Nicolaitanism or The Nicolaitan heresy .

​

If there are two things the Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox do not want to be added to the list of early heresies, they are in my opinion

​

1) Sacerdotalism

2) A correct interpretation of Nicolaitanism.

​

Because Protestants often do not realise just how much Catholics and Orthodox believers are influenced by the fake list of bishops making up the line of Apostolic succession (absurdly the Catholics and Eastern Orthodox have contradictory lines of descent, as do Oriental Orthodox etc) they do not realise the importance of making sure "sacerdotalism" is on that list of early heresies. Instead Protestants often add to the list of early heresies

1) The evolution of the mass

2) The evolution of a 2nd priesthood

3) The evolution of infant sprinkling 

​

But sacerdotalism (grouping them together) should be emphasized more, partly because it later led to adding more and more fake sacraments to the first two real ones, in order to increase perceived priestly powers and thus "power over the laity".

​

if we prove The Nicolaitan heresy is in fact an early cult that practiced sacerdotalism, this would mean that the entire line of apostolic decent deceptions falls apart, and would instead show how a few corrupted early false bishops began a corruption that later led to Nicolaitanism being linked into the state of Emperor Constantine.

​

A Protestant view of the Nicolaitan heresy.

​

In his Study Bible Cyrus Ingerson Scofield expounded one of the most obvious and biblical  explanations of what the Nicolaitan heresy was and is. To quote his footnote in Revelation chapter 2:6 : quote:

​

[1] Nicolaitanes

From nikao, "to conquer," and laos, "the people," or "laity." There is no ancient authority for a sect of the Nicolaitanes. If the word is symbolic it refers to the earliest form of the notion of a priestly order, or "clergy," which later divided an equal brotherhood Mt 23:8 into "priests" and "laity." What in Ephesus was "deeds" Rev 2:6 had become in Pergamos a "doctrine Rev 2:15.

Margin Nicolaitanes

Rev 2:15, contra, 1Pet 5:2,3 Mt 24:49.

​

unquote,

​

This belief states that Jesus puts the explanation of what the Nicolaitan heresy is into the very word itself, that is nikao, "to conquer," and laos, "the people," or "laity." This then becomes the obvious explanation of the evolution of a priestly order, claiming to offer up Christ, and pass on grace for salvation, and thus the false priests trick the "laity" into thinking they have power over them. This explanation is so powerful the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics want it suppressing. It explains they are Nicolaitan heretics, and that Jesus says "But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate." Rev 2:6. In other words Jesus says he hates the underpinning premise of sacerdotalism that characterizes the Nicolaitan heresy, and that means he is saying he hates the deeds of the later Catholic and Orthodox false churches. It also shows that in the early church there were brothers and sisters spiritual enough to see how dangerous priestcraft heresies are, and that they were opposing these practices, and that Jesus was commending them for it.

​

A prime example of their "power over the Laity" is making someone wait for 2 years before baptizing them, even though they say you are not born again until you are baptized (another heresy) until you are spouting their formulaic heresy good enough

​

A Catholic and Orthodox conspiracy to hide the Protestant view.

​

In order to divert people away from the realisation that Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism are in fact two diverse forms of the Nicolaitan heresy, they have both entered into a conspiratorial pact to try to convince the world that Nicolaitanism was in fact a now dead sex cult started by Nicholas from the bible. I can only conclude that the extremis and very controversial nature of interpreting Nicolaitanism as a sex cult led, by the deacon Nicholas from the new testament, is meant to cause such a stir it acts as even more of a diversion to people's minds, than the more obvious way of interpreting it by use of the literal interpretation of the word as a sect considering its priests "higher than the laity" or having "power over the laity". Also by inventing this sex cult interpretation, that is "established" as such by reference to traditions that amount to little more than old wives tales, or later invented accusations, they also take their proselytes along the usual red herring route of exalting folktales and fallacies over a desire to see historical facts.

​

The Orthodox / Catholic view of the Nicolaitan heresy.

​

The last Western Church Father was Isidore of Seville, who finished the Etymologies, or the Origins, in the year 636 A.D. In Book VIII titled "The Church and sects (De ecclesia et sects)" he wrote, "The Nicolaites (Nicolaita) are so called from Nicolas, deacon of the church of Jerusalem, who, along with Stephen and the others, was ordained by Peter. He abandoned his wife because of her beauty, so that whoever wanted to might enjoy her; the practice turned into debauchery, with partners being exchanged in turn. Jesus condemns them in the Apocalypse, saying (2:6): "But this thou hast, that thou hates the deeds of the Nicolaites."[3]

​

see link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaism

​

I have discovered that because there are about 1 billion Catholics in the world, and 350,000 Eastern Orthodox believers, that Wikipedia is heavily pervaded by their followers. As Wiki is also largely edited by volunteers many of whom are well below professional standards, and as religious persuasions make them partisan, when Protestants try to draw attention in wikipedia to their view of sacerdotalism and Nicolaitanism, it can be falsely interpreted by wiki staff as turning wiki into a "battleground" and thus the higher objective of wiki that it should be a place giving a balanced view of all perspectives is side stepped by them, resulting in a bigoted behind the scenes agenda that hides from the public a full expanded view of the Protestant side of this debate, held by scholars for instance such as Cyrus Ingerson Scofield. Catholics and Orthodox believers understand clearly that a list of early heresies that includes sacerdotalism and Nicolaitanism could be catastrophic to their bogus concept of Apostolic Succession, so they are very bigoted indeed about allowing proper Protestant expositions on the subjects. What I am saying is, no matter how many of you try to add them, I would predict you will never see articles in Wikipedia properly explaining sacerdotalism or Nicolaitanism from the Protestant perspective. 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​