Albert Barnes Commentary Revelation 2:14

"But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there some that hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit fornication." — Revelation 2:14 (ASV)

But I have a few things against you. As against the church at Ephesus (Revelation 2:4). The charge against this church, however, is somewhat different from that against the church at Ephesus. The charge there was that they had left their first love; but it is spoken in commendation of them that they hated the deeds of the Nicolaitanes (Revelation 2:6). Here the charge is that they tolerated that sect among them, and that they also had among them those who held the doctrine of Balaam. Their general course had been such that the Savior could approve it; He did not approve, however, of their tolerating those who held to pernicious practical error—error that tended to sap the very foundation of morals.

Because you have there those who hold the doctrine of Balaam. It is not necessary to suppose that they professedly held to the same opinion as Balaam, or openly taught the same doctrines. The meaning is that they taught substantially the same doctrine which Balaam did, and deserved to be classed with him. What that doctrine was is stated in the subsequent part of the verse.

Who taught Balak to cast a stumbling-block before the children of Israel. The word stumbling-block properly means anything over which one falls or stumbles; and then, anything by which a person may fall into sin, or which becomes an occasion for their falling into sin. The meaning here is that it was through the instructions of Balaam that Balak learned the way by which the Israelites might be led into sin, and might thus bring upon themselves the Divine malediction. The main circumstances in the case were these:

1. Balak, king of Moab, when the children of Israel approached his borders, felt that he could not contend successfully against so great a host, for his people were dispirited and disheartened at their numbers (Numbers 22:3–4).

2. In these circumstances, he resolved to send for one who had a very distinguished reputation as a prophet, that he might “curse” that people, or utter a malediction over them, in order at the same time to ensure their destruction and to inspirit his own people in making war on them, in accordance with a prevalent opinion of ancient times that prophets had the power of blighting anything by their curse. (See Barnes on Job 3:8). For this purpose, he sent messengers to Balaam to invite him to come and perform this service (Numbers 22:5–6).

3. Balaam professed to be a prophet of the Lord, and it was obviously proper that he should inquire of the Lord whether he should comply with this request. He did so and was positively forbidden to go (Numbers 22:12).

4. When Balaam’s answer was reported to Balak, he supposed that Balaam might be persuaded to come by the offer of rewards, and he sent more distinguished messengers with an offer of ample honor if he would come (Numbers 22:15–17).

5. Balaam was evidently strongly inclined to go. However, in accordance with his character as a prophet, he said that if Balak would give him his house full of silver and gold, he could do no more and say no more than the Lord permitted. He proposed again to consult the Lord to see if he could obtain permission to go with Balak’s messengers. He obtained permission, but with the express injunction that he was only to utter what God should say. When he came to Balak, notwithstanding his own manifest desire to comply with Balak’s wish and all the offers Balak made to induce him to do the contrary, he only continued to bless the Hebrew people until, in disgust and indignation, Balak sent him away again to his own land (Numbers chapters 22-23 and Numbers 24:10 and following).

6. Balaam returned to his own house, but evidently with a desire still to gratify Balak. Being forbidden to curse the people of Israel, having been overruled in all his purposes to do it, having been, contrary to his own desires, constrained to bless them when he himself was more than willing to curse them, and still having a desire to comply with the wishes of the king of Moab, he cast about for some way in which the object might yet be accomplished—that is, in which the curse of God might in fact rest upon the Hebrew people, and they might become exposed to Divine displeasure.

   To do this, no way occurred that was so plausible and had such probability of success as to lead them into idolatry and into the sinful and corrupt practices connected with idolatry. It was, therefore, resolved to make use of the charms of the Moabite women, so that through their influence the Hebrews might be drawn into licentiousness.

   This was done. The abominations of idolatry spread through the camp of Israel; licentiousness prevailed everywhere, and God sent a plague upon them to punish them (Numbers 25:1). That this was also planned and instigated by Balaam is apparent from Numbers 31:16: Behold these [women] caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord. The attitude of Balaam’s mind in the matter was this:

   1. He had a strong desire to do that which he knew was wrong and which was expressly forbidden by God.

   2. He was restrained by internal checks and remonstrances, and prevented from doing what he wished to do.

   3. He cast about for some way in which he might do it, notwithstanding these internal checks and remonstrances, and finally accomplished the same thing in fact, though in a form different from that which he had first prepared.

This is not an unfair description of what often occurs in the plans and purposes of a wicked man. The meaning in the passage before us is that in the church at Pergamos there were those who taught substantially the same thing that Balaam did; that is, the tendency of whose teaching was to lead people into idolatry and its ordinary accompaniment—licentiousness.

To eat things sacrificed to idols. Balaam taught the Hebrews to do this—perhaps by somehow securing their attendance at the riotous and gluttonous feasts of idolatry celebrated among the people with whom they sojourned. Such feasts were commonly held in idol temples, and they usually led to scenes of dissipation and corruption.

By plausibly teaching that there could be no harm in eating what had been offered in sacrifice—since an idol was nothing, and the flesh of animals offered in sacrifice was the same as if slaughtered for some other purpose—it would seem that these teachers at Pergamos had induced professing Christians to attend those feasts, thus lending their countenance to idolatry and exposing themselves to all the corruption and licentiousness that commonly attended such celebrations. See the banefulness of thus eating the meat offered in sacrifice to idols. (See Barnes on 1 Corinthians 8:1).

And to commit fornication. Balaam taught this, and that was the tendency of the doctrines inculcated at Pergamos. On what pretense this was done is not said, but it is clear that the church had regarded this in a lenient manner. The heathen world had been so accustomed to this vice that many who had been converted from idolatry might be disposed to look on it with less severity than we do now, and there was a necessity for incessant watchfulness lest the members of the church should fall into it. (See Barnes on Acts 15:20).