Jumpstarter 1 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 1

Jesus says twice in Revelation 2 that He “hates” both the deeds and the doctrine of the Nicolaitans; what does that language suggest about God’s character and moral priorities, and how do we tend to react to the idea of Jesus hating certain “teachings” (not just abstract evil in general)?

Another way to ask: Jesus says He “hates” the Nicolaitans’ actions and teachings. What does that show about what God cares about, and how do you feel about Jesus hating certain teachings, not just “evil” in general?

Direct Answer Based on Bercot’s teaching, Jesus’ “hate” language shows that God is not morally neutral: He actively opposes both sinful actions and the teachings that justify them. Many of us tend to soften this by treating wrong teaching as merely “interpretation,” but Revelation portrays Jesus as personally judging and rejecting it.

Support from Transcript:

Jesus says, “you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate” and “those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate” (Rev. 2:6, 15).
Bercot says the Nicolaitans’ “two noteworthy unscriptural practices” were “sexual immorality and eating food sacrificed to idols,” implying Jesus’ hatred is tied to concrete, tolerated sins.
He connects Rev. 2:20: Jesus rebukes allowing Jezebel “to teach and to seduce my servants” into those same sins—so the target is not only behavior but permissive teaching.
Bercot pushes back against the idea that these issues are “indifferent,” noting Irenaeus: “They teach that it is a matter of indifference…”
He testifies many Christians assume “there’s nothing wrong” with idol-meat, showing our instinct to blunt Jesus’ moral clarity.

Discussion Follow-ups If Jesus “hates” certain doctrine, what should that do to our tolerance for teaching that makes sin seem harmless? How do we keep Jesus’ severity from being redefined by our preferences?

Jumpstarter 1 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 1 of 10