Talk:Epistle to the Laodiceans

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Christianity (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Religious texts (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a joint subproject of WikiProject Religion and WikiProject Books, and a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religious texts-related subjects. Please participate by editing this article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

In Kerouac's "On The Road" he speaks of the Laodiceans as an allusion to reality and society bursting the bubble of childhood ignorant bliss. Does anyone know why the Laodiceans fit this metaphor?

Probably a reference to Revelation 3:14-22, in which the writer is instructed to write to the church in Laodicea. Verse 17 says, For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind and naked. (ESV) In the previous to verse, he says, ...beacause you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth. Other translations, including the KJV, say spew or vomit, rather than spit. Copey 2 14:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Philemon as the Letter to the Laodiceans?[edit]

A good case can made for this hypothesis. I'll hunt out some friendly references before I post it, but I may put the bulk of the information under Colossians with a short reference here, since this article is primarily about the pseudepigraphic work. Copey 2 14:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


The publication year of Lorber's letter should be 1844, not 1884 which is after Lorber's death. -- (talk) 01:35, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

You are right, I have corrected the mistake. --FordPrefect42 (talk) 10:08, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Location of the Referenced Verse in Colossians[edit]

There are a couple places in article the that mention Paul possibly/probably referencing the Epistle to the Laodiceans in his Epistle to the Colossians (4:16). Is there a reason why the chapter and verse of the reference is not included? I know Paul did not write his letters with the divisions in them, but they seem to be a universally accepted way of dividing and referencing points in the texts. If it was an oversight or incomplete work I can fix it (or anyone else who reads this), as I think it will add value to the article, but if it was intentional, I will not complain as long as I can know why. Jbo5112 (talk) 17:28, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Removed whole letter quotation[edit]

I don't understand what is the reason to publish in the Wikipedia whole text of one of the possible forged versions of the Epistle (it is not even clear which one it is). Removing and storing here for posterity. Somebody should find some better place for it (isn’t it somewhere in wikibooks?). Ceplm (talk) 18:29, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Letter to the Laodiceans[edit]

1 Paul, an apostle not from men nor by man, but through Jesus Christ, to the brethren that are at Laodicea.

2 Grace be unto you and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 I give thanks to Christ in all my prayers that you continue in him and persevere in his works looking for the promise in the Day of Judgement.

4 Nor do vain insinuations of some overset you that you turn away from the truth of the Gospel, which is preached by me.

5 And now God will help those who are of me to continue in kindness and doing works which serve the truth of the gospel of salvation of eternal life.

6 And now well known are my bonds which I suffer in Christ, in which I rejoice and am glad.

7 And this to me is for everlasting salvation that is brought about by your prayers, which the Holy Spirit administers, whether by life or by death.

8 For it is joy to me to live in Christ and (it is joy) to die (in Christ).

9 And likewise will he work his mercy in you that you may have the same love and be of one mind.

10 Therefore, dearly beloved, as you have heard in my presence so hold fast and work in the fear of God, and it shall be unto you for life eternal.

11 For it is God that works in you.

12 And whatever you do, do without regret.

13 And for the rest, dearly beloved, rejoice in Christ and beware of filthy lucre.

14 Let all your petitions be made openly before God and be steadfast in the mind of Christ.

15 Do those things that are sound and just and true and sober and to be loved (amiable).

16 Hold fast in your heart what you have heard and received (by thinking on those things),

17 and you shall have peace.

18 The saints salute you.

19 The grace of the Lord Jesus be with your spirit.

20 And cause this letter to be read to them of Colossae and the letter of the Colossians to be read to you.

The Latin Vulgate Epistle[edit]

The section "The Latin Vulgate Epistle to the Laodiceans" currently carries this sentence: "Jerome, who wrote the Latin Vulgate translation, wrote in the 4th century, "it is rejected by everyone"[16] and included it in the Vulgate, which is the reason for translating the letter into Latin." This makes no sense. Why was it included in the Vulgate? Being rejected by everyone would be a reason NOT to include it. Why was it translated into Latin? "Because it was rejected by everyone" makes no sense. "Because it was included in the Vulgate" makes even less. I would fix the wording but I can't imagine what the sense should be. -Friendly Person (talk) 16:39, 3 January 2015 (UTC)