that doeth righteousness is righteous: he that committeth sin is of the Devil. (1 John iii. 7, 8.)

Nor was it the only consequence of Gnostic licentiousness, that many real Christians were led away, and made shipwreck of their faith. It was from the gross immorality of nominal Christians, that the holy name of Christ was blasphemed among the Gentiles. Our Saviour had forewarned them in the spirit of prophecy, Ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake: (Matt. xxiv. 9.) and we learn from St. Paul, that it was slanderously reported, and some affirmed that the Christians said, Let us do evil, that good may come1. (Rom. iii. 8.) St. Peter observes that the Gentiles spoke evil of them, as of evildoers. (1 Pet. ii. 12, 15. iii. 16.) And whence did these calumnies arise? Not surely from the preaching of the apostles: not from the lives of them or of their followers; they came from certain men who crept in unawares, ungodly men, turning the grace of God into lasciviousness: (Jude 4.) who when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error: while they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption. (2 Pet. ii. 18, 19.) These were

This text is applied to the Simonians by Grabe (ad Bulli Harm. Apost. p. 30.) and by Waterland (on Regeneration, vol. VI. p. 371. and Sermon XXI. vol. IX. p. 263.) There may be allusions to false teachers who indulged the passions of their hearers in 1 Thess. ii.

3-5. iv. 7. Titus iii. 8. 1 Tim. vi. 3. Jude 4, 10, 16, 18. 2 Pet. ii. 1, 18, 19. James iii. 13. That they were sometimes successful is shewn in 1 Tim. v. 14, 15.

This is referred to the Gnostics by Epiphanius. Hær. XXVI. II. p. 93.

the men who brought the Christians into contempt: who raised against them the charges of incestuous rites, of Thyestean banquets, and all those horrors which poetry alone had hitherto imagined; but which were all supposed to be realized in the practice of the unhappy Christians 3. Their apologists in the second and third centuries were forced to clear themselves from these atrocious calumnies: and while the Christians were suffering from the profligacy of the Gnostics, the real criminals escaped by the same laxity of principle which led them to commit the crime. The Gnostics did not refuse to offer incense to the gods, and to partake of heathen sacrifices. The Christians were willing to be made themselves the victims; but they died with unpolluted hands, and with lips still calling upon Christ.

This leads me to consider a particular division of the Gnostics, which is perhaps the only one mentioned by name in the New Testament. St. John says in his Revelations, to the Angel of the church of Ephesus; But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate: (ii. 6.) and again to the Angel of the church of Pergamos; So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. (15.) These are the only two places where the Nicolaitans are mentioned in the New Testament: and it might appear at first, that little could be inferred from these concerning either their doctrine or their practice. It is asserted however by all the Fathers, that the Nicolaitans were a branch of the Gnostics: and the epistles, which were addressed by St. John to the seven Asiatic churches, may perhaps lead us to the same conclusion. Thus to the church at Ephesus

L

he writes, Thou hast tried them which say they are apostles and are not, and hast found them liars. (ii. 2.) This may be understood of the Gnostic teachers, who falsely called themselves Christians, and who would be not unlikely to assume also the title of apostles. It appears from this and other passages, that they had distinguished themselves at Ephesus; and it is when writing to that church, that St. John mentions the Nicolaitans. Again, when writing to the church at Smyrna, he says, I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. (9.) I have perhaps said enough in my former Lectures to shew, that the Gnostics borrowed many doctrines from the Jews, and thought by this means to attract both the Jews and Christians. We might therefore infer, even without the testimony of the Fathers, that the Gnostic doctrines were prevalent in these churches, where St. John speaks of the Nicolaitans and if so, we have a still more specific indication of their doctrine and practice, when we find St. John saying to the church in Pergamos, I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. (14.) Then follow

This may perhaps enable us to explain the expression of St. Paul, βλέπετε τοὺς κύνας, βλέπετε τοὺς κακοὺς ἐργάτας, βλέπετε Thν KаTαTоunν. (Phil. iii. 2.) He may have alluded to persons, who adopted circumcision and certain outward ceremonies, but did not in other respects

obey the law of Moses; and he may have used the term karaτομὴ rather than περιτομὴ to ex press this spurious or pretended Judaism. See Castalio, Zegerus ad 1. Hammond, de Antichristo, IV. 2. p. 16. Compare also Rev. xxii. 15.

the words which I have already quoted, So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. There seems here to be some comparison between the doctrine of Balaam and that of the Nicolaitans: and I would also point out, that to the church in Thyatira the apostle writes, I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. (20.) The two passages are very similar, and may enable us to throw some light upon the history of the Nicolaitans. Tertullian has preserved a tradition, that the person here spoken of as Jezebel was a female heretic, who taught what she had learnt from the Nicolaitans 1: and whether the tradition be true or no, it seems certain, that to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication, was part of the practice of the Nicolaitans.

These two sins are compared to the doctrine of Balaam and though the Bible tells us little of Balaam's history, beyond his prophecies and his death, yet we can collect enough to enable us to explain this allusion of St. John. We read, that when Israel abode in Shittim, the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab: and they, i. e. the women, called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people did eat, and bowed

De Pudicit. 19. p. 571. Buddeus considered Jezebel to be a real name: (Eccl. Apost. p. 401.) Several authorities read τὴν γυναϊκά σου Ιεζάβελ, which Griesbach prefers and

hence it is supposed that this woman was the wife of the bishop of Thyatira. See Grotius and Dionysius (Carthusianus) ad l.

down to their gods. (Numb. xxv. 1, 2.) But we read further, that when the Midianites were spoiled and Balaam slain, Moses said of the women who were taken, Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor. (xxxi. 16.) This, then, was the insidious policy and advice of Balaam. When he found that he was prohibited by God from cursing Israel, he advised Balak to seduce the Israelites by the women of Moab, and thus to entice them to the sacrifices of their gods. This is what St. John calls the doc trine of Balaam, or the wicked artifice which he taught the king of Moab and so he says, that in the church of Pergamos there were some who held the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. We have therefore the testimony of St. John, as well as of the Fathers, that the lives of the Nicolaitans were profligate and vicious to which we may add, that they ate things sacrificed to idols. This is expressly said of Basilides and Valentinus, two celebrated leaders of Gnostic sects and we perhaps are not going too far, if we infer from St. John, that the Nicolaitans were the first who enticed the Christians to this impious practice, and obtained from thence the distinc

in This may well explain the conduct of the Almighty towards Balaam, and the expression of the Angel, Thy way is perverse before me. (xxii. 32.) Commentators and critics have not always studied the heart of Balaam. Though so little is said of his policy in the Bible, it was a fact, upon which the Jews appear to have had much historical or traditional in

formation. That Balak consulted Balaam, is said in Micah vi. 5. See Josephus, Antiq. iv. 6. Philo Judæus, De Mose, vol. II. p. 127. De Monarch. I. p. 220. De Fortitud. p. 381. The whole history is minutely detailed by these writers. See Waterland, Sermon XXXII. on the History and Character of Balaam, vol. IX. p. 397; also vol. VI. p. 108.