death and the believer’s faithful perseverance in Christ. Both aspects must remain intact (see additional notes below). The “book of life” itself contains both the names and the deeds of all who claim allegiance to Christ, and only those who remain faithful will stay in it. The verb ἐξαλείψω (exaleipsō, I will blot out) was often used of a name “erased” from a written record (Deut. 9:14; 29:20; Isa. 48:19; 56:5) and became a metaphor for removal or destruction. Here those who remain “unspotted” from the pagan surroundings are promised eternal reward in the presence of God.

Finally, the faithful are told, “I will confess his name in the presence of my Father and in the presence of the angels.” This is a definite allusion to the logia Jesu in Matt. 10:32 (par. Luke 12:8), “Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven.” In the dominical saying both the positive (“I will acknowledge”) and negative (“I will deny”) sides are present, and it is likely that the added “before his angels” alludes to the parallel (negative) form in Mark 8:38 (par. Luke 9:6), “If anyone is ashamed of me … the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.” The majority in the church at Sardis had been “ashamed” of Christ, probably by compromising their Christian distinctives in order to be accepted by their peers. Behind the promise of 2:5 for the faithful minority, there is also a warning of judgment for the unfaithful in the church.16 Ὁμολογήσω (homologēsō, I will confess) in contexts like this has a definite forensic or juridical force. Christ is not so much a witness at the Final Assize but the judge and jury pronouncing the word of acceptance or rejection. “Name” occurs four times in this letter (3:1, 4, 5 [twice]). In the ancient world the “name” spoke of the essence or chief characteristic of the person. In Revelation, to have the “name of God” (3:12; 14:1; 22:4) is to be characterized as his; to have the “name of the beast” (13:17; 14:11) is to belong to Satan. Here the “name” is first of all written in the book of life and then confessed at the final divine court. Those who remain true to Christ have a new identity, a new citizenship, and a new future—eternal life in heaven.

Once more (3:6; cf. 2:7, 11, 17, 29) the call to heed the Spirit’s message concludes the letter. The Spirit-led in Sardis and all “churches” (note the plural) who read this letter must hear and obey the warnings if they are to receive the promises. The message is from God, not just John, and the importance of responding to these truths could not be overstated.

Summary and Contextualization

One would hope that there are few churches like Sardis today, but there are many. Lack of spiritual vigilance in a secular world is as prevalent today (perhaps more so) as it was in John’s day. It is easy to get so caught up in the things of this life that we lose sight of the fact that only Christ controls the “stars”/churches. That is the heart of watchfulness, to acknowledge the supremacy of Christ in everything. Many churches, even entire denominations, have so compromised their beliefs and practices by accommodating to the fads of intelligentsia or the ways of the world that they have virtually ceased to be Christian. Every passage on the return of Christ in the NT (e.g., Rom. 13:11; James 5:8; 1 Pet. 4:7; 1 John 2:18) makes the point of living life from the perspective of future accountability to God. In such churches the righteous few, as here, must stand up and be counted. They must consider themselves missionaries to their own church and wake up those who are about to die while there is still time. In fact, they are responsible before God to do so.

Additional Notes

3:2. σου τὰ ἔργα: A few manuscripts (A C etc.) omit the article before ἔργα, resulting in the meaning “any of your works,” while others (א P etc.) retain the article. Some scholars (Hort, Moffatt, Mounce, Hemer) prefer the absence of the article on the grounds of “more difficult reading,” while others (R. Charles, Beckwith, Thomas) prefer its presence on the grounds of the author’s usual practice (cf. 2:2, 9; 3:1, 8, 15). The first is more harsh and could contradict the favorable statement that “some remain” (also 3:4), but it is more in keeping with the tone of the passage, and the argument from the more difficult reading is slightly stronger.

3:3. πῶς: Beckwith (1919: 474) states that πῶς here refers not so much to the manner (“how”) but the matter (“what”) of what they had been taught. This is not as unusual as it may first seem; as BAGD §732 says, it sometimes has the same meaning as ὅτι “in accordance w. the tendency in later Gk.” Hemer (1986: 261 n. 64) and Thomas (1992: 265–66), however, argue that mere content in this context lacks force. Thomas states that the focus is on the quality of their fine beginning and the manner in which they had once received these truths. However, the two verbs following, “received” and “kept,” are more in keeping with the doctrinal truths of the faith. It seems better to see the “works” of 3:2 as stating the “how” and the “received” truths of verse 3 as stating the “what.”

3:3. Εἴληφας καὶ ἤκουσας: Scholars debate the relationship between the perfect εἴληφας and the aorist ἤκουσας. Some (Hort, Beckwith, Moffat, Hemer) argue that εἴληφας must be an aoristic perfect on the grounds of parallels between the two verbs and the frequent use of aoristic perfects in the book (cf. 5:7; 8:5; 11:17). Others (Swete, R. Charles, Mounce, Thomas) say that the change is deliberate: “Members of the church had received the faith as an abiding trust at the moment faith came by hearing” (Mounce 1998: 94). The problem is that in that case we would expect the verbs to be reversed, and the tendency today is to realize a closer relationship between tenses in tandem as here.

3:5. οὕτως: There are two problems, one text-critical and the other interpretive. Several traditions (אc P 046 TR etc.) read οὕτος rather than οὕτως, which has slightly stronger attestation (א* [A οὕτω] C 1006 etc.). Though some (e.g., Beckwith 1919: 475–76; Johnson 1981: 450) wonder if οὕτος might be preferred on interpretive grounds (see below), it is more likely that οὕτως was original and replaced either due to a hearing error (Hemer 1986: 262 n. 73 points out that even in NT times the distinction between long and short vowel pronunciation had probably disappeared) or because οὕτος made more sense in the context. In short, the manuscript superiority as well as the principle of “least likely reading” support οὕτως as the original reading.

Closely connected is the meaning and force of οὕτως as the connective between 3:4 and 3:5. It could mean “likewise” and introduce a class of conquerors distinct from those in v. 4, but that is unlikely here. The faithful in Sardis (3:4) are certainly also “overcomers.” As Beckwith (1919: 476) points out, for this meaning the writer would more likely have used ὁμοίως or ὡσαύτως. It could also mean “thus, in the same manner,” stating that conquerors “just like” the faithful in Sardis would receive rewards from God. Or one could take it as inferential (Hemer 1986: 148, from Hort 1908: 33), drawing a conclusion from what is said in the previous verse. Either of the latter two meanings will work in this context, but the former (“in the same manner”) is slightly preferable. The faithful minority are the conquerors who will receive the rewards promised.

3:5. οὐ μὴ ἐξαλείψω τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῆς βίβλου τῆς ζωῆς: The significance of this for the security of the believer has received a great deal of attention. On the surface it seems to indicate that it is possible to lose one’s salvation. Noting the connection with the doctrine of election in 13:8 and 17:8, Caird (1966: 49) calls for a “conditional predestination. A man cannot earn the right to have his name on the citizen roll, but he can forfeit it.” Mounce (1998: 97) recognizes the implications but answers that “it is hermeneutically unsound to base theological doctrine solely on either parables or apocalyptic imagery.” Few, however, are willing to place apocalyptic in that category. Thomas (1992: 260–63) notes several possible solutions: (1) This could be an example of litotes, in which the negative is stated (“never erase”) in order to stress the positive (“you are enrolled in the book of life”). If this is true, it could be an affirmation of security more than a warning against apostasy. But the promise is empty if the “blotting out” could never occur, and in Ps. 69:28 such a possibility is affirmed. (2) If this is a register of citizens whose names were erased upon death, this could refer only to those who profess Christ (3:1, “a name that you live”). However, it is difficult to conceive why those with an empty profession would be included on such a list in the first place. (3) There could be a distinction between the OT perspective (physical death) and the NT perspective (spiritual death), with this referring to the OT sense. However, it is likely that the OT sense, especially in Isa. 4:3 and Dan. 12:1, refers also to eternal life. (4) Thomas’s solution is to note 13:8 (cf. 5:9–10) and to argue that the book of life was written “before the foundation of the world” at the predestined “slaying of the Lamb.” Since his death affected the whole world (Christ died for all humankind), the names of all were in the book. Names are erased when there is no profession of faith, and in this case that would be the majority in the Sardian church. However, there is no indication in Revelation of such a phenomenon. In 13:8; 17:8; and 20:15 the earth-dwellers are those “whose names were not written in the book of life.” Thus those whose names are “erased” are a different group. Those “not written” are the earth-dwellers who worship the beast and have always rejected the gospel. Those “erased” are members of the Sardian church who failed to remain true to Christ. Moreover, there are other passages in Revelation on the possibility of losing one’s place in the kingdom (cf. 2:5; 21:7–8; 22:17–18) as well as corroborating material in the rest of the NT (e.g., John 15:1–6; Heb. 6:4–6; 10:26–31; 2 Pet. 2:20–22

Osborne, Grant R.: Revelation. Grand Rapids, Mich. : Baker Academic, 2002 (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament), S. 171