Itttemadthmal Critixal
"Scarcely higher praise can be afforded to a volume than by the
statement that it is well worthy of the International Critical
Commentary Series." Church Quarterly Review.
For Prices see Messrs. T. & T. Clark s latest Catalogue.
GENESIS. Principal JOHN SKINNER, D.D.
NUMBERS. Prof. G. BUCHANAN GRAY, D.D.
DEUTERONOMY. Prof. S. R. DRIVER, D.D.
JUDGES. Prof. G. F. MOORE, D.D.
SAMUEL I. and II. Prof. H. P. SMITH, D.D.
CHRONICLES I. and II. Prof. E. L. CURTIS, D.D.
EZRA AND NEHEMIAH. Prof. L. W. BATTEN, D.D.
ESTHER. Prof. L. B. PATON, Ph.D.
JOB. Prof. G. BUCHANAN GRAY, D.D. [In the Press.
PSALMS. Prof. C. A. BRIGGS, D.D. Two Vols.
PROVERBS. Prof. C. H. TOY, D.D.
ECCLESIASTES. Prof. G. A. BARTON, Ph.D.
ISAIAH. Vol. i (,Ch. i.-xxvii.). Prof. G. BUCHANAN GRAY, D.D., D.Litt.
AMOS AND HOSEA. President W. R. HARPER, Ph.D.
MICAH, ZEPHANIAH, AND NAHUM, Prof. J. M. P. SMITH;
HABAKKUK, Prof. W. H. WARD; and OBADIAH AND JOEL,
Prof. J. A. BEWER. One Vol.
HAGGAI, ZECHARIAH, Prof. H. G. MITCHELL; MALACHI, Prof.
J. M. P. SMITH ; and JONAH, Prof. J. A. BEWER.
ST. MATTHEW. Principal W. C. ALLEN, M.A. Third Edition.
ST. MARK. Prof. E. P. GOULD, D.D.
ST. LUKE. ALFRED PLUMMER, D.D. Fourth Edition.
ROMANS. Prof. W. SANDAY, D.D., and Principal A. C. HEADLAM, D.D.
I. CORINTHIANS. The BISHOP OF EXETER and Dr. A. PLUMMER.
II. CORINTHIANS. ALFRED PLUMMER, D.D.
GALATIANS. Prof. E. D. BURTON. [In the Press.
EPHESIANS AND COLOSSIANS. Prof. T. K. ABBOTT, D.Litt.
PHILIPPIANS AND PHILEMON. Prof. M. R. VINCENT, D.D.
THESSALONIANS. Prof. J. E. FRAME, M.A.
ST. JAMES. Prof. J. H. ROPES.
ST. PETER AND ST. JUDE. Prof. CHAS. BIGG, D.D.
THE JOHANNINE EPISTLES. A. E. BROOKE, D.D.
REVELATION. ARCHDEACON R. H. CHARLES, D.Litt. Two Vols.
1/7/20
THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY
A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL
COMMENTARY
ON
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
BY
R. H. CHARLES, D.Litt., D.D.
VOLUME I
Also by Archdeacon R. H. CHARLES, D.LItt., D.D.
STUDIES IN THE APOCALYPSE
Price 7f- net
"This volume on the Apocalypse, by one whose
knowledge of Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic
is unrivalled among English scholars, will be wel
come to all serious students of the New Testament.
. . . We are grateful for a book which is a real
contribution towards the scientific study of the
Apocalypse." Churchman,
EDINBURGH : T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET
A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL
COMMENTARY
ON
THE REVELATION OF
ST. JOHN U| |^
WITH INTRODUCTION, NOTES, AND INDICES
ALSO
THE GREEK TEXT AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION
BY
R. H. CHARLES, D.Litt., D.D.
ARCHDEACON OF WESTMINSTER
FELLOW OP THE BRITISH ACADEMY
(IN TWO VOLUMES)
VOL. I
EDINBURGH
T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET
1920
1
PRINTED BY
MORRISON AND G1BB LIMITED,
FOR
T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.
LONDON: SIMPK.N, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, AND co. LIMITED.
NEW YORK: CHARLES SCRIBNER S SONS.
The Rights of Translation and of Reproduction are Reserved.
TO
MY WIFE
TO WHOM
I AM IMMEASURABLY BEHOLDEN
IN THIS AS IN MY OTHER STUDIES
BUT IN THIS
BEYOND ALL THE REST
vii
PREFACE.
IN 1894 Messrs. T. & T. Clark asked me to undertake
a Commentary on the Apocalypse. The present Com
mentary, therefore, is the result of a study extending over
twenty-five years. During the first fifteen years of the
twenty-five not to speak of the preceding eight years,
which were in large measure devoted to kindred subjects
my time was mainly spent in the study of Jewish and
Christian Apocalyptic as a whole, and of the contributions
of individual scholars of all the Christian centuries, but
especially of the last fifty years, to the interpretation of
the Apocalypse. The main results of these studies are
embodied in my article on " Revelation," in the last edition
of the Encyclopaedia Britannica.
But this work had hardly passed through Press before
I became convinced that many of the conclusions therein
set forth were in a high degree unsatisfactory, and that, if
satisfactory results were to be reached, they could only be
reached by working first hand from the foundation. From
that period onwards I began to break with the traditions
of the elders alike ancient and modern and to rewrite
and that not once or twice the sections of my Commentary
already written. Thus I soon came to learn that the Book
of Revelation, which in earlier years I feared could offer no
room for fresh light or discovery, presented in reality a
X PREFACE
field of research infinitely richer than any of those to
which my earlier studies had been devoted. The first
ground for such a revolution in my attitude to the Book
was due to an exhaustive study of Jewish Apocalyptic
The knowledge thereby acquired helped to solve many
problems, which could only prove to be hopeless enigmas
to scholars unacquainted with this literature. But the
second ground was of greater moment still. For the more
I studied the Greek of the Apocalypse the more conscious
I became that no scholar could appreciate the essential
unity of the style of the greater part of the book, or even
translate it, who had not made a special study of the
Greek versions of the Old Testament, and combined
therewith an adequate knowledge of the Greek used by
Palestinian Jewish writers and of the ordinary Greek of
our author s time. From the lack of such a study arose
the multitude of disintegrating theories with which I have
dealt in my Studies in the Apocalypse. The bulk of these
were due to their authors ignorance of John s style. They
failed to recognize the presence in the text of certain
phrases and passages which conflicted with John s style,
while with the utmost light-heartedness they excised from
his text chapters and groups of chapters which are indis
putably Johannine.
John s Grammar. In fact, John the Seer used a unique
style, the true character of which no Grammar of the
New Testament has as yet recognized. He thought in
Hebrew, 1 and he frequently reproduces Hebrew idioms
literally in Greek. But his solecistic style cannot be wholly
explained from its Hebraistic colouring. The language
1 I have already in part dealt with this subject in my Studies in the
Apocalypse*, pp. 79-102. I am glad to learn from the editor of Moulton s
Grammar of N. T. Greek that Dr. Moulton abandoned his earlier attitude on
this question after reading these lectures.
PREFACE xj
which he adopted in his old age formed for him no rigid
medium of expression. Hence he remodelled its syntax
freely, and created a Greek that is absolutely his own.
This Greek I slowly mastered as I wrote and rewrote my
Commentary chapter by chapter. The results of this
study are embodied in the " Short Grammar " which is
included in the Introduction that follows.
The Text The necessity of mastering John s style
and grammar necessitated, further, a first-hand study of
the chief MSS and Versions, and in reality the publication
of a new text and a new translation. When once con
vinced of this necessity, I approached Sir John Clark and
laid before him the need of such a text and such a trans
lation. After consultation with Dr. Plummer, the General
Editor of the Series, Sir John acceded to my request with
a courtesy and an enthusiasm I have never yet met with
in any publisher. Sir John s action in this matter recalls
the best traditions of the great publishers of the past.
For the order of the text and the readings adopted,
and for any critical discussion of the text in the Apparatus
Criticus, I am myself wholly responsible. The readings
followed in the Commentary do not always agree with
those in the Greek Text and in the Translation. Where
they disagree, the Text, Translation, and Introduction
represent my final conclusions. But these disagreements
only affect matters of detail as a rule, and not essential
questions of method. The Text represents only a fuller
development of the methods applied in the Commentary.
Apparatus Criticus. In the formation of the Appar.
Crit. I had to call in the help of other scholars, since
owing to over twenty years spent largely in the collation
of MSS and the formation of texts in several languages, I
felt my eyes were wholly unequal to this fresh strain.
xil PREFACE
When seeking such help, I had the good fortune to meet
the Rev. F. S. Marsh, now Dean of Selwyn College,
Cambridge. To his splendid services I am deeply in
debted for the preparation of the Appar. Crit. At his
disposal I placed the photographs of the Uncials A
and X, of twenty-two Cursives, and of all the Versions
save the Ethiopic. One-half of the twenty-two Cursives
I examined personally in the Vatican Library, in the
Laurentian Library in Florence, and in St. Mark s in
Venice, and had them photographed. The rest of the
photographs I procured through the kind offices of the
Librarians of the Bodley, the National Library in Paris,
and of the Escurial. Three or even four of these Cursives
are equal in many respects to the later Uncials, and in
certain readings superior.
Mr. Marsh collated in full the readings of these MSS
and practically all the readings of the Versions, 1 and
prepared the Appar. Crit. of chapters i.-v. Readings
from other Cursives have been adopted from Tischendorf,
Swete, and Hoskier. Unfortunately, when the work was
far advanced, Mr. Marsh was called off to the War for
three years. During his absence, Professor R. M. Gwynn 2
and Miss Gertrude Bevan most kindly came to my help,
and verified the Appar. Crit. of i.-v., with the exception of
the Syriac and Ethiopic Versions. There are three other
scholars to whom my warm thanks are due. The first is
the Rev. Cecil Cryer, who verified Mr. Marsh s collations
of vi.-xiv. and embodied them in the Appar. Crit.^ and
1 I am myself responsible throughout for the collation of the Ethiopic
Version. For my own satisfaction also, I have collated and verified hundreds
in some cases thousands of readings in each of the other Versions, and in
each of the twenty-two MSS.
2 Professor Gwynn also read through the proofs of the Commentary, and
Miss Bevan gave me most ungrudging help in part of the Introduction.
PREFACE xin
subsequently carried i.-xiv. through the Press. 1 During
this process I verified here and there in the proofs
thousands of readings from the MSS and Versions, but
this revision was of necessity only partial. Mr. Marsh
then made a complete revision of the Apparatus Criticus
and corrected a large number of errata. The other two
scholars are the Rev. D. Bruce- Walker and the Rev. J. H.
Roberts. These in conjunction verified Mr. Marsh s col
lations of xv.-xxii., the former taking the larger share of
the work. At this juncture Mr. Marsh returned, and
prepared and carried through Press xv.-xxii. Once again
I must record my grateful thanks to Mr. Marsh, and
express the hope that he may find time and opportunity
for research, and so make the contributions to scholarship
for which he is so well qualified. Also I would express
my gratitude to the Rev. George Horner for the targe
body of readings which -he put at my service from the
Sahidic Version, and the frequent help he gave in connec
tion with readings from the Bohairic Version ; and to
Professor Grenfell for calling my attention to the Papyrus
Fragments of the Apocalypse (see vol. ii. 447-451).
Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to Dr. Plummer
for his patience and kindness throughout the long years
in which I was engaged on this Commentary, as well as
for the many corrections he made in the revision of the
proofs.
The Indexes. For the first and fourth Indexes I am
indebted to the competent services of the Rev. A. LI.
Davies, Warden of Ruthin, North Wales.
The Translation. The Translation is based on the
text. While the text diverges in many passages from
1 Mr. Cryer further helped me by verifying the references in the Intro
duction.
xiv PREFACE
that accepted in the Commentary, the Translation diverges
from the text practically only in one (ii. 27).
In the Translation I have sought to recover the
poetical form in which the Seer wrote so large a part of
the Apocalypse. Nearly always, when dealing with his
greatest themes, the Seer s words assume perhaps un
consciously at times the forms of parallelism familiar in
Hebrew poetry. Even the strophe and antistrophe are
found (see vol. ii. 122, 434-435). To print such passages
as prose is to rob them of half their force. It is not only
the form that is thereby lost, but also much of the thought
that in a variety of ways is reinforced by this parallelism.
The Apocalypse a Book of Songs. Though our author
has for his theme the inevitable conflicts and antagonisms
of good and evil, of God and the powers of darkness, yet
his book is emphatically a Book of Songs. Dirges there
are, indeed, and threnodies ; but these are not over the
martyrs, the faithful that had fallen, but spring from the
lips of the kings of the earth, its merchant princes, its
seafolk, overwhelmed by the fall of the empire of this
world and the destruction of its mighty ones in whom they
had trusted, or from the lips of sinners in the face of actual
or impending doom. But over the martyred Church, over
those that had fallen faithful in the strife, the Seer has no
song of lesser note to sing than the beatitude pronounced
by Heaven itself: " Blessed blessed are the dead that die
in the Lord." A faith immeasurable, an optimism inex
pugnable, a joy inextinguishable press for utterance and
take form in anthems of praise and gladness and thanks
giving, as the Seer follows in vision the varying fortunes
of the world struggle, till at last he sees evil fully and
finally destroyed, righteousness established for evermore,
and all the faithful even the weakest of God s servants
PREFACE XV
amongst them enjoying everlasting blessedness in the
eternal City of God, bearing His name on their foreheads,
and growing more and more into His likeness.
The Apocalypse a book for the present day. The
publication of this Commentary has been delayed in
manifold ways by the War. But these delays have only
served to adjourn its publication to the fittest year in
which it could see the light that is, the year that has
witnessed the overthrow of the greatest conspiracy of
might against right that has occurred in the history of the
world, and at the same time the greatest fulfilment of the
prophecy of the Apocalypse. But even though the powers
of darkness have been vanquished in the open field, there
remains a still more grievous strife to wage, a warfare from
which there can be no discharge either for individuals or
States. This, in contradistinction to the rest of the New
Testament, is emphatically the teaching of our author.
John the Seer insists not only that the individual follower
of Christ should fashion his principles and conduct by the
teaching of Christ, but that all governments should model
their policies by the same Christian norm. He proclaims
that there can be no divergence between the moral laws
binding on the individual and those incumbent on the
State, or any voluntary society or corporation within the
State. None can be exempt from these obligations, and
such as exempt themselves, however well-seeming their
professions, cannot fail to go over with all their gifts,
whether great or mean, to the kingdom of outer darkness.
In any case, no matter how many individuals, societies,
kingdoms, or races may rebel against such obligations,
the warfare against sin and darkness must go on, and go
on inexorably, till the kingdom of this world has become
the kingdom of God and of His Christ.
xvi PREFACE
It is at once with feelings of thankfulness and of regret
that I part with a work that has engaged my thoughts in
a greater or lesser measure for twenty-five years. On the
one hand, I am thankful that I have been permitted to
bring this study of the Apocalypse to a close, though this
thankfulness is tempered by a keen sense of its many
shortcomings, of which none can be so conscious as I am
myself. On the other hand, I cannot help a feeling of
regret that I am breaking with a study which has been at
once the toil and the delight of so many years; and in
parting with it I would repeat, as Professor Swete does
in his work on the Apocalyse, St. Augustine s prayer :
Domine Deus . . . quaecumque dixi in hoc libra de tuo,
agnoscant et tui ; si qua de meo, et Tu ignosce et tui. 1
R. H. C
4 LITTLE CLOISTERS, WESTMINSTER ABBEY,
May 1920.
1 Advice to the reader. Since the present work on the Apocalypse is a
large one, and in many respects difficult, it would be advisable for the serious as
well as for the ordinary student to read through the English translation first.
This will introduce him to the main problems of the book, and help him to
recognize that the thought of our author is orderly and progressive, and easier
to follow tfean that of the Epistle to the Hebrews or of St. Paul s Epistle to
the Romans. After the Translation he should read the Introduction, i, 4,
and such others as these may suggest to him. The serious student should
master the chief sections of the Short Grammar (pp. cxvii-clix). So pre
pared, he can then face the problems discussed in the Commentary, and
recognize the grounds for the adoption of certain readings and interpreta
tions and the rejection of those opposed to them.
Each chapter (or, in two cases, groups of chapters) is preceded by an
introduction. Such introductions are divided into sections. The first section
( l) always gives the general thought of the chapter that follows, while the
remaining sections discuss the diction and idiom of the chapter, its indebted
ness to the Old Testament and other sources, and many other questions,
exegetical, critical, and archaeological.
CONTENTS.
VOLUME I.
INTRODUCTION, pp. xxi-cxci.
I. I. Short account of the Seer and his Book, pp. xxi-xxiii. 2. Plan
of the Book, pp. xxiii-xxviii.
II. Authorship of the Johannine Writings. Evidence internal purely
linguistic. The Apocalypse (J a P) and the Gospel (J) from different
authors. I . Grammatical differences, p. xxix. 2. Differences in
diction, p. xxix sq. 3. Different words and forms used by these
writers to express the same idea, p. xxx sq. 4. Words and phrases
with one meaning in J a P J and another in J, p. xxxi sq. 5. Authors
of J a P and J were in some way connected with each other, pp. xxxii-
xxxiv. 6. J and 1.2. 3 J by the same author, pp. xxxiv-xxxvii.
7. The importance of these conclusions for Johannine criticism,
p. xxxvii.
III. Authorship of the Joharmine Writings. Evidence partly internal, but
mainly external. I. J a P not pseudonymous, but the work of John
the Seer, p. xxxviii sq. 2. The author of J a P is distinct from the
author of J, p. xxxix sq. 3. There were two Johns according to
Papias, the Apostle and thf Elder, the latter being the author of
J a P according to Dionysius, p. xl sq. 4. I. 2. 3 J by the author
of J, p. xli sq. 5. If John the Elder is admitted to be the
author of 2. 3 J, as is done by many competent scholars, then he is
the author also of J and i J, pp. xlii-xliii. 6. If John the Elder is
the author of J and i. 2. 3 J, is John the Apostle the author of J a P ?
No. Its author claims to be a prophet, not an apostle. He was a
Palestinian Jew who migrated late in life to Asia Minor, p. xliii sq.
7. The silence of the writers of the first two centuries as to any
residence of John the Apostle in Asia tells against his being
author of J a P, p. xlv. 8. These conclusions confirmed by the
tradition of John the Apostle s early martyrdom, which, if trust
worthy, renders his authorship of J a P or J, I. 2. 3 J impossible.
That John the Apostle died a martyr s death before 70 A.D. is to be
inferred on the following grounds : (a) Prophecy of Jesus to that
i Jap = the Apocalypse, J the Gospel, i J the First Epistle, etc.
b xvii
xviii CONTENTS
effect, p. xlv sq. ; (b] the Papias-tradition, p. xlvi ; (c) the state
ments of certain ancient writers (145-344 A.D.), pp. xlvi-xlviii ;
(d) the Syriac Martyrology and certain Church Calendars, pp.
xlviii-1.
IV. The Editor of J a P. The present order of 2O 4 -22 could not possibly
have originated with its author. Hence the necessary hypothesis of
an editor, whose existence, though suggested occasionally by certain
intrusions in the earlier chapters, was not demonstrable till 2O 4 -22
was reached. The interpolations in 1-19, when restudied from the
standpoint of this hypothesis, appear in a new light, and these com
bined with those in 20-22 make it an easy task to sketch the main
lines of this editor s character. He was apparently a Jew of the
dispersion, a better Grecian than his master, but otherwise a person
profoundly stupid and ignorant ; a narrow fanatic and celibate, not
quite loyal to his trust as editor ; an arch-heretic, though, owing to
his stupidity, probably an unconscious one, pp. 1-lv.
V. Depravation of the Text through ( i) Interpolations, pp. Ivi-lviii ; ( 2)
Dislocations, pp. Iviii-lx ; ( 3) Lacunae, p. Ix sq. ; ( 4) Ditto-
graphs, p. Ixi.
VI. Greek and Hebrew Sources, and their Dates, pp. Ixii-lxv.
VII. Books of the O.T., of the Pseudepigrapha, and of the N.T. used by our
author. I. General summary of the facts, p. Ixv sq. 2. John
translated directly from the O.T., and did not quote any Greek
version, though often influenced by the LXX (i.e. o ) and another
later version a revised form of o , which was subsequently revised
and incorporated by Theodotion in his version (i.e. ), pp.
Ixvi-lxviii. 3. Passages based directly on the Hebrew of the O.T.
(or the Aramaic of Daniel) ; these are hardly ever literal quotations,
pp. Ixviii-lxxvii. 4. Passages based on the Hebrew of the O.T.,
or on the Aramaic of Daniel, but influenced, in some cases certainly,
in others possibly, by o , p. Ixxviii sq. 5. Passages based on the
Hebrew of the O.T. or on the Aramaic of Daniel, but influenced, in
some cases certainly, in others probably, by a later form of o , which
is preserved in 6 , p. Ixxx sq. 6. Phrases and clauses in our
author which are echoes of O.T. passages, p. Ixxxi sq. 7.
Passages dependent on or parallel with passages in the Pseudepi
grapha, p. Ixxxii sq. 8. Passages in some cases dependent on,
and in other cases parallel with, earlier books of the N.T.,
pp. Ixxxiii-lxxxvi.
VIII. Unity of J a P. I. Unity of thought and dramatic development,
Ixxxvii sq. 2. Unity of style and diction. Examples of unity of
diction, Ixxxviii sq. 3. The unity in dramatic movement does not
exclude the use of sources and earlier visions of his own. Some
earlier visions and writings of his own re-edited. Generally their
inclusion gives them a new meaning (footnote, p. Ixxxix). Sources
re-edited and incorporated, pp. Ixxxix-xci.
CONTENTS XIX
IX. Date of J a P. I. External evidence. The Trajanic, Claudian, and
Neronic dates. The Domitianic date, pp. xci-xciii. 2. Internal
evidence. (i) Such evidence exists alike for the Neronic, Ves-
pasianic, and Domitianic dates. (2) Evidence for the Domitianic
which explains all the rest, (a) Use of earlier N.T. books. (&) The
present form of the Seven Epistles points to a Domitianic date, though
originally written under Vespasian, p. xciii sq. (c] The imperial
cult (though presupposed throughout J a P) not enforced till the reign
of Domitian, p. xciv sq. (d) The Nero-redivivus myth exhibits
phases belonging to the reigns of Titus (?), Vespasian, and Domitian.
Domitian not to be identified with the Antichrist, pp. xcv-xcvii.
X. Circulation and reception. I. No certain trace of J a P in the Apostolic
Fathers, p. xcvii sq. 2. In the 2nd cent. J a P was all but uni
versally accepted in Asia Minor, Western Syria, Africa, Rome, South
Gaul, pp. xcviii-c. 3. Two protests against its Johannine author
ship and validity in the 2nd cent, (a) Marcion. (b) The Alogi,
p. c sq. 4. Question of its authenticity reopened by Dionysius
of Alexandria, p. ci. 5. Rejected by the Syro-Palestinian Church
and the Churches of Asia Minor. 6. Ignored or unknown in the
Eastern-Syrian and Armenian Churches for some centuries, p. ci sq.
7. Always accepted in the West, gradually came to be acknow
ledged in the East, p. cii sq.
Object of the Seer. His Methods Vision and Reflection or Reason.
i. Object of the Seer, p. ciii sq. 2. Methods of the Seer
generally psychical experiences and reflection or reason. Psychical
experiences, (a) Dreams, (b} Dreams combined with translation
of the spirit of the Seer, (c) Visions, (a) Visions in sleep. (/3)
Visions in a trance. (7) Visions in which the spirit is translated.
(5) Waking visions, p. civ sq. 3. Value of such experiences
depends not on their actuality, but on their source, their moral
environment and influence on character, p. cv sq. 4. Literal
descriptions of such experiences hardly ever possible. Language of
Seer symbolic, p. cvi sq. 5. Highest form of spiritual experience,
p. cvii. 6. Reason embracing the powers of insight, imagination,
and judgment. Its use (a} in the arrangement of his own materials,
(b) in the construction of allegories, (c) in the adaptation of tradi
tional material, (d) Conventional use of the phrase "I saw,"
pp. cvii-cix.
Some doctrines of our author. I. Doctrine of God. 2. Jesus
Christ. (a) The historical Christ. (b) The exalted Christ, (c)
Unique Son of God. (d) High Priest and Lamb of God. 3. The
Spirit. 4. Doctrine of Works. 5. First Resurrection ; Mil
lennium and Second Resurrection ; Judgment, pp. cix-cxvii.
XIII. Grammar of the Apocalypse, pp. cxvii-clix. For contents, see p. cxvii.
xx CONTENTS
XIV. i. Relative values of the uncials provisionally arrived at, p. clx-clxii.
2. Absence of conflation from best uncials confirms result arrived at
in I, p. clxii sq. 3. Readings of uncials taken singly and also
in groups of two give further confirmation. Classification of uncials
on the basis of the above data, pp. clxiii-clxv. 4. Evidence of
uncials taken in groups of three or more in chaps. 1-4, p. clxv sq.
5. Character of the Latin and Syriac Versions, and their classifica
tion, pp. clxvi-clxix. 6. Armenian, Bohairic, and Ethiopic Versions.
Their classification, pp. clxix-clxxi. 7. Relations of Bohairic,
Sahidic, and Ethiopic Versions to each other, p. clxxi. 8. Textual
value of the uncials, pp. clxxi-clxxiii. 9. Cursives collated for this
edition, and their groupings, pp. clxxiii-clxxvi. 10, Origen s
so-called text, p. clxxvi sq. n. Some account of the Versions,
pp. clxxviii-clxxxiii
XV. Methods of interpretation adopted in this Commentary. I. Con
temporary-Historical. 2. Eschatological. 3. Chiliastic. 40:.
Philological in earlier form. 5. Literary-Critical, embracing
(a) Redactional-Hypothesis, (6) Sources-Hypothesis, (c) Frag
mentary-Hypothesis. 6. Traditional-Historical. 7. Religious-
Historical. 8. Philosophical. 9. Psychological. 46. Philo
logical in later form, pp. clxxxiii-clxxxvii.
XVI. Bibliography Commentaries, Studies Exegetical and Critical, Texts,
Abbreviations, pp. clxxxvii-cxci.
Addenda et Corrigenda, p. cxcii.
Commentary on Chapters I.-XIII. and XIV. 12-13, I ~373-
INTRODUCTION,
i.
i. Short Account of the Seer and his Work.
JOHN the Seer, to whom we owe the Apocalypse, was a Jewish
Christian who had in all probability spent the greater part of his
life in Galilee before he emigrated to Asia Minor and settled in
Ephesus, the chief centre of Greek civilization in that province.
This conclusion is in part to be drawn not only from his
defective knowledge of Greek and the unparalleled liberties he
takes with its syntax, but also from the fact that to a certain
extent he creates a Greek grammar of his own. 1 He had never
mastered the Greek of his own day. The language of his
adoption was not for him a normalized and rigid medium of
utterance : nay rather, it was still for him in a fluid condition,
and so he used it freely, remodelling its syntactical usages and
launching forth into unheard of expressions. Hence his style is
absolutely unique. That he has set at defiance the grammarian
and the usual rules of syntax is unquestionable, but he did not
do so deliberately. He had no such intention. His object was
to drive home his message with all the powers at his command,
and this he does in some of the sublimest passages in all litera
ture. With such an object in view he had no thought of con
sistently committing breaches of Greek syntax. How then is the
unbridled licence of his Greek constructions to be explained?
The reason, as the present writer hopes to prove, 2 is that while
he wrote in Greek he thought in Hebrew and frequently trans
lated Hebrew idioms literally into Greek. In Galilee he had no
doubt used Aramaic as the ordinary vehicle of intercourse with
his fellows, but all his serious studies were rooted in Hebrew.
He had so profound a knowledge of the O.T. that he constantly
uses its phraseology not only consciously, but even unconsciously.
When using it consciously he uses the Hebrew text, and trans
lates it generally first hand ; but not infrequently his renderings
are influenced not only by the LXX, but also by a later version,
1 See pp. cxvii-clix. 2 See pp. cxlii-clii.
xxii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
which is now lost in its original form, but which was re-edited by
Theodotion 100 years later. 1
John the Seer was quite distinct from the author of the
Gospel and Epistles. 2 That the Gospel and Epistles were from
one and the same author, who was probably John the Elder,
I have shown below. 3 That these two Johns belonged to the
same religious circle, or that the author of the Gospel was a pupil
of John the Seer, is not improbable. 4
We gather from the Apocalypse that John the Seer exercised
an unquestioned authority over the Churches of the Province of
Asia. To seven of these, chosen by him to be representatives of
Christendom as a whole, 5 he wrote his great Apocalypse in the
form of a letter, about the year 95 A.D. 6 The object 7 of the
Apocalypse was to encourage the faithful to resist even to death
the blasphemous claims of the State, and to proclaim the coming
victory of the cause of God and of His Christ not only in the
individual Christian, and the corporate body of such individuals,
but also in the nations as such in their national and international
life and relations. It lays down the only true basis for national
ethics and international law. Hence the jeer claims^ not only
the after-world for God and for His people, but also this world.
God s work will be carried on without haste, without, rest., till
^the kingdom of this world has become the kingdom oTj^od
and of His ChikL"
The Seer has used freely not only his own visions of various
dates, 8 but also Jewish and Christian sources of Neronic and
Vespasianic dates in the presentation of his great theme. 9
The fact of his having freely used sources might seem to
militate against the unity of his work. 10 But this is not so. A
glance at the Plan 1] of the book will show how thoughiL and
action steadily advance step by step from its very beginning tiil
they^ reach their consummation and cuhnmaTc at its close.
, But unhappily the prophet did not live to revise his work, or
even to put the materials of 20 4 -22 into their legitimate order. 12
This task fell, to the misfortune of all students of the Apocalypse,
into the hands of a very unintelligent disciple. This disciple
was a better Greek scholar than his master, for he corrects his
Greek occasionally, and was probably a Greek-speaking Jewish
Christian of Asia Minor. He had not his master s knowledge
of Hebrew, if he had any knowledge of it, and he was pro
foundly ignorant of his master s thought. If he had left
See pp. Ixvi sqq., Ixxx sq. 2 See pp. xxix-xl.
See pp. xli-xliii. 4 See pp. xxxii-xxxiv.
See p. Ixxxix sq. note. 6 See p. xxiv.
See p. ciii sq. 8 See pp. xc, xciv.
See p. xc sq. 10 See pp. Ixxxvii-xci.
11 See pp. xxiii-xxviii. 12 See pp. 1-lv.
PLAN OF THE BOOK xxiii
his master s work as he found it, its teaching would not
have been the unintelligible mystery it has been to subsequent
ages ; but unhappily he intervened repeatedly, rearranging the
text in some cases, adding to it in others, and every such inter
vention has made the task of interpretation impossible for all
students who accepted such rearrangements and additions as
genuine features of the text. Since, however, his handiwork and
character are fully dealt with later, we need not waste more time
here over his misdemeanours. 1
When once the interpolations of John s editor, which amount
to little more than twenty-two verses, are removed, and the
dislocations of the text are set right, 2 most of the difficulties of
the text disappear and it becomes a comparatively easy task to
follow the thought of our author as it develops from stage to
stage, from its opening chapters darkened with the shadow of the
great tribulation about to fall on entire Christendom, till it
reaches its triumphant close in the eternal blessedness of all
the faithful in the new heaven and the new earth.
The Apocalypse consists of a Prologue, i 1 3 , the Apocalypse
proper, consisting of seven parts a significant number and an
Epilogue. The events in these seven parts are described in
visions in strict chronological order^ save in the case of certain
proleptic visions which are inserted for purposes of encourage
ment and lie outside the orderly development of the theme of
the Seer : i.e. y 9 17 io-n 13 14, and 12, which relates to the past,
but forms a necessary introduction to i3- 3
Thus there is no need to resort to the theory of Recapitula
tion which from the time of Victorinus of Pettau (circa 270 A.D.)
has dominated practically every school of interpretation from
that date to the present. So far is it from being true that the
Apocalypse represents more or less fully, under each successive
series of the seven seals, the seven trumpets and the seven bowls,
the same series of events, that the interpretation which is com
pelled to fall back on this device must be pronounced a failure.
This principle of interpretation, like many other forlorn efforts
in this field, arose mainly from the non-recognition by scholars
in the past of the interpolations made in the text by the disciple
and editor of the Seer.
2. Plan of the Book.
The Apocalypse consists of a Prologue, i 1 3 , a letter consisting
of seven distinct parts: (i) i 4 20 , (2) 2-3, (3) 4-5, (4) 6-20 3 , (5)
2I 9_ 22 2. 14-15. 17 20 4-10 j ( 6 ) 20 11-15 } ( ? ) 2I 5a. 4d. 5b. l-4abc ^S-
Epilogue, 2 i5c.6b-8 22 6-7. 18a. 16. 13. 12. 10. 8-9. 20-21^
1 See pp. 1-lv. a See pp. Ivi-lx. 3 See p. xxv.
xxiv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
The Apocalypse consists of a Prologue, the Apocalygse
pr oper^^cbnsistinp: of seven distinct parts, amfaB Epilogue. in"
the Prologue, i 1 8 , the Apocalypse is affirmed to have been given
by God to Christ and by Christ to John. In the Epilogue the
truth of the claims made in the Prologue is attested by God,
2I 5c. 6b-s. Dy Christ, 22 6 - 7 - 18a - 16 - 13 - 10 ; an( } by John himself,
2 2 8-9. 20-21;
The seven parts and the Epilogue constitute a letter, i 4 -22 21 ,
which, like the Pauline letters, opens with "John to the Seven
Churches. . . . Grace unto you, and peace, from Him which is,
and which was, and which is to come ; and from Jesus Christ "
(i 4 5a ), and ends with the words, "The grace of the Lord Jesus
be with all the saints. Amen."
The Prologue and Epilogue are not mere subsequent
additions to the book. They are organic parts of it. Not to
mention other grounds, this is at once obvious from the fact that
the Prologue contains the first of the seven beatitudes of the
Apocalypse (i.e. i 3 ), and the Epilogue the seventh (i.e. 22 7 ).
That there should be exactly seven beatitudes in our book and
not more and not less, is at once intelligible to all students of the
Apocalypse. 1
The Book, apart from the Prologue and Epilogue, falls
naturally into seven parts again a significant division. In
Jewish writers the favourite division of a work was a fivefold one.
Thus the five books of the Pentateuch, of the Psalms, of the
Megilloth, of the Maccabean history by Jason of Cyrene, of
i Enoch, of the Pirke Aboth. This fivefold division is clearly
traceable in Matthew (see Horae Synopticae*, 164 ; Hawkins).
But the number five does not occur in our author save with evil
associations (cf. 9 5 - 10 i; 10 ), whereas seven is a most sacred
number in his regard.
The seven parts are as follows : (i) i 4 20 . John s letter to the
Seven Churches, in which he tells how Christ had appeared to
and bidden him to send to the Churches the visions written in this
book. (2) 2-3. The problem of the book as reflected in the
letters to the Churches how to reconcile God s righteousness and
Christ s redemption with the condition of His servants on earth.
(3) 4~5- A vision of God and a vision of Christ, who takes
upon Himself the guidance of the world s destinies and its
judgments. (4) 6-f. 8 1 - 3 5 - 2 - 6 - ls -g. n 14 -t3. i5~2o 3 . Judg
ments of the world. (5) 2i 9 -22 2 - 14 15 - 17 so 4 10 . The Millennial
Kingdom : attack of evil powers on the Beloved City at its
close: their destruction and the casting of Satan into the
lake of fire. (6) 20 11 15 . Heaven and earth vanish : final
judgment by God Himself. (7) 2 1 5a - 4d - 5b - !- 4abc 2 2 3 - 5 . The
1 See note on i. 3 ; also footnote 1 in vol. ii. 445.
PLAN OF THE BOOK xxv
everlasting Kingdom in the new heaven and earth and the
New Jerusalem.
In these seven parts the events described in the visions are
in strict chronological order, save that the Seer is obliged in
chap. 12 to consider past events in order to prepare for those in
13. But there are certain sections of the book lying outside the
orderly development of the Seer s theme, sc. 7 9 17 io-n 13 and
14. These three additions, which do not carry on the action of
the divine drama and are likewise breaches of unity in respect of
time, are all prole-ptic. After y 1 8 the visionary gaze of the
Seer leaves for the moment the steady progressive unveiling of
the events of his future and beholds in 7 9-17 the more distant
destinies of the martyred faithful triumphant and secure before
the throne of God in heaven (although these sealed members of
the Church are not martyred till 13), and of the same host of
martyrs on Mount Zion (during the period of the Millennial
Kingdom) in I4 1 5 . These visions are recounted out of their
due order to encourage and inspire the Church in the face of an
impending universal martyrdom. In the case of io-n 13 the
explanation is different. Our Seer sees Rome to be the
impersonation of sheer might, of wickedness and lawlessness, i.e.
the Antichrist. But before our Seer s time in Christian circles
Jerusalem was expected to be the scene of the appearance of
the Antichrist (2 Thess. 2 4 ) and Rome was regarded as the
representative of order. This former view of the Antichrist
is preserved in this proleptic section, but no reference is made
again to it throughout the remaining chapters.
In the analysis which follows the three proleptic sections are
inserted on the right hand of the page :
Prologue, i 1 8 . I 1 3 . The Revelation given by God
to Christ and by Christ entrusted to
John. John s testimony to it as from
God and Christ. The first beatitude
on those who keep the things written
therein.
I. John writes to the Seven Churches I 4 " 7 . John begins his letter to the
to tell them that he has seen Christ Seven Churches with the blessing of
and been bidden by Him to send grace and peace from the Everlasting
them the visions written in this God and Jesus Christ, Lord of the
book i 4 20 . dead and Ruler of the living, the
Redeemer.
i 9 20 . John recounts his vision of
the Son of Man in Patmos, who bids
him to write down what he saw in a
book and to send it to the Seven
Churches.
XXVI
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
II. Problem of the book set
forth in the Letters to the Seven
Churches, which reflect the seeming
failure of the cause of both God and
Christ on earth 2-3.
III. Vision of God, to whom the
world owes its origin, and of Christ, to
whom it owes its redemption 4-5.
IV. Judgments. First Scries
the first Six Seals.
Judgments. Second Series, 7-13
The seventh Seal and the Three
Woes, bringing into manifestation the
servants of God and the servants of
Satan and Satan himself. Before the
seventh Seal there is a pause on earth,
during which God marks out His
servants by a seal on their foreheads ;
after the seventh Seal there is a pause
in heaven during which His servants
prayers are presented before God
both the sealing of the faithful and
their prayers being designed to secure
them against the Three Woes.
First and Second Woes bring Satan s
servants into manifestation and affect
only those who had not been sealed.
2-3. Letters to the Seven Churches.
These implicitly set the problem.
How are God s righteousness and
Christ s redemption of the world to
be reconciled with the condition of
His servants on earth and the domi
nating power of evil thereon ? Hence
John s visions, embracing heaven and
earth, begin in 4-5 with God and
Christ as the Supreme Powers in the
world.
4. Scene of John s visions is no
longer earth with its failures, troubles,
and outlook darkened with the appre
hension of universal martyrdom, but
heaven with its atmosphere of perfect
assurance and peace and thanksgiving
and joy. John s vision of God of a
throne and of Him that sat thereon,
to whom the Cherubim and Elders
offered continual praise, and to whose
will the whole creation owes its being.
5. Vision of Christ, who, having
wrought redemption for God s people,
takes upon Himself the guidance of
the destinies of the world in a series
of judgments.
6. First series of judgments affect
ing all men alike, good and bad the
first six Seals.
7 1 8 . Further judgments stayed till
the spiritual Israel are made manifest
through the seal of God affixed on
their foreheads and are thus secured
against the Three Woes, against the
first two absolutely, and against the
spiritual effects of the third.
7 9 17 . Proleptic vision of a vast
multitude of the faithful in heaven, i.e.
of those who had just been sealed and
had died as martyrs a vision sub
sequent in point of time to the visions
in 13.
8 i. 3-5. 2. 6. is. The seventh Seal,
introducing the Three Woes, is fol
lowed by silence in heaven, during
which the prayers of the faithful are
offered before God in heaven for pro
tection against the Three Woes.
9~ii 14a . First and second demonic
woes (heralded by trumpet blasts)
affecting only those who had not
been sealed, with torment and death
respectively.
PLAN OF THE BOOK
xxvn
Third Woe, followed by two songs
of triumph in heaven, brings into full
manifestation Satan, his chief agents
the two Beasts, and all his servants.
Evil is now at its climax. All Satan s
servants are visited with spiritual
blindness and marked with the mark
of the Beast. All the faithful are
martyred.
Vision of the entire martyr host in
heaven who had proved themselves
victorious over the Beast and his
image.
Judgments. Third Series, I5 5 -2O 3 . \
(a) Preliminary judgments the |
Seven Bowls affecting the heathen who f
alone survive.
lO-ii 13 . Proleptic digression on
the Antichrist in Jerusalem a vision
contemporaneous in point of time
with 13.
ii 141 - 19 . Third and Satanic Wor
heralded by a trumpet blast. There
upon two songs of triumph burst forth
in heaven declaring that God is King,
and faithful and faithless alike will
receive their due recompense.
12-13. Third or Satanic Woe.
Satan at last fully manifest. Climax
of his power and his apparent
triumph on earth. In 12 the vision
is retrospective : it recounts the birth
and ascension of Christ and the casting
down of Satan to earth facts closely
connected ; also Satan s persecution
of the Church. In 13 Satan summons
to his help the first and second Beasts.
The faithless are spiritually blinded
and marked by the mark of the Beast.
All the faithful are martyred.
I4 1 " 7 . Proleptic vision (a) of the
Church triumphant on earth in the
Millennial Kingdom and the conver
sion of the heathen a vision con
temporaneous with 2O 4 6 , and (b) in
I4 8-n. 14. is-20 of judgment of Rome
and of the heathen nations a vision
contemporaneous with and summar
izing 1 8. I9 11 21 20 7 10 .
I5 2 " 4 - Vision of the martyred host
(martyred in 13) standing on the sea
of glass before God, singing praises
and proclaiming the coming conversion
of the nations.
is 5 8 . The Seven Bowls of God s
wrath entrusted to the Seven Angels.
1 6. The Seven Bowls.
(I)} Successive judgments affecting
the powers of evil in succession.
(a) Destruction of Rome and the
Seer s appeal to Heaven to rejoice over
its doom.
The response of all the angel and
martyr hosts in songs of thanksgiving.
i; 1 6 . Vision of the Great Harlot
seated on the Beast.
I7 8 18 . Interpretation of this vision.
l8 i-iy. 2] -23d vision of her destruc
tion.
l8 20. 23f-24 > The
Heaven to rejoice.
I9 1 " 3 . Thanksgiving song of the
angels.
IQ 4 i6 5 k~ 6 . Thanksgiving song of
the Elders and Cherubim.
i6 7 . Thanksgiving song of the
altar beneath the throne.
I9 5 8 . Thanksgiving song of the
martyr host in heaven.
XXV111
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
(/3) Destruction of the Parthian Lost (though referred to prole p-
hosts by Christ and His elect. tically in I7 14 and presupposed in
I9 13 : possibly displaced by the inter
polated passage, I9 a 10 ).
(7) Destruction of the hostile
nations by Christ and the armies of
Heaven. The Beast and False Pro
phet cast into the lake of fire, and
Satan chained for 1000 years.
I9 11 21 . The Word of God and
the armies of Heaven destroy the
hostile nations. The Beast and False
Prophet cast into the lake of fire.
2O 1 3 . As Satan was cast down
from heaven on the fresh advent of
Christ, on Christ s second advent he
is cast into the abyss and chained for
1000 years.
2I _ 22 . -. 20 - >
V, Millennial Kingdom : Jerusalem I the Heavenly Jerusalem coming down
come down from heaven to be its I from heaven to be the abode of Christ
Capital. Reign of the martyred Saints 1 and the glorified martyrs who are to
for 1000 years. I reign with Christ 1000 years and
| evangelize the nations.
Final attack of the evil powers
the Saints in the Beloved City : their
20 7 10 . Close of the Millennial
Kingdom. Satan loosed : march of
he Beloved ^ity : meir j Q and M inst the Beloved
destruction and the casting of Satan 1 Q{ * . their deduction and the casting
into the lake of fire.
VI. Heaven and Earth having
vanished, a great white throne appears,
before which the dead come to be
judged by God Himself.
of Satan into the lake of fire.
20 11 16 . Vision of a great white
throne, and of Him that sat thereon.
Disappearance of the former heaven
and earth. Judgment of those risen
from the dead, both bad and good.
Death and hell cast into the lake of
fire.
VII. The Everlasting Kingdom C 2 i 5a - 4d> 5b - l - 4abc 22 3 5 . The new
established in which God and Christ I heaven, the new earth, and the New
dwell with man. Reign of all the j Jerusalem. The faithful reign as
saints for ever and ever. v. kings for ever and ever,
2i 5c - 6b s . God s testimony to John s
book and His message to mankind
through John of divine sonship for
them that overcome.
22 6-7. 18a. 16. IS. 12. 10. Christ s tCSti-
Epilogue. < mony to John s book. The seventh
beatitude. Christ s speedy coming to
judgment.
228.9.20-21. j ohn > s own testimony.
Christ s final words. John s prayer
and benediction.
AUTHORSHIP OF JOHANNINE WRITINGS xxix
II.
AUTHORSHIP OF THE JOHANNINE WRITINGS LINGUISTIC
EVIDENCE.
The Apocalypse and the Fourth Gospel^ from different Authors.
We shall deal here only with the linguistic evidence on this
question, which is in itself decisive. We shall, however, dis
cover later that the two writers were related to each other, either
as master and pupil, or as pupils of the same master, or as
members of the same school.
i. The grammatical differences. These make the as
sumption of a common authorship of J and, J ap absolutely
impossible, unless a very long interval intervenes between the
dates of J ap and J. But such an assumption is made imprac
ticable by the best modern research. Furthermore, our author s
style shows no essential change in the interval of from 10 to 20 or
more years, which elapsed between the writing of the Letters to
the Seven Churches and the Apocalypse as a whole (see vol. i.
43-47). The reader will find the grammatical differences between
J ap and J dealt with in the grammar. The main evidence is given
under the heading, "The Hebraic Style of the Apocalypse"; but
throughout the rest of the grammar (see particularly " The Order
of Words >r ) the evidence is more than adequate to prove diver
sity of authorship. Observe amongst a host of other differences
that, whereas J uses /XT} with the participle n times and the
genitive absolute frequently, our author uses neither. Also that
whereas in our author the attracted relative never occurs, it often
occurs in J : see 4 14 7 39 i5 20 i? 5 n " 12 2i 10 and i J 3 24 . Again,
in J ap aios is followed by inf. ; in J by Iva.
2. Differences in diction. Lists of words found in J ap
but not in J could be given here, or vice versa, but such
divergence in the use of words might in the main be due to
difference of subject. But it is instructive to touch upon a few
phenomena of this nature. Thus our author has TriVris 4 times
and TTI OTOS 8, whereas J has not TTIO-TIS at all, Trtcrros once, but
TTwrrevetv nearly 100 times. Our author uses VTTO/XOJ/T; 7 times
and <ro<ia 4, but J, neither. On the other hand, J uses
dyttTTav 36 times and dyaTny 7 (i. 2. 3} 31 and 21 respectively),
but our author has dya/Trav only 4 and aydirri only 2 times.
Again, dA.rj0eia, dX^^ijs, and x a P<* found so frequently in J, are
wholly absent from our author. J has //,eV ... 8e 6 or more
1 For convenience sake J will designate the Gospel, I J the first Epistle,
etc., J a P the Apocalypse,
xxx THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
times, our author not once : dAAa 100 and ydp 65, and our author
13 and 1 6 respectively. Again our author has WUTTIOV 34 times
and Lva 45, whereas J has these once and 150 times respectively.
3. Different words or forms used by these writers to express the
same idea. Our author uses d/Wov ( = Lamb of God) 29 times
where J uses d//,vds 2 : /xov or e/xov T ( " mine ") where J uses
t/xos 36 times: avros as an emphatic pronoun 3 20 i4 10 ig 12 ,
whereas J uses e*e/os in this sense while he uses OTTO S as an
unemphatic pronoun : see Abbott, Gr. 236. Again our author
says ev /xeVo) or di/a /xeVov where J uses /xeVos : lepouo-aXrJ/x where
J has *lpocn>Av/xa. 2 Our author uses iftov (26), but J tSe 3 :
lovSatos, 2 9 3 9 ( = a member of the Chosen People of God, nearly
so in Ro 2 17 - 28 ), where J has lo-pa^Am/?, i 47 . Again, whereas our
author defines the historic city Jerusalem as T/?S TroAews . . . ^rts
KaAetrai Trreu/AariKtos 2oSo//,a, II 8 , J names it as le/aoo-uAtyxa, I 19 2 13
etc.
A very interesting divergence is to be observed where the
Greek equivalent of " called " or " named " occurs. Here our
author always has /caAeu/ and J Ae yeu/. Thus we have i 9 rfj
vr)<Tip T. /caXou/xev^ Xlar/xa), 1 2 9 6 Ka\ov[JLvo<s Aia/3oAos, while J
writes 4 5 TrdAiv . . . Xcyo/xeviyv Sv^dp, 4 25 Meamas ... 6 Aeyo-
jiiej/os Xpio-rds, II 16 $a>/zas 6 Aeyo/xei/os AtSv/xos (cf. I 38 5 2 9 11 1 1 54 2O 24
2 1 2 ) : and just as our author says, n 8 ^rts KaXetrat . . . 3oSo//,a,
so J i9 17 says o Xeyerat . . . ToAyotfa. The divergence comes
still more into relief when we compare J ap i6 16 TOTTOI/ r. KO.\OV-
fjicvov . . . *Ap MayeSwv and J I9 13 TOTTOJ/ Aeyo/xet ov
On this as well as on other grounds 8 lla KCU TO ovo/x,a rov
A^ycrat C O *Ai{/iv6o<s is to be excised as a gloss.
Again, our author always uses /caroiKeu/ of living in a certain
locality ; J sometimes uses fieVeii/ in this sense, but never KO.TOL-
Ktiv : also oAiyoi/, i; 10 ( = "a little while"), whereas J says piKpov
in the same sense 9 times ; and ovs 8 times while J uses <OTIOI/
once.
A very delicate distinction calls for attention in their equi
valents of the English "no longer." Thus our author 4 says OVK
. . . en (14, including chap, xviii.), but J always OVKCTI (12),
and ws with finite verb by way of illustration (2 27 ), while J uses
K<x0ws with finite verb (i3 15 i5 12 i; 23 etc.).
Finally, whereas J frequently uses /catfok (31, and i. 2. 3 J 13
1 J uses <r6s (6), u/^repos (3), ?3ios (15), and I J ij^repos (2), but our author
uses the possessive pronouns always in their stead. He has ^/i6s once.
2 In our author lepovaaXri/j. is used only of the heavenly or the New
Jerusalem. It is used by Paul always, and nearly always by Luke, of the
historic city, whereas Mark always (and Matt, always save once) uses Iepo<r6-
j.a.
3 J uses idoti 4 times.
4 Our author has OVK^TI 3 times (2 of these in chap, xviii.).
AUTHORSHIP OF JOHANNINE WRITINGS xxxi
times), our author uses always ws in the same sense. Where J says
K<x0w9 eyw (i5 10 ), our author says o>? K<xyw (2 27 ). 1 Where J ilp uses
a^pi (n times), J uses ew?. Neither J nor i. 2. 3 J use
ax/ 31 - Where J ap uses or^oSpa, i6 21 , 2. 3 J, uses Xiav. In this
last contrast, I assume that 2. 3 J and J are from the same
author.
4. Words and phrases with one meaning in our author and
a different one in J :
APOCALYPSE.
01X77 6s = true in word as opposed
to false ( = d\>?0?7s).
aKovew
avr6s used as emphatic pronoun.
ol dovXoi TOV 0eo0 2 a title of the
highest honour: cf. i 1 (& *) 7 3 io 7
ii 18 I9 2 .
dupedv, 2I 6 22 17 = " freely."
e6i>os or e^ (23) = Gentiles, 2 26 II 2
I5 4 etc., or all nations, including the
Jews(?).
lovScuos, 2 9 3 9 used in a good sense.
/cd<r/xos = the created world, u 15 n 8
i 7 .
Xa6$ = Gentiles generally, but = Chris
tian believers twice.
A.6yos TOV 6eov, IQ 13 a conception
developed in Jewish thought.
oSv (6), always illative, 3 a particle of
logical appeal.
Troifj-aiveiv, 2* I2 5 iq l5 = " to destroy"
(though in ; 17 =" to feed").
FOURTH GOSPEL.
= " genuine" as opposed to unreal.
See vol. i. 85 sq.
Different meaning in J. See Gram. t
vol. i. p. cxl.
Used as unemphatic pronoun, ^Keivos
being used as emphatic.
I5 15 OVK^TI Xyw v[J,
1 5 s5 " without a cause."
cdvos (5) only used of Jewish nation.
Used over 70 times, and generally
in a bad sense.
K6<r/j.os = the world of man (frequently,
and often in a bad sense).
Jewish nation (2, excluding 8 2 ).
A6yos, T i lsqq -. This conception
is quite different and presupposes,
while opposing, Philonic specula
tions.
195 times, and generally a narrative
particle, i.e. of historical transition.
2i ie "to feed."
1 J uses o>s in a temporal sense ( = " when ") 20 times : our author never.
On our author s various uses of ws, see vol. i. 35 sq.
2 The servant in J I5 15 knows not his Master s will, in J a P he does.
In our author the word SoOXos means (a) a slave as opposed to eXevdepos : cf.
6 15 I3 16 IQ 18 , and (b) a willing servant of God, whether prophet or other faith
ful worshipper : cf. i 1 2 20 7 3 io 7 etc. Thus our author uses SoOXos as the
equivalent of na^. But in J SoGXos follows the Greek usage as denoting a
bondman in the literal sense, cf. I5 15 , and in the metaphorical sense 8 34
5oOXos . . . TTJS afj-aprias. nay is not used in this metaphorical sense. The verb
13J;, however, is used of idolatrous service. See Abbott, fokanm ne Voc. 212,
227, 289-292, for the use made by the four Evangelists of this word.
3 In Homer o$v is non-illative, just as in the majority of passages in J.
It is noteworthy that in J oftv occurs nearly always in the narrative portions,
and only 8 times in Christ s words out of the 195, whereas in J ap it occurs only
in Christ s words, and never in the narrative portions. In the Synoptists
it occurs mostly in Christ s words.
xxxii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
irpoffiivveiv, c. dat. = " to worship." These constructions have exactly
,, c. ace. " to do homage to." opposite meanings in J. See Gr.
See note on 7 11 : vol. i. 211 sqq. p. cxli, also vol. i. 211-212;
Abbott, Voc. 1 37 sqq.
=ti6wp fcDi/, 4 10 7 s8 , which phrase
includes [he meanings of the two
S, 222- *
Again, though 7 15 6 KaOyfJLtvos CTTI f T. Opovov f orKr)vw<Ti CTT avrovs
is similar to J I 14 6 Adyos crdp eyeVero KOL eo~K^i/(ocrev ei/ T^/XII/, the
similarity is only an outward one. The same is true of 2 27 dX^a
Trapa r. Trarpds yu,ov as compared with J IO 18 Tavrrjv T. evro\r]v
e\a/3ov Trapa r. Trarpds ftov.
5. The Authors of the Apocalypse and the Fourth Gospel
were in some way related to each other :
(a) The following phrases point in this direction :
APOCALYPSE. FOURTH GOSPEL.
2 2 ov SVVQ patrrdaai. l6 2 ov dtivaade
2O 6 6 2x ( * }V l*pos & I3 8 ^X^is
22 15 TTOI&V \f/evdos. 3" 1 iroiuv T. dXrjdeiav (i J 3 8 TTOI.CJV
T. a/Jiaprlav).
22 17 6 5i\/C)v txtadu. 7 37 ^^^ rts
(^) The spiritual significance attached to such terms as on;,
Odvaros, St^av, So^a, Treti/av, vt/cav (16 times, in J (i), in
1 J ( 6 ))> oo^yetv.
(c) The occurrence of the following words and phrases
exclusively in these two writers in the N.T. \a\elv
{jura, (elsewhere in N.T. the dative or Trpos cum. ace.
follows AoAetV) : o\f/i<s (i 16 J 1 1 44 ) = Trpoo-coTrov : r^petv
T. Xoyov or Xdyous (4 times J 8 : see note, vol. i. 369) :
6Vo/xa avra) 6 ^a^aros, 6 8 ovo/xa avrw Itoawr;?, J I 6 3 1 :
Kpov, 6 11 J 7 33 : /jiLKpov ^pdvov, 2O 3 J I2 35 :
once J once : Trop^vpcos 2 times J 2 times :
, 4 J once : <f>oivi, once J once.
(</) The agreement of both authors (in i 7 J i9 37 ) in the
rendering e^eKeVr^crai/ against the LXX. See, however,
vol. i. 1 8 sq. The use of the suspensive on; see
Gram. p. cxxxvii.
(e) The use by both authors of the following phrases and
words found occasionally in the rest of the N.T.
TroieiV o-r/yneioi , 4 J 14 (only 4 times in rest of N.T.) :
rr)pLv T. cVroAa?, 2 J 4 (i J 5 times) : Sewcvvrai (of
revelation), 8 J 7 : tppaurrij 2 J 5 : /naprupux, 9 J 14
(i J 6 times, 3 J once): 7rtaeiv, i J 8: o-^/xat
i J 3 : <iA.eij/, 2 J 13 : <r<f>dw, 8 i J 2 times.
AUTHORS OF J AP AND J IN SOME WAY RELATED xxxiii
(/) There is to be no temple in the heavenly Jerusalem the
Capital of the Messianic Kingdom, 2i 22 . Accord
ing to J 4 21 the temple will cease to exist as the centre
of worship.
(g) The same Jewish and Christian ideas underlie the phrase
6 d/xvos rov Ocov, J i 2 9- 36 ? and the equivalent phrase TO
apviov in J ap .
(h) The number " seven " occurs more frequently in our
author than in all the rest of the N.T. Though it does
not occur at all in J, yet J is " permeated structurally
with the idea of * seven. . . . John records only seven
signs. . . . The Gospel begins and closes with a
sacred week . . . the witness to Christ is ... of a
sevenfold character " (see Abbott, Gr. 463).
The above facts, when taken together with other resemblances,
to which attention is drawn in the Grammar, point decidedly to
some connection between the two authors. The Evangelist was
apparently at one time a disciple of the Seer, or they were
members of the same religious circle in Ephesus. We find
perfect parallels to the latter relationship in earlier days. The
authors of the Testaments of the XII Patriarchs and of the Book
of Jubilees, who wrote at the close of the 2nd century before
the Christian era, studied clearly in the same school ; for the
text of the one has constantly to be interpreted by that of the
other. Yet these two writers are poles asunder on some of
the greatest questions of their day. The former hopes for the
salvation of the Gentiles and sets forth a system of ethics with
out parallel before the N.T. The author of Jubilees is a legalist
of the narrowest type : is mainly concerned with the Mosaic law
and the deductions to be drawn from it, and declares categori
cally that no Gentile can be saved. The second parallel is to be
found between 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. The materials of these
two works are in certain respects complementary. The former
is all but hopeless as to the future alike of Judaism and the
Gentiles, whereas the latter is a thoroughgoing optimistic Jew,
who looks to Judaism for the conversion of the Gentiles, so far
as these can be saved.
In the Seer and the Evangelist we have got just such another
literary connection. But the literary connection is much less
close than in the case of the Jewish authors just mentioned, while
the theological affinities between the Seer and the Evangelist are
much closer than those existing between the Jewish writers.
The greater unity in spiritual outlook and theological concept
is explicable, however, from the fact that the variations
within the Christianity of the ist century are infinitesimal as
c
xxxiv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
compared with those that prevailed in contemporary and earlier
Judaism.
6. J and (i.) 2. 3 J were written by the same Author.
That J and i J are derived from the same author is
generally admitted. But from a very early date 2 and 3 J have
been ascribed to a different writer. 1 But a study of the internal
evidence leads to the conclusion that all 2. 3 J and most
probably i J are from one and the same writer, who was also
the author of the Gospel. The same evidence shows that,
though 2 or 3 J have a few points in common with J ap , the
style of these two Epistles is decidedly that of J (or i J) as
opposed to that of J ap- Their failure to study the linguistic
relations of 2. 3 J have led Schmiedel, von Soden, and
Moffatt into the grievous error of attributing 2. 3 J and J ap to the
same author. The pronouncement of these scholars led me to
investigate this subject, and therein I am grateful to them, seeing
that the result of this investigation appears to furnish the key to
some important Johannine problems. No investigation of this
nature has, so far as I am aware, ever been made.
There is one usage in 2 J which it has in common with J ap
and which is not found in J. In 2 J 10 we have c? TIS (epxerai),
which occurs occasionally in J ap but never in J or i J, which have
always ecu/ TIS. But there seems to be a reason for using ei here
and not lav. The author assumes that the Zpxfo-Oai is not a
mere possibility but a thing likely to happen. ei>s with the part,
is found in 2 J 5 oi>x ws ypa^wv, and in J ap i 15 5 i3 3 but not in J.
But the usage is not really the same in 2 J 5 and J ap . In the
latter o>s conveys the idea of likeness, whereas in 2 J 5 it implies
a purpose. The Hebraism in 2 J 2 Sta rr)v dX-jj^etav rrjv /xeVovo-av
eV fjfjiiv KOLL /x,e$ tyxwi/ carat ( = " which abideth in us and shall be
with us ") is of frequent occurrence in J ap . But it occurs probably
in J I 32 T0ea/xai TO 7n/e9yu,a KarajBalvov . . . KOI e/xetvei/ eV* avroV,
and in Col i 26 . Hence no real weight can be assigned to these
coincidences in style.
On the other hand, the body of evidence in favour of a
common authorship of J and (i.) 2. 3 J carries with it absolute
conviction.
i. 2. J J are with one exception (2 f 2 ) free from the solecisms
and idiosyncrasies of J ap .
\\. Constructions common to 2. SjandJ, but not found in J af :
(a) 2 and 3 J use ^ 3 times with the participle : J n
times : i J 8 times : 3 J has //^SeV once with
part., while J has it twice. But J ap never
1 Origen (Eus. vi. 25. 10) writes that questions as to the genuineness of
these Epistles were rife in certain quarters : Jerome (De Viris Illust. 9)
distinctly assigns them to different hands.
J AND I. 2. 3 J BY THE SAME AUTHOR xxxv
uses \M] or fjL-qSev with the participle. In this
respect J ap diverges from J, i. 2. 3 J, exactly
as the Iliad does from the Odyssey.
(b) In 2 J 10 the writer uses prj with the present
imperative, i.e. ^ Actual/ere (3 J n /zr) /JLL^OV) in
order to forbid an action not yet begun. Here
the author of J ap would have used prf with the
aor. subj. In this respect the author of 2. 3 J
has the support of J (see below, p. cxxvi).
(c) In 3 J 3 we have the genitive absolute, which occurs
often in J but never in J ap (nor i J).
(d) The unemphatic possessive pronoun avrov (or
avTrjs) (i.e. the genitive before its noun) occurs in
3 J 10 i J 2 5 and frequently in J, but never in J ap
(save in a source 1 8 5 ).
(e) ovro? is used resumptively in regard to a preceding
clause (consisting of 6 with part, or os with finite
verb) in 2 J 9 and 4 times in J but not in J ap .
(/) fj.aprvpt iv takes the dative 3 times in 3 J and 4 in J,
but J ap always construes it with the ace. //aprf/oetv
is followed by 6 in i J and by Trept in J, but
by neither in J :lp .
(g) In 3 J 9 the order of the words, 6 ^tAoTrpwrevW
avrwv Aiorpe </>i79, has several parallels in J but none
in J ap (or i J). The author of J ap would have
written 6 Atorpec^s 6 ^tXoTrpwrevwv aurwi/. See
Gram. p. clvi. TTO\V<S is a prepositive in 2 J 7 i J 4 1
J 6 5 io 32 ii 47 etc.; but always postpositive
in J ap , once in i J and in J 3 23 6 2 - 10 ; 12 .
(ti) epwToo o-e . . . tva, 2 J 5 J 4 47 ly 15 ig 38 * but not
in J ap . avrr) eVrtv . . . fi/a, 2 J 6 <**> J I5 12 i; 3
(i J 3 1L23 ) 5 but not in J ilp . /xei^orepai/ TOVTWV
^X ^X w X a P^ v J * I/a ^ KO ^ W J 3 J 4
dyctTT^v ouSets e^et, ti^a rts rrjv i(/v^r]v avrov
J i5 13 . To this construction I know of no real
parallel.
iii. Words ; particles, and phrases common to 2. 3 J and J (i J),
but not found in J af .
(a) Words.
(ft) Particles and phrases. dAAa Kat, dXX* ov,
Kat vw, Trept (cum gen.), TOIOVTOS, v?rep : /cat
Se, 3 J 12 ~J i5 2ti : ^ Ap^s, 2 J^-J 8^ 4 i 5 27 (i J
I 1 2 7 - 13< 14 etc.): rots epyots avrov rois irovrjpols
* The verb "ask " does not occur in J a ? though tpwrav is found in 2 J and
J, and alrelv in I J and J. J uses also ^erdfU , tTrepwTav, irwddveo-dcu.
xxxvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
2 J 11 J 7 7 TO. epya avVov Trovrjpd : vTro/JLvrja-ta, 3 J 10
J I4 26 : TO Ka/coV, 3 J n J i8 23 : TO ayaOov
3j n -J.S 29 .
iv. Words frequent in I. 2. 3 J and J t but exceptional in
J ap . /u,os once in 3 J (in 15 verses), only once in J ap in
404 verses; thus 3 J using it once in 15 verses
approximates to J which uses it once in every 22.
J ap uses no other possessive adjective, but i J
uses ^/xeTe/aos twice, and J v/xeVepos 3 times and o-os 6.
7rt does not occur in i. 2. 3 J, but 150 times in J ap
and 35 in J. If J had it relatively as often as J ap , it
would occur 225 times instead of 35. Thus i. 2. 3 J
are strongly marked off here from J ap but approximate
toj.
v. The following parallel expressions are in themselves strong
evidence of identity of authorship :
2 J 9 Tras 6 ... ptvtav tv rr) didaxy J ; 16 (cf. l8 19 ) i] tyy didaxr) OVK
TOV X/M0TOU. tyd]-
This parallel is full of significance ; for in J Sidax-n is used only of
Christ s teaching (as derived from God, 7 17 ), whereas in J a P it is
used only of heretical teaching : cf. 2 14< 15 - 24 .
J IO 18 ravTtjv ri\v IVTO\^V \a/3ov trapa
rov 7rarp<5s /JLOV.
2 J 6 rjKov(raT air dpx^J (i J 3 11 )- J l6 4 ^ dp%^s OVK
>ii)v crot Kaiv^v (evToXty J I3 34
J 2 7 ).
2 J 1 oi yvu)K6Tes Trjv dXr/deiav. J 8 32 yvuffeade TTJV d\rjdei.av.
2 J 12 (i J I 4 ) Ivo. i] X a P& V/J.&V j 3 29 avrtj ovv 77 %apd 17 t/u.7) Tre
TerXrjpuftfni $ Cf. 15" I6 24 .
3 J 10 K T^S tKKX-rjo-las ^/cjSdXXei. J 9 34 ^/SaXov auT^v ^w.
3 J U ^X eApaKtv TOV deov. J 14" 6 ewpa/ccbs ^ eupaKevTbv iraTtpa.
3 J 12 ^ fw,pTVpla TIIJL&V a\r)dr/5 GT(.V. J 8 14 d\r]6^s >I.V T/ [tapTvpia fj.ov.
The connection of 2. 3 J with i.J could be shown by such
examples as 2 J 9 0eov ov/c e^ei i J 5 12 6 . . . l^wi/ TOV vtov TOV Ocov :
3 J J1 CK TOV $eov ecrrtv I J 4 2 : 2 J 7 6 dvTt)(pto Tos I J 2 18 - 22 .
The conception of the Antichrist in i. 2 J is quite different from
that in J ap .
vi. There are no quotations in i. 2. J J. In this respect they
show an affinity with J where there are very few, and
offer a strong contrast to J ap where quotations abound.
Even in the Epistles to the Seven Churches this feature
is prominent.
vii. The Greek of 2. 3 J is far more idiomatic than that of
J ap . The order of the words exhibits none of the
monotonous regularity of J ap .
From the above evidence I conclude without hesitation that
i. 2. 3 J and J are ultimately from the same author. J has
RESULTS OF PRECEDING CRITICISM xxxvii
undoubtedly undergone revision, and i. 2. 3 J may have
suffered somewhat in this respect. 1
7. This conclusion of criticism, completing as it does the
work of Dionysius the Great of Alexandria, is one of tremendous
importance. Before his time, from 135 A.D. onward (see
p. xxxix sq.), Church writers began uncritically to assign J ap to
the Apostle John. This false conception led necessarily to
intolerable confusion. No matter how valid the evidence might
be for the martyrdom of this Apostle before 70 A.D., it could only
be regarded as purely legendary, seeing that according to the most
current view John the Apostle wrote the Apocalypse and wrote
it in Domitian s reign. If the Apostle were living about 95 A.D.
he could not, of course, have been martyred before 70 A.D. This
misconception has therefore vitiated the evidence of most Early
Church writers on this question, 2 and has proved an ignis fatuus
to many distinguished scholars of our own day. Hence it is not
astonishing that so little evidence of the Apostle John s early
martyrdom and yet, cumulatively considered, it is not little
should have survived, but it is astonishing in the extreme that any
evidence of any sort as to John s early martyrdom has survived at
all, seeing that the all but universal beliefs of the Church from
the earliest ages worked for its absolute deletion from the pages
of history. Happily such evidence has survived in out-of-the-
way corners of Church history and Church observance, which,
owing to the prevailing opinions on such subjects, must have
been a hopeless enigma to those who sought to understand
them. One Church writer Gregory of Nyssa in his Laudatio
s. Stephani and De Basilio magno : see below, p. xlvii has
attempted to do so, and has explained away the evidence of the
Church calendars for the early martyrdom of John in a way that
can satisfy only those who share the same groundless hypothesis
as himself as to John s joint authorship of J and J ap .
any connection with J a P. For Trpe<rJ3i>Tepos there has a different meaning.
Even an apostle could designate himself thus : cf. I Pet 5 1 6 W^TT pea fitir epos.
But Peter has already called himself cbr<5a-ToXos Iij<rov Xpiorou in I 1 . Hence
there is no risk of confusion. No weight, moreover, attaches to the use of
e tv for icoivwvlav tx eiv > or ti 16 occurrence of the greeting x^P i
.
Justin Martyr believes in the Apostolic authorship of J a P as early as 135
A.D. or thereabouts. A myth can arise in a very few years. Hence it is
not strange that such writers as Hegesippus (ob. circ. 1 80) and subsequent
writers, as Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, have lost all knowledge of the early
martyrdom of John the son of Zebedee.
xxxviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
III.
AUTHORSHIP OF THE JOHANNINE WRITINGS.
It may assist the reader if the conclusions arrived at in this
chapter are put shortly as follows (a) J ap and J are from
distinct authors, (b) 2. 3 J are from the author of J and not of
J ap . The evidence for this fact, which in the present writer s
opinion furnishes the key to some of the chief Johannine
problems, is given on p. xxxiv sqq. (c) If John the Elder is the
author of 2. 3 J, then he is according to all internal evidence the
author of J and of i J. (d) John the prophet a Palestinian Jew,
who late in life migrated to Asia Minor, is the author of J ap .
(e) The above conclusions, which are arrived at on internal
grounds, and on external evidence mainly of the 2nd century,
are confirmed by the Papias-tradition, that John the Apostle
was martyred by the Jews before 70 A.D.
i. The Apocalypse is not pseudonymous, but the work of a
John. In Jewish literature practically every apocalyptic book
was pseudonymous. I have elsewhere T shown the causes which
forced works of this character to be pseudonymous. In the
post-Exilic period the idea of an inspired Law adequate,
infallible, and valid for all time became a dogma of Judaism.
When this dogma was once established, there was no longer any
room for the prophet, nor for the religious teacher, except in so
far as he was a mere exponent of the Law. The second cause
for the adoption of pseudonymity was the formation of the Canon
of the Law, the Prophets and the Hagiographa. After this date
say about 200 B.C. no book of a prophetic character could
gain canonization as such, and all real advances to a higher ethics
or a higher theology could appear only in works of a pseudony
mous character published under the name of some ancient
worthy. Accordingly, when a man of God, such as the author
of Daniel, felt that he had a message to deliver to his people, he
was obliged to issue it in this form. But with the advent of
Christianity the Law was thrust into a wholly subordinate place ;
for the spirit of prophecy had descended afresh on the faith
ful, belief in inspiration was kindled anew, and for several genera
tions no exclusive Canon of Christian writings was formed.
There is, therefore, not a single a priori reason for regarding the
Apocalypse as pseudonymous. Furthermore, its author distinctly
claims that the visions are his own, and that they are not for
some far distant generation, as is universally the case in Jewish
pseudonymous works, but for his own (22 10 ). In four distinct
1 See my Eschatology*, 173-205 (especially 198-205), 403 sq. ; Daniel,
p. xi sq., Religious Development between the 0. and N. Testaments, 41-46.
J AP AND J OF DIFFERENT AUTHORSHIP xxxix
passages he gives his name as John ( i 1 - 4 - 9 2 2 8 ). He states that he
is a servant of Jesus Christ (i 1 ), a brother of the Churches in Asia
and one who has shared in their tribulations (i 9 ), that he has him
self seen and heard the things contained in his book (22 8 ), and
that he was vouchsafed these revelations during his stay (voluntary
or enforced) * in the island of Patmos for the word of God and
the testimony of Jesus (i 9 ). To a more intimate study of our
author we shall return later. So far it is clear that the Apoca
lypse before us was written by a prophet (22 9 ) who lived in Asia
Minor, and that his actual name was John. J ap is just as
assuredly the work of a John as 2 Thess 2 and i Cor 15 are
apocalypses of St. Paul. 2 Even the later Christian apocalypse of
the Shepherd of Hermas bears, as is generally acknowledged,
the name of its real author.
Finally, if the work were pseudonymous, it would have
gone forth under the aegis not of a John who was a prophet of
Asia Minor and otherwise unknown, but of John the Apostle.
Furthermore he would not have ventured to claim the name and
authorship of a prophet in the very lifetime of that prophet and
in the immediate sphere of that prophet s activity. There is not
a shred of evidence, not even the shadow of a probability, for the
hypothesis that the Apocalypse is pseudonymous.
There is manifold early evidence of the Johannine authorship.
Thus Justin, who lived about 135 A.D. in Ephesus, where one
of the Seven Churches had its seat, declares that J ap is by "John,
one of the apostles of Christ" (Dial. 81). Melito, bishop of
Sardis, another of the Seven Churches, wrote (circ. 165) a lost
work on J ap (ra Trept . . . TT}S aTTOKaXvij/ews Iwavvov : see Eus.
iv. 26. 2). Irenaeus (circ. 180) upheld the Johannine authorship
of all the Johannine writings in the N.T. For J ap , see Haer.
iii. ii. i, iv. 20. n, v. 35. 2, where John is called Domini dis-
cipulus (6 TOV Kvpiov fjLaQrjTrjs) (a title, however, which does not
exclude apostleship; cf. ii. 22. 5). Tertullian cites J ap as the
work of the Apostle John (c. Marc. iii. 14, 24). So also Origen,
Hippolytus, and others : also the Muratorian Canon.
2. John, the author of J ap , is distinct from the author of
J. Tertullian, 3 Hippolytus, 4 and Origen 6 were assured that
1 There is no evidence that John was exiled to Patmos before Clement of
Alexandria, and that evidence is chiefly Western.
2 Hence the attribution of the Apocalypse to the heretic Cerinthus by Caius
(200-220 A.D. See Eus. ii. 25, vii. 25) and the Alogi (Epiphanius, Haer. Ii.
3,4), in ancient times and by certain modern scholars, is an utterly baseless
and gratuitous hypothesis. 3 C. Marc. iii. 14, 24.
4 See his Comment, on Daniel, edited by Achelis, 1897, pp. 142, 240, 244,
etc., and his Ile/x rou Amxpfcrrop, xxxvi., OSrosyap iv Ildr/iy . . . 6p$ airoKa-
\v\f/iv . . . \ye /not, & fj.aKdpie IwdvvTi, dTroVroAe Kal f^ad^rd TOV Kvplov, rl elSes.
5 In Joann., torn. i. 14: (f)-r}fflv odv tv ry dtroKaXvif/ei 6 TOV ZefieSaiov
torn. v. 3 : see also the quotation from Origen in Eus. vi. 25. 9.
xl THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
both the Gospel and the Apocalypse proceeded from the son of
Zebedee. But this view, that both works proceeded from one
and the same author, was rejected by Dionysius (pb. 265 A.D.),
bishop of Alexandria, a pupil of Origen. Dionysius (Eus. H.E.
vii. 25. 7-27) accepts J ap as the work of a John, but declares that
he could not readily agree that he was the Apostle, the son of
Zebedee. In the following sections he enumerates a variety of
grounds, (a) The Evangelist does not prefix his name or
mention it subsequently either in the Gospel or in his Epistle,
whereas the writer of the Apocalypse definitely declares himself
by name at the outset, and subsequently. That it was a John
who wrote the Apocalypse he admitted, but this John did not
claim to be the beloved disciple of the Lord, nor the one who
leaned on His breast, nor the brother of James, (b) There is
a large body of expressions of the same complexion and char
acter common to the Gospel and i J, but wholly absent from J ap .
Indeed, the latter " does not contain a syllable in common " with
the two former works, (c) The phraseology of the Gospel and
i J differs from that of J ap . The former are written in irrepre-
hensible Greek (d^rato-Tos), and it would be difficult to discover
in them any barbarism or solecism or idiotism (tSiwrto-yotoi/). But
the dialect and language of J ap is inaccurate Greek (SiaXe/o-ov . . .
Kal yXwrrav OVK d/cpi/?oos eAA^v/^ouo-av), and is characterized by
barbarous idioms and solecisms. Such is Dionysius criticism
of the style of J ap ; and from the standpoint of the Greek scholar
it is more than justified. But that there was law and order
underlying the seeming grammatical lawlessness of the Seer
neither Dionysius nor any purely Greek scholar could ever
discover a fact that widens immeasurably the breach discovered
by Dionysius between J and J ap . This will become apparent
when we come to the grammar and vocabulary of our author
(see pp. cxvii-clix). A study of these with a knowledge of the
Hebraic style of our author makes it impossible to attribute J ap
and J to the same author. Thus the theory of Dionysius as to
diversity of authorship has passed out of the region of hypothesis
and may now be safely regarded as an established conclusion.
There were at all events two Johannine authors. Who were
these ?
3. There were, according to Papias, two Johns, one the Apostle
and the other John the Elder. Dionysius and Eusebius suggest
that the latter is the author of J ap . Eusebius in his history (iii.
39. 4) quotes the following fragment of Papias which clearly dis
tinguishes the Apostle and the Elder, both bearing the name
John. " And if any one chanced to come who had been also a
follower of the elder, I used to question (him) closely as to the
sayings of the elders as to what Andrew or Peter had said
I. 2. 3 J AND J BY SAME AUTHOR xli
), or Philip, or Thomas, or James, or John, or Matthew, or
any other of the disciples of the Lord : also as to what Aristion
and the Elder John, the Lord s disciples, say (Xeyov<riv)."
Eusebius then goes on to emphasize the distinction made by
Papias between these two Johns, and contends that this view is
confirmed by the statements of those who said that there were
two Johns in Asia and " there were two tombs in Ephesus, both
of which bear the name of John even to this day. To which
things it is needful also that we shall give heed ; for it is probable
that the second (i.e. the Elder), unless one will have it to be the
first, saw the Apocalypse bearing the name of John (iii. 39. 6)."
At an earlier date Dionysius of Alexandria threw out the same
suggestion. He held that John the Apostle wrote J and i J
(Eus. vii. 25. 7), but that another John one of the two Johns who
according to report had been in Asia and both of whose tombs
were said to be there had written the Apocalypse (vii. 25. 16).
Jerome testifies to the belief ("Johannis presbyteri . . . cujus
hodie alterum sepulcrum apud Ephesum ostenditur," De viris
illus. 9), and also to the fact that in his day the tradition was
still current that this John the Elder was the author of 2 and
3 J (ibid. 1 8).
4. But 2 and j John appear on examination of the language
and idiom to proceed even more certainly than I J from the author
off. 1 The traditional view assigns i J and J to the same author
ship. But in modern days a minority of competent scholars
have rejected this view. The problem is discussed with great
fairness by Brooke (Johannine Epistles, pp. i-xix), who comes
to the conclusion that "there are no adequate reasons for
setting aside the traditional view which attributes the Epistle and
Gospel to the same authorship. It remains the most probable
explanation of the facts known to us (p. xviii)." 2 With this
conclusion the present writer is in agreement.
But what as to the authorship of 2. 3 J ? Some notable
scholars disconnect these two Epistles wholly from J and i J.
Thus Bousset (Offenbarung, 1906) at the close of a long discussion
on the authorship of J a ^ (pp. 34-49) concludes that a John of
Asia Minor, and not John the Apostle, was the author of J ap :
that this John was probably identical with John the Elder of whom
Papias tells us, with the Elder of 2. 3 J, with the unnamed disciple
in J 21, and with the teacher of Polycarp, of whom Irenaeus writes
in his letter to Florinus. Von Soden (Books of the N.T., pp.
1 I take J as it stands, since its relation to i. 2. 3 J does not require any
critical study of its composition. J and i J (?) have been more or less edited,
but the work of the editors does not affect the question now at issue.
2 The list of linguistic differentiae in I J, which is given in Moffatt s
Introd. to N. T* t p. 590 sq., should be noted. They are important.
xlii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
444-446, 1907) is also of opinion that John the Elder was the
author of J ap and 2. 3 J as well as I J. Next, Schmiedel
{Johannint Writings, pp. 208-209, 216-217, 229-231, 1908)
attributes J ap and 2. 3 J to an unknown writer who assumed the
pseudonym of John the Elder, and i J to another author. The
joint authorship of J ai> and 2. 3 J is also supported by Moffatt
(Introd. to Lit. of the N.T?, p. 481).
But the present writer cannot accept this hypothesis. After
a considerable time spent on the linguistic study l of 2. 3 J in
comparison with J and J ap , he has been forced to conclude that
2. 3 J are connected linguistically with J, and that so closely as
to postulate the same authorship. This study was first under
taken to discover what connection existed between 2. 3 J and
J ap , since an early tradition assigned the latter to John the Elder
and the opening words (6 n>eor/3irrepos) of 2. 3 J received their
most natural explanation on this hypothesis. In fact, this is
more or less the view advocated by the scholars mentioned
above.
Now on p. xxxiv sqq. I have dealt with the characteristic words
and constructions common to 2. 3 J and J, or 2. 3 J and J ap .
The facts there set forth admit in the present writer s opinion
of only one conclusion as regards the relations of 2. 3 J with J
and J ap , and this is that whereas 2. 3 J have nothing whatever to
do withj ap , they are more idiomatically connected with J than is
I Ji and postulate the same authorship.
5. Jf> then, (l.) 2. 3 J and J are derived from the same author
and J** from quite a different author ; and John the Elder is admitted
to be the author of 2. 3 J, it follows further that John the Elder
is the author not only of 2. 3 J, but also of J and of I J.
There is no evidence that John the Elder wrote J ap beyond
the conjectures of Dionysius and Eusebius. But there is some
external evidence and good internal evidence that the Elder
wrote 2. 3 J. The external evidence is of the slightest. It is
found in Jerome (De viris illus. c. 18), "rettulimus traditum
duas posteriores epistulas Johannis non apostoli esse sed
presbyteri." But the internal evidence is strong. As Brooke
writes (Johannine Epp. i66sq.): " The evidence of Papias and
Irenaeus points to a prevalent Christian usage of the word
(7rpeo-/3irre/3os), especially in Asia, to denote those who had com-
panied with Apostles. ... It is natural to suppose that through
out the fragment of his Introduction, which Eusebius quotes,
Papias uses the expression TT pea- (3vr epos in the same sense." The
elders are the men from . . . whom Papias learnt the sayings
1 No linguistic study of 2. 3 J in relation to J and J a P is known to me.
But for my previous study of J a P I should have missed most of the points
that determine the question at issue.
JAP NOT OF APOSTOLIC AUTHORSHIP xliii
of the Apostles. "The absolute use of the phrase in Papias
(KOL TOV# 6 7rpecr/?vrepos eAeye) and in 2 and 3 John makes it the
distinctive title of some member of the circle to whom the
words are addressed, or at least of one who is well known to
them." Hence // is only natural to recognize the Elder,
mentioned in Papias and in 2. j J, as John the Elder, ivhom
Papias so carefully distinguishes from John the Apostle. The
writer of 2. J J cannot have been an apostle}-
But if John the Elder was the author of 2. J /, then we
conclude further by means of the results arrived at in II. 6 above
that he was also the author of J?
This conclusion does not exclude the possibility that John
the Elder was, as Harnack suggests, the pupil of John the
Apostle. In this case J embodies materials which John the
Elder learnt from John the Apostle, but the form is his
own.
6. If John the Elder is the author of J and (/.) 2. J J, is
John the Apostle the author of J ap ? No. John, its author, claims
to be a prophet, not an apostle. He was a Palestinian Jew who
migrated to Asia Minor when probably advanced in years.
John the author of J ap nowhere claims that he is an apostle.
He appears to look upon the apostles retrospectively and from
without, 2 1 14 (cf. i8 20 ). In these two passages he enumerates as
two distinct classes apostles and prophets. He never makes
any claim to apostleship : he never suggests that he knew Christ
personally. But he distinctly claims to be a prophet a member
1 It has, however, been urged that an apostle could designate himself an
elder. This is true under certain conditions but not in 2. 3 J. That the
writer is an elder and not an apostle we infer from the fact that he claims
no higher title in 3 J, where, had he been an apostle, he wotild naturally
have availed himself of his power as an apostle to suppress Diotrephes
and others who disowned his jiirisdiction and authority, which they could
not have done had he been an apostle. Further, in case I Pet 5
is quoted to prove that an apostle may designate himself as an elder
(Trpecrfivrtpovs o$v ev v/juv Trapa/caXcD 6 awn-pecr/Si/repos), we have only to observe
that Peter has at the outset indicated his apostolic authority, so that the
words in 5 1 form no true parallel to 2. 3 J 1 .
2 The statement in Irenaeus (ii. 22. 5), that according to the elders in
Asia, John the disciple declared that Jesus reached the age of 50, is professedly
second-hand, and is therefore to be estimated accordingly. If this evidence
were trustworthy, it would be practically impossible to assign J to John the
Elder. But as we have seen elsewhere, Irenaeus is often quite untrust
worthy. The extravagant account of the fruitfulness of the vine is also attributed
by Irenaeus (v. 33 3 ) to the elders, who said that they had heard it from John
the disciple. Such an expectation, if it was literally accepted and really
transmitted by John the Elder, would be against his authorship of J.
But it was obviously to be interpreted in a purely metaphorical sense.
In these passages Irenaeus believes that the John he is speaking of is the
Apostle and not the Elder, although he never designates him as dTrdcrroXo?, but
only as
xliv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
of the brotherhood of the Christian prophets, 22 9 , who are God s
servants in a special sense, i 1 io 7 n 18 22 6 , whereas other
Christians are God s servants so far as they observe the things
revealed by the prophets, 22 9 . He is a servant of Jesus Christ,
i 1 , a brother 1 of the Churches of Asia and a partaker in their
sufferings, i 9 . He is commanded "to prophesy" to the nations
of the earth, io 11 . He designates his work as " the words of the
prophecy," i 3 , or "the words of the prophecy of this book,"
22 7 - 10 - 18 . Hence it may be safely concluded that the author of
J ap was not an apostle.
The author of J ap was a Palestinian Jew. He was a great
spiritual genius, a man of profound insight and the widest
sympathies. His intimate acquaintance with the Hebrew text
of the O.T., of which his book contains multitudinous quota
tions based directly upon it, is best explained by this
hypothesis. The fact also, that he thought in Hebrew and trans
lated its idioms literally into Greek, points to Palestine as his
original home. Though no doubt he used the Aramaic of his
day, in a real sense Hebrew was his mother s tongue. His Greek
also, which is unlike any Greek that was ever penned by mortal
man, calls for the same hypothesis. No Greek document
exhibits such a vast multitude of solecisms and unparalleled
idiosyncrasies. Most writers on J ap have been struck with the
unbridled licence of his Greek constructions. But in reality
there is no such licence. The Greek, though without a parallel
elsewhere, proceeds according to certain rules of the author s
own devising. Now this fact is a proof that our author never
mastered Greek idiomatically even the Greek of his own day.
But we may proceed still further. Just as his use of Hebrew
practically as his mother tongue (for Hebrew was still the.
language of learned discussions in Palestine) points to his being
a Palestinian Jew, so his extraordinary use of Greek appears to
prove not only that he never mastered the ordinary Greek of hjs
own times, but that he came to acquire whatever knowledge he
had of this language when somewhat advanced in years.
Two other characteristics of the man and his work point not
only to Palestine, but Galilee as his original home. The first is
that he was a prophet or Seer. Now the writers of apocalypses,
so far as we are aware, were generally natives of Galilee, not of
Judaea. In the next place, our author exhibits an intimate
acquaintance with the entire apocalyptic literature of his time,
and this literature found most of its readers in Galilee, where the
Law, which was hostile to it, had less power than in Judaea.
1 The author describes himself simply as a brother of his readers. In
2 Pet 3 15 Paul is similarly described (6 dyaTrrjTbs ^uwi> d5eX06s) ; but there one
apostle is supposed to be referring to another.
MARTYRDOM OF JOHN THE APOSTLE xlv
7. The silence of ecclesiastical writers down to 180 A.D. as to
any residence of John the Apostle in Asia Minor is against his being
the author of J ap . The conclusion reached in 6 is confirmed by
external evidence. No sub-apostolic writer betrays any know
ledge that John the Apostle ever resided in Ephesus. Yet the
author of J ap was evidently the chief authority in the Ephesian
Church, or at least one of his chief authorities. Thus Ignatius
(circ. 1 10 A.D.) in his letter to the Church of Ephesus (i2 2 ) speaks
only of Paul, but makes no allusion whatever to John the
Apostle, though according to the later tradition John had exercised
his apostolic authority in Ephesus long after Paul, and had
written both J and J ap . The reasonable inference from the above
silence is that Ignatius was not aware of any residence of John the
Apostle in Ephesus. That Clemens Romanus (circ. 96 A.D.) was
silent as to John s residence in Ephesus, may have some bearing
on this question when taken in connection with that of Ignatius.
Justin and Hegesippus (150-180 A.D.) in like manner tell
nothing of John s residence in Ephesus. Yet Justin lived in
Ephesus about 135 A.D., which city, according to later tradition,
was the scene of John s apostolic labours.
8. The above conclusions are confirmed by the tradition of
John the Apostles martyrdom, which, if trustworthy, renders his
authorship of J ap as well as of the other Johannine literature
impossible^- That John the Apostle, like his brother James, died
a martyr s death, has been inferred from the following evidence :
(a) The prophecy of Jesus. This is recorded in Mk io 35-40 =
Mt 2o 20 " 23 , and especially the words : "The cup that I drink shall
ye drink " (TO Tror^piov o eyu> TrtVeo TriW^e KCU TO /3oL7TTi<rfJia o eyw
/?a7TTio/x,at /3a7mo-#7yo-eo-$e, Mk IO 39 = TO jjikv TTOTrjpiov JJLOV 7rt eo-0f,
Mt 2o 23 ). 2 In Mark the above words are followed by a
parallel clause : " And with the baptism that I am baptized withal
shall ye be baptized." The meaning is unmistakable. Jesus
predicts for James and John the same destiny that awaits
Himself. That this prediction was in part fulfilled when Herod
Agrippa I. put James to death, we learn from Acts i2 2 , but not
in the case of John. Now, if John s martyrdom fell within the
period covered by Acts, we may conclude with Wellhausen and
1 See Schwartz, Uber den- Tod der Sohne Zebedaei, 1904 ; Wellhausen and
J. Weiss on Mk io 39 ; Schmiedel, Rncyc. Bib. ii. 2509-2510; Burkitt,
Gospel History , 250 sq. ; Moffatt, Introd. to Literature of the N. T. 3 602 sq.,
613 sq. ; Swete, The Apocalypse, p. clxxix sq. ; Bacon, Fourth Gospel in
Research, 133, 147 ; Latimer Jackson, Problem of the Fotirth Gospel,
142-150.
2 If these words are taken to be a vaticination post eventum, as they are
by certain scholars, then the evidence for the martyrdom of John is simply a
fact of history. But the present writer accepts the words as an actual
prophecy of Christ and one that was fulfilled in actual fact.
xlvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
Moffatt that we have here one of the many gaps discoverable in
Luke s narrative, who fails to record John s death as he does
that of Peter. But it is not necessary to assume that John
was martyred before 66 A.D., as we shall see presently.
(ft) But though Acts 12* fails us here, there is a Papias-
tradition recounting the martyrdom of John. A MS of Georgius
Hamartolus (9th cent.) states on the authority of Papias that John
the son of Zebedee was slain by the Jews (( Icoavv^s) /jLaprvpiov KO.T-
IlaTrias yap . . . c^cur/cei on VTTO louSaiwv avypeOrj,
/xera rov dSeA.<cn) rrjv rov Xpicrrov Trc.pl avr&v
This statement is confirmed by an extract published by De Boor
(Texte u. Untersuchungen, 1888, v. 2. 170) from an Oxford MS.
(7th or 8th cent.) of an epitome of the Chronicle of Philip of
Side (5th cent.). " Papias in the second book says that John the
Divine and James his brother were slain by the Jews " (ITaTuas
ev T. Sevrepw Aoyco Xeyet on Icaai/vrys 6 $eoAoyos * KOL Ia/cw/?os 6
a8eX(/)0? O.VTOV VTTO louSaiW avyptOrjcrav). Swete (Apoc. clxxix. sq.)
adds here the following pertinent comment : " If Papias made
it (this statement), the question remains whether he made it
under some misapprehension, or merely by way of expressing
his conviction that the prophecy of Mk x. 39 had found a
literal fulfilment. Neither explanation is very probable in view
of the early date of Papias. He does not, however, affirm that
the brothers suffered at the same time : the martyrdom of John
at the hand of the Jews might have taken place at any date
before the last days of Jerusalem" 1 *
This Papias-tradition is rejected by Bernard, Studia Sacra,
260-284; Harnack, TLZ., 1909, 10-12; Drummond, 227 sq. ;
Zahn, Forschungen, vi. 147 sq. ; Armitage Robinson, Historical
Character of John s Gospel, 64 sqq. ; Stanton, Gospels as His
torical Documents, i. 166 sq. ; but such a rejection is hazardous
in face of the evidence furnished by subsequent and independent
authorities, not to speak of the results already arrived at inde
pendently in this chapter. 3
(c) Certain ancient writers imply or recount the martyrdom oj
John the son of Zebedee. The first evidence is that of Heraclcon
(an early Gnostic commentator on J, about 145 A.D.), preserved
in Clement of Alexandria (Strom, iv. 9). Heracleon in connec
tion with Lk T2 11 12 states that "Matthew, Philip, Thomas,
1 6 #60X6705 is, of course, a late addition. It is found in most cursives of
the Apocalypse in its title.
2 The italics are mine.
8 These results exclude the possibility of John the son of Zebedee being
the author of J ap , and also of i. 2. 3 J, J, if, as is highly probable, John the
Elder wrote 2. 3. J. John the Apostle may have been the teacher of John
the Elder. This Papias-tradition would account perfectly for the absence
of his writings from the N.T.
MARTYRDOM OF JOHN THE APOSTLE xlvii
Levi, 1 and many others" had escaped public testimony to
Christ. The omission of John s name is full of significance.
He cannot, in view of his prominence both in the N.T. and in
the 2nd cent, be relegated to the nameless body of the " many
others." Clement does not call in question this statement of
Heracleon. Archbishop Bernard weakens this evidence, but his
(Studia Sacra, 283 sq.) argument proceeds on the hypothesis that
John the Apostle was the author of the Apocalypse.
The next evidence is furnished by the Martyrium Andreae
i. 2 (Bonnet, Ac fa Apost. Apocr. n. i. 46 sq.). Here it is
recounted how the apostles cast lots as to which people they
should severally adopt as their sphere of missionary effort. The
result of the casting of the lots was that the circumcision was
assigned to Peter, the East to James and John, and the cities of
Samaria and Asia to Philip (eKAr/pwtfr/ IleVpos rrjv
IaKO)/?os /cat Ia)dW?7s TT)V avaroXrjv ^iXiTTTro? ras
5a/xapias KOL rrjv A<riW), and so on. What is significant in this
legend is that it ignores wholly any residence of John in Asia
Minor. 2
Next, in Clement (Strom, vii. 17) it is stated definitely that the
teaching of the apostles, embracing the ministry of Paul, was
brought to a close in the reign of Nero 3 (^ Se aTroo-roAwi/ avrov
(i.e. Xpioroi)) P<XP L 7 6 T ^ s Ilav/Vov Aeirovpyias CTTI Nepwi/os
TeAeicnmu). These words presuppose the death of all the
apostles before 70 A.D. In Epiphanius (li. 33), John s activity
is assigned to the times of the Emperor Claudius : rov ayiov
Icoai/i/ot) . . . Trpo^r/Tcvo-avro? ei/ ^poj/ois KAavSi ou /cat crapos.
The same tradition of John s martyrdom is attested in
Chrysostom (Horn. Ixv. on Mt 20 23 ), though in Horn. Ixxvi. he
says that John long survived the fall of Jerusalem.
According to Moffatt (p. 607), even Gregory of Nyssa
(Laudatio Stephani : De Basilio Magno) mentions Peter, James,
and John as martyred apostles and places them between Stephen
and Paul. But Bernard (Studia Sacra, 280 sqq.) has rightly
objected to Gregory being cited as supporting such a thesis.
The fact is that Gregory is mystified naturally by this attestation
of the Church calendar to the martyrdom of John and seeks to
explain it away.
1 This reduplication in Matthew . . . Levi is found elsewhere.
2 As Latimer Jackson observes, "the allusion Gal 2 9 is significant; it
suggests that John, extending the right hand of fellowship to Paul and
Barnabas (who had taken the Gentiles as their sphere of work), decides to
cast in his lot with the circumcision (p. 149)." But we have to remember
also that Peter went to the West and was martyred in Rome.
3 It is true that elsewhere Clement (Quis dives salv. 42) tells the story
of John and the robber, which, were it true, would imply his living to old
age.
xlviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
As Clement and Chrysostom reflect the conflicting traditions
as to the manner of John s death and the age at which he died,
the Muratorian Canon attests indirectly the survival of the older
tradition. It states that Paul wrote to seven churches after the
precedent set by John. This statement cannot be accepted,
since most (if not all) of the Pauline Epistles were written
before all the Seven Churches in Asia were founded. Thus
the Church in Smyrna was not founded till 61-64 A.D. at
earliest : cf. Polycarp, Ad Phil. ii. But the statement becomes
intelligible, if John s apostolic activity belonged to the decades
before 70 A.D. Thus the older tradition discovers the element
of fact in this statement of the Muratorian Canon. For in
its enumeration of the works of St. Paul it proceeds : " Ex quibus
singulis (non) necesse est a nobis disputari, cum ipse beatus
apostolus Paulus, sequent prodecessoris sui Johannis ordinem,
nonnisi nominatim septem ecclesiis scribat. . . ." Here the
composition of J w is set before that of the Pauline Epistles.
This fact justifies the assumption that the Muratorian Canon
represents the composition of J as prior to the dispersion of the
apostles. " Quartum evangeliorum Johannis ex discipulis. (Is)
cohortantibus condiscipulis et episcopis suis dixit : Conjejunate
mihi hodie triduo, et quid cuique fuerit revelatum, alterutrum
nobis enarremus. Eadem nocte revelatum Andreae ex apostolis,
ut recognoscentibus cunctis Johannes suo nomine cuncta
describeret" That the condiscipuli=ti\z rest of the apostles, is
to be inferred from John himself being called ex discipulis. It may
be remarked in passing that the revision of J is here plainly stated.
The North African work De Rebaptismate (arc. 250 A.D.)
supports the Papias-tradition : " He said to the sons of Zebedee :
" Are ye able ? " For he knew the men had to be baptized, not
only in water but also in their own blood."
Finally, the Syrian Aphraates (De Persecutione (344 A.D.))
writes : " Great and excellent is the martyrdom of Jesus. . . .
After Him was the faithful martyr Stephen, whom the Jews
stoned. Simon also and Paul were perfect martyrs. And
James and John walked in the footsteps of their Master Christ. . . .
Also others of the apostles thereafter in diverse places confessed
and proved themselves true martyrs." Here the actual martyrs
are mentioned first, including John. Then come the confessors
to whom the hononary rank of martyrs is accorded.
(d) The Syriac Marty rology postulates the martyrdom of John
the son of Zebedee. This martyrology (411 A.D.) was drawn up
at Edessa for the use of the local church. It contains the
following festivals :
Dec. 27. ludvvr/s Kat Ia/ca>/?o5 ot a.7ro<rroA.oi lv
Dec. 28. Ev Pco/xiy TTJ TroAet IlauAos KCU Sv/xeobv
MARTYRDOM OF JOHN THE APOSTLE xlix
Here the martyrdom of James and John in Jerusalem is
commemorated between that of Stephen on Dec. 26 and that of
Paul and Peter on Dec. 28.
Seeing that the statements with regard to James, Paul and
Peter are trustworthy, there appears no reason for questioning
that respecting John. In the Calendar of Carthage (circ. 505)
there is the entry, " Commemoration of St. John Baptist, and of
James the Apostle, whom Herod slew." Since in the same
calendar the Baptist is commemorated on June 24, it is clear
that John the son of Zebedee is here intended. Thus the two
sons of Zebedee are here conjoined, and evidently on the
ground of their common martyrdom. According to Moffatt
(Introd. Lit. N.T. p. 605), the Armenian and Gothico-Gallic
Calendars agree with the Syriac.
This considerable body of independent and diverse forms of
evidence appears to the present writer to remove the Papias :
tradition from the sphere of hypothesis into that of reasonably
established facts of history. Finally, the date of John s martyrdom
can be fixed within certain limits. He was alive when Paul had
his conference with the " pillar-apostles " in Jerusalem (Gal 2 9 ).
This was not later than 64 A.D. 1 Since he was martyred by the
Jews, he must have died before 70 A.D.
That the later testimony of Irenaeus that John the Apostle
resided in Asia, as well as the statement that Polycarp was a
disciple of the Apostle, must be rejected if the Papias-tradition
is correct, follows as a matter of course. Irenaeus is occasionally
very inaccurate. His confusion of John the Elder with John
the Apostle 2 finds (in. 12. 15) an exact parallel in his confusion
of James the Lord s brother, who in Acts i5 13 takes part in the
Council of Jerusalem, with James the son of Zebedee, who has
already been martyred in Acts i2 2 . In iv. 27. i he states that one
of his authorities is a disciple of the disciples of the apostles ;
yet in 32. 2 he designates the same man as a disciple of the
apostles. In H.E. iii. 39. 2, Eusebius charges Irenaeus with
wrongly representing Papias as a disciple of John the Apostle.
Irenaeus states on the authority of certain elders, who main
tained that they had heard it from John, that Jesus did not die
1 Galatians is variously dated from 53 to 64 A.D.
2 Though Irenaeus has transferred to John the Apostle the labours of John
the Elder and the scene of these labours, he still distinguishes the Elder whom
he frequently quotes alike from the body of the Elders whom he also quotes, and
from John the disciple of the Lord ; cf. iv. 30. 4 : "Si quis autem diligentius
intendat his, . . . quaecunque Joannes discipulus Domini vidit in Apocalypsi,"
and 31, I: "Talia quaedam enarrans de antiquis presbyter reficiebat nos";
32. I : "Senior apostolorum discipulus" ; also iv. 28. I. It is significant,
however, that Irenaeus never calls this John, whom he regards as the author
of the Johannine writings, an apostle, but only a disciple of the Lord.
This element of truth still survives in his treatment of this question.
d
1 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
till the reign of Claudius (11. 22. 5). The confusion of Philip
the Evangelist and Philip the Apostle, whom Luke in the Acts
distinguishes carefully, is found in several ancient writers, most
probably in Polycrates of Ephesus (arc. 196 A.D.) and Proclus :
cf. Eus. iii. 31. 3-4, v. 24. 2 ; in Clement of Alexandria (Strom.
iii. 6. 52), Tertullian and Eusebius. See Encyc. Bib. (2511);
Moffatt, Introd? 608 sqq. ; otherwise Lightfoot, Colossians, 45 sq.
The primitive tradition as to the martyrdom of John the
Apostle was gradually displaced by the later tradition represented
by Irenaeus ; but even so the primitive tradition maintained itself
in various places down to the yth cent., as we have shown
above.
The conclusion to which the above facts and inferences point
is that John the Apostle was never in Asia Minor, and that he
died a martyr s death between the visit of St. Paul to the "pillar"
apostles in Jerusalem, circ. 64 (?) and 70 A.D.
IV.
THE EDITOR OF THE APOCALYPSE.
From the section dealing with the Plan, pp. xxiii-xxviii, we
have seen that J ap exhibits, except in short passages, and espe
cially towards the close of chap. 18, a structural unity and a
steady development of thought from the beginning to 2o 3 . In
2o 4 -22, on the other hand, the traditional order of the text
exhibits a hopeless mental confusion and a tissue of irreconcilable
contradictions. In vol. ii. 144-154 I have gone at length into this
question, and shown the necessity for the hypothesis that John
died when he had completed I-2O S of his work, and that the
materials for its completion^ which were for the most part ready in
a series of independent documents - , were put together by a faithful
but unintelligent disciple in the order which he thought right. Such
was the solution of the problem I arrived at five years ago, and
all my subsequent study has served to confirm the truth, of this
hypothesis. In the earlier chapters (i-2o 3 ) I adopted tentatively
and occasionally the hypothesis of an editor, but generally that
of an interpolator or interpolators, but it was nothing but one
hypothesis possible amongst many others, till I came to deal
with 2o 4 -22. This present section, therefore, represents a brief
restudy of the interpolations which can with most probability be
attributed to the editor from the standpoint of the solution of
the problem discovered in connection with 2o 4 -22. For the
main grounds for this hypothesis the reader should consult ii.
144-154 and the commentary that follows.
FIRST EDITOR OF THE APOCALYPSE li
On p. Ivii sq. we have given a complete list of the inter
polations in the text, and marked by an asterisk those which
appear to proceed from the editor.
Now, if we wish to learn something about this editor we
should begin with his editing of 2o 4 -22. We are here first of
all seeking to learn his grammatical usages, though occasionally
we shall consider his opinions so far as they have led him to
change the text. He is a more accurate Greek scholar than
our author, and, as he shows no sign of really knowing Hebrew,
he was probably a native of Asia Minor.
As regards grammar, the construction in 20 11 TOV KaBrj^vov
tir* f avrov f and 2I 5 6 /ca^r^uevos CTTI f TOV 0/ooVou f, which is not
that of our author (see p. cxxxii), is probably due to him. This
construction with the gen. is more usual in classical Greek. 1
Now in the interpolation which he has made in i4 15-17 we find
this same construction twice : r<3 /ca^/xeVo) CTTI TT}S K<J>d\rjs and
6 Ka.QriiJif.vos 7u Trjs i/e^eA.^?; and in g 17 we find the same non-
Johannine construction r. Ka^/xeVov? lif f avrwv f, which may be
traced to the editor. In any case, in three passages at least the
editor appears to have corrected the Johannine construction into
the more usual Greek one. 2i 5 6 Ka#?j/>ievos rl frw 0poVa> f
seems to be a primitive corruption for eVt TOV Opovov.
In 2o 4 -22 there are three other passages where the editor has
changed the text. In 2o 4 the omves is an insertion of the
editor to make the text possible Greek. But the construction
without the ofrivcs, i.e. TOJV TreTreXe/CKr/xei/wv /cat ov 7rpoo~Kvvr)o-av, is
always elsewhere the Hebraism used by our author. See vol. i.
14 sq. Again, in 2i 6 TW OHJ/WVTL Swo-<o we should expect, in
accordance with our author s usage, aurw after Swo-w (which 046
and certain cursives actually add). Here again the editor was
improving the author s Greek. In 22 12 the order of the words,
TO epyov CO-TIV O.VTOV, is the editor s. In any case it is not John s.
Here 046 and a few cursives restore John s order.
That the editor was a better Greek scholar than the author
is apparent also in his interpolations in 22 n - 18b 19 . To these
passages, which are interpolations (see ii. 221-224), we shall return
presently.
But though a fair Greek scholar, the editor is very unintelligent.
He has made a chaos of 2o 4 -22, and wherever else he has
intervened he has introduced confusion and made it impossible
in many cases for students, who accepted his interpolations as
part of the text, to understand the author. In i 4 he has sought
i, c. gen. dat. or ace. , is found in our author as elsewhere after icddrjcrdai.
But where the idea of resting on is present, the genitive is most natural.
But the use of the case after KadyvBai lirl in our author is wholly unique.
See p. cxxxii.
lii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
by his interpolation to make the text enumerate the Persons of
the Trinity a grotesque conception indeed, but with a parallel
in Justin Martyr. His interpolation of i 8 is singularly infelicitous
as well as being impossible. Not understanding that 6 Ocbs 6
iravTOKpa.Tu)p is a stock rendering of the Hebrew " God of Hosts,"
and that accordingly this title cannot be broken into two parts,
he actually divides 6 0eos from 6 Travro/cparwp by eight words, and
next represents the Seer as hearing God speaking this verse,
although he has not yet fallen into a trance. The intrusion
37-12 w j t h th e necessary changes in the adjoining context is to
be traced to him also (see vol. i. 218-223). This fragment is
of unknown provenance. In order to introduce this inter
polation the editor has, as already observed, made many changes
in the adjoining contexts. One of these changes bears clear
testimony to his ignorance of our author s style. Thus in 8 5
he represents our author as saying @povTal Kal <on/ai KCU aorpairai.
But our author knows well that the aa-Tpa-n-aL always precede the
/3povTcu: cf. 4 5 n 19 i6 18 . But apparently this editor neither
knew this fact nor his master s usage. This interpolation made
it impossible for all interpreters of the Apocalypse to understand
the meaning of the clause eyei/ero o-iyi) ev TW ovpavw us 77/u<6piov.
Besides, 8 7 12 is a weaker repetition of what is said elsewhere in
our author, and is frequently at variance with its adjoining
context.
In Q 11 the clause Kal lv rfj EAA^vi/crj OJ/O/AO, l^t ATroXXvoov
(which is good Greek) appears to come from the editor s hand.
Our author would naturally have written Kal EXX^wo-Ti ATroXXiW,
if he had written the words at all, since the preceding words run,
wopa avTcu E/fyaurrt A/?aSSojj/, and our author never aims at
variety of construction in repeating the same simple fact. ovo/u,a
avrw is frequent in the LXX. See also 6 8 and the note on Q 11 .
The next interpolation due to this editor is i4 3e - 4ab . If
these clauses are from his pen they help us to recognize
another trait in his character. He is a narrow ascetic, and
introduces into Christianity ideas that had their origin in pagan
faiths of unquestionable impurity. According to the teaching of
i4 3e - 4ab , neither St. Peter nor any other married apostle nor any
woman whatever would be allowed to follow the Lamb on Mt.
Zion. But it is chastity not celibacy that is a Christian virtue.
To regard marriage as a pollution is impossible in our author,
who compares the covenant between Christ and the Church to
a marriage, 19, and calls the Church the Bride, 2i 2 - 9 22 17 .
In i4 14 20 , however, the editor reaches the climax of his
stupidity. Here by his insertion of the impossible verses, i4 15 17 ,
which he found elsewhere, he has first of all divided the
Messianic judgment into two acts, the first of which added by
FIRST EDITOR OF THE APOCALYPSE liii
him is called the harvesting of the earth, I4 15 17 and the second
of which is called the vintaging of the earth, i4 18-2 . The first is
assigned to the Son of Man ! and the second and greater part
to an angel. Thus the Son of Man is treated as an angel a
conception impossible not only in J ap , but in Jewish and
Christian literature as a whole. But our author never speaks
of the judgment as a harvesting of the earth, but as a vintaging,
and this vintaging is described at length in IQ 11 21 and assigned
to the Word of God (6 Aoyos TOV 6eov), who "treadeth the
winepress of the fierce anger of God Almighty" (iQ 15 ). The
fact that our editor, in the face of this clear assignment of the
entire Messianic judgment described as *a vintaging of the
earth to the Son of Man, could assign it to an angel, betrays
a depth of stupidity all but incomprehensible, and brands him
as an arch heretic of the first century though probably an
unconscious one. And the irony of it is that, despite his
abyssmal stupidity and heresies, he has achieved immortality by
securing a covert in the great work which he has done so much
to discredit and obscure. 1
In 15* we have, no doubt, another of his additions. It is
designed to introduce the Seven Bowls. Now every new
important section our author begins with the words //.era ravra
eloov (see note on 4 1 in Commentary). Less important divisions
are introduced by KOL etSov. Here, however, we find the latter
words used, which at once provokes our astonishment. But
that is not all. The vision breaks off, and a new vision that of
the blessed martyrs in heaven, i5 2-4 is recounted; and then at
last we come to the real introduction to the Seven Bowls in i5 5 ,
which rightly begins with the words /cat /zero, ravra etSov a fact
which shows that the Seven Bowls are here mentioned for the
first time. Such an interference with the text can hardly be
assigned to any mere scribe (see vol. ii. 30-32).
Passing over i6 2c , which was most probably interpolated
by the editor, since it exhibits a wrong construction of Trpo-
from the standpoint of our author, we come to i6 5a
TOV dyyeXov TWI/ vSarcov a clause which he added in
order to introduce some actual sentences of our author, i.e.
i6 5b " 7 . These verses belong after iQ 4 . The editor may have
found them detached on a separate piece of papyrus, and owing
to his inability to recognize their true context inserted them
after i6 4 . It is true that to the uninstructed mind they present a
1 History has here in part repeated itself ; for in the Testaments of the
XII Patriarchs (see my edition, pp. xvi sq., Ivii-lix) the work of a bitter
assailant of the Maccabean priest-kings has gained a place in the heart of a
book that was written by an ardent upholder of the earlier members of that
dynasty.
liv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
superficial fitness for the place they occupy in the traditional text,
but they are in reality wholly unsuited to it, as its technical
expressions prove. See vol. ii. 120-123. i6 13b " 14a (ws ySarpa^of
eicriv yap TrvevfAara 8ai/xorto>v Trotovvra (r^/Aeta) was also apparently
foisted into the text by the editor. It is against our author s
grammar, which would require u>s (3aTpdxov<s. To adapt the
context to the interpolation he has changed eK7ropvo//,ei/a into a
K7ropvovraL. 1 7 9b (oprj etcriv, OTTOV rj yvvrj KaOrjrai CTT avruv 1 /cat
with eTTTa added after /Sao-iAcis), which gives a second explanation
of the CTTTOL /Sao-iAeis, 1 appears also to be from his hand. 1 9 9b - 10
is quite clearly an interpolation (see vol. ii. p. 128 sq.), and owes
its insertion here very probably to the editor. It has dislodged a
necessary part of the original text. Was the original undecipher
able, or was it simply expunged in order to receive the contribu
tions of the editor ?
We now return to 2o 4 -22 with which we began. I have
shown at length in ii. 144-154 the chaos to which the editor has
reduced the work of his master in 2o 4 -22. Notwithstanding, it
will be instructive to touch here also on a few of the hopeless
incongruities he has introduced through his sheer incapacity to
understand his master s teaching. In 2o 4 -22, as it stood origin
ally, our author sees in a vision the coming evangelization of
the world by Christ and the glorified martyrs on the Second
Advent. This is already foretold in advance in 15* by the
triumphant martyrs before the throne of God, " All the nations
shall come and worship before Thee," and in a vision in i4 6 - 7 ,
and again in n 15 where proleptically the angelic song declares
that " the kingdom of this world hath become the kingdom of
our Lord and of His Christ." The evangelization of the world is
thus committed to the glorified martyrs at once as their task and
the guerdon of their faithfulness in the past. They preach afresh
the Gospel to the nations of the earth, and all who receive it are
healed of their diseases, cleansed from their sins, admitted to
the Heavenly City, and allowed to eat of the bread of life.
Thus the Millennial Reign is one of arduous spiritual toil, and the
thrones assigned to these glorified martyrs are simply a symbol
of faithful service, which vary in glory in the measure of their
service.
Such is our author s teaching, but through the editor s
rearrangement of the text the Millennial Reign is emptied of
all significance. The glorified martyrs return to earth with
Christ and enjoy a dramatic but rather secular victory, sitting
on thrones in splendid idleness for full one thousand years
(20 4 6 ) !
1 The editor prefers the genitive always after Kd0ija6ai tirl, as we have
seen above.
FIRST EDITOR OF THE APOCALYPSE Iv
Nearly all the incongruities in 2o 4 -22 are due to the editor s
incompetence. But in 2O 13 there is something worse. Dis
honesty has taken the part of incapacity. The editor has
tampered with his master s text. In order to make the text
teach a physical resurrection he has changed some such word
as "treasuries" or "chambers" (i.e. the abode of righteous souls
not of the martyrs who went direct to heaven) and inserted
rj OdXacra-a. But the sea can only give up bodies, not souls.
Yet the phrase " the dead " (TOI>S ve/c/aovs) implies personalities,
i.e. souls, just as certainly as it does in the next line, where death
and Hades give up " the dead " (r. vc/cpov s) in them. Hence it
follows that fj OdXaa-o-a cannot have stood originally in the text.
Besides, before the final judgment began the sea had already
vanished, 2O 11 . On this depravation of his text by the editor,
see vol. ii. 194-199, where, as well as in the English trans., I
have restored the text.
22 11 is written in a form of parallelism unexampled elsewhere
in our author, while its subject-matter is in conflict with other
passages in our author. The last interpolation, 1 22 18b 19 , exhibits
the editor at his worst. Having taken the most unwarrantable
liberties with his author s text by perverting its teaching in some
passages and by his interpolations making it wholly unintelligible
in others, he sets the crown on his misdemeanours by invoking
an anathema on any person who should in any respect follow
the method which had the sanction of his own example. 2 By
this and other like unwarrantable devices this shallow-brained
fanatic and celibate, whose dogmatism varies directly with the
narrowness of his understanding, has often stood between John
and his readers for nearly 2000 years. But such obscurantism
cannot outlive the limits assigned to it; the reverent and
patient research of the present age is steadily discovering and
bringing to light the teaching of this great Christian prophet
whose work fitly closes the Canon, and closes it with his
benediction : " The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the
saints."
1 In addition to the arguments advanced in vol. ii. 222-223 against the
authenticity of 2i 18b 19 , we should observe that in the writer s use of eirLTidtvai
there is a play on the two meanings of this verb, i.e. "to add" and "to
inflict." The latter use is found in Luke io 30 , Acts I6 23 , and frequently in
classical Greek. Such a play on words is not found in our author.
2 The use of such anathemas by writers of an inferior stamp was quite
common as I have shown in vol. ii. 223-224.
Ivi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
V.
DEPRAVATION OF THE TEXT THROUGH INTERPOLATIONS,
DISLOCATIONS, LACUNAE, AND DITTOGRAPHS.
i. Interpolations. There are in all some 22 or more
interpolated verses in our text, if we add together all the inter
polated verses, clauses, phrases, and words. The grounds for
regarding these as interpolations are nearly always given in the
Commentary, in loc., and in footnotes to the English translation
in vol. ii. in a more popular and less technical form. But in a
few cases these will be found only in the latter, since they were
not recognized as interpolations, or else wrongly condemned as
such when the Commentary was written.
The interpolations are rejected as such either because they
are wrong in their subject-matter, that is, against the context, or
because they are against our author s linguistic usage. But
generally an interpolated passage betrays its intrusive character
both by its linguistic form and subject-matter. Where these two
kinds of evidence combine, they are conclusive. As notable
interpolations of this kind, the reader should study i 8 i/j. 15 17 .
First, as regards i 8 we discover that this verse is impossible in its
present context ; for it represents the Seer as hearing God pro
nounce these words, although the Seer does not fall into a trance
until i 10 . Next, we discover that it could not occur in any
context in our author, since, contrary to his universal usage and
that of all Palestinian writers, he separates 6 ira.vTOKpa.rwp from
6 0eos by eight words, whereas it should immediately follow it, as
it is a rendering of the Hebrew genitive (niNHtf) immediately
dependent on 6 0eos (Tlta). Next, I4 15 17 is against our author s
usage in respect to constructions. But it errs still more grievously
against the context. The interpolator, failing to recognize " one
like a son of man " (i4 14 ) as Christ, has treated Him merely as an
angel, and assigned Him only one-half of the Messianic judgment,
wherein the judgment is compared to a harvesting of the earth
a figure not used by our author. But this is not all. He has
assigned to "another angel "the Messianic judgment i.e., the
vintaging of the earth the duty expressly attributed by our
author to Christ in iQ 11 21 .
But interpolation sometimes leads to further depravation of
the text. This occurs when the interpolated passage obliges the
interpolator to adapt the immediate context to his additions to
the text. The classical instance of such tampering with the text
will be found in connection with the interpolation of 8 7 12 , whereby
"the three Woes," each preceded by a trumpet blast, have been
INTERPOLATIONS Ivii
transformed into "the seven Trumpets." This drastic interven
tion of the interpolator has necessitated slight changes in 8 2 - 6 - 13
9!- 18 io 7 1 1 15 and the transposition of certain clauses. This addi
tion is at variance with the entire context : it has destroyed the
dramatic development of our author s theme, and represents him
as indulging in vain and inconsistent repetitions. 1 The presence
of this interpolation in our text has hidden from all interpreters
up to the present the true meaning of the phrase " there was
silence in heaven for the space of half an hour," as well as other
important matters.
Several interpolations have arisen from marginal glosses ;
t-8d j^is ^ e^cov e^ovcrtW 7ri r. Trvpos), iy 9b (op*7 ewrtV . . . ITT
aarwv /cat) a second interpretation of " the seven heads " from
the hand of the editor or an interpolator. i9 9b -i is mainly a
doublet of 22 8 9 , and in n 5b iy 17 the additions appear to be
simply dittographs.
The complete list of interpolations in and additions to the
text is as follows. Those which appear to be due to the editor
are marked with an asterisk.
*i 4c (/cat a.7ro TCOV 7rra . . . avToC). See vol. i. 11-13. *i 8
( Eyto et/u TO "A\<f>a ... 6 TravTO/cparwp). See footnote
on English translation in loc., vol. ii. i 14 (ws X L( *> V )-
2 5 (lav fjJt] /jiTavorj(Tr]<i). 2 22 (ecu/ /A?) ^ravorjaovaiv e/c TOJV
epywi/ avrijs). See footnote on Eng. trans, in loc.^ vol. ii.
4 5 (a cVrtv ra cTrra Tn/ev/xara TOV Oeov) . 4 6 (ev /xeorw rov
Opovov /cat) : 4 s (/cu/cXo^ev /cal ecrw^ev ye^ovcrtv 6<pOaXfj.C)v).
5 8(1 (at et(rtv at Trpocrev^at rtov aytan>) : 5 11 (Kat T. a>eoi/ /cat T.
rrpcr(3vTp(Dv). See vol. i. 145, 148 respectively.
6 8b (/cat 6 aS^s rjKoXovOei /ACT avrov). See vol. i. 169 sq.
6 8de (a.7ro/CTu/at . . . VTTO r. ^7/ptW T. y^s). See i. 171.
*8 2 (ot ei/WTTtov T. Oeov etrTr;/cao-tv). See i. 2 2 1 : also footnote
on Eng. trans, in loc. 8 7 12 . To adapt this interpolation
of the first four Trumpets to its new context, changes
were introduced in 8 2 - 6 - 18 9 1 * 13 io 7 n 15 and 8 2 trans
posed from its original position after 8 5 . See i. 219-222.
9 5c (/cat 6 /?acrav(ay/,o9 . . . avflpwTrov? See footnote : Eng.
trans.). *9H C (/<at ev rrj . . . ATroAXvtoi/). See i. 246.
*cji6b-i7a (fjKovcra T. apiOpov . . . opdVci). Observe that
the wrong construction, T. Ka&yptvovv f ITT avruv f, is
due to editor. See i. 252. 9 19b (/cat lv rats . . .
/cec^aXa?). See i. 254.
1 Hence practically every editor who accepts the entire work as from
John s hand, whether he adopts or not the hypothesis of sources, is obliged to
resort to the " Recapitulation Theory" in a greater or lesser degree, that is,
that the Apocalypse does not represent a strict succession of events, but that
the same events are either wholly or in part dealt ivith tinder each successive
series of seven Seals, seven Trumpets, and seven Bowls.
Iviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
H 5b (KCU ci TIS . . . a7roKTav6r]vai). See i. 284.
*I4 3 4 (ot riyopa.a-fJif.voL OLTTO r. y>}s . . . to~iv and *at TW ctpvao.
See ii. 5-10, 422, footnote. *i4 15 - 17 KCU aXXo? dyyeXos
. . . opeTravov ou). See ii. 1819, 2022. i4 18 (6 t\wv
IgovfTiav 7ri TOV 7rvpos). I4* 9 (6 ctyycXos).
*i5 1 . See ii. 30-32. i5 3 (T. wS^v . . . T. #eo{) KCU). See
ii. 34. 15 (ot CTTTO, dyycXot ot e^oi/Ts . . . TrX^yds
a deliberate change for ayyeXot CTTTCL owing to interpola
tion of I5 1 ). See ii. 31-32, 38.
*l6 2c (TOUS e^oi/ra? . . . etKoVt avrov). See ii. 43. *i6 5a
(KCU fjKovcra rov dyyeXou TCOI/ vSarcov Xeyovro?) added by
editor when he wrongly introduced i6 5b 7 , which
properly belongs after i Q 4 . ii. 44, 120-123. * r 6 13b - 14a
(o>? pdrpaxoi . . . crry/xeta). See ii. 47-48. i6 19a (/cat
eyeVero . . . fte/si;). See ii. 5 2 -
*!7 9b (op>y eicrtV . . . ITT avrwv KCU and eTrrd after /SacrtXct?).
See ii. 68-69. iy 15 a gloss on ly 1 . See ii. 72.
I7 17 (Kat TTOi-^crav /xiai/ yvtjyp^v}. See ii. 73-
l8^ 3 (/(CU tTTTTCOV . . . O"(OjU,CtTO)v). S&6 ii. IO4-
I9 8b (TO yap PVO-Q-LVOV . . . ecrnV). See vol. i. 127-128.
i9 9b - 10 , doublet of 22 8 9 , which has dislodged part of the
original text. See ii. 128-129. i9 12c (e^on/ oi/ojaa . . .
L fAr) auros). See ii. 132. IQ 16 (CTTI T. t/xaTiov KCU).
See ii. 137.
*2O 4 (omves). *2O 5 (ot XOITTOI raiv veKpwi/ OVK Z,r)(ra.v
372. 2O 12 (Kara TO, tfpya aurcov). *2O 13 (17 6aXa.o-o~a.
an interpolation which has dislodged the original).
ii. 194 sqq. 2o 14b (OVTOS 6 0dVaTos . . . Trupo s). See
ii. 199 sq.
*2i 6a (KO.\ cLTTtv ftot* Teyovav). See English translation, in
loc. ii. 443. *2i 25 text changed by editor. See ii. 173,
439-
*22 n . See ii. 221 sq. *22 12 ws TO epyoi/ f CCTTIV avTovf.
The order rriv avrov is due to the editor. Our author
wrote avTov eariV. *22 18b 19 . See ii. 222 sq.
2. Dislocations in 2o 4 -22. In vol. ii. 144, 1 have emphasized
the fact that apocalyptic is distinguished from prophecy in its
structural unity and its orderly development of thought to the
final consummation. In the pages that follow (145-154) I have
shown at some length that the text is incoherent and self-
contradictory as it stands, and that these characteristics of 2o 4 -22,
which are wholly impossible in apocalyptic (if the work is from
one and the same author), are due to vast dislocations of the
text. No mere accident could explain the intolerable confusion
of the text in 2o 4 -22 (see vol. ii. 144-154). Since this entire
DISLOCATIONS lix
section, with the exception of two or more verses, comes from the
hand of our author, the only hypothesis that can account for the
present condition of the text is that John died when he com
pleted i-2o 3 of his work, and that the materials forks completion,
which were for the most part ready in a series of independent
documents, were put together by an editor who fundamentally
misunderstood the thought and visions of the Seer. Alike in
the Commentary, Text, and Translation, the present writer has
sought to recover the original order of the text (see vol. ii. 153-
154) and given the grounds which have guided this reconstruc
tion throughout. Manifold traces of the activity of this un
intelligent editor are to be found in the earlier chapters, and it is
more than probable that most of the interpolations are to be
traced to his hand.
Dislocations in i-2o 3 . Though there is nothing in the text
of 1-2 o 3 in the least comparable to the confusion that dominates
the traditional structure of 2o 4 -22, yet there are some very
astonishing dislocations of isolated clauses and verses.
Of the many dislocations of the text in i-2o 3 only one
appears to have been deliberate, i.e. the transposition of 8 2 from
its original position after 8 5 in order with other changes to
adapt the interpolated section 8 7 12 (the first four Trumpets) to
its new context.
The remaining dislocations in i-2o 3 are as follows :
2 27c has been restored after 2 26b . See Eng. trans, in loc.
3 8bc has been restored before 3 8a . See Eng. trans, in loc.
7 5c -6 has been restored after y 8 . See vol. i. 207.
n 18h has been restored after n 18b . See vol. i. 295 sq.
n 18 s has been restored after n 18c . See vol. ii. 416, foot
note to Eng. transl. in loc.
i3 5b has been restored after i3 6b . See vol. ii. 419, foot
note to Eng. transl. in loc.
I4 i2-i3 n a s Deen restored after i3 18 . See vol. i. 368 sq.
i6 5b - 7 has been restored after 19*. See vol. ii. 120-123
i6 15 has been restored after 3 3b . See vol. i. 80 sq.
T 714-17 has Deen restored as follows : ry 17 - 16 - H . See vol. ii.
60 sq.
i8 14 23 has been restored as follows: i8 15 - 19 - 2] - 14 - 22a-d.28cd.
22e-h. 23ab. 20. 23^
The most startling of the above dislocations of the text is
that in i8 14 - 23 . How this dislocation arose we cannot determine,
but that the text is dislocated is beyond question. First, we
observe that i8 14 comes in wrongly between i8 13 and i8 15 , and that
both its sense and structure connect it immediately with i8 22 23
and, as an introduction to these verses, which, combined with it
express in due gradation the destruction of everything in &ome
Ix THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
from the greatest luxuries to the barest necessities. Thus
jgu. 22-23 (four stanzas) compose a special dirge over Rome.
Next, i8 20 breaks the close sequence between i8 19 and i8 21 by
introducing an apostrophe to heaven between the descriptive
passages dealing with the ruin of Rome, i8 19 , and the dramatic
action of the angel, i8 21 . But, though it cannot stand after i8 19 ,
it comes in with the most perfect fitness at the close of the dirge
over Rome (i8 14 - 22 23 ), as an appeal to heaven to rejoice over
the doom of Rome an appeal that is immediately answered by
choir after choir from heaven of a mighty multitude of angels, of
the Elders and Cherubim, and of the martyr host in iq 1 4
l6 5bc-7 I9 5-7.
The dislocations in 7 5c 8 n 18 i^b-eb I7 i4-i7 cou \d easily have
arisen. Parallels to such dislocations are to be found in other
books of the Bible and in other documents. Only three other
dislocations remain, but two of these are suggestive. As to i6 15
which is to be restored after 3 3b , it is possible that it was written
on a separate slip of papyrus which got displaced and was
subsequently inserted after the sheet of papyrus ending i6 14 .
However this may be, it cannot possibly have stood originally
after i6 14 , with which it has no connection of any kind. Its
natural place is after 3 3b , and nowhere else.
Now we come to the two interesting dislocations, i4 12 " 13 ,
I7 15 . 1 These two passages appear to have been inserted above
the written columns on the papyrus sheets, the first by the Seer
himself, the second by the editor. The scribe who copied the
original MS incorporated these marginal additions in the wrong
columns. It is noteworthy that i4 12 13 is exactly the same
number of lines from i3 18 that i; 15 is from ly 1 , of which it is a
gloss.
3. Lacunae in the Text. Apart from 2o 4 -22 where it is
impossible to determine what lacunae exist (save in 2i 22 ; see
below) owing to the disorder of the text, there do not appear to
be many in i-2o 3 . There are, however, lacunae, and these are
important. The first consists of a loss of several clauses in i6 10
(see vol. ii. 45-46). The second is a still graver loss after i9 9a .
These lost verses after i9 9a (whose place has been taken by an
1 That I4 12 " 13 (tS5e r) V-JTO^OV^ T&V aylw KT\.) is wholly out of place in a
section that deals with the judgments inflicted on the wicked is clear at a
glance, and that they should be restored at the close of the account of the
persecution of the second Beast, i.e. I3 18 , is at once manifest, when we com
pare the closing words of the persecution of the first Beast, I3 10e (tD5^ {env ^
vwo/j-ovr] . . . T&V a.yiwv}. These words are added for the encouragement and
strengthening of the victims of the two persecutions. Next, it is clear that I7 16
was originally an explanatory marginal gloss on I7 1 . Since it has no connec
tion whatever with its present context, the explanation given above for its
position in its present context seems adequate.
LACUNAE AND DITTOGRAPHS Ixi
interpolation, i.e. ig0b-io modelled on 22 8-9 ) recounted the
destruction of the Parthian kings. Their destruction was
prophesied in ry 14 , and the vision recounting their destruction
should have been given here. In ly 17 - 16 there is a prophecy
of the destruction of Rome : in 18 a vision of this destruction.
In 1414-18-20 ( see a i so j6i3-i4. 16) we have a proleptic vision
of the judgment of the nations by the Son of Man and a
vision of their destruction by the Word of God in I9 11 21
(20 7 10 ). Thus it is clear that a vision dealing with the de
struction of the Parthian hosts by the Lamb and the Saints
(see iy 14 ) should have been recorded in our text. That it
actually did stand in the autograph of the Seer may be reason
ably concluded from ig 13 , where the Word of God is said to be
"clothed with a garment dipped in blood." That this is the
blood of the Parthian hosts follows from any just interpretation
of the text. See vol. ii. 133.
A third lacuna occurs after i8 22a . The context makes the
restoration easy, i.e. ov ^ aKovo-Or} lv <rol In. Again, in 2i 22 ,
where we should have a couplet, but where only the words KCU
TO apviov survive of the second line, we can with great probability
restore the missing words by a comparison of n 19 . These are
rj KL/3(aro<s TTJS 8ia.6r)K-rj<s OLVTTJS. See vol. ii. 170 sq.
4. Dittographs. There are several dittographs, i.e. (a)
I 3 3c.8 =l7 8. () I9 9b =2I 5c =22 6a. (^ ^10 = 22 8b. 9 . (^ 2Q 14b
= 2I 8e .
(a) Both members of the first, i.e. i3 3c - 8 = 178, belong to our
text. See vol. i. 337.
(b) Here practically the same clause (/cat etTrei/ /xot OVTOL ol
Xoyoi TTia-Tol K. aXrjOwoi) is repeated three times. In 2i 5c 22 6a
it is a genuine part of the text. On 2i 5c see note 3 on English
translation, vol. ii. 443, in accordance with which the note in vol.
ii. 203 (ad fin.) sq. is to be corrected. In i9 9b it is manifestly
interpolated (see vol. ii. 128, 203 sq.), probably by the
editor.
(<:) Here 22 8b - 9 is original and ig 10 is an interpolation of the
editor repeated in the main from 22 8 9 but giving to <rw8ovXos
quite a different meaning. See vol. ii. 1 28 sq.
(d) 2i 8e o IO-TLV 6 0ai/aros 6 Scvrepos is original. But in 2o 14b ,
where this phrase also occurs, it is quite meaningless. It
represents the casting of death and Hades (as distinct from their
inhabitants) into the lake of fire as the second death !
Ixii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
VI.
GREEK AND HEBREW SOURCES AND THEIR DATES.
Our author has used sources. Nearly one-fifth of his text
appears to be based on sources, i.e. 7 1 8 n 1 18 12-13 ( I 5 5 " 8 ?)-
17-18. These sources he has adapted to his own purposes, and
in the course of such adaptation has, except in certain details,
transformed their meaning, (a) Sources he found in Hebrew
or Greek, (b) Sources he found in Greek, (c) Sources in
Hebrew.
(a) Chap. 7 1 8 (before 70 A.D.). That there are two sources
here is shown in vol. i. 191 sqq. Whether our author found these
sources already existing in Greek and recast them in his own
diction or translated them directly from the Hebrew is uncertain.
Chap. 7 1 3 . Here " the four winds " (so designated though
not previously mentioned) are not to be let loose till the faithful
are sealed. A pause is enjoined in the course of judgment for
this purpose as in i En 66 1 2 , 67, and in 2 Bar 6 48( i ( i-. The four
winds appear in earlier tradition. See vol. i. 192-193.
Chap. 7 4 8 . From a Jewish or Jewish-Christian source. See
vol. i. 193-194. The "sealing" in our text is also derived from
tradition, but the meaning is wholly transformed from what it
bears in the O.T. and Pss. Sol i5 6 - 10 13 } which later work appears
to have been before our author.
(b) Greek Sources, i.e. sources already existing in Greek, n 1-13
12.* 17-18.
Chap, ii 1 13 (before 70 A.D.). This section had originally
a different meaning and was borrowed by our author from a
source written before 70 A.D. n 1 13 consists- of two earlier frag
ments, both of which presuppose Jerusalem to be still standing
( 1 1 1 - 8 ). The diction, idiom, and order of words differ perceptibly
from that of our author, and they contain certain phrases which
bear a different meaning from that which they bear in our author.
In n 3 13 our author s hand is discernible in the additions n8bc-9a
and the entire recasting of 1 1 7 , so that what stood there originally
cannot be known. In our text the temple in n 1 must be inter
preted not as the actual temple which no longer existed, but as
the spiritual temple, of which all the faithful are constituent
members a figure which our author has already used in 3 12 , and
the words " the measuring of his temple, the altar and those that
worshipped therein," mean in their new context the securing of
* In vol. i. 300-305 I took chapter 12 to be a translation by our author
from a Hebrew source, but subsequent study has obliged me to abandon this
view. See Introd. p. clviii n.
GREEK SOURCES Ixiii
the faithful against the spiritual influences of the demonic and
Satanic powers. But all the ideas in the text do not lend them
selves to such reinterpretation, and the presence of such inexplic
able details is prima fade evidence that the sections in which
they occur are not original creations of our author but are derived
from traditional material. See vol. i. 269-292.
Chap. 12 (before 70 A.D.). In vol. i. 298-299 the meaning
of this chapter in its Christian setting is given. But that this
was not its original meaning, and that it could not have been
written originally by a Christian, is shown in vol. i. 299-300.
A full discussion of the two sources which underlie this chapter
and were translated from Semitic originals but not by our author,
is given in vol. i. 305-314. Our author most probably found
these sources already in a Greek form, and the conclusion
recorded in i. 303 is here withdrawn. These two sources, so
far as they survive in our text, consist of I2 1 5 - 13 " 17 and I2 7 10 - 12 .
These were adapted by our author to their new Christian context
by the addition of i2 6 - n and by certain additions in i2 3 (?), i2 5
(os /xeAAet Troi/xatVetv Travra TO. Wvr] v pa/3So> criS?7pa), I2 9 (6 o<ts
6 updates, 6 KaXov/xevos AcaySoXos. . . . f/SXrjOrj ), I2 10 (KOL f) eoucria
TOV XpLo-rov avrov and TCOV dSeA<oh/ fj/jiwv dislodging a Jewish
phrase), I2 13 (ore ctSev and on /3\rj9r) cis TT/V yyv), I2 17 (TOJJ/
rrjpovvTwv ras evroXas rov Oeov KGU e^ovrwv rrjv fjiaprvpiav T^o-ov).
The expectation expressed in i2 14-16 is a survival of an earlier
time, being found by our author in his source. It referred to or
prophesied the escape of Jewish Christians before 70 A.D. But
the idea of such an escape during the entire sway of the Anti
christ (i2 14 Kaipov /cat /coupons KOL rj/jiLcrv Kaipov) is impossible in
our text, where our author s expectation is that of a martyrdom
of the entire Christian Church. No part of the Church escapes.
Chaps. 17-18 (71-70 A.D.). These chapters, though recast
by our author to serve his own main purpose, preserve incongruous
elements and traces of an earlier date. Thus I7 10 - 11 cannot be
reasonably interpreted of a later time than Vespasian. And yet
our author s additions in I7 8 - n , which refer to the demonic Nero
coming up from the abyss, can only be explained by a Domitianic
date. The sense is confused, but the date is clear. To leave
this passage unaltered was an oversight on the part of our author.
Similarity, i8 4 (see vol. ii. 96 sq.) postulates a Vespasianic date.
These chapters, the greater part of which our author found
in a Greek form, were derived from two Hebrew sources, which
for convenience sake we designate A and B. A consisted
originally of i7 lc - 2 - 3b - 6 - 7 - is. s-io (greater pan) I g2-23 < g ee yoL jj 8 88-89,
94-95- B consisted of i7 n <e reater P art >- 12-13. IT. w. See vol. ii.
59-6o.
Our author has adapted these sources to his own purposes,
Ixiv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
by inserting the following clauses: 17* (KCU rjKQev . . . Seto> o-oi),
3a (/cat a7r?;j/eyKeV /AC ... Trrev/uart), Sc (/cac Kpara SeKa), 6b (Kat CK T.
af/x,aTOS . . . Irjcroi)), 8 (^v Kat OUK . . . VTrayet), and (on rjv . . .
Trapeorai), 9 (aiSe 6 vows 6 e^wv o-o<tav), n (o T^I/ Kat OVK eVrtv), and
(Kat cts dTrwXetav vTrayet), 14 . But the text of ly 11 17 is in disorder.
i7 15 is a gloss (see vol. ii. 72), ly 17 should precede i7 16 , and
i7 14 (our author s addition) should follow immediately on ly 16 .
Hence the right order of the text (see vol. ii. 61) is i; 11 - 13 - *7. ie. i^
After ly 14 our author transferred i7 18 , which originally belonged
to A (see above), to the close of the chapter in order to introduce
chap. 1 8.
Chap. iS 2 " 2 ^" 6 . This chapter, as we have already seen,
belongs to the source A. Our author apparently found it in some
disorder in a Greek form. He has made few changes in it. He
has introduced it by prefixing iS 1 , by inserting i8 20 , and closing
it by i8 23f - 24 . Since i8 20 is an appeal to the heavenly hosts an
appeal that is immediately answered in iQ 1 " 7 , our author would
naturally have placed it at the close of 18 and not where it stands
in the traditional text. i8 20 - 23f - 24 would thus form the close of
this chapter coming from our author s hand and serving to
introduce the theme of ig 1 4 i6 5bc 7 iQ 5 7 .
Since, therefore, i8 20 does not apparently stand where our
author inserted it, it is reasonable to conclude that some of the
great disorder that exists in i8 14 23 arose subsequently to our
author s composition of the work as a whole.
(c) Hebrew Sources. One chapter, i.e. 13, is mainly composed
of translations from three Hebrew sources by our author (see
vol. i. 334-338). To the first source, written by a Pharisaic
Quietist before 70 A.D., is to be traced i3 labd - 2. 4-7* 10. s ee vo \ j e
340-342. To the second source, i3 3c - 8 , of which we find a second
Greek translation from another hand in i7 8 . See vol. i. 337.
To the third, ^"-i**- is-uab. iead-i7a See vol< i 342-344. The
date is probably prior to 70 A.D.
The original meaning of these sources is transformed by their
incorporation into our author s text. He has adapted them to his
own purpose by the insertion of the following clauses : i3 lc (Kat
7rt Ttov .. . . StaS^/xara), 3ab (Kat /xtai/ . . . e^epaTrcu^r/), 6c (TOVS . . .
(TK^j/ovi/Tas), ^ (Kai 806*7; . . . e^yos), 8b ~ 9 (TOV apviov . . . d/covrmTa>),
10c (a>8e . . . aytW), 12bc (TO drjpLov TO TrpwTov ov fOepaTrevOr) . . .
avTov), 14b-15 (cVwTrioi/ . . . aTroKTav&oo-tv), 16 (T. /iiKpovs . . . SovAovs),
17-18
Possibly i5 5 8 is translated from a Hebrew source by our
author. The grounds for this hypothesis are to be found in the
two impossible phrases in i5 5 - 6 . It is remarkable that both these
phrases can be explained by retranslation into Hebrew. See
vol. ii, 37-38. On this hypothesis we should expect the whole
J3OOKS USED BY OUR AUTHOR Ixv
narrative of the Bowls to be likewise a translation from the
Hebrew. But if it is, it is so thoroughly recast that no evidence
for this hypothesis survives.
If we reject this hypothesis, we might assume that XCvov is a
primitive error for Xivovv in 15, and that T^S O-K^V^STOI) /xaprvpiov
was originally a marginal gloss which was derived from Ex. 4o 29 ,
on which our text is based, and was subsequently incorporated
in the text against both the sense and grammar. The editor,
however, was capable of the grossest misconceptions, as we have
been elsewhere : see pp. 1-lv.
VII.
BOOKS OF THE O.T., OF THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA AND OF THE
N.T. USED BY OUR AUTHOR.
i. General statement of our author s dependence on the above
books. Our author makes most use of the prophetical books.
He constantly uses Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel ; also,
but in a less degree, Zechariah, Joel, Amos, and Hosea ; and in a
very minor degree Zephaniah and Habakkuk. Next to the pro
phetical books he is most indebted to the Psalms, slightly to
Proverbs, and still less to Canticles. He possessed the Penta
teuch and makes occasional use of all its books, particularly of
Exodus. Amongst others, that he and his sources probably
drew upon, are Joshua, i and z Samuel, and 2 Kings.
The evidence for the above summary of facts will be found
below in 3-5.
Of the Pseudepigrapha the evidence that our author used the
Testament of Levi, i Enoch, and the Assumption of Moses, is
sufficiently strong; see below, 7. It is not improbable that
he was acquainted with 2 Enoch and the Psalms of Solomon.
See below, 7. But the direct evidence is not so convincing as
the indirect Repeatedly in the commentary that follows it is
shown that without a knowledge of the Pseudepigrapha it would
be impossible to understand our author. As a few proofs of this
fact, see on 4 (the Cherubim), pp. 117-123; 6 3 ("a great
sword"), p. 165; 6 9 (Martyrs = a sacrifice to God, cf. i4 4 ), p.
174, vol. ii. 6 ; 6 9 (the one altar in heaven), p. 172 sqq. ; 6 11 (world
to come to an end when the roll of the martyrs is complete), pp.
177-79 ; (white robes = spiritual bodies), pp. 184-188 and passim.
From an examination of the passages given below in 8,
it follows quite decidedly that our author had the Gospels of
Matthew and Luke before him, i Thessalonians, i and 2 Corin
thians, Colossians (or else the lost Ep. to the Laodiceans, which
presumably was of a kindred character), Ephesians, and possibly
Ixvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
Galatians, i Peter, and James. Our author shows no acquaint
ance with St. Mark.
That our author used Matthew is deducible from the follow
ing facts. In i 7 he has had Matt 24 30 before him, where our
author s combination of Dan 7 13 and Zech i2 10 - 12 occurs already.
Our author derives from Matthew the words Trao-at at <}>v\al r.
y^s, which are not in the O.T. or Versions. Next, a reference to
2 7 shows that it is the Matthaean (or Lucan : cf. 8 8 ) form of the
command, 6 l^wv ovs KT\., Matt u 15 13 etc., that our author was
familiar with. The dependence of 3 3 , i6 15 on Matt 24 42 - 43 - 46 is
obvious at the first glance. 3 5 presupposes both Matt io 32
and the parallel passage in Luke i2 8 . Other passages showing
dependence on Matthew, though not so conclusively, will be
found under i 3d i 16 6 4 n 15 below.
That our author used Luke appears certain, though the
evidence is less conclusive, from a comparison of i 3 with Luke
ii 28 , 3 5 with Luke i2 8 , n 6 with Luke 4 25 , and i8 24 with Luke
ii 50 . Unless we assume our author s acquaintance with the
Little Apocalypse (embodied in Luke 21, Matt 24, Mark 13),
then he is indebted to Luke for his fourth plague, i.e. the pesti
lence, Luke 2 1 11 (Xoiftot). 1
Possibly I3 8 (T. dpviov r. eo^ay/xevou a,7ro /cara/JoA^s /cooy/.ov)
implies an acquaintance with i Pet i 19 - 20 . Compare also i6 19
and i Pet 13 , and i 6 and i Pet 2 9 .
2. John translated directly from the O.T. text. He did not
quote from any Greek Version, though he was often influenced in
his renderings by the LXX and another later Greek Version, a
revised form of the o (i.e. the LXX], which was subsequently
revised and incorporated by Theodotion in his version. Our
author never definitely makes a quotation, though he con
tinually incorporates phrases and clauses of the O.T. The
question naturally arises : Do he and his sources (ii 1 18 12-13.
17-18) derive such phrases and clauses directly from the Hebrew
(or Aramaic), or from o or from the Hebrew combined with o ?
(see 3-5).
An examination of the passages based on the O.T. makes it
clear that our author draws his materials directly from the
Hebrew (or Aramaic) text, and apparently never solely from o or
any other version. 2 And this is no less true of the sources our
1 If, however, our author used Matthew and Luke only and not the Little
Apocalypse, how are we to account for his using ddvaros and not Xot/x.6s?
But if he had the Aramaic document behind the triple tradition in the Synop
tics this would be explicable, since KniD=" death * or " pestilence." If he
had the Little Apocalypse in Aramaic, we should have the explanation of this
and other difficulties.
2 It is important to recognize the results arrived at in 3-6, seeing that
several German scholars have definitely declared that certain classes of O.T.
TWO PRE-CHRISTIAN GREEK VERSIONS OF O.T. Ixvii
author incorporated and edited. But this fact does not exclude
the possibility that our author was acquainted with and at times
guided by o and some other Greek version. The latter clause
is added deliberately, "and some other Greek version."
That our author was influenced in his renderings of O.T.
passages by o may be taken as proved after an examination of
the list of passages given in 4. But in the list of passages
that follow in 5, we discover that our author s renderings
of the Hebrew are closely related to those which appear in
& (i.e. Theodotion), where & differs from o . But since Theodo-
tion lived several decades later than our author, we must assume
with Gwynn (Diet. Christ. JBiog. iv. 974-978) that side by side
with o (preserved in a corrupt form in the Chisian MS of Daniel)
there existed a rival Greek version from pre-Christian times. 1
But Gwynn s hypothesis, although adequate to a certain extent,
is inadequate when confronted with fresh facts that have emerged
in my study of this question. For from 5 we learn that
in i 17b our text agrees not with o but & in Is 48 12 : similarly 3*
with 6 of Is 22 22 and 3 9c with & of Is 6o 14 . Again the quotation
i5 3 4 6 /8ao-iA.ei>s T. e 0va>i/ Tis ov py <f>o(3r)@rj ; agrees word for word
(though differing in case and tense) with & of Jer io 7 , whereas o
is here wholly defective. Finally, i 6 (5 10 ) /facrtXctav tepets is found
in & of Ex ig 6 where o is different. Now one or more of these
might be coincidences, but it is highly improbable that all five are.
Hence we have good grounds for concluding that there existed
either a rival Greek version alongside o from pre-Christian times
or a revised version of o , which was revised afresh by Theodotion
and circulated henceforth under his name. How many books
of the O.T. were so translated afresh cannot be determined.
The above evidence would imply that Isaiah and Jeremiah were
so translated. 2 Possibly all the prophetic books were rendered
passages are directly from the Hebrew and others just as definitely from the
LXX. The greatest offender in this respect is Von Soden (Books of the NT,
372 sq.), who states that " quotations from the O.T. in the Johannine portion
(of Revelation, i.e. I 5 ~7) are constantly made according to the LXX, while
in the Jewish portion (8-22 5 ) the Hebrew text is taken into account." There
is no foundation in fact for this statement.
1 This hypothesis (first suggested by Credner, Beitrage, ii. 261-272) was
practically accepted by Salmon (Introd. p. 547) and by Swete (Introd. to the
O. T. in Greek, p. 48).
Gwynn supports this hypothesis by evidence drawn from I Bar i 15 -2 20 .
Since the date of I 2 ~3 8 is generally accepted as earlier than 80 A.D., and since
numerous passages in i 15 -2 20 are clearly based on 6 and not o of Dan 9 7 " 19 ,
Gwynn (op. cit. 976) rightly infers the existence of a version of Daniel differ
ing from o and of a type closely akin to that which bears.
2 There is, of course, the possibility that our author was using a collection
of Testimonia. But this explanation could not be used in the case of the
passages wherein our author s text shows numerous and very close affinities
to $ . It is noteworthy that the author of the Fourth Gospel never agrees
Ixviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
afresh into Greek and this work incorporated and revised by
Theodotion in his version. But the matter calls for further
investigation.
3. Passages based directly on the Hebrew of the O. T. (or the
Aramaic in Daniet). These are hardly ever literal quotations :
in any case the words carry with them a developed and often
different meaning.
I 7b tfi/ ercu avrbv TTCIS 600aX,udj /rat Zech I2 10 o 6 . eTri^Xetyoi/rcu irpbs
oiTives avrov ^eKevr-rjffav * /ecu ^, avd &v Kanapx^avTO (& . ets
K6\f/ovTai TT avrbv Tracrat at 0uXat dv e^eK^vrrjaav) Kal K6\j/ovTcu ^TT
T. 7775. 2 (>& } avrfo- I2 12 o . /cc^erou i] yrj
Kara 0i>Xas 0i>Xcls.
I 10 yevb[jt,T)v v TTvetifJiaTi . . . iJKOvcra Ezek 3 12 dv^Xaficv fj.e
<Ti<T/ut.ov /j.eyd\ov.
I 13 (I4 14 ) SfjLoiov vibv avdptbirov. Dan 7 13 (o 6 ) ws w6s dvdpuirov.
TroSrjprj. Dan IO 5 D"i3 ^n 1 ?. o 6 . ^vdedv
fivffffLva (9 . paddeiv). Ezek IO 2
renders the same words,
r. /^acrrots ^vrjv Dan io 5
av. Cf. I5 6 where the text ai roO irepLe^dxr^v^ v xpva Kj}. o .
recalls the present. r. c5<r0iV 7repie"o;o7iej/os /3v<raiv({).
4a ^ 5^ /ce0aXr/ auroO ffai al T/)t %es Dan 7 ^ . /cat ^ ^pt^ r. KefiaXrjs avrov
wcrei eptoi/ Ka6ap6v. o . KO.IT.
r. Ke0aX?7$ ai)roD w
ji4b (1^12^ O j (500 a X/iot aurou cus 0X6^ Dan io 6 (o ^ ) ot 60XaX/Aoi ai>rou cocret
7Ti;p6s. Xa/^TrdSes ;ri;p6s.
ot 7r65es auroG 6 uotot xaX/coXt/Sdi aj. Dan io 6 o ^ quite different.
exclusively with (see IQ 37 where it agrees in part), and only a few times
literally with o in 2 l7 =Ps 68 (69) 10 , lO^Ps 81 (82) 6 , i2 13 =Ps 117 (nS) 26 ,
I2 38_ j s c^ 1 , J^-PS 21 (22) 19 . But the author of the Fourth Gospel seldom
quotes even indirectly from the O.T., whereas our author s text shows its
influence directly and indirectly, wherever his subject admits of it.
1 Here our author renders npi as . But this proves nothing ; for
iKKevretv (airoKevrelv or KaraKevTelv} is its normal rendering in the Versions.
o , of course, presupposes npn. Cf. John IQ 37 o^o/rat els dv ^fK^vT^av.
2 The words Ktyovrcu. CTT avrbv Tracrcu al <f>v\ai T. 777? agree exactly
with Matt 24 30 save that the latter omits tir avrov. Now, since Matt 24 30
combines Zech I2 10 and Dan 7 18 just as our author does in I 7 , it is highly
probable that our author was acquainted with Matt 24^, or that our author
and Matt 24 30 drew here upon an independent source i.e. a collection of
O.T. passages relating to the Messiah. I have placed I 7a iSov ep^erat ^terd
r. ve0eXw under 5, but possibly it ought to be under 3, as I 7h) . In Zech 12
the people mourn for him that is cut off, whereas in our text and in Matt 24 30
they mourn for themselves. KOTrrecrflcu eTr avr6v= " mourn in regard to
him."
3 Our author here diverges greatly from 6 , and here alone approximates to o
against 6 in Dan. , though not necessarily presupposing a knowledge of o . Our
text and o , however, really point to the same Aramaic npj -nn inyD HPNT "lypi.
This appears to have been the original text "And the hair of his head
was spotless as white wool."
PASSAGES BASED DIRECTLY ON HEBREW OF O.T. Ixix
5 (196) i] <j>(t)vt] atfrou ws
vSarwv TroXXwj .
(o )
. . . <Ja. Cf. 4***19*.
I 17 j-Trecra irpbs r. ir6da$ avrov a>s
i>Kp6s Kal f-0r)Kev r. Se^iav avrov
elfil e/s T. al&vas r. al&vwv.
Kal iropvevvai.
2 18 rote 6(j>0a\fJi.ovs /crX. See I 14
above.
2^ 3 E7c6 efyu 6 epavv&v vecppovs Kal
Kapdias, Kal Swcro; v/juv efcdary /caret
TO, Zpya V/JL&V.
3 i)a ijZovcriv Kal irpoffKvvfjcrovcriv Ivw-rrtov
3 17 7r\oi5(Tt6s et/it Kal
tav
Ezek
But our text is a literal rendering
of the Hebrew n 31 D D *?ipD iSip.
Dan io 6 is based on Ezek 43 2 but
only remotely, and is not followed
by our author. Jerome remarks
how Rev I 15 supports the Mass.
here.
Is 49 2 ZdrjKev r. or6yita JJ.QV ws fj,dxaipav
d^elav.
Dan io 9 - 10 - 12 Heb. = " Then was I
fallen into a deep sleep on my face.
. . . And behold a hand touched
me. . . . And he said unto me,
Fear not." (Greek Versions very
different from our text).
Dan 4 31 (6 ) I2 7 , I Enoch 5 1
Num 25 1 " 2 4peJ3T)\wdri 6 Xads
. . . Kal tyayev.
Jer I7 10 "Ey& Ktipios trafav Kapdlas
Kal doKi/u.dfa} t>e<ppoijs, roO dovvat
(nn 1 ?) e/cd(rr({j /caret r. odotis ai)roG. 2
Is 6o 14 o . TropefoovTai Trpos (r^. ^ .
iropevffovTai irpbs <r, Kal TrpoffKvvrj-
ffovffiv irl T. txvij T&V TroScDy ffov :
cf. 45 14 -
Though this construction occurs in
the LXX it is comparatively rare
and represents a special Hebrew
phrase : see vol. i. 289 sq., 336.
Hos I2 9 . See vol. i. 96.
Prov 3 11 - 12 fjii] 6\iy<Jbpei. Tratdelas Kvptou
. . . dv yap dyairy Ktipios
3 20 ^ffrrjKa irl r. Ovpav Kal Kpovw av Cant 5 2 Kpovei tirl r. dvpav.
Dan 7 6 birlffu roirrou Ide&povv Kal
IdoTLi. o . Kal ftera ravra tdeupovv.
1 Based on the Hebrew of Is 6o 14 . The clause omitted by o is supplied
by , but as we see in a different form. See on I5 4 below under 4, where a
closely related text is derived from Ps 85 (86) 9 .
2 Alone in the O.T. does Jer I7 10 combine the two ideas in our text.
Hence correct my note in vol. i. 72. Jeremiah also uses jm in the rather
unusual meaning of "to requite." With the second line cf. also Prov 24 12
aTroStSwcriv (3 E>n) e/cdtrry Kara T. Zpya avrov : Ps 61 (62) 13 . Moulton and
Milligan, Voc. of GT, p. 160, try to explain this meaning of 8i86vai by a
quotation: X/tfy 8tdwKev ry viij} fj,ov (sc. TrX-riyfiv) = " he gave it him with
a stick." This is not a parallel. Our text involves no ellipse. It is a
Hebraism. Our author s use of 8i86vai here = "to requite" is due
wholly to Jer I7 10 ; for in 22 12 he naturally uses &iro8i86vai in this sense
( = an#n or n^) as in Prov 24 12 , Ps 6i 13 .
3 See note in vol. i. 99. 3 19 might be classed under 4.
Ixx
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
dffrpatral K
Kal fipovral.
K1JK\<p T. 0p6l>OV Te<T(Tpa fad ye/HOVTa
rd Trptxr&TTOV cos dvdp&irov . . .
dfj-oiov aery.
4 8a P /ca#
4 8c X^yopres "A.yios iiyios dyios tctipios 6
debs 6 iravTOKparcop. 1
5 1 eirl T. Se^iav . . . jSt/SXW yeypafj,-
fdvov evwdev Kal 6irLcr6ev t
5 6 (5 12
6<p8a\/j.obs evrd, of ... dTrecrraX-
/i^i/oi (DBtsiD) et s irda-av T. yijv.
^s /cal 7Xwo"o"77S /cai Xaou /cai
pvptddes
X
6 2 8 IfTTTTOS XcU/f6s . . . tTTTTOS TTVpp6s
. . . ITTTTOS /x^Xas . .
6 18 ol d<rr^pes T. ovpavov Zirevav . .
ws O-U/CT} jSdXXet T. <5X^^ois aurr^s.
6 15 ?Kpv\l/av eavTofa els T.
. trerpas T. 6peuv.
Kal
6 16 /cal \eyovfftv T. ope<ru> Kal T. irer-
pais Heffare e<fi r)/j.ds Kal Kpv\l/are
fads dirb Trpoa-wTrov r. Kadrjfdvov
KT\. Contrast Luke 23 80 which is
drawn from o .
6 17 1)\6ev 77 r7/A^pa 77 /j.eyd\r) r.
uiv, Kal rls dtvarai <rTa0Tjvai ;
ywvlas r. 7775.
7 1 (2O 8 ) ^?rl r.
Ex I9 16 kyLvovro 0wi>cu Kal darpairai.
See vol. i. 116. Cf. Jub2 2 0775X01
<f)WvS>v fipovT&v Kal dcrrpairuiv.
Ezek I 5 ev T. [<?< cbs 6ytcoiWjU.a TC<T-
adpwv ffluv. I 38
KVK\66ev. See vol. i. 118.
Ezek i 10 77 o/Aoluffis ... 77
dvdpUTTOV . . . \toVTOS . . ,
. . . derou.
Is 6 2 Trrepvyes ry evl Kal If Trrepvyes
Ty evi (iriK^ D 3JD VV D 3J3 ^^.
Is 6 3 e\eyov "Ayios dytos dytos
crafia&d.
Ezek 2 9 * 10 ev avrrj (i.e.
fy ra Zfj,irpoffdev Kal ra
Is 29 11 TOV /BiftXlov TOV e<r(ppayi<r-
fjitvov : Dan 8 26 .
Is 53 7 d>s irpbfiarov tirl <r<payT]v fjx^ 7 )
Kal el 1 ? djj.vbs.
Zech 4 10 evrrd oSroi 6(f)6a\[ioL eifftv ol
^Trt/SXeTTOvres ^?rt Trao-af r. 7^.
From an older Aramaic text of
Daniel than that preserved in the
Canon. See vol. i. 147 sq.
Dan 7 10 o 6
From Zech I 8 6 1 8 . Our author has
not used the Greek Versions but the
Hebrew freely for his own purposes.
See vol. i. 161 sq.
Is 34 4 o . irdvra T. affrpa Trecremu
. . . cos TriTrret 0i;XXa d?r6 <TUK^S.
Our text is independent of the o
here, but like o and a presuppose
^IS (ireaeiTai) instead of the Mass.
*y.
Is 2 10 - 19 elff&Oere els r. Ti^rpas /cai
KpiJTrreffde . . . Kal rd %et/307roi7;ra
. . . elveveyKavres ds T. airrjKaia.
See vol. i. 182.
Hos IO 8 Kal dpovaiv r. ope<riv KaXu^are
i)fj.ds, Kal T. fiovvol s Il^crare <[>
T?/ias. Is 2 10 Kpinrrecrde eh r. yijv
dirb Trpcxrwirov r. (pofiov Kvpiov.
Joel 2 11 /j.eyd\fj fat pa T. Kvpiov . . .
Kal ris e<TTai iKavbs avrrj (U7*3*) ;
2 31b Trptv AtfetV fatpav KvpLov T.
/j,eyd\7)j>. Nah I 6 dTrd irpoauirov
6/57175 atfrou T^S UTTocTTTjo-erai (Toy).
Ezek 7 2 ^?ri r. r^a-<ra/?as irrtpvyas
(niB33) r. 7775.
1 On the critical importance of this rendering, 6 0e6s 6 iravTOKpdrtap, see
vol. ii., English translation, footnote on I 8 . This epithet, 6 TravTOKpdTwp, is
not found in any version of Isaiah.
PASSAGES BASED DIRECTLY ON HEBREW OF O.T. Ixxi
7 3 (9 4 I4 1 22 4 ) a%pi a^payiawfj-ev . . . Ezek 9 4 56s cryfjt.e iov tirl r.
T.
---/ -r> Q < / L\
7 T) (rwTtjpla T. 6eip. Ps 3 "? Kvpiov T) ffUTTjpla (nywn mn 1 ?).
7 16 - 17 ov ireivdffovffiv en. ovde 8i\j/r]- Is 49 10 . See vol. i. 216.
(TOVCTIV Tl, KT\.
7 17 (2 1 4 ) 4^a\et^i . . . irav ddKpvov Is 2$ 8 d<pei\ev . . . irav Sdxpvov dirb
K T. 6<pda\iJ.(it)v avr&v. iravrbs TrpocrdoTrov nj?DT . . . nno)
[8 2 tv&iriov r. 0eov eaTTj/caeriy.] [A common Hebrew expression.]
8 3 effrdd-ri lirl r. 6vffia<rTriptov. Amos 9 1 T. Kvpiov tyeffrwra eirl T.
QvffiaffTrjpiov.
Ezek 8 11 TJ dr/xis T.
dvefiaivev.
[8 7 %dXaf"a ^al irvp fj.e/j,t.y/j^va.] [Ex 9 24 (see i. 233).]
. . . T. BdvaTOv Kal ov Job 3 21 ot dfteipovTai T. dwdrov Kal
/AT) evpuffiv avr6v. ov Tvyxdvovcriv.
9 7 TO, 6fjLotwfJ.aTa T. aKpidcov o/j,oia Joel 2 4 * 5 ws 8pa<ris iiriruv i) 8pa<ris
/TTTrots ijTOi/j.ao fji.evois els ir6\/j.ov. avrdov . . . iraparao O dfJi.evos els
iroXefjiov (i. 244).
9 8 ol 6S6vres avrCbv us \e6vTUV. Joel I 6 (i. 245).
9 9 d>b}VY) ctpjudrwj Lirirwv ... Tpeydj - Joel 2 4 "^ (i. 245).
T(t)V.
9 20 ovre fiXeireiv . . . of re aKoveiv 1 Ps H3 13 - 15 (H5 5 " 7 ) ou/c fyovrai . . .
ovre Trepnrareiv (or under 4). Kal OVK dKov<rovTat . . . Kal ov
IO 1 ol ir68es atirov us <rrv\oi Trvp6s. Dan IO 6 (& . rd GK^Kij. o . ol Tr65es).
ev T V X ei Pt airrov J3ij3\apldi.oi>. Ezek 2 9 tv airy (i.t
IO 2 Sxrirep \ewv fivKarai. Hos II 10 u?s \<av
IO 5 * 6 7?/>e 2 r. xeZ/m ayrou r. dej-Ldv els Dan I2 7 (^ o ) vif/wcrev r. Se^tdv avrov
r. ovpavbv Kal &fj.ocret> ev T. f&vri els ... (>o )esr. ovpavbv Kal tipocrev
T. ai&vas. ev T. &vTi (r. ffivra els o ) T. ai&va.
!O 6b 8s fKTicrev 3 r. ovpavbv Kal r. ev Ex 2O 11 o f \ eiroiyirev (rt vy) Kvptos r.
avT< Kal T. yrjv Kal r. ev avT-f} Kal r. ovp. Kal T. yijv Kal irdvra rd iv
6d\a<T(rav Kal r. ev avrfj. See on en/rots : Neh 9 6 .
i4 7 under II.
IO 7 rb lAVffTTjpiov T. deov, ws evrjy- Amos 3 7 edv /AT) diroK.aXv ty Q jraidelav
ye\urev T. eavrov SouXous r. Trpo<prj- ( = 1D1D corrupt for mo=r. /SofXr)^
ras. ai^roO and fj.vffr^pi.ov in our text)
irpbs T. 8ov\ovs avrov T.
IO 9 rd ptp\ttpldiov Kal \eyet /AOI . . . Ezek 3 1 - 3 (i. 267-268).
1 But Dan 5 23 was doubtless in the mind of our author : 6 . Beovs . . . ot ot
P\irovcrij Kal ot O&K aKotiovo iv, seeing that the preceding words in our author,
rd et SwXa r. xpucra Kal r. dpyvpa, KT\., are based on Dan 5 28 .
2 Both o and 6 read v\f/wcrei>, but o reads T. faJfra els r. al&va 0e6v instead
of the last five words in 6 . atpew is the usual rendering of N?J in the phrase
v NBM, but Daniel has here D in.
3 Our author uses KT^CLV as a rendering of n tyy, but none of the O.T.
versions do so. In I4 7 he uses iroieiv the usual rendering. Hence I4 7 is
given under 4. Observe that o > Kal r. 0dX.
4 The idea first suggested by Ezekiel is reproduced in the Pss. Solomon
and the Little Apocalypse in the Synoptics. But in our text the idea is
wholly transformed : see vol. i. 194 sqq. While the Pss. Solomon use o-rjfj.e iov
(i.e. in) our author uses vcppayls (i.e. Dnin). See later (p. Ixxxv) on this verse
in connection with Eph 4 30 ,
Ixxii
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
II 2 fArjvas Ttffaep&KOVTO. /cat dvo.
1 I 4 al dvo ACUCU Kal al dvo \vxviai al
r. Kvplov r. yrjs earOrres.
II 5 irvp tKiropeverai K r. ffr6/j.aTos
r. dvafiatvov
avr&v teal
II 7 (I3 1 I7 8 ) r. 077,
CK T. dj3v<rcrov.
II 7 (I3 7 ) Tronjo-ei /in
Kal vncfiffd avrovs.
II 15 T. KVptOV TJH&V Kal T. X/3KTTOU
avrov, Kal /3a<nXeu<m eis r. at wvas
r. aiwvwv.
12 3 ^x a>1 Kepara 6eKa.
12 4 crt;/>ei r. rpirov T. darepuv T.
ovpavov Kal ZjBaXev avrovs els r. yijv.
12 5 erexev vlbv, Aparev.
I2 8 ovdt r67roj evfdr] ainruv.
I2 9 6 o0is ... 6
I3 2 r6 drjpiov . . . 8/j.oiov irapSd\i
ws &PKOV ...<!>$..
TTotTjcrcu ir6\e/Jiov fj.era r. ayLwv Kal
viKrjeai avrofa. See above under
1 1 7 . Here our text agrees closely
with .
I3 8 r. dpviov r. cr<t>ay/j.vov.
I3
rts ets aixfJi.a\w<rlai>, | eJs
* | ef ns ^v
t | f ai/r^" t ^
ip-g dTroKTavdTjvai. Our author
combines the first two clauses in
the Hebrew.
I4 2 (frwvrjv ... (is (puvty vdaruv iro\
Xuv. See on I 15 above.
I4 5 /cai ^ ry <rr6/iari avruv of>x
I4 8 Ba/SiAwi . . . ^ K r. ofvoy [T.
^u/ioD] r. iropveias avrijs veirbriKev
travra r. ttfj/i;. See on i8 3 below.
Dan 72* I2 7 (i. 279).
Zech 4 2 Xuxvfa xpvrf 4 3 ^^ Aatat.
4 14 irapeffT-fjKaffiv Kvpty irda-j/s r.
7^s.
2 Sam 22 9 Trvp K r. (rr6/u<rros aiJrou
Cf. Jer 5 14 dedtoKa r.
/xou eis r. <yr6/j.a <rov irvp
. . . /fed /cara^aYerat.
Dan 7 3 6^ . r^crcre/aa 6^77pta . . . dvtfiaivev
K r. flaXao o Tjs.
Dan 7 21 ^ . ^irolei Tr6\efj.ov /ierct T.
Kal ttrxvffev Tpos auroi/s. o
cvvLffrdfJifvov irpbs r. a7t ous Kal
Tpoirov/j.evov avrovs.
Ps 2 2 Kara r. Kvpiov Kal Kara r.
XptoToO ayrou. 9 s7 ( io 16 ) @a<rt\ev<rfi
Kvpios els T. al&va Kal ets r. aluiva r.
aiuivos.
Dan 7 7 ^ K^para d^Ka aury.
Dan 8 10 (0 ) ^Treo-ej/ (eppdxdrj, o ) tirl T.
?r6 r. dwd/mecos r. ovpavov Kal
Is 66 7 ZTCKCV apcrev (Mass. "OT p).
Dan 2 s5 (0 ) r6iros oi>x evpeQrj avrois.
This clause is missing in o .
Gen 3 13 6 o<pis r)TrdTr)<rev fj.f.
Dan 7 6 o . 6-rjplov u<rel irdpSaXis (o .
irdpSaXii ) . . . 7 5 8fj.oioi> apK($ (o .
6not<t)<rii> fyov &PKOV) . . . J 4 uael
\taiva.
Dan 7 21 .
Dan I2 1 . 6 yey pap/Afros VT.
Ps 68 (69 J 29 K /St ^Xou fwi/rwy.
Is 53 7 <^s irpdftarov eirl (rcpay^v.
Jer I5 2 Scroi e/s ddvarov, els ddvarov
Kal 8aoi els fj-dxaipav, els ftdxaipav
. . . Kal CHTOI els alxf^aXucriav, els
alxv-aXwlav. Cf. also 50 (43 ) u
where the same Hebrew words are
rendered for the most part by
different Greek words.
Zeph 3 13 ov Xa\T]<rovffLV /j-drata, Kal
ov /J.T] evpedrj ev rt^ rr6/x.ari avr&v
y\C)ffffa So\ta. The Seer s words
are a compression of the last four
words of the Hebrew, no mr K^
D.TB3 N^D N^l.
Is 2 1 9 o . TreTTTWKev, TreirruKev (B).
So also d .
PASSAGES BASED DIRECTLY ON HEBREW OF O.T. Ixxiii
W irlcTat, K r. otvov rov ffvpov r.
faov T. KeKepaff/a^vov dicpdrov v r.
. 6/37175 avTov.
I4 14 tiri T. ve<p\r]v Ka.d-riiJ.evov. See
i 7 * in 5 below.
[14 * Ttp^ov TO 8p&ravov <rov /cat
, QTI ?i\dev j\ wpo depicrat, OTI
6 0eptcriJ.bs rijs 7*7*.]
I4 18 v^fitl/ov crov T. Sp^iravov TO 6v,
Kai TpiryrjG ov r. f36rpvas r. dju.ire\ov
r. 7175, on iJK/j.acrav a i
KCLI 0ai//ta<rra r. Ip7a <rov.
3 Sixaiai icai d\T]0i.vai ai odoi croi 1
(cL i6 7 I9 2 ).
ov1: 2 But
= w, which should here have been
rendered fiveffwov. See vol. ii. 38.
vepl T. ar-r]Qt] ^"wvos
See on I 13 above.
. . xal
as KO.TCVOV .
ovSely 8vra.TO flcreXQeir etj r.
Is 5 1 17
Joel 3
OTI
toOera ^ir x L P*
T. dvfJLOV O.VTOV.
ronfjpiov v X 1 P* fvp
Ov irX^pes /ce/)d<r/iOTo?
(4) 13
<vpiov T.
Ps 74
iov, olvov
3
Joel 3 (4) 13 . See preceding passage.
rms : o
ff . \rjVOV
Lam I 15 o. XT/yoy fird-rrjaev
Ps no (in) 2 ne-yd\a T. 1/370
138 (I39) 14 &avpdtria T. tpya <rov
Ps 144 (I45) 17 Siicaioi tiptoe fr
T. 65ois CLVTOV. 118 (lip) 131
at 65oi crou a
Dan io 5 ^ .
/caro-
Is 6 4 6 otxos
Ex
ets r. aKijvrjv T. fiaprvpiov
i So^T/S KVptOV
l6 2
T.
TOVTJpbv TTl Ex 9* &y4vfTO lA/fT/ . . . ^F T.
dvdpUTTOlS. DeUt 28 M f\Kl TOVTJpq.
1 Just as the interpolation I4 15 refers only to the harvest of judgment-
idea which is not used metaphorically by our author (see ii. 19, 20 sqq.) so
I4 18 refers only, and rightly, to the vintage of judgment.
2 This tracing of 15^ to Dan io 3 rests on the supposition that Xi 0oi is a
corruption of \tvov. But the use of this word is questionable in itself, and our
author does not use it, but jSva-cnvos. See vol. ii. 38.
3 In Ps 75 9 otvov d/cpdrou is a rendering of ten j where the Mass, punctu
ates differently. Cf. Jer 32 l (25 1S ) where we find r. otvov r. djcpdrou. The two
terms are brought together in Pss. Sol 8 13 eittpaa-ev . . . OLVOV dxpdTov. By our
author, o and Pss. Sol icrr is taken as = " unmixed wine," but it is pointed
Ten and rendered "(which) foams" by modern scholars.
In i^ib 19 the cup is God s cup of judgment, whereas in i; 4 iS 6 (sources)
the cup is in the hand of Babylon. The former refers to God s judgments,
the latter to Babylon s corrupting of the world.
4 The Mass. Tsp = depicr/jLos, whereas o presupposes TSX These words
are confused in Jer 48*- where some MSS read one and some the other.
Possibly Tsp in Is id 9 is also corrupt for -m ( = o ). Thus in our text I4 15
follows the Mass. Tap. But Vza is only used here in O.T. of the ripening of
grain, if indeed it is so used. In Gen 4O 10 it is used of vines, and so possibly
it should be here. Thus Tsp would be corrupt for TSS, and Joel 4 13 would
rightly relate only to the vintage (so R.V. in marg.), just as in I4 18 of our
text.
Ixxiv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
16 3 Ttao-a \J/VXT} ffc^s. Gen I 21 Traaav
16 4 ^x V T <pt-d\tjv avrov els T. Ex 7 20 ^ara^ev TO VS&p . . . /cat
7rora/toi)s . . . /cat eytvovTQ afyta. /iere/SaXei (but Mass. ^En?. tytvfTo)
irav TO v8b)p . . . eis al/Jia.
i6 7 dXrjdival Kal 5i/caiai at Kplcreis vov. Ps 18 (I9) 20 . See on I9 2 below.
16 18 otos OVK yvero d<j> 06 avdpwiroi Dan I2 1 # . o t a 01) y^yovev d0 r^s
tytvovTO wl r. 777$. yeyevrjTai edvos tv Ty 777 (^?ri r. 777$,
AK). 1
16 19 dovvai avrr) T. TTOTT^PIOV r. oiVour. Jer 32 1 (25 16 ) AdjSe r. iroTTjpiov T. oivov
dv/j-ov T. dpytjs avrov. r. d/c/>drou. See on I4 10 above.
Jer 28 (5l) 13 /caratr/CTjyoOj ras ( = n3DB>
i, Q) ^0 vdacrc TroXXors.
7775 TrdVats r. /iiacrtXeiats . . . r.
^fj.d6ff6rjaav ol KaToiKovvTes T. yijv. Jer 28 (5l) 7 iroT-qpiov . . . RafivXuv
17 a.ir7]veyK^v /ie . . . tv
See 2 1 10 below.
I7 4 7roT77ptov xp vcr v" & T X L pi ai)r77S. Jer 28 (5l) 7 iroTTjpiov xpfcrouf . . . v
Xetpi Kvpiov.
I7 8 ytypaiTTai . . . tiri r6 fiifi\iov rys
fai)s. See I3 8 above.
a7r6 KaTa(3o\Tjs KOfff^ov. See I3 8
above.
ri T. trdpvr\v Kal yprjud)- Ezek 23 29 Troi rjcrova iv tv troi ^p ftlffei
TTOLrjcrova iv avTyv Kal yv/JLvrjv. Kal
iS 1 77 77^ tfywrlaQ t] in r. 6^775 ai)rou. Ezek 43 2 77 777
i8 2 gireffeit %Tre<rev, KT\. See I4 8
above.
<?7eVero KaTOiKyrripiov 8ai[j,ovi<i)v. Is I3 21 Possibly a combination of
D vyb . . . UDtyi or based on
I Bar 4 s5 KaToiK.r)dr)<TTai virb Sai-
l8 3 ^/c r. ofvou r. iropveias avTijs Treirb- Jer 28 (5l) 7 ?ror77/3toy xpucrou*
Ti/cev Trd^ra r. ^^77. This is with- . . . /j.cdixrKOJ Trdcrav r. 77^^. a7r6 r.
out doubt the original reading and ofoou ai5T77s tirlovav Wvt\. 32 1 (25 1B )
explains the later corruptions. See Xd/3e r. TTOT^PLOV r. otVou . . . Kal
148 172. iroTtets Trdira r. Zdvi). See note on
ii. 14.
1 8 3 ol paviXeis r. yrjs ^ter avrfjs tirbp-
vevaav. See 1 7 2 above.
18 4 e&Xdare ft- avrrjs 6 Xa6s /J.QV. Jer 5 1 45 Heb. Dy HDinD IKS. > o .
J<
18 5 e Ko\\rj6rj<rav afrrrjs al dftapriai Jer 28 (5l) 9 ijyyiKfv (yi3) e/s ovpav6v.
&xpi T. ovpavov.
18 6 diroSoTe avrrj us Kal avTT) aTrtduKev. Ps 136 (l37) 8 d^raTroSaxret crot ... 6
v Ttf 7TOT77pt y y tittpaaev. See above on I4 10 .
l8 7 _Srt tv r. Kapola avTryi \tyei 6Yt Is 47 7 " 8 elTras Ets r. aftDva
/SatrtXtcrcra, /cat x~HP a OUK apxovffa . . . TJ \yov<ra v Kapftla
trtvdos ov firj tdu). airr^s . . . oti KadiCj
bptyaveiav.
1 Our text and 6 agree in adding the last three words tirl T, 7775 and v r.
777. I am inclined to infer the existence of p3 in the Hebrew text of
Dan I2 1 in the first cent. A.D.
PASSAGES BASED DIRECTLY ON HEBREW OF O.T. Ixxv
i8 9 ol fiacriXeis r. 7775 ol /*er aur^s See I7 2 i8 3 above.
i8 13 \f/vxds dvdp&irwv. Ezek 27 13 e*
l8 18 ri s ouoia r. ir6\ei r. jueydXri. Ezek 27 32 . rts &&lt;nrep Ttpos;
iS^^/SaXo? "xpvv eirlr. /ce0aXds ai)rcDf , Ezek 27 30 ^TriOrjaovcriv eVi r.
avr&v yriv.
Ezek 27 KeKpd^ovrai.
. . o& //,77 Ezek 26 13 77 (puvrj r. if/aXrTjplui aov ou
/mr) aKOvvdrj ert.
ptf/i- Jer 25 10 (puvrjv vviJ,<plov Kai (f>wv}]v
7) vi5/i077s, *j* 6o~fJL7]v /nijpov "J* /cat 0cDs
it 0u)s Xi/x^of. (Here <pwvr\ n,ti\ov in
Apoc. is right = D m ^ip).
[iS 230 ol f^iropol ffov Tjaav ol /j,eyia- Is 23 8 ot euiropoi avrrjs ev
raves r. 717?.] T. 7775.
I9 2 d\f]6Lval Kai 5^/catat al Kplffeis Ps 18 (l9) 10 rd Kpipara KVf.
avrov. See I5 3 l6 7 above. ediKaiwiJ.eva eirl rb avr6
nn* ipn^ no*), Ps 118 (ng) 75 - 137 .
I9 4 A/iTTX AXX77Xowd. Ps 105 (lo6) 48 yevoiro.
19^ U)S <p(3)VT\V H> )(\OV TToXXoO . . . COS Dan IO^ 6 , (pWVT] 8 Y\OV (o . 0.
<f)i>)i>T]v uSdrwy TroXXcD//. See I 15 6opv(3ov).
above.
I9 6 7 efiacriXevaev /ci^ptos . . . x a ^ w A tej/ Ps 96 (97) 1 6 /ci;ptos
/cat dya\\LWfJiev. dyaXXiafferai 77 77^,
19 11 elSoi r. obpavbv Tji^etfy/Jievov, Kai Ezek I 1 rjvolxOycrav ol ovpavot,
t 5oi5. el8ov.
ef dtKaioffvvr) KpLvei. Is II 4 p^^D tiSJB i. o presupposes a
different text Kpivelraireiv<f Kpicriv.
19 12 ol 5 6<j>6aX/jiol atrov, /crX. See I 14
2 18 above.
I9 1B ^/c r. o"r6/iaros auroO eKiropeverat
po/Ji(j>aia 6eia. 1 Cf. I 16 .
tVa ^v atfrij Trard^Tj rd ^^^77. Is 1 1 4 7rardet 77^* r. X6yy r. (rr6/taros
a^rou.
oiftave? avTotts ev pdfBSq Ps 2 9 iroiuaveis auroi>s ^/ pdSSw atd-noa.
Cf. 2 s7 I2 5 . This line
will be treated under 4.
irareiT. Xyvbv r. otvov r. 0u/zou . . . r. Is 63 3 . For diction, cf. Lam I 16 ,
^eou. See on I4 20 above.
Tratrt r. dpveots . . . Ezek 39 4 . See ii. 138.
els r. Seiirvov . . .
r. 6eov. 18 Iva 00777x6 <rdpfcas
/3a<TiX(j)v . . . /cat o*dp/cas Iff^ypCov.
I9 21 irdvra r. 8pvea exopTdffdycrav eK r. Ezek 39 4 rd 6^77 rd /xerd <rou doOri-
ffapKwv avr&v. ffovraL etj TrXrjOr) opveuv . . . /cara-
Ppudrjitai. 39 20 /cai ^fj-irXtjcrdria-effde.
2O 4 eZSov 6p6i>ovs Kai eKadurav ITT Dan 7 9 ^ . tdeupovv ?ws Srou 6p6voi
atirovs Kai /cpi /xa d6di) ai/rots. eredfjcrav. 7 2G r6 Kpirr/piov ^Kddicrev,
7 s2 TO Kptfj,a (r. Kplcnv o }
(+T. o ) dyiois (+r. o ) vif/larov.
1 Cf. Heb. 4 12 6 X670S roD 0eoO . . . ro/xwrepos i>7rp iracrav
2 These ideas of smiting the Gentiles with the word of His mouth (Is n 4 )
and of breaking them in pieces like potter s vessels (Ps 2 9 ) have already been
combined in Pss. Sol I7 26 27 - 39 .
Ixxvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
20 11 eWov 0p6voi> . . . Kal r. Ka0-r)- Dan 7 9 o . e/cd^ro ... 6 0p6vos
fjtevov. avrov >o .
20 12 8tB\la -fivolx0Tl(rav. Dan 7 10 o . 8lB\c
20 12 dXXo BtB\Lov 7)voLx0r), 6 ianv r. Ps 68 (69) 29 BlB\ov 61
21* i) ffKyvy T. 0eov ftera r. dv0pwTrwv Ezek 37 27 , Lev 26 11 la . See ii. 207.
Kal <rKT)v<i)<Tt /ter avr&v Kal avrol
Xads aurou eVovrai.
2 1 4 ^a\i\l/fi irdv ddKpvov. See 7 17
above.
2 1 4 " 6 rd irpura airrj\dav . . . LSov Is 43 18 " 19 fJ-T] fivrj/move^ere ra
Katvd TTOttD. Kal rd dpxata
idou y& TrotcD /catvd. See ii. 203.
21 6 ry St^ tDi rt . . . 5to<ra> ^/c . . . r. Is 55 1 ot Sti/ cDi res, iropeveade 4q
vdaros r. fw^s dwpedv (22 17 ). /cat 6 o*ot ^17; ^X ere dpyvpiov
dyopdffare.
2 1 7 ^(ro/xai aury ^eos /fat auros carat 2 Sam 7 14 ^7(b ^(ro/xai aury ei s
yuot it6s. /cat ai;r6s larat /uu ets uicij .
2 1 10 dinfiveyK^v /AC ^v TrvetifjtaTi 4iri Ezek 4O 1 " 2 -fjyaytv fj,e v opdaet 0eov
6pos . . . v\l/Tf]\6v. Cf. I7 3 above. . . . /fat ZdrjKtv p,e tir 8pos v\f/rj\6v
(naa nn SK jn j 1 ! . . . wan).
. T. SwdeKa (pv\&v Ezek 48 31 at TruXat r. 7r6Xea>s ^TT
2I^ 3 aTro dvaroX^s 6v6p.a<rtv (frvKCjv r. lo pa^X* TruXat
TTuXwi esrpets /cal aTro jSoppa TruXwj es rpets Trpos Boppav. 48 3 -" 34 Kal rd
rpe?s, /crX. ?r/)6s d^aroXas . . . Tr^Xat rpets /crX.
2 1 18 T; ^v5c6/tr;o-is T. re%oi>s aurf}s Is 54 12 #770-0; r.
faaTris.
2 1 19 6 0efj.t\io$ ... 6 Seirrepos o-d7r- Is 54 11 rd
</>eipos.
2 1 23 (22 5 ) T/ 7r6"Xis ou xpeta?/ ex^t T. Is 6o 19 ou/f ^crrat (rot en 6 7^X10$ e/s
TjXtou ou5 r. o-eX?7i 77S iVa (ftalvwffLv 0ws 77/t^pas ou5^ dfaroXTj o"eX77i 77S
aurTj, 77 7ap 56^a r. #eou ^(puTLcrev 0wrte? o^ou r. vtiKra, dXX ecrrat . . .
2 1 24 /cat TreptTrarTjo-ouo ti rd e flj T; 5td r. Is 6o 3 /cat Tropeixrovrat . . . r< 0a>rt
0wrds aur77S /fat o2 /SaatXets r. 7775 aou . . . etfpT/. 6o u al irtiXat <rou
<ptpov<nv 1 r. d6av avr&v ... ... 7/yitepas /cal vu/cr6s ou K\et<T0-/j-
2 1 25 /fat oi TTuXwi es aurTjs ou /*7j /fXeto"- o oj rai, elcrayayeiv Trpds ae duvafuv
0&(rtv i]/j.tpas . . . dv&v Kal /Sao-tXets aurw^ a70/u^i ous. 1
2 1 26 /fat ofoovcrtvT. 86av . . . r. Zdvwv 6o 5 t TrXouros . . . IdvCiv Kal
ei s afirrjv. Kal TJov<nv f. 2
2 1 27 ou /XT? elatKd-rj . . . Trai Kotvbv. Is 52 1 OVK{TI 7rpoo-re#?7<rerai
. . . a/fd0apros. See ii. 173 sq.
et /XT; oi yeypa/j,fj.vot ev r. /3t/3Xia) r. Dan I2 1 # r . oyeypa/A^vos
;T}S. See 13^ I7 8 above. o . ^yyeypa/bt^vos v r.
1 In the Mass, as well as the LXX the text is clearly corrupt : i.e. " that
men may bring unto thee the wealth of the nations and their kings led (by
them)." As modern scholars recognize, O Jinj ( = " led ") is corrupt for D jrta
= " leading." Hence instead of "and their kings led (by them)," render :
"under the leadership of these kings." The kings lead and are not led
by their people. Now apparently our author anticipated our modern
scholars ; for he represents the kings as acting on their own initiative : " they
bring the glory of the nations into it."
2 Here the LXX is quite corrupt 2i 26 is nearer the Mass. "]V INT D"iJ ^n,
" the wealth of the nations shall come unto thee." Our author either read
1x5; instead of o;, or followed the Mass, in 6o u .
PASSAGES BASED DIRECTLY ON HEBREW OF O.T. Ixxvii
22 1 " 2 irora^bv vdaros far)s . . . eKirop-
evo/J.evov K T. dpovov r. 0eov. The
idea is to be found in its developed
form in I and 2 Enoch.
22 ev peffy . . . T. irora/ULOV evrevdev
Kai eneWev v\ov fwrjs TTOIOUV Kapirovs
5u>5e/ca, /card fJLTJva eKaarov diro-
didovv T. Kapirbv avrov /cat r. (f>v\\a
T, v\ov ei s Oepaireiav r. tdv&v.
22 s * Tfav Karddefia OVK carat eri.
22 4 8if>ovrai T. irpowirov avrov.
, KT\.
22 OVK
See 2 1 23 above.
Kvpios 6 debs (parrlffet 1 eir avrovs.
22 12a t 5oi> epxofJLai raxv, Kal 6 uur66s
IJLOV uer 4aov.
22 12b airodovvat ^KaffTcp ws r. epyov
avrov. 3
. . vdd)p fwTj
22
owpe&v. See 2 1 6 above
[- 22 l8b-19 r
<ret . . . Kal ta.v rts
Ezek 47 1 vdup
vbrov iri TO
. OTTO
Zech
Ie/>ou-
Kzek 47 12 o . e?ri r. Tror
Tri T. x e ^ ol/s ayroO evdev Kal
. . . ov8 /AT] K\iirri 6 Kapirbs avrov
TI)S KaLvdrrjTos avrov (v^nn)) Trpwro-
jSoX^tret, 6Vi . . . Icrrcu . . . dvajSacris
avruiv (inVy) et s vyleiav. Here the
LXX has missed the sense and
misrendered several times where
our author has rightly reproduced
it. 4 None of the Greek renderings
is so close to the Mass, as our
author. See ii. 176-7.
Zech I4 11 avadepa (D"jn) OVK ecrrcu en.
Ps 16 (i7) 15 TJS nmx. But o has
6<j>6ri(ro[j.ai T. TrpotrciTry (rou. Con
trast Mass, and o in 83 (84) 7 .
Ps 117 (ll8) 27 6ebs Kvpios
ijfuv an abbreviated form of the
Aaronic blessing : see ii. 210-211.
Is 4O 10 Idov Kupios . . . ep%ercu . . .
idov 6 fuadbs avrov yuer avrov. 62 11 .
Prov 24 12 airooiodxnv eKa<rT($ Kara T.
epya avrov. Cf. Ps 6 1 (62) 12 d7ro5c6-
(rets CKaffTtj} Kara r. epya avrov.
Is 55 1 oi Sii/ cDj/res iropeveade.
Deut 4 2 ov trpoadrjffevde wpbs T. pij/j-a.
. . . Kal OVK d^eXeZre air avrov
, just as he
1 In iS 1 our author renders nVNn of Ezek 43 2 by
renders ix;, Ps 117 (u8) 27 by 0coriVet.
2 Clem. Rom. ad Corinth, xxxiv. 3 has a close but independent parallel
to 22 12ab . t 3oi> 6 Kvpios Kal 6 /u.io-6bs avrov (cf. Is 4O 10 ) irpb irpocruirov avrov
(cf. Is 62 11 ), airooovvai Kao~rq> Kara rb epyov avrov (cf. Pr 24 12 ). Here
Clement is a mosaic of the o of these three passages, but not so our author.
The (/ of Is 62 11 is e%a>^ rbv tavrov fjucrdbv, Kal rb epyov avrov irpb Trpocrwirov
avrov. The order of the words, a>s r. epyov e<rrlv avrov, is not our author s :
see p. clvii ad Jin. The clause = in^ysD. tus here = * according as " a classical
meaning not elsewhere found in our author. But in our author s mind ws
is the regular rendering in our author for ? in Hebrew (see vol. i. 35-36).
The Hebrew particle has this meaning. Yet we should expect Kara ra epya
avrov (cf. 22 12 ).
3 The throne of God in the Apocalypse is in the heavenly temple. But
since there is no temple in the heavenly Jerusalem, only the throne of God
is mentioned here.
4 R.V. of this passage shows how faulty the LXX is here. " By the
river ... on this side and on that side shall grow every tree . . . neither
shall the fruit thereof fail : it shall bring forth new fruit every month . . .
and the leaf thereof for healing."
Ixxviii
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
4- Passages based on the Hebrew of the O. T. (or the Aramaic
in Daniel) but influenced (in some cases certainly p , in others possibly]
by o .
I 4 aTTo 6 &v. Ex 3 14 6*706 efyu 6 &v.
I 5a 6 ftdprvs 6 7rt(TT(5s. Ps 88 (89 ) 38 A fidprvs v ovpavqt Trurrds. 3
I 5b 6 ir/)a?r6ro/cos r. veKp&v Kal 6 ap^uv Ps 88 (Sg) 28 Kay Co TrpwrdroKov Br/cro/jiaL
T. /Sao iXe toj r. 7175. avrdv, v^rjXbv irapa r. (3a(n\ev(nv T.
23a
6a.va.Ttp.
2 26b Scicrw ai/ry ^ovfftav eV2 r. tQv&v.
2 s7 /cat TTOLfjiavei avTovs i> pdfidy (nSrjpqi,
(is r. (r/ceify T. /cepa/u/cd
Ezek 33 s7 tfavdry aTro/crei tD (Mass.
iniD nma).
Ps 2 8 " 9 5c6<ro> (roi e^^ r. K\r)povofj,lav
3 5 otf
>w r. 6fO/ta auroD K r.
pf^ets auro^s. See vol. i. 75-77
and Pss. Sol I7 26 .
Ex 32 32 33 ^dXen/^p ytte ^/c r. /3t /3Xov
erou. Ps 68 (69) 29 Qa\eut>8-fiTtoffa.v
K plp\ov fdvruv See i. 84.
Is 43 4 y<J) ere rjydTnjcra.
Is 6 1 r. Kvpiov Kadrj/j.evov ^jrl Bpbvov.
I Kings 22 19 Oei.
dirl 6p6vov aurov.
Ps I4O 2 rj irpotrevx^
Ps 143 (I44) 9 tpdfyv Kwr\v go-o/xai <rot.
Is 42 10 .
Ezek I4 21 po[j,<f)alav Kal
6-rjpia irovrjpa. Kal Qdvarov (^).
6 10 ?ws Tr6re . . . ou Kplvets Kal 2 Kings 9 7 ^/cSt/c^creis r. a^ara r.
r. aZ/ia ^/*w^ ^/c r. /carot- SotiXwv /u.ov . . . e*/c %et/)6s ]
^TriT. 7775; cf. I9 2 .
3 9c 6*70; TjydirTja d (re.
4 2 (7 10 I9 4 ) ^?rt r. dpbvov
[5 8 dv/uuajudTuv, a l elviv a!
5 9 (I4 3 ) d dovtriv y5V Ka.(.vi]v.
[6 8 aTTOfcreti at ^v po^aLq. Kal tv
davdrif) Kai virb r. drjpiuv r.
ws
6 14 6
f \Krcr6/Jiei>ov f.
7 14 ^TrXfi ai r. erroXas avr&v
Cf. 22 14 .
6 ij\tos.
1 1 6 7rara,at r. 777^
["
^/ aurots /cai
aurwv.
Is 34 4 \iy^a-Tdi
Gen 49 11 TrXwet ^y of^y r.
avrov Kai iv ai /iart.
Ex I9 18 dv^fiaLvev 6 /ca?rv6s ws
Joel 2 10 6 TJXtos Kal 97
Sam 4 8 ol Oeol oi Trard^avres r.
v irda-ji irXyyfj ( . . .
TroSas
Ezek 37 1
e/s avTotis rd
. . . ea-rrjffav eiri r.
KO.I
aura> .
Ps 98 (99) 1 /ci/pios tpoffiXewev dpyt-
XaoL.
1 Here and in 2O 15 our author appears to use /3t/3Xos owing to o in the first
passage and in his second. For, when writing independently, he uses
fiiftXlov, even when using the phrase r6 fiifi\lov r. fw^s, I3 8 2i 27 (cf. I7 8 ). In
all fiifiXlov occurs 23 times (3 times in an interpolation).
2 Our author uses ^ffrddrjv (8 3 I2 18 ) as the aorist of iW^/xt. Chapter 1 1 is
a source, and the use of tvT-r)<rav in it may be due to o".
8 The ideas in the Apoc. I 5a and Ps 88 (Sg) 38 are wholly dissimilar, but the
dependence in case of the diction is clear.
PASSAGES INFLUENCED POSSIBLY BY O Ixxix
jji8d-g T> SotiXois ffov T irpo(f>r]Tais Kal Amos 3 7 r. dov\ovs avrov r.
T. dyiois Kal T. (f>oj3ovfj.evoi.s T. 6voud ras. Ps II3 21 (l!5 1S ) r -
ffov T. uiKpovs Kal T. /m,eyd\ovs. r. Kvpiov r. piKpovs /ierdr. fj,eyd\<av.
I2 1 - 2 o"j/j.eiov . . . 7W7] . . . ^v Is 7 14 ffyfj-eiov Idov i] irapdevos kv
~rpl exovffa Kal Kpdfrei J)8ivov<ra yaarpl eei (tfA XiJ/i^erai, B). 26 17
. reKeiv. 1 ij &5lvov(ra eyylfa reKeiv, eirl rfj
&olvi avTTJs e/c^/cpaev.
I2 8b TroifJ-alveiv Trdvra r. edvrj tv See on 2 s7 above.
pd/SSy cridrjpy.
I2 12 evippaiveaOe ovpavoi. Is 49 13 ev(f>paive<rde ovpavoi. Cf. 44 s3 .
I4 7 T. iroirjcravTi r. ovpavbv Kal r. 7 / >7/ Ex 2O 11 (quoted on !O 6b under 3
/cat flaXac-cra?. Contrast IO 6 under above). Neh I9 6 eTrolcnjas r. ovpavbv
3 above. On this phrase see . . . r. 7^^ . . . r. 0aXd(r0-as.
Acts 4 24 I4 15 .
I4 11 6 Kawvbs . . . els al&vas al&vwv Is 34 10 WKrbs Kal ijutpas . . . Kal . . .
dvafialvet . . . r]fj.epas Kal VVKTOS. els T. alwva -\_pbvov /cat d^a/STjcrerat 6
Kairvbs avrijs.
I5 3 qoovcnv [r. <jj5V Mwi^a^ws r. SotfXou Ex I4 31 MWUO-T? r. depdirovri. avrov.
T. 0eoO], Ex I5 1 ^(rei Mwua^s . . . r. yi
ravTTfjv.
I5 4 Sol-da-ei r. o^o/xa <rov. Ps 85 (86) 9 5o^d(rou(r r. 6^o/xd <rou.
I5 4 Trdvra r. eflvT; ij^ovffiv Kal irpoff- Ps 85 (86) 9 irdvra r. efli^ . . . TJ^OVCTIV
Kvvrjffovffiv evd!)7ri6v <rov. Kal TrpoffKvvfjcrova i.v 4vd)Trt6v aov.
trepl T. ffT^dt] favas See on i 13 under 3.
l6 5 5t /catos el . . . #<rtos. Ps 144 (I45) 17 5t/caios
6 trtos.
dl/j.a . . . irelv. Is 49 26 frlovrai . . . rb alfta avr&v.
I7 16 /caZ r. ffdpKas avrijs (fidyovrai. Is 49 26 (pdyovrai . . r. (rdp/
a^rwi .
19 2 ^edlKrjffev r. af/^a r. SoivXwy auroG
e/c x l P os UVTTJS. See on 6 10 above.
19 3 6 Kairvbs avrfjs dvafiaivei els r.
al&vas. See on I4 11 above.
I9 5 alvelre r. ^ey ^wJ , Trd^res ol Ps 134 (I35) 1 ^ alveire r.
dovXot avTov, ol <j>oj3ovfj.evoi avrdv, ol Kvpiov, aivelre SovXoi Kvpiov 2 . . . oi
fUKpol Kal ol /j.eyd\ot. <f>o(3ov/j.evoi r. Kvpiov. See on II 18
above.
I9 15 iva ev avTri iraTdt-Tj rd edvrj Kal Is II 4 /cat 7rardei yijv ry X^7y rou
avrbs Troi/mavel avrovs ev odfidfj) <rr6/>iaros avrov.
ffiSrjpg,. See 2 >J7 above.
2O 9 e?ri r. TrXdros r. 7^5. Hab I 6 tvi rd TrXdri; (r6 TrXdros A)
r. 7775.
Kare/3?7 TrCp e/c T. ovpavov Kal /care"- 2 Kings I 10 o exactly as in our text.
(j>ayev. (This could be registered
under 3, since the Hebrew could
hardly be rendered differently.)
2I 1 ovpavbv Katvbv Kal yrjv Kaivfiv. Is 65 17 evrai ydp b ovpavbs Kaivbs Kal
2I 2 (2l 10 )r. iroXivT. dylav Iepovo-aX-fifj,. Is 52 1 Tepoi^a-aXr;^, 7r<5Xts ^ a7^a. Cf.
Dan 9* 4 d f .
2 1 12 Idov e"pxofj.ai ra^v, Kal b fj,icr66s Is 4O 10 I8ov Kvpios Kvpios . . . tpxerai
/jiov u,er 4fj,ov. Already registered . . . /5oi> 6 /ucrdbs avrov per avrov.
under 3 above.
1 Possibly this passage should have been given under 3.
2 Our author rightly follows the Hebrew here, mm nay, against o .
Ixxx THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
5. Passages based on the Hebrew of the O.T. (or the Aramaic
of Daniel\ but influenced (in some cases certainly , in others prob
ably) by a later form ofo, such as is preserved in Theodotion 6 .
I 1 a Set yevfoffai. Dan . 2 28 - w - 4fi & Set
I 6 (5 10 2O 6 ) tiroli]<rfv pita s fia.<n\eiav Ex I9 6 6 . /3a<rtXe/a tepets, which =
iepeis T. 0e<^. D jra roVoo. But the Mass, has
"3 nD^DD, and also o . fiaai\eiov
iepdrev/ma. See vol. i. 16.
I 7a Sou lpx erat /^rd * ?" ve<f)\G)v. Dan 7 13 t Soi) yuerd r. vf<f>e\u)v . . .
t Soi) ^?rt r. ve(p\&v . . . tfpxero.
ji7b ^ 2 8 22 13 ) 716 ei /u 6 TrpcDros /cat 6 Is 48 12 (cf. 44 6 ) fnrw 3N qx jitrxT 3N.
eVxctTOS. Is 48 12 . E7tb wpcDros /cal ^70;
^<TXaros. o . 701 et ^tt Trpwros /cal
^70) etyut e^s r. at cDva.
I 19 A ytt^XXet yivevdai yiteTot raura. Dan 2 s9 X . r Set yev^adat f^era ravra
r. /cXe?v ... 6 dvoiyuv Kal Is 22 22 6
ouSets K\elffi Kal K\etuv Kal ovdels . . . Kal dj/ot^et /cal oi)/c ^arat 6
6 avoiywv. o f . 5c6a"a; T. 56av AauetS
. . . /cal #pet, Kal ou/c ^<rrat 6 di Ti-
, /cal K\dffi Kal OVK carat 6
3 90 ij!;ov<ru> Kal irpoaKwf)<rovcnv tv&iriov Is 6o 14 . /cal TropevcrovTai . . .
T. TroSah <rou. See on I5 4 under vavruv . . . /cal irpoaKw^ffovcriv
4. ^?rl r. tx vr l T - Tro5)v crov. o om.
last eight words.
4 1 a Sel yevfodai ytterd raOra. See on
i 19 above.
9 30 TO, dai/j.6ifia Kal r. etSwXa 2 r. xP Vff & D an 5 s3 # ( > o ). r. 0eoiys r.
/cal T. dpyvpd Kal r. x ^*** /ca ^ T Ka ^ dpyvpovs 4 /cal
\L0iva Kal T. j-v\iva, a ovre [BXtireiv (riSTjpoOs /cal uX/vous /cal
SiJi aj Tai offre dKOveiv otire irepi- ot ov p\irov<nv Kal ot OVK di
(o < entire passage). Cf. Ps 113
. . . OVK dKov<rovTai . . . ov
IO 6 tifAoo-fv v T. U>VTL et s r. aftD^as. Dan I2 7 . u> / uo<rei ^^ r. fu)?
1 Our author knows only ny, as does 6 , whereas o f presupposes Vy. In
I4 14 ^TT! r. ve^Xrjv Kadrj^evov does not presuppose Sy, for Kadrifj.evov requires
tirl here. Thus ay is presupposed by /xerd in Rev i 7 , Mk I4 62 tpx6/j.evov
yuerd r. ve(p. : by tv in Mk I3 6 ^px^/^^ov iv ve<p., Lk 2 1 27 : whereas Matt 24 30
26 s4 px6jj.evov 4irl r. ^60. presuppose o r and *?y. See vol. i. 18.
2 This combination of demons and idols is first found in i En gg 7 .
3 o has this phrase also in 3 28> 29 ; but since there is no other passage in
our author based on Daniel that agrees with o against 6 , and many that agree
with d f against o , we conclude that where they agree, as here, our author is
influenced by a version of the character of Q .
4 The Mass, here trs. xp v <rus Ka * dpyvpovs. But, since and Peshitto
here, as well as all the authorities for the same list of substances in 5 4 , support
the order XP- Ka <- &P7 there can be no doubt that the Mass, is wrong here
and that our author and Q attest the true order in 5 s3 . Our author is follow
ing S 28 here, as the concluding clauses prove.
ECHOES OF THE O.T. Ixxxi
I2 14 Kaipbv Kal Kaipovs icai rjfjuffv Dan I2 7 Q o . Kaipbv Kal Kaipovs
Kaipov. (AQF) Kal TJ/J.KTV Kaipov. Cf. "j 25 .
I3 5 ffT6[j.a \a\ovv fji,eyd\a. Dan 7 8 6 o . or. XaX. fiey.
I3 7 7rot?7<rat ir6\e/j,ov //era r. ayiwv. Dan 7 21 ^ tirolei ir6\efjiov p.era r.
ayiuv. o . ir6\e[jiov (rvviffTd/nevov
irpbs T. dyiovs.
I3 15 8<roi eav ^77 irpoaKVvfjffovffiv T. Dan 3 6 6 o . 5s av ^77 (+7re<rwi o )
et /coVa. TTpoaKwrjar] (T. elKOVi).
I4 8 Ba/SuXcbv 77 /j,eyd\r). Dan 4 27 </. Ba/3. 77 yu.e7.
I5 3 " 4 6 /3a(ri\evs r. tQv&v ris ov ^ Jer IO 7 Q r (>o r ). Ws ov fj
00/377077 y aerai, f3aai\ev r. edv&v ;
2O U rdiros oi/x evpedrj avrois (cf. I2 8 ). Dan 2 35 r . TOTTOS ou% eup
o x . wcrre
2O 15 ef TIS ovx evpe9r) ev r. /3t/3Xw a T. Dan I2 1 r . Tras ( + 6 evpedels AQ) 6
07775 yeypafA/mcvos. yeypa/u./Aevos ev T. ^StjSXy. o . 5s av
evpedrj tyyeypa/Jiuevos ev r. /3i/3Xaj.
22 10 ^177 ff<ppayia"r)s T. \oyovs . . . r. Dan I2 4 X . a(f>pdyi<rov r. ^i^>\lov. o .
T. /3i/3Xioi>. I2 9 .
>7oi. o .
TrpocTTd^yuaTa.
6. Phrases and clauses in our Author which are echoes of
O. T. passages.
2 20 ryv yvvalKa Iedpe\. I Kings 2O (2l) 25 lefdjSeX 77 71^77
ai roO.
5 5 6 X^wv 6 ex T. <j)v\TJs lovda. Gen 49 9 CTKV/JLVOS \4ovros, lovda.
77 pifa Aaveid (cf. 22 1K ). Is II 1 CK r. pifrs leffffai.
9 s e^rj\6ov aKpides els r. 7771*. Ex IO 12 dva^rjTdi} aKpls eV! r. 777^.
X(^T. fj,eyd\($ Eixppdry. Gen I5 18 r. TTOT. r. /ie7. E^0.
. . . iropveias . . . /cXe/i- Ex 2O 13 (Mass., but different order in
o ).
Tropveias. 2 Kings 9 22 al Tropveiai Ied/3eX . . .
Kal T. <f>dp(j.aKa avTrjs.
IO 11 5eZ (re Trd\iv irpocpriTevo ai eiri Jer I 10 Idov Kad^araKd ere ... eiri
Xaots Kal edveffLv . . . Kal /3acrt- ^0^77 Kal /SacnXelas.
\evffiv.
11 1 Kd\afios . . . ^TpTjffov T. vaov. Ezek 4<D 3 ev T. xeipl afiTov fy . . .
/cdXa/uos perpov. 4 1 13 5ie/xerp?i(rev
KarevavTi r. OLKOV.
11 2 43607} T. edveviv Kal r. 7r6\iv r. Zech I2 3 077(ro / u,at r. lepovffdXij/u, \L6ov
irb\Lv r. dyiav.
1 1 8 TrvevfjLaTiK&s 265o/xa. Is I 10 Israel addressed as "Sodom."
II 10 5u)pa ireiityovaiv d\\r)\ois. Esth 9 19 dTrocrrAXoires fiepidas eVcacrros
e*^. Frequent in the O.T.
ets r. ovpavbv. 2 Kings 2 11 dve\r)/u.<j)8-r) . . . els r.
copai/oV.
II 13 eSwitav d6av r. 0e< (cf. 14"). Josh 7 19 , Jer I3 16 etc.
r. 0ey r. ofyxwou (cf. l6 u ). Dan d f . 2 18 - 19 - 37 ; 6 o . 2 44 .
1 1 15 fiacriXevcrei els T. aluvas r. al&vwv. Ps 9 37 (lo 16 ) j3acriXe^<rei Kvptos els r.
1 See note on 3 5 under 4. explains our author s use of /3t /3Xos here
instead of his own word f3ip\loi>.
Ixxxii
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
I4 7 0oj9i707Tre r. deov.
I4 10 irvpl Kal delq.
I5 1 77X7770,5 eirrd.
I6 1 ^/cx^ere r. 0idXas r.
0eoO.
l6 10 eyevero 77 /3a<rtXe/a aurou &TKOTO>
Eccles 1 2 13 .
Gen I9 24 .
Lev 26 21
T. Jer io 25
i6 12 e&pdvd-ti r. f/5w/> airrov.
l8 9
l8 14 crou XT)? TT 1.6 v [lias TTJS
i8 21 Suggested by
2O 9 r.
21* ovre irevdos otfre Kpavyr) otfre
ou/c lorai rt.
2 1 10 r. So^ai/ r. 0eou.
2 1 16 T; ?r6Xts Terpdyuvos Keirat.
Ex io 21
AlyiJTTTOV.
Ex I4 21 ^TroLf]<Tfv r. flaXacrtrai %r)pdv.
2 Sam I 12 tud^avTO . . . xal tK\avcrai>.
Deut I2 15 - 20 - 21 , Ps 20 (2i) 3 etc.
Jer 28 (5I) 638 * Xi^oj/ . . . ptyas
Ps 77 (78) 68 r. fyos T. Setcbi rjydirrjffev.
86 (87) 2 dya-Trq. /ci^ptos r. Trt-Xas S^y.
Is 35 10 dirtdpa 68vvi) Kai XI^TTT; /cai
Is 58 8 .
Ezek 48 16 where the measures of the
city show that it was Terpdywvos.
7. Passages dependent on or parallel with passages in the
Jewish Pseudepigrapha.
i 13 8/jLoiov vlbv dvQp&irov. See on I4 14
below.
2
2 17 6vo/j.a
T. T. Lev l8 n 5c6<rei r. cr
T. i/Xou r. fays. See vol. i. 54.
ovpavw.
I8ov 6upa
6 n iva dvcnravo oi Tai . . .
6u)(rt.v . . . oi dde\(f)ol
avrov o
6 12 6 77X10? tyevero /teXas
6 Xr; fytvero ws a
cca!
T. Lev 8 14
1 En I4 16 /ecu /5oi>
fitvyv (i.e. in heaven) : T. Lev 5 1 .
2 En 3 3 "They showed me a great
sea" (i.e. in the first heaven). Cf.
T. Lev 2 .
In i En 47 the end will come when
the number of the martyrs is com
plete exactly as in our text. 47 3 " 4
" I saw the Head of Days when He
seated Himself upon the throne of
His glory. . . . And the hearts of
the holy were filled with joy,
Because the number of the righteous
had been offered." 1
Ass. Mos. io 5 Sol non dabet lumen et
in tenebras convertent se cornua
lunae . . . et (luna) tota convertet
se in sanguinem. 2
1 Here the martyrs are regarded as an offering to God just as in our text
I4 4 (d-jrapxTl r. 6e$). See vol. i. 174.
Ezek. 32 7 (c/. 77 <re\-f]vri ov ducrei rb 0dos avTrjs) and Joel 2 31 (3 4 ) (o . 6 ijXios
els cr/c6ros Kal i) ffeX^vij els alfj.a) are the sources of Ass. Mos
io 5 . Hence the latter passage should be read as in my edition, (sol) in tenebras
convertet se, et luna non dabit lumen et tota convertet se in sanguinem. The
tota appears in this connection only in this passage and in our text. See
vol. i. 1 80.
PASSAGES BASED ON THE PSEUDEPIGRAPHA Ixxxiii
7 1 r{<r<rapas ayy\ovs . . . tirl r.
T<T<rapas ywvlas rfjs yfjs, Kparovvras
T. T&r<rapas avfyovs r. yfjs.
9 1 avrtpa K T. ovpavov ireTTTUKora ets
T. yfjv, Kal d66r) avT(f 77 /cXeis r.
9 20 iva JJ-TJ TrpoffKvvfiffovffLv T. dai/j.6via
Kal T. efSwXa. 3
I4 r
10 /3a<ra/>icr0?7<rercu
r.
irvpl
I4 14 Suoiov
14 (Cf. I9 16 )
/ca*
T. 0T(/idTOS aTOU K7TOpeV6Tai
po/x0cua o^eta, Ifva ^ a^r^ Trard,^??
/cai aur6s iroi/J-avel ai)roi)s fe
Zduicav
22 2 r. 0p6vov r. 0eoO /cat r. dpviov.
2O S rbv Tuy Kal
2O 13 6 Bdvaros Kai 6
See vol. i. 204, 192 (note), where this
conception is shown to be in i
Enoch.
i En i8 13 ws 6pi) fjt,eya\a Kai.6iJ.eva, : 2i 3
ouolovs 6pe<nv yue^aXois /cat ^y irupl
i En 86 1 "Behold a star fell from
heaven and it arose " etc.
i En 99 7 "Who worship stones . . .
impure spirits and demons."
i En 48 9 "As straw in the fire, so
shall they burn before the face of
the holy."
I En 46 1 which first applies to the
Messiah, this phrase which in Dan
7 13 =: the saints." 4 Ezra I3 3
where the Syriac presupposes 6 /*otoj
uiy avdpdnrov. See vol. ii. 20.
i En 9 4 (G s 2 ) Ktpios r. nvpluv Kal
Pss. Sol i y 26 - 27 - 39 quoted in vol. ii.
136 where already Is n 4 and Ps 2 9
are applied in the same Ps. to the
Messiah.
See vol. ii. 188.
I En 5 1 1 " Sheol also shall give back
that which it has received, and hell
shall give back that which it owes."
See vol. ii. 194 sqq.
i En 62 3 - 5 . See vol. ii. 175 sq. The
throne is the throne of God and of
the Son of Man.
8. Passages in some cases directly dependent on and in others
parallel with earlier books of the N. T. Our author appears to
have used Matthew, Luke, i Thessalonians, i and ^ Corinthians,
Colossians, Ephesians and possibly Galatians, i Peter and James.
The possibility of his having had one or more other books of the
N. T. is not excluded.
1 The diction is almost identical, but the ideas are quite different. In
i En the stars are really spirits or angels undergoing punishment. In this
interpolated passage 8 7 " 12 the "burning mountain" in 8 8 and "the
burning star " in 8 10 are purely physical things. Contrast our author s
use in g 1 .
2 The parallel is good. The star in each case is an angel, and in each case
falls from heaven. A parallel is found also in Is I4 12 t&Trecrev e/c r. ovpavov 6
8 Combined worship of demons and idols first mentioned in i En 99 .
4 The fact that the expression opoios vlbv avdp&irov occurs in 4 Ezra 13
shows that it may have been more current in certain circles than is generally
believed. On the other hand, it is simply the apocalyptic form of 6 vlbs T.
avdp(*)TTOV.
Ixxxiv
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
I yua/c
\6yovs
o yap Kaipbs eyyvs.
I 4 xd/ns vfj.lv Kal
I 5 6 wpwTOTOKos r.
1 5 rig dyair&vTi 77/uas.
1 6 fiafftXeiav, lepeis r.
i) px ercu
8\//Tai avrbv Tras 6<pda\fj.bs Kal
oiTives avrbv ^eK^vrrjaav, Kal
K6\j/ovTat ^TT ai/roy Trcurcu ai (pvXal
T. 7775.*
Matt 24 6 , Luke 2i 9 .
ol aKovovres T. Luke 1 1 28 yuaffdptoi oi aKovovres T.
\6yov T. 9eov Kal (pvXdaaovTes.t
Matt 26 18 6 Kaip6s pov tyyvs ecrriv.
Col I 2 x<*pis vjjuv Kal dp-fjvrj and eight
other Pauline epp. Not earlier
than N.T. apparently.
Col I 18 TrpwToYoKOS eK T. veKp&v.
Gal 2 20 TOI) vlov r. ^eoO TOL! 0707777-
<ravr6s fte.
I Pet 2 9 fiaff iKeiov lepdrevfM.
Matt 24 30 ToYe K6\f/ovrai iracrai al
(pv\al T. 7775 Kal 6\f/ovrai r. vlbv T.
dvdp&TTOv px6fj,ei>ov eirl T.
T. otipavov.
T. ve<j>e\u}v,
2 Cor I 20 TO j/at ... TO d/mrjv.
Matt I7 2 e\a/j,\//ev rb irpoauTrov avrov
ws 6 77X105.
2 Cor 6 9
I 16 77 6^is aurou <l)s 6 ij\ios (palvei.
I 18 vtKpbs Kal ldof> G)v.
2 7 6 ^x w " ^ s d/coua-dTw 3 (seven times). Matt II 15 I3 9 - **, Luke 8 8 I4 35 6
2 9 oT5d ffov . . . T. 7TT(t}x e ^ av ) dX\d
el.
2 10 r.
Kal (jtayetv elduiXddvra.
iropvevvat.
: Mark 4 9 - 23 5s (etVts)
(4 23 ) ?x ei & Ta dKotieiv d/cou^TW.
2 Cor 6 10 o>s TTTwxot 7roXXois 5^ TrXovrl-
OVTS. JaS 2 5 T. TTTW^Ol)? T.
7TXoU(TlOi;S ^J/ Trl(TTl.
Jas I 12 T. (TTt<pavov T. fw77s.
Acts I5 28 ^So^ey . . . 77/ui/
v/juv /3dpos
2 24 r.
l6 1
r. 2,arava.
/tTJ 7^7770/37^0-775, 77^0> 0)5
cai 01) ^177 yvfs irolav tipav
ypyyopuv. 6
iropvelas,
I Cor 2 10 T.
Matt 24 42 yp-rjyopeire odv, on OUK otdare
Trola if fit pa 6 Kvptos vp&v
24
yiv&&lt;TKT6, on el rjdei 6
s Trola
1 Peculiar to Paul and our author in this sense.
2 The combination of Dan 7 13 and Zech I2 10 - 12 is first found in the N.T.
and is peculiar to Matt, and our author. This combination is not found in
the parallel passages of Mark I3 26 , Luke 2I 27 , which omit the quotation from
Zech. Further, the phrase Trdcrai al <pv\al r. 7775 is peculiar to our text and
Matt 24 30 , and the meaning assigned to Kd^ovrat ("mourn for themselves")
is peculiar to our author and Matt 24 30 . On the other hand, our author keeps
to the Hebrew in rendering fj.erd T. v<f>e\&v, whereas Matt 24 30 reads 4irl T.
ve<p. as o r . Observe that our author has dir avrbv (so Heb. and LXX), but
not Matt.
3 Our author s use of this phrase clearly goes back to our Lord, and his
form of it is closer to that in Matthew and Luke than to that in Mark.
4 Jas I 12 contains the earliest instance of the phrase. Cf. T. Benj. 4 1
<TTe<j)dvovs 55^775.
8 Our author was clearly acquainted with the Apostolic edict, but that he
also used Acts is doubtful.
6 The dependence of 3 3 i6 15 on Matt 24 42 - 43 - is obvious.
7 <pv\d<r<reiv is a Lucan word : cf. Luke i8 21 , Acts 7 53 i6 4 27 24 , whereas our
author does not use <pv\d<r<rew at all, but uses r^peiv in the same sense.
PASSAGES BASED ON THE N.T.
Ixxxv
aov dvpav
3 5 6fj,o\oyr](rMT. 8vo/u.a avrov
irarpos /mov Kal iv&iriov r.
avrov.
T - KTtorews r. deov.
3 17 Tr\ovcri6s etytu . . . Kal OVK oTdas
6Vi <rv el 6 . . . 7TTw%6s. See on
2 9 above .
3 21 Saxru; avTy Kadicrai ywer , e/ioO iv r.
0p6vt>} ftov, us . . . ^Kadura yuerd T.
irarpbs fjiov ev r. 6povij} avrov.
6 4 \afielv r. elprjvrjv IK r. yijs.
6 2 17 7 1 , Subject-matter of the Seals
suggested by the Little Apocalypse. 1
6 10 e ws irbre . . . ov
aifMa
iKeis rb
6 12 " 13 6 7?Atos lytvero /w^Xas ws <rd/c/cos
rplxwos Kal r/ <T\7]vri 0X77 yvero cos
al/j.a, Kal ol aartpes r. ovpavov
ei s r. 7^^. 2
6 15 " 16 01 /SatrtXeTs r. 7^5 . . . /cat Tras
SoOXos Kai tXevOepos %Kpv\f/av eavrous
els r. <nrri\aia Kal els T. irerpas r.
optuV Kal \eyovaiv T. 6pe(riv /cat
r. Trtrpais He&are e<f> rifj,as Kal
Kpfyare 7]/J.as a7ro Trpo<r&irov, /crX. 3
6 17 rfs
epx,erai, e ypyyoprjffev av Kal OVK av
etacrev Siopvx&Tjvm T. oiKiav avrov.
46 Ma/cdptos 6 dovXos eKelvos. I Thess
Kvpiov us K\Trrr)s . . .
I Cor l6 9 dvpa yap pot dveyyev. 2 Cor
2 12 Ovpas fjioi dveijiy/ui^vrjs.
Matt IO 32 6^0X07770-0; /cd7cb ^j aura?
eiJLirpoadev r. -jrarpbs /J,ov (contrast
Luke 1 2 s enirpoaOev r. ayyeXw r.
teriv
Col I
apxf}. I
TOKOS Trdcrris Kriaews.
Contrast Col I 27 r. TrXoOros r. 56|7?sr.
X. ^j U/AIV.
Col 3 1 rd Ai w ^retre, 08 6 X.
r. 0eou Kadrj^evos. Eph 2 6
eirovpavLois ev X. I.
Luke 7 13 (8 52 ) ^77 /cXate.
Matt IO 34 firi vo/Jiicrrire ori r}\dov fiaXeiv
elpr}vr)v eirl r. 7771 OVK 3j\dov jSaXeiv
elprjvrjv dXXa /maxaipav.
Matt 2 4 6 - 7 - 9a - 29 and parallels in
Luke 2i 8 - 12a - 25 26 . See vol. i.
158 sqq.
Luke l8 7 - 8 6 5e Oebs ov ^77 iroir}arj rr\v
fKolKrfffiv r. eK\Kr&v avrov, . . .
iroir/aei T. eK$lKri<nv avr&v ev rd^et.
Matt 24^ 6 ^Xtos (TKorio-dri<rerai, Kal
77 creXr/vr] ov 5c6(7et r. <f>eyyos avrrjs
Kal ol dffrepes treaovvrai. dirb r.
ovpavov. So Mark I3 24 25 save that
for last four words it reads eaovrai
CK r. ovp. Triirrovres. Luke 2 1 25
evovrai <rr//j.eia tv rjK up Kal <re\rivrj
Kal aarpois.
Luke 23 30 r6re ap^ovrai \eyei.v T.
opeffiv Il^crare e<f> rumas Kal r. fiovvois
Iva
Luke 2 1 86 dypvirveire .
deov.
r. viov T. dvdpuTrov.
rovs dov\ovs rov Eph 4 30 efftypayiffOrjre els rnj.epav diro-
Xirrpaicrews. 4
1 Our text seems to presuppose the use of Luke and Matthew in the
enumeration of the seven evils following on the opening of the Seals, or else of
the Little Apocalypse behind the three Gospels. See vol. i. 158-160.
2 The parallelism of 6 12 13 with Matt 24 29 is very close, but not with Luke.
It is not, however, dependent directly on the former.
3 There is a remote parallelism with Luke, but not with Matthew.
4 The meaning of <r(f>paylfa, 7 3 " 8 , may be partly due to Eph 4 30 i 13 : cf.
2 Cor i 22 . In fact, in Eph i 30 the sealing gives the faithful assurance of their
spiritual preservation to the day of redemption, and this thought is allied to
Ixxxvi
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
7 17 TO apvlov . . . trot-pavel avrovs. I Pet 2 s5 r. iroiptva . . . T.
9 20 ol \ourol TU>V avdp&wuv (20). Luke i8 n .
II 8 irpo<pffrVffovaLv ijfj^pas ^tX^as^ Luke 4 25 eK\elcrdtj b ovpavbs 7-77 rpla
SiaKocrias e^KOvra. I /cat ftyvas e%. ]a.s 5 17 OVK efipegev
1 1 6 /tXet<rat r. ovpavdv, tva ^ verbs j fTrt r. 7775 evi.avrovs rpels Kal prjvas
fipexy T- "fjfJ^pas T. irpocpyreLas avr&v. J e%.
1 1 15 77 fiaviXeLa r. K6cr/j,ov. Matt 4 8 r. jSa<rtXeas r. /c60ytou.
I2 9 6 Sarai/as . . . e^X^drj els T. yrjv. Luke IO 18 ede&povv r. "Zaravav cos
darpaTT rjv eK r. ovpavov irecrbvra..
I3 8 r. apvlov r. ^(paypAvov dirb Kara- I Pet i 19 20 d/ij/ou . . . irpoeyvuff-
/SoX^s KdcrjJLOV. fj-evov fjiev irpb /cara^SoX^s KOCT/AOV.
I3 11 Brjplov (i.e. b \}/vb*oirpo<p f)T r) s, l6 13 Matt 7 15 T - ^evdoTrpo^rjTuJv, oirives
I9 20 ) . . . elxev Kepara duo ofj.oia epxovrai Trpbs vftas ev evovpaai
apvlip Kal \d\ei ws dpaKwv. irpo(3drwv effwdev de et<riv \VKOI
apwayes.
I4 4 ol aKbXovdovvres ry dp^tV OTTOV av Luke 9 57 dKoXovBriau <rot 6 ?rou &/
virdyet. aTrepxy. Cf. Mk 2 14 IO 21 .
I4 7 r. iroL fjffavTL T. oupavbv Kal r. yrjv Acts 4 24 I4 15 6 TrotTjcras (6s eTrolrjffev,
I4 15 ) r. ovpavbv Kal T. yijv Kal r.
I7
eariv nal
I7 14 tfX tyToi /cai eK\eKTol /cat iriarol.
i6 19 (I4 8 I7 6 etc.)
l8 4
I Thess 4 16 oi veKpol ev Xptary.
I Tim 6 15 6 jSacrtXeus r.
*cat Kvpios T. Kvpievbvrwv.
Matt 20 16 22 14 TroXXoi 7dp elaiv
K\7]Tol, (5Xl 70l 5^ K\KTOI.
1 Pet 5 13 ^ BajSi/Xtovt ( = Rome as in
Apoc.).
2 Cor 6 17 e&\6are eK nevov avruv.
Eph 5 11 A 1 ^? wvKOivuveire r. epyoi.s
. . . T. tr/cdrovs.
l8 24 afya irpo(pr]TU)v Kal dyiwv evpedrj Luke II 50 iva eK^rjT^drjr. alfia Trdvrwv
Kal irdvrdiv r. eff(pay/.i.eva}v eirl r. r. irpo<f)T]T&v rb eKKexvftevov dtrb
77^5. /cara/SoX^s KOCT/AOU.
I9 7 xaf/jw/iev /cal d7aXXiwAte> . 3 Matt 5 12 X a ^-P re Ka ^ dya\\ia<r6e.
I9 9 /^a/cdptot ol e/s r. oeltrvov r. yd/Jiov Luke I4 16 eiroiei Seiirvov [j.eya . . . /cat
aTr^crreiXej . . . TO?S KeKXrjfj.evots.
airr)\6av loov Kaiva 2 Cor 5 17 ra dpxata TraprjXdev, i8ov
yeyovev Kaiva.
irl 6pos Matt 4 8 TrapaXa^dvei avrbv . . . ets
ne. 6pos v\l/r)\bv \lav, Kal oeiKWinv avraj.
Some form of this grace is found at
the close of the Pauline Epp. and
Hebrews, and in them only in the
N.T. Cf. Eph 6 24 77 xdpts Aterd
I. X. , Col 4 18 77 X&P L * /" e # VfJL&V.
Trotw travra.
2 1 10 dir7)veyKV fie ev
fj.eya K
22 2
ayiuv.
xvpiov
that of our author, according to whom the faithful are secured, not against
physical evils, but against their spiritual enemies. These latter recognize
this divine mark on the faithful and cannot injure them.
1 On the O.T. originals of this passage see io 6b above under 3, and I4 7
under 4. It will be seen that 14 is closer verbally to Acts 4 24 than to any
of the O.T. passages.
2 See list of passages influenced by Pseudepigrapha.
3 The thought in both passages is not unrelated. The words in Matt, come
in at the close of the Beatitudes which promise that the righteous shall inherit
the earth. I9 7 in our author represents in vision the fulfilment of this promise.
UNITY OF THOUGHT Ixxxvii
VIII.
UNITY OF THE APOCALYPSE.
i. Unity of thought and dramatic development. When the
interpolations of the editor are removed and the dislocations
of the text set right (see p. Ivii sqq.), the unity of thought
and development in the Apocalypse is immeasurably greater
than in any of the great Jewish apocalypses of an earlier
or contemporary date. In fact, the order of development is at
once logical and chronological save where our author deliber
ately, as in 7 9 17 io-n 13 I4 1 11 - 14 - 18 - 20 , breaks with the chronologi
cal order and in 7 9 17 I4 1 11 - 14 - 18 - 20 adopts the logical, that he
may show the blessed future in store for those that were faithful
in the tribulations which are recounted in the text immediately
preceding these sections. The dramatic movement of the book
is independent of all these sections. But the superiority of the
Apocalypse to other apocalypses in this respect is not merely
relative but absolute, as a short study of the Plan of the
Apocalypse (see p. xxiii sqq.) will abundantly prove.
Smaller unities * maintained and developed within the
Apocalypse might be brought forward, such as : (a) the Seven
Beatitudes, i 3 i6 15 (which is to be restored after 3 3b ) i4 13
i9 9a 22 14 2o 6 22 7 . (b) The judgment demanded by the souls
under the altar is dealt with in various stages of fulfilment in 8 3 4
9 13 i4 18 i6 7 (which with i6 5b 6 is restored in this edition to its
original context after iQ 4 ). (c) The promises of the re-evangeliza
tion of the heathen world in n 15 i4 6-7 i5 4 are fulfilled in
1 In respect to the angels sent to instruct the Seer with the revelation of
God, there is no unity observed in the Apocalypse. Our author apparently
set out with the intention of committing this revelation to one angel. To
this intention he holds fast (as I now see) in i 1 - 1(M1 4 1 io 4 - 8 . In IO 11 it is
possible that Xtyowiv is an oversight for X^et, which 025 Tyc Pr gig vg dfv s
arm bo eth attest. But the adoption of sources (li 1 13 12-13. 17-18), where
this angelic guide is not mentioned, interfered with his original purpose, and
hence there is no reference to him till I9 9a 22 9 . But even in i-io various
other heavenly beings instruct the Seer one of the Elders in 5 5 7 13 " 17 , the
Cherubim in 6 1 - 3 - 5 - 7 . This fact prepares us for the intervention of one of the
Seven Angels of the Bowls in I7 1 2i 9 - 10 22 1 . But there is a special fitness in
this intervention. These angels have to execute judgment on the world now
subject to the Antichrist, and so it is one and the same angel that shows the
Seer the destruction of Rome (I7 1 " 10 ), the capital of the Antichrist on earth,
and that shows the city that is to replace it the Heavenly Jerusalem coming
down to be the capital of Christ s kingdom on earth for 1000 years
(2i 9 -22 2 - 14 - 15 - 17 20 4 6 ).
But the above phenomena are not inconsistent with unity of authorship,
though on revision the author would, no doubt, have removed some of the
incongruities. In other apocalypses there are several angelic guides. Thus in
Dan io 108 ii- one of the holy watchers, S 168 ^- Gabriel, and possibly in io 1 *.
Many angels act in this capacity in i Enoch 21-36 : two angels in 2 Enoch.
Ixxxviii
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
2i 9 -22 2 - 14 15 17 when restored to their right context immedi
ately after 2o 3 .
2. Unity of style and diction. The grammar and the style
of our author are unique, as the Grammar which I give, pp. cxvii-
clix, amply proves. This unity is discoverable in every part of the
Apocalypse save in the sources which our author has taken over
in a Greek form (such as n 1 13 12. 17. 18; see p. Ixii sqq.), and
even in these the hand of our author is constantly manifest, as he
edits them to serve his main purpose. Moreover, in the introduc
tion to every chapter (save in the case of the sources) its essential
affinities of diction and idiom with the rest of the book are
given almost in full.
This unity, therefore, does not exclude the use of visions of
his own of an earlier date or of sources.
A few examples of the essential unity of diction between
different parts of the Apocalypse may here be added.
(a) Chaps. 1-3 and 2o 4 -22.
I 1 5e?ai rots SovXois airrou a Set yevtcr- 22 6 Setcu rots SotfXois at/rou a 5e?
Bat tv ra%et. yevtcrdai v rci%et.
I 3 /j,aKapios 6 avayivdxTKWv Kal ol . . . 22 7 /xa/cdptos 6 Tt)pu>v TOVS \6yovs
TOVS \6yovs TT)S Trpo^Tjreias ... T
I y<) efj.1 Trpwros
2 7 TO irvevu-a. X^yet.
2 11 TOV davdrov TOV
z 28 TOV darepa TOV trpwivov.
3 11 fyxofjuu Taxrf.
3 12 TTJS Kaivijs lepovaaXrjfj., i] /caret -
/SaiVofcra K TOV ovpavov awo TOV
deov (J.OV.
(b) Chaps. 1-3 and 4-20*.
I 1 5etcu .
. a 5e? yevecrdat..
r//xas /3a<rt\eta^,
iepets
I 10 ^yev6]o.Tf]v tv TT
I 13 OJAOIOV vibv avdp&wov.
iJ.vov irpbs
22 13 ^ycb ... 6 irpwros Kal
22 17 TO Trvevfj.a Kal i] vvficfir) \yov<Tiv.
2 1 8 6 ddvaTos b devTepos (cf. 2O fi ).
22 16 6 d(TTT]p ... 6 7rpwiV6s.
22 12 i8ov pxojj.ai Ta\v.
2 1 2 lepoucraX^ Kaivyv . . . /cara-
fialvovaav K TOV ovpavov dirb TOV
deov.
a 5e?
epets.
I 14 ot 6<f)da\iu.ol avTov cos
2 7 r6
rots /tta(rro?s
irvp6s.
2 21 fj.Tavorj<rai 4if.
z 23 tv 0avdT(f) ( " by pestilence ").
2^ TToi/j-avet ( = " shall break ").
3 7 6 ^7105 6 d\-r)dci>6s, where
( = " faithful").
Kal jrpoffKVV fia ovcn.v
ffOV.
4 - ^yfvdjj.Tjv tv T
I4 14 ofj.oi.ov vibv
I5
irepl TO. (TT-i]Qt]
I4 13 X^et Tb irvevfjia.
I3
9 20. . I I6 ll e
6 8 6 OdvaTos.
IQ 15 I2 5 .
ot/couyu.^j 7/s o Xv/s.
I5
(TOV.
I2 9 l6 14 .
avTov cf. I7 14 .
wrjaovaiv ev&iri.bv
3 10 roi -s KaTOiKovvras tirl TTJS yr)$ (in a 6 10 8 13
teclmical sense).
UNITY CONSISTENT WITH USE OF SOURCES Ixxxix
The above examples could be increased indefinitely. But
there is still weightier evidence. The recurrence of idioms in
many cases idioms unique and peculiar to our author s style
throughout the Apocalypse, from the earliest chapters to the
last, presents still stronger proofs of the unity of authorship.
Since these are recorded in the introduction to each chapter and
summarized in the Grammar, I shall not dwell further on them
here.
3. But this unity in the dramatic movement of the Apocalypse
does not necessitate the assumption that all and every part of the
Apocalypse is our author s own creation. As a matter of fact
this is not the case. Our author has, as we have seen elsewhere^
used sources. These sources, together with earlier visions of his
own, he has re-edited and brought in the main into harmony with
their new contexts. But the work of editing has not been
thorough. Certain incongruities survive in the incorporated
sections, which our author would no doubt have removed if he
had lived to revise his work. Traces of an earlier date and often
expectations of an earlier generation still survive. Thus in vol.
i. 43-47 I have shown that our author wrote the Seven Epistles
under Vespasian, when the Church had no apprehension of a
universal martyrdom of the faithful, but expected to survive till
the Second Advent of Christ. By various additions and changes
this expectation is changed for the expectation that pervades the
rest of the book, and the letters to the Seven Churches are
transformed into letters to entire Christendom. 1 But traces of
1 Their inclusion in this work has given them this new meaning. The
fact that there are seven letters and only seven, suggests that the Seer is now
addressing himself not merely to Seven Churches out of the many others to
which he could have written with authority, nor yet to all the Churches of
the province of Asia, but through these Seven Churches to all the Churches
of Christendom. The approaching struggle, as the entire Apocalypse pre
supposes, is not between the Christian Churches of a single province and the
Empire, but between Christendom and the Antichrist impersonated in the
Empire and its head, though the storm is threatening to break first on
the Churches of Asia.
This suggestion gains support from the following considerations. Seven
is a sacred number with our author and is capable of a symbolic meaning.
That the Seven Churches embrace all the Churches, appears to follow
from I 12 - 13 combined with i 16 - 20 . In I 12 seven candlesticks and only seven
are visible, and in I 16 seven stars and only seven stars. Now, since from
i 20 we learn that the seven candlesticks are the Seven Churches i.e. the
Churches in their actual condition and that the stars are the angels of the
Seven Churches i.e. the Churches as they should be ideally, and since in I 13
the Son of Man stands in the midst of these Churches, and holds in His hands
the seven stars or the ideals they have to achieve, the natural conclusion is
that it is all the Churches of Christendom in the midst of which Christ stands,
and not an insignificant group, and that the stars which He holds in His right
hand are the ideals which they are summoned through His help to realize.
As all Christians, according to the rest of the Apocalypse, are to share in the
XC THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
earlier date survive. As I have elsewhere shown, these letters
came from our author and from none other.
Again in 4 1 8 our author re-edits a vision of his own, 4 2b - 3 - 5-8acde_
See vol. i. 104-106 and the commentary in loc. In the course
of incorporation certain infelicities have been incurred. It is
said of the Seer in 4 2a eyevo/xyyv ev Tn/ev/xan a phrase which
denotes the state of trance as in T 10 . But according to 4 1 he
was already in this state, as the words /zero, ravra elSov show.
See vol. i. 109-111, 106-107. Again 4 4 is a later addition from
our author s hand; but the grammar is wrong, and the subject-
matter does not harmonize well with the context. The
Apocalypse is clearly a first sketch and needed revision: see
vol. i. 115-116.
In y 1 8 our author makes use of traditional material, but the
language is his own. See vol. i. 191-199. The four angels and
the four winds, which are here introduced and introduced in
terms that lead us to expect their subsequent appearance in the
way of judgment (y 3 prj dSt/ojo-^re ryv yrjv . . . a^pt cnpayiVa>/zei>,
KT\.), are not directly referred to again.
In ii 1 13 our author has made use of two sources (n 1 2 n 3 13 ),
both written before 70 A.D., in which, if the text is taken literally,
the historic Jerusalem is supposed to be standing (n 2 - 8 ), and the
Temple to be inviolable (i i 1 ). These references have been taken
literally by many scholars as determining the date of the whole
Apocalypse, especially by those who accept its absolute unity and
its composition by one author. But to construe such statements
literally implies a complete misconception of our author s
attitude to the earthly Jerusalem. Our author could not possibly
have regarded the earthly Jerusalem as rrjv Tro Aiv TTJV dyiai/ (n 2 ).
Such a definition he reserves for the New Jerusalem, the eternal
abode of the saints (21^), and the Jerusalem coming down from
heaven to be the seat of the Messianic kingdom for 1000 years
(2 1 10 ). This latter he calls also rrjv -n-oXiv TT)V ^yaTr^/xeV^v (2o 9 ).
But for him the actual city is that ?}TIS KaXetrat 7n/ev/xartKws 2oSo/x,a
xat AtyuTTTOS OTTOV /ecu 6 Kvpios avraiv ecrravpw^r/ (ll 8 ). But Our
author has re-edited this section by the addition of 1 1 4 (?) - 8bc< 9a
and the recasting of n 7 , according to his own thought and in
his own diction, and thus the inviolable security which the Jews
attached to the Temple is reinterpreted by our author as
meaning the spiritual security of the Christian community despite
the attacks of Satan and the Antichrist. But such spiritual
security does not exclude martyrdom, as n 3 13 makes clear. See
coming tribulation, they are all here addressed in these letters. After the first
chapter the numeral is dropped and our author speaks only in his later
additions to the letters (2 7 - " 17 - 29 3 6 - 13 - 22 (see vol. i. p. 45) of al 4KK\ri<riai..
The larger thought of all the Churches seems to be here before him.
DATE OF THE APOCALYPSE XC1
vol. i. 269-270. ii 1 13 has so far as possible to be reinterpreted
from the later standpoint of the Apocalypse as a whole. But in
some cases this is hardly possible.
12 is a source, or rather a combination of two sources, which
our author has borrowed in its Greek form and re-edited. Thus
we find in I2 1 evrl T^S Ke^oA^s where our author would have used
7rt T. /ce<aA.as : in I2 3 iirra StaSr^aara instead of SiaSr^uxTa ITTTOL :
in i2 7 TOV before the infinitive not elsewhere in J ap : in i2 12
ovpavot instead of ovpavi : in i2 14 0.71-0 TrpocrwTrou =" because of."
Contrast 6 16 20 11 . Hence I here withdraw the thesis maintained
in vol. i. 300 sqq. 3, that our author translated this source
himself. See also p. clviii n.
i2 13 15 , though full of significance in their original context and
at their original date, do not admit of interpretation from the
standpoint and date of our author s work (see vol. i. 330).
In 17-18 our author has edited two sources already existing
in a Greek form (see p. Ixiii sq., vol. ii. 56-58, 88 sqq.). But
traces of the original date of their composition survive in ij l( >- 11 and
i8 4 . See vol. ii. 59 sq., 93. Another trace of 18 being a source
survives in i8 2 , where it is stated that Rome has become KO.TOLKT)-
TTfjptOV 8aifJ,OVL(l)V KOL ^vXttKT) . . . TTCIVTO? 6pVOV OLKaOdpTOV, whereaS
our author himself in i<f represents the smoke of her burning as
ascending age after age to the end of the world.
Such incongruities as the above do not affect the main
movement of thought and development in the book. Without
the sources, in which these incongruities occur, the book would
suffer irreparably. These sources, with the exception of io-n 13
which is a proleptic digression, form organic members of the
whole. The survival, therefore, of such incongruities requires
the hypothesis that our author not only used sources but also
did not live to revise his work.
IX.
DATE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
The date of J ap can be established by external and internal
evidence.
i. External evidence. This evidence almost unanimously
assigns J ap to the last years of Domitian. But some ancient, but
not the earliest, authorities assign it to the reigns of Claudius,
Nero, or Trajan. This may be in part due to the survival in
the sources used by our author of statements and situations pre
supposing an earlier date than that of Domitian. That these
survivals explain the great divergence of scholars of the past fifty
xcii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
years on the dating of the Apocalypse, we shall see when we
turn to the internal evidence.
The Trajan date. To return, however, to the three dates just
mentioned, />., the reigns of Claudius, Nero, and Trajan, we shall
treat first of the last. This dating is found only in very late
authorities. Theophylact on Matt. 2o 22 : IwdVvr/v 8e Tpaiai/os
/careSt/cacre /AaprvpovVra TW Aoya) rrjs aXrjOeias. Synopsis de vita et
morte prophetarum (attributed to Dorotheus) : VTTO Se TpaiWov
ySacriAetos e^wpicr^ eV rfj VT^CTO) Ilarpiu) . . . /xera oe rrjv TfXevrrjv
Tpaiavov 7raVeio~iv (XTTO TTJS vrjcrov . . . ei<rt oe ot Xeyovcriv fjir) eTrt
Tpaiavov avrbv iopicr9 ?)vai eV IlaT/xa) dAAa ITTL Ao/AeTtavov. * These
statements appear, as Swete suggests (Introd. p. c), to have arisen
mainly from a misunderstanding of such words as those in
Irenaeus, ii. 22. 5, Trapc/xetve yap avrois (o Icaavvi/s) ^\pl TWV
Tpaiavov xpoVw, or those cited below from Origen on Matt. torn.
xvi. 6.
The Claudian and Neronic dates. n 1 2 and 6 9 of the
Apocalypse, if taken literally, refer to Jerusalem and the Temple
as still standing, and the martyrdoms under Nero (64-68 A.D.).
Other sources, though less clearly, postulate a Neronic date.
Hence it is not difficult to understand the assignment of the
banishment of John to the reign of Nero in the title prefixed to
both the Syriac versions of the Apocalypse and by Theophylact
(Praef. in loann.). I do not see, however, how we are to explain
the Claudian date (41-54 A.D.), which is maintained by
Epiphanius (Haer. li. 12, /tera rrjv avrov OLTTO TT}S Ilar/xov eTravooW,
TYJV 7rt KXavOtov yevofAevrjv /catVapos : li. 33, avrov oe Trpo
KA.av8t ov KatVapo? di/wrarw, ore eis rrjv Ilar/xov
The Domitianic date. The earliest authorities are practically
unanimous in assigning the Apocalypse to the last years of
Domitian. Melito of Sardis (160-190 floruit) may possibly be
cited as upholding the Domitianic date, as he wrote a commentary
on J ap and addressed a protest to Marcus Aurelius declaring that
Nero and Domitian had at the instigation of certain malicious
persons slanderously assaulted the Church (Eus. iv. 26. 9 : cf.
Lact. De Mort. Persecutorum, 3).
Irenaeus (Adv. Haer. 180-190). In his account of the
persecution of Christians by Domitian, Eusebius (iii. 18. 3)
quotes the following words from Irenaeus : et Se IS avafyavSov
ev TW vvV Katpw Kr)pvTTt(r6aL rovvo/xa avTfv, oY e/mVov av eppfOrj TOV
/cat rrjv iaroKaXvtyw ecopaKoros. ovSe yap < ; po TroAXov ^povov ewpa^r;,
dAA.a <r)(t$ov CTTI r^s -^/xerepa? yei/ea?, Trpos TW TeXet rrj<s Ao/xeriavov
dp^T}?. This passage is found in Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. v. 30. 3,
almost exactly as quoted in Eusebius.
1 The above two quotations are drawn from Swete, Introd. p. c.
DATE OF THE APOCALYPSE xciii
Clement of Alexandria. In his Quis Dives, 42, we find : rov
Tvpdvvov reXevrryo-ai/Tos aTro rfjs HOLT/ADV r^s vrfo-ov [MerrjXOev CTTI TJJV
Origen (185-253). In Mt. xvi. 6 (Lommatzsch, iv. p. 18;,
6 Se Poo/AfuW /3acriAeus, ws rj 7rupdSo<ris SiSaovcei, /careSt/catTC TOV
ItoaWTyj/ fiaprvpovvra Sia TOV T^S dA?7$eias Adyov tts TTar/xov T>)V
vT/o-oi/. Neither in Clement nor Origen is Domitian s name
given, but it may be presumed that it was in the mind of these
writers. Victorinus (circ. 270), Eusebius, and Jerome are quite
explicit. Victorinus in his In Apoc. lo 11 writes : " Hoc elicit
propterea quod quando haec loannes vidit, erat in insula Patmos,
in metallum damnatus a Domitiano Caesare. Ibi ergo vidit
Apocalypsin. Et cum jam senior putaret se per passionem
accepturum receptionem, interfecto Domitiano, omnia judicio
ejus soluta sunt. Et loannes, de metallo dimissus, sic postea
tradidit hanc eandem quam acceperat a Deo Apocalypsin." Also
on i7 10 " Unus exstat sub quo scripta est Apocalypsis, Domitianus
scilicet." Eusebius, H.E. iii. 18. i : Ei/ TOVTV /carpet Adyos rbv
aTrdoToXoi/ a/jia /cat evayyeAtaT^v Iwai/i/^v en rw /Slip ev8taTpt/?oj/Ta,
TT/S ets rov Oeiov \oyov ci/exev /xaprvpt a?, IlaT/xoi/ OLKCLV KaraSiKa<r-
Orjvai rrjv vrjcrov. iii. 20. 9 : Tore orj ow KCU TOV aTrocrroXov Iwawryv
a7ro T?}S /cara rr/i/ v^crov ^>vy^s r^v CTTI E^eaoi; Siarpt/S^v tt7reiA^</)Vat
6 T<OV Trap T^/XIV dp^at wi/ TrapaStStucrt Adyo?. iii. 23. I : A-TroaToAos
6/xov Kat evayycAicrTr/? Icoawiys ras avroQi StetTrcv KKXrj(TLa<s, OLTTO
TT^S Kara r^v v^(rov ytxera rr)v Aoyu,eriavo{) reAevT^i/ 7raveA^a)k (>vyfj<;.
Jerome (Deviris illustr. 9) : " Quarto decimo anno post Neronem
persecutionem movente Domitiano in Patmos insulam relegatus
scripsit Apocalypsim . . . interfecto autem Domitiano et actis
ejus ob nimiam crudelitatem a senatu rescissis sub Nerva principe
redit Ephesum."
2. Internal evidence. To the cursory reader the internal
evidence as to the date is hopelessly confusing. But this evidence
is confusing not only to the cursory reader, but also to the
earnest student, as the history of the interpretation of J ap clearly
shows. The students of J ap fall into three groups on this
question, (i) Those who assign it to the reign of Nero after the
Neronic persecution, 64-68 A.D., such as Baur, Reuss, Hilgenfeld,
Lightfoot, Westcott, Selwyn, B. W. Henderson. (2) Those who
place it under Vespasian, as B. Weiss, Dusterdieck, Bartlett,
Anderson Scott. (3) Those who maintain the Domitianic date.
For these three datings internal evidence is undoubtedly forth
coming. Our author has used sources, and several of these
were written under Nero, or at all events before the fall of
Jerusalem, as the reader will see under the section Greek and
Hebrew Sources and their Dates, p. Ixii sqq. But such a date
cannot be maintained in the face of i; 10 - 11 (see vol. ii. 59-60,
xciv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
69-70) and i8 4 , both of which postulate a Vespasianic date.
Hence such statements as clearly presuppose a Neronic date
(i.e., in ii 1 13 i2(?). 131-7.10) are simply survivals in the sources
used by our author.
Hence it appears that the Apocalypse was written either
under Vespasian or under Domitian. The external evidence is,
as we have already seen, unanimous in favour of the latter as
against the former. We have now to discuss the bearing of the
internal evidence on this question. This evidence, which is
clearly in favour of the Domitianic date, is as follows.
(a) The use of earlier N. T. Books. See pp. Ixxxiii-lxxxvi.
There it is shown that our author most probably used Matthew
and Luke. If this is so, it makes the Vespasianic date
impossible, unless these Gospels were written before 70 or 75 A.D.
(b) The present form of the Seven Letters, although in their
original form of Vespasianic date, point to a Domitianic. The
Church of Smyrna did not exist in 60-64 A - D - at a time when
St. Paul was boasting of the Philippians in all the Churches. Cf.
Polycarp (Ad Phil. xi. " Beatus Paulus . . . gloriatur in omnibus
ecclesiis, quae solae tune Dominum cognoverant; nos autem
nondum cognoveramus "). But though Polycarp s letter tells us
that the Church of Smyrna was not founded in 60-64 A.D., he gives
no hint as to when it was founded. Hence several years may
have elapsed after that date before it was founded. When,
however, we turn to Rev 2 8 11 we find that our text presupposes
a Church poor in wealth but rich in good works, with a
development of apparently many years to its credit. This
letter, then, may have been written in the closing years of
Vespasian (75-79) but hardly earlier. But if the present writer s
hypothesis (see vol. i. 43-46) is correct, then the Seven Letters,
all of which probably belong to the same period, were re-edited ;
for whereas they speak generally of local persecutions, there is
not a hint, save in 3 10 , of the universal martyrdom that is taught
or implied in the rest of the book. Nor again is there a single
clear reference to the imperial cult of the Caesars, unless possibly
in 3 10 . (See vol. i. 43-46.) The Letters, therefore, in their
original form, acquaint us with the experiences and apprehensions
of the Churches in Vespasian s reign. But what worlds divide
their original outlook from that of the Book in which they are
incorporated ! The natural conclusion, therefore, is that though
our author wrote the Letters in the reign of Vespasian, he re-
edited them in the closing years of Domitian for incorporation
in his Book.
(c) The imperial cult as it appears in J ap was not enforced until
the reign of Domitian. There is no evidence of any kind to prove
that the conflict between Christianity and the imperial cult had
DATE OF THE APOCALYPSE xcv
reached the pitch of antagonism that is presupposed in the J ap
before the closing years of Domitian s reign. In the reign of
Vespasian the Christians, as Moffatt (Introd? 504) writes, "seem
to have enjoyed a comparative immunity . . . and our avail
able knowledge of the period renders it unlikely (cf. Linsenmayer s
Bekampfung des Christentums durch den romischen Staat, 1905,
66 f.) that anything occurred either under him or Titus to call
forth language so intense as that of the Apocalypse." Moreover,
Vespasian did not take his claims to divinity seriously. But
Domitian insisted on the public recognition of these claims, and
in the last year of his reign he began to persecute the Church in
the capital of the Empire. Thus in Rome he had his own cousin
Flavius Clemens executed, and his niece Flavia Domitilla
and others banished for their faith to the island of Pontia.
Eusebius (H.E. iii. 18. 4) states that there were many others. 1
Now, if Christians of the highest rank were exposed to martyrdom
in Rome, what would be expected in Asia Minor, where the cult of
the Emperor had been received with acclamation as early as the
reign of Augustus, and had by the time of Domitian become the
one religion of universal obligation in Asia, whereas the worship
of the old Greek divinities only took the form of local cults?
Compliance with the claims of the imperial cult was made the
test of loyalty to the Empire. In the earlier days, Christians
had been persecuted for specific crimes, such as anarchy, atheism,
immorality, etc. But in the latter days of Domitian the con
fession of the name of Christ (cf. J ap 2 3 - 13 3 8 i2 n 2o 4 ) was
tantamount to a refusal to accede to the Emperor s claims to
divinity, and thereby entailed the penalty of death (i3 15 ). Now,
with the insight of a true prophet John recognized the absolute
incompatibility of the worship of Christ and the worship of the
Emperor, even if this worship were conceived merely as a test of
loyalty to the Empire. Therein he penetrated to the eternal issues
underlying the conflict of his day, and set forth for all time the
truth that it is not Caesar but Christ, not the State but the
Church that should claim the absolute allegiance of the individual.
Nay more : the prophet maintains that the conflict between the
claims of Christianity and the absolutism of the State can never
be relinquished till the State itself, no less than the individual,
tenders its submission and becomes an organ of the will of the
Lord and of His Christ (n 15 ).
(cT) The Nero-redivivus myth appears implicitly and explicitly
in several forms in our text, the latest of which cannot be earlier
than the age of Domitian.
The Jewish source lying behind 1 7 12 - 17 was probably writteni
1 On the persecution under Domitian, see Lightjfaot, Clem. Rom. I. i,
104-115.
xcvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
in the reign of Titus. It embodies the expectation that the
living Nero will return from the East at the head of the Parthian
hosts an expectation to be found in the Sibylline Oracles of
this period (see vol. ii. 81). Another phase of this myth which
appears in our text (in n 7 ), but with which we are not here con
cerned, is dealt with in vol. ii. 83. But the last phase of this
expectation attested in our text is given in 13 and 17. At this stage
there is a fusion of the Nero myth with those of the Antichrist and
Beliar. The expectation of a living Nero returning from the East
has been abandoned. Nero is now a demon from the abyss, com
bining in his own person the characteristics of Beliar and the
Antichrist. This phase of the myth belongs to the last decade
of the ist century. For this form of the myth, see vol. ii. 84-87. 1
I do not see how it is possible to assign 13 and 17 in their
present form to the reign of Vespasian, though the sources behind
both these chapters were mainly of a Vespasianic date, and in
part of that of Titus.
Before we leave this section it will be well to touch again on
the interpretation of I7 10 11 . Bousset (p. 416) has rightly pro
tested against the identification of Domitian with the eighth head.
This is done by some commentators, but can only be done by mis
interpreting the text or misunderstanding the nature of Christian
apocalyptic. Some, who accept the Vespasianic date, are guilty
of the first offence ; others, who accept the Domitianic date, are
guilty of both.
Let us consider the latter offence first that which consists
in misunderstanding Christian apocalyptic. If we accept the
Domitianic date and assume absolute unity of authorship, we
must conclude that the writer " transfers himself in thought to
the time of Vespasian, interpreting past events under the form
of a prophecy, after the manner of apocalyptic writers " (Swete).
Such a procedure belongs to Jewish apocalyptic but not to
Christian, till we advance well into the 2nd century. Those
who urge the Vespasianic date are not guilty of this misconcep
tion, but the Apocalypse does not admit of the Vespasianic date.
Hence, if we accept the Domitianic date, I7 10 - 11 must be regarded
as a survival from sources belonging to the time of Vespasian
and Titus. In its present context, therefore, I7 10 - 11 does not
admit of precise interpretation. For Domitian cannot be iden
tified with Nero redivivus. This brings us to the first offence.
Domitian cannot be identified with Nero redivivus. Not a
single phrase descriptive of the latter can be rightly applied to
Domitian, if we accept the Domitianic date as the evidence
requires. Nero redivivus is described in i7 8 as TO OypLov . . .
1 A critical study of all the forms assumed by the Antichrist myth is given
in vol. ii. 76-87.
CIRCULATION AND RECEPTION xcvii
/cat OVK ZQ-TW Kcu /xcAAct ava/3aiviv IK T^S aj3v<Tcrov, /cat eis
VTrayet, and again on rjv /cat OVK ecrrtv /cat Trapecrrat. So
again in ly 11 , where it is further added that he c/c TWV OTTOI eo-rtv.
See also n 7 . Another description is given in i3 3 /cat /x,tav e/c TWI/
/cec^aAcov avrot) ws eo~(j>ay/JLvr]v ets OdvaroVj KCU rj TrAryyr) rov Oavdrov
avrov cOepaTTtvOr). Cf. i3 14 . Now I have shown in vol. ii. 71 :
(a) Domitian cannot be described as OVK to-rw, seeing that earn/
must be affirmed of him. (/5) Pre-existence cannot be ascribed
to him, as the clause o rjv would require, (y) It cannot be said of
him that he is e/c ron/ eVra. (8) It is impossible to connect /xtav
e/creov /cec/>aAan/ ws eo-c^ay/xeV^v (i3 3 ) with Domitian. (e) It cannot
be maintained of Domitian, who is already seated on the throne
of the Beast, that //e AAet dj/a/?aiVetv IK rfjs a(3vcr<rov. (Q There is
no ground for making Domitian the leader of the Parthian hosts
against Rome, as Nero redivivus is represented in i y 12-18. 17. w j
and fighting against the Lamb, ly 14 . (rj) Nor can we conceive
Domitian in I9 11 19 as mustering the nations to battle against the
Word of God in the Messianic war that prepares the way for the
Messianic kingdom. 1
It is not an actual Roman emperor, but a supernatural
monster from the abyss that is to play the part of the Nero
redivivus, and that in the immediate future.
X.
CIRCULATION AND RECEPTION.
i. There are most probable but no absolutely certain traces
of J ap in the Apostolic Fathers. In the Shepherd of Hernias,
Vis. ii. 2. 7, there is a very probable connection with our author. 2
Thus fJMKapLOL v/xets o<roi v7TOjU,ei/eT TTJI/ 6Xi\l/LV rrjv ep^o/xev^v TYJV
/xeyaAryv : iv. 2. 5, ^At^eco? ri}s /xeAAovcny? r-^s /xeyaAr/s, and in IV.
3. 6, 1-^79 flAu/^ews T>}S epxo/xeVr/s /xcyaA^?, all but certainly recall Rev
7 14 rfjs OXtytws rfjs /x,eyaAr?s, and 3 10 r^
1 If it were possible to ascribe the Apocalypse to the reign of Vespasian
the objections given in /3, 7, 5 above would be fatal to the identification of
Domitian with Nero redivivus. f and 77 would also stand in the way.
2 The fact that Hernias used the same imagery as J a P may be rightly used
as evidence that he knew it. Thus the Church, Vis. ii. 4, is represented by
a woman (cf. J a P i2 ls( W-) ; the enemy of the Church by a beast (6rjptov), Vis.
iv, 6-10, J a P 13 : out of the mouth of the beasts proceed fiery locusts, Vis.
iv. I, 6, J a P 9 s : whereas the foundation stones of the Heavenly Jerusalem bear
the names of the Twelve Apostles, J a P 2i 14 , and those who overcome are made
pillars in the spiritual temple, J a P 3 12 , in Hernias the apostles and other
teachers of the Church form the stones of the heavenly tower erected by the
archangels, Vis. iii. 5. i. The faithful in both are clothed in white and are
given crowns to wear, J ap 6 11 etc., 2 10 3 11 ; Hermas, Sim. viii. 2. i, 3.
xcviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
0-779 p^(rOat, i. I. 3, TTj eu/xa . . . dTr^i/ey/ceV /xe Sta dvoSt as, is
reminiscent of iy 3 aTr^ey/cti/ tie eis epr/tiov ev Trvev/xart. Barn,
xxi. 3, eyyus 6 /cvptos /cat 6 /xto-$os avVov, seems to suggest
some dependence on Rev 22 10 - 12 6 /caipos yap eyyvs eo-rtv . . .
tSov ep^oyoiat Ta^v /cat 6 tuor$os /xou tieT* e/xov. (See, however,
Is 4-O 10 .) Barn. vii. 9, eVeiS?) oi/^ovrat avrov rore TT; ^epa
TOV Trappy? e^ovTa . . . Kat ZpovcrLV Ovx OUTOS ecrrtv 6V Trore
17/xets e o-Tavpajo-a/xev, has affinities with Rev I 7 - 13 oi^erai avroi/
Tra? o<f)6a\/jios /cat otrivcs avrov e^eKeVr^o-av . . . evSeSv^tevor
TToSr/pr;. (See, however, TV^T 7 . / ^ Apostolic Fathers , p. 16.)
But as for the passages in Ignatius, ^*/ /%//. vi. i (see vol. i.
92) has nothing to do with Rev 3 12 , nor -<4<^ ^/^. xv. 3, t^a
w/zev avrov i/aot, /cai avro? 17 ev Ty/xtv ^eos, with Rev 2 1 3 : nor
does Barn. vi. 13, Xeyei 8e Kvptos iSov TTOIO) ra eo-^ara a>s TO.
Trpwra, reflect Rev 2i 5 iSou /caiva TTotw TravTa (see vol. ii. 203):
for the sense is absolutely different. Nor should we connect
Clem. Rom. Ad Cor. xxxiv. 3 (see p. Ixxvii, footnote) with Rev
22 12 .
2. In the 2nd cent. J ap was all but universally accepted in
Asia Minor, Western Syria, Africa, Rome, South Gaul.
In Asia Minor. Papias was the first, according to Andreas in
the prologue to his Commentary on J ap , to attest, not its apostolic
authorship, but its credibility. (Ilept /xeVroi TOT) 007n/euVrov r^s
/3ifi\ov TreptTTOv /x/rj/cuVeiv TOV Xoyov ^you/xe^a, rtov /m/capiW Tpry-
yoptov . . . Kai Kupt AAou, Trpoorert 8e /cat rav dp^atorepcov IlaTrt ov,
Etpryvatov, Me^oStov /cat lTTTroAirroi; 7rpoo-/xaprupoiWwv TO d^toTrto-rov. )
Eusebius, however, never definitely says that J ap was known to
Papias (H.JE. iii. 39). The statement, however, in iii. 39. 12
which he attributes to Papias, seems to be an echo of J ap (xAiaSa
Ttva <f>r)ort.v ercov eo-eo-$ai /xera ryv IK vc^cpoov aWo-rao-ty, o-co/xart/cais
rr}s Xpio~rov y3ao~tA.tas 67Tt ravr^o-i TT}S -y^? VTroarTrja-ojjitvrjs}. But
Eusebius proceeds to say that this statement of Papias was due to
his misunderstanding of certain apostolic statements (dTroo-ToA-t/cas
. . . SiT/y^o-eis), which he took literally instead of figuratively.
Melito, bishop of Sardis (160-190 A.D. fl.), wrote a commentary
(To, Trept TOV Sia/3oA.ou Kat rr)s aTTOKaXui^eaJS loodVvou), Eus. IV. 26. 2 :
Jerome, De vir. illustr. 9, understands this title to refer to two
distinct books. This work of Melito is noteworthy, since Sardis
was one of the Seven Churches. Justin, who lived at Ephesus
(circ. 135) before he went to Rome, is the first to declare that
J ap was written by John, one of the apostles of Christ : Dial.
Ixxxi. 15, Trap fjfj.lv avrjp TIS, <S ovo/xa IwdVi ?;?, el? TWV aTrocrroAwv
TOV Xpio-Tov, eV a7ro/caAv i//i ye^o/xeVi? aura) xi Aia cry 7rotr;o-etv ev
lepovcraA^tt TOVS T<3 ^/xere pa) Xptorw Trto-Tevo-avTa? Trpoe^ryreuo-e :
cf. also ApoL i. 28\which refers to Apoc. i2 9 ); Eus. iv. 18. 8.
Irenaeus maintained the apostolic authorship of all the Johannine
CIRCULATION AND RECEPTION xcix
writings in the N.T., but the evidence for his views has to be
drawn from the great work which he wrote as bishop of Lyons :
see below. Apollonius, a writer against the Montanists in
Phrygia (circ. 210 A.D.), used J ap of John as an authority in his
controversy (Eus. v. 18. 14).
In Western Syria. Theophilus, bishop of Antioch in the
latter half of the 2nd century, cites J ap in a treatise against
HermOgeneS (Eus. iv. 24), tv u> e* ryj<s aTro/ca/Vv^eoos Icoaj/i ov
In South Gaul. Irenaeus, who defended the apostolic
authorship of all the N.T. Johannine writings, carried with him to
Gaul the views that prevailed in Asia Minor ; and there, as Bishop
of Lyons (177-202 A.D.), he wrote his great work, Against all
Heresies. In this work he uses such expressions as loannes in
Apocalypsi, iv. 14. 2, 17. 6, 18. 6, 21. 3, v. 28. 2, 34. 2.
loannes Domini discipulus in Apocalypsi, iv. 20. n, v. 26. ij
in Apocalypsi videt loannes, v. 35. 2 ; per loannis Apocalypsin,
i. 26. 3. See Zahn, Gesch. N.T. Kanons, i. 202, note 2. At a
slightly earlier date, 177, the Churches of Vienne and Lyons
addressed an epistle to the Churches in Asia and Phrygia (Eus.
v. i. 10, 45 (where rfj TrapOtvw /x^rpt = the Christian Church), 55,
58) in which reference is made to Apoc. 14* I2 1 iQ 9 22 11 , the last
being introduced by the N.T. formula of Canonical Scripture
Iva f) ypa<f>r) TrXrjpwO fi.
In Alexandria. Clement follows the general tradition of the
Church, and cites J ap as scripture, Paed. ii. 119 (TO a-v^oXiKov
TOJV ypacfriov), and the work of John the apostle, Quis dives, 42,
Strom, vi. 106-107 (see Zahn, Gesch. d. N.T. Kanons^ i. 205).
Origen accepts John the Apostle as the author of the J ap , the
Gospel, and the first Epistle (In loann. torn. v. 3 ; Lommatzsch,
i. 165; Eus. vi. 25. 9). The upholders of Millenarianism in
Egypt, against whom Dionysius wrote, appealed to the Apocalypse
(Eus. vii. 24).
In Rome. On the very probable use of our author by Hermas
we have adverted above. Of this work the Muratorian Canon
writes : " Pastorem vero nuperrime temporibus nostris in urbe
Roma Hermas conscripsit." But whether Hermas used our
author or not, this Canon implies that J ap was universally
recognized at Rome : " lohannes enim in apocalypsi, licet septem
ecclesiis scribat, tamen omnibus dicit," while a few lines later,
according to the most natural restoration of the text, he states
that the Apocalypse of Peter had not such recognition.
Hippolytus (190-235 fl.), in his Ilepi rov Ai/Tixpio"rov (ed. Achelis,
1897), constantly quotes the Apocalypse. He speaks of it as
f] ypa<f>ri (chap. 5) and its author aTroVroAos /cat fjLaOrjTrjs TOV Kvpiov
(36). See Zahn, i. 203 (note).
C THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
In Carthage. In this Church, which was the daughter of the
Roman Church, J ap enjoyed an unquestioned authority at the
close of the 2nd century. Tertullian cites quotations from
eighteen out of its twenty-two chapters. He knows of only
one John, the Apostle, and he is unacquainted with any doubts of
its canonicity save on the part of Marcion. He names it the in-
strumentum Joannis (De Resurrectione^ 38) and the instrumentum
apostolicum (Pud. 12). See Zahn, i. in, 203 sq. The Acts of
Perpetua and Felicitas show many traces of dependence on our
author, as 4, "circumstantes candidates milia multa": 12, "intro-
euntes vestierunt stolas Candidas . . . et audivimus vocem unitam
dicentium Agios agios agios sine cessatione . . . et vidimus in
medio loco sedentem quasi hominem canum . . . et in dextra et
in sinistra seniores viginti quattuor." See Zahn, i. 203 sq.
Thus throughout the Christian Church during the 2nd cent,
there is hardly any other book of the N.T. so well attested and
received as J ap .
3. There were, how ever , two distinct protests against its
Johannine authorship and validity in the 2nd century. (a) The
first of these came from Marcion. He rejected it on the ground
of its strongly Jewish character (Tert. Adv. Marc. iv. 5), and
he refused to recognize John as a canonical writer (iii. 14,
" Quodsi loannem agnitum non vis, habes communem magistrum
Paulum ")
(b) The more important attack came from the Alogi the
name given to them by Epiphanius (Haer. li. 3). 1 This sect
(Haer. li. 33) rejected both the Gospel and Apocalypse and
attributed them to Cerinthus. They objected to the sensuous
symbolism of the book, and urged that it contained errors in
matters of fact, seeing that there was no Church at Thyatira.
Since Epiphanius draws most probably upon Hippolytus (190-
235) for his information, we have in Epiphanius a nearly con
temporaneous account of these opponents of J ap .
With these Alogi, as Zahn urges (i. 223-227, 237-262, ii.
967-973), the sect mentioned by Irenaeus (iii. u. 9) is to
be identified. This sect was anti-Montanist. It rejected the
Johannine books because of the support they gave the Gospel
through the doctrine of the Spirit and the Apocalypse through
its prophetic character to this Montanist party. Caius, a
Roman Churchman, though not one of the Alogi, also rejected
J ap in a manifesto (circ. 210 A.D.) against Proclus the Montanist
on the ground of its marvels and its sensuous doctrine of the
Millennium, and ascribed it to Cerinthus (Eus. H.E. iii. 28. 1-2).
There is no conclusive evidence that Caius and his school
rejected the Gospel.
1 T <j><i<rKQV(ri Toivvf ol "AXoyot : ra^rrjv y&p ai)rois
CIRCULATION AND RECEPTION ci
The writing of Caius was answered by Hippolytus 1 (215 A.D.)
in a work entitled Ke^aXaia Kara Fat ou KCU a7roA.oyt a v?rep T.
a.TroKa\v\l/<i)<s lajai/ov, fragments of which have been preserved in
a Commentary of Bar-Salibi (Gwynn, Hermathena, vi. 397-418,
vii. 137-150). From this date forward no Western Churchman
seriously doubted J ap . In Africa, Cyprian repeatedly makes
use of it.
4. The question of the authenticity of J ap reopened by
Dionysius of Alexandria, bishop of Alexandria, 247-265 A.D.
Fragments of this scholarly and temperate criticism of the
Apocalypse (Ilept ETrayyeAton/) are preserved in Eusebius (vii.
24-25). This book was written as a refutation of a work by
Nepos, an Egyptian bishop, entitled "EAeyxos AAA^yopto-Tcov,
which sought to prove that the promises made to the saints in
the Scriptures were to be taken literally in a Jewish sense and
particularly with regard to the Millennium (Eus. vii. 24). In
his refutation of this book Dionysius advances many grounds
to prove that J ap was not written by the author of the Gospel
and i John. He admits its claim to have been written by a
John, but not by the Apostle. Some of the arguments we have
given elsewhere (see p. xl).
If modern scholars had followed the lines of criticism laid
down by Dionysius their labours would have been immeasurably
more fruitful.
5- J ap rejected for some time by the Syro- Palestinian Church
and by the Churches of Asia Minor. The criticism of Dionysius
in discrediting the apostolic authorship of J ap discredited also its
canonicity. Eusebius (260-340 A.D.) evidently agreed with the
conclusions of Dionysius. Seeking to carry further the con
clusions of that scholar, he suggests that J ap was written by John
the Elder of whom Papias wrote (Eus. iii. 39. 6). He is doubtful
(iii. 24. 1 8, 25. 4) whether to reckon it among the accepted
(6/AoAoyou/x-ei/a) or the rejected (v60a). Some years later Cyril
of Jerusalem (315-386) not only excluded it from the list of
canonical books, but also forbade its use in public and private.
After enumerating the books of the N.T. in which the Apocalypse
is not mentioned, he proceeds to say (Catech. iv. 36, TO, Se AotTm,
TTOLVTO. e(o KticrOu) tv Setn-epu). KCU o<ra /xev ev eKK\r)(riais pr] avayiv-
tocTKerai, ravra /x-^Se Kara crcurrov di ayiVwo-/ce).
The influence of Dionysius criticism spread also to Asia
Minor. Thus J ap does not appear in Canon 60 of the Synod
of Laodicea (circ. 360), nor in Canon 85 of the Apost. Constitutions
1 Another work of Hippolytus in defence of the Johannine writings may be
inferred from the list of works engraven on the back of the chair on which
the statue of the bishop wa? seated : vtrkp rov /card, I&dvvrjv evayye\iov Kal
See Lightfoot, St. Clement , I. ii. 420.
cii THE REVELATION OF ST, JOHN
(Zahn, ii. 177 sqq., 197 sqq.), nor in the list of Gregory of
Nazianzus (ob. 389). Amphilochius of Iconium (ob. 394)
states that J ap is rejected by most authorities (ot TrActW Se ye |
voOov Xeyovcriv).
The school of Antioch did not look with favour on J ap .
Chrysostom (ob. 407) represented this school in Constantinople.
Theodore (350-428) carried with him the views of this school
to Mopsuestia in Cilicia, and Theodoret (386-457) to the east
to Cyrrhus. None of the three appears to have mentioned it.
Other lists from which it is excluded are the so-called Synopsis
of Chrysostom, the List of 60 Books, and the Chronography of
Nicephorus.
6. Quite independently of the criticism of Alexandria, J ap was
either ignored or unknown in the Eastern- Syrian and Armenian
Churches for some centuries. The Apocalypse formed no part of
the Peshitto Version of the N.T. which was made by Rabula of
Edessa, 411 (Burkitt, St. Ephraems Quotations, p. 57). The gap
was afterwards supplied by a translation in 508 by Polycarpus for
Philoxenus of Mabug, and by that of Thomas of Harkel, 6 1 6. On
these the reader should consult Gwynn, The Apocalypse of John in
Syria, pp. xc-cv, and Bousset s Offenbarung, 26-28. But it took
centuries for J ap to establish itself in the Syrian Churches. Junilius
(Departibus divinae legis, i. 4), who reproduces the lectures of Paul
of Nisibis, writes (551 A.D.), " De loannis apocalypsi apud Orient-
ales admodum dubitatur." Jacob of Edessa (ob. 708) cites it as
Scripture, and yet Bar Hebraeus (ob. T2o8) regards it as the work
of Cerinthus or the other John. In the Armenian Church it
first appears as a canonical book in the i2th century (Conybeare,
Armenian Version of Revelation, p. 64).
this same attitude towards it was gradually adopted by the Eastern
Churches. In the Church of the West, notwithstanding the
attacks of Gaius and the rejection of its apostolic authorship by
Dionysius, writers were unanimous after the elaborate defence by
Hippolytus of the canonicity of J ap . Only Jerome takes up a
doubtful attitude towards it; for, while in Ep. ad Dardanum,
129, he appears inclined to accept it, elsewhere (In Ps. 149)
he ranks it in a class midway between canonical and apocryphal.
J ap found a succession of expounders in Victorinus of Pettau
(ob. 303), Tyconius, Primasius, and is duly recorded in all the
Western lists of the canonical books.
In Alexandria, Athanasius (293-373) recognized its Johannine
authorship and canonicity, and in due course the Greek com
mentaries of Oecumenius, Andreas, and Arethas.
Thus throughout the world the full canonicity of the
Apocalypse was accepted in the i3th century save in the
8 7. J ap was always accepted as canonical in the West, and
OBJECT OF THE SEER cm
Nestorian Church. With the views of later times the present
work is not here concerned. For these, readers may consult
Bousset, Offenbarung, 19-34; or the present writer s Studies in
the Apocalypse, 1-78.
XL
OBJECT OF THE SEER AND HIS METHODS VISION
AND REFLECTION.
i. The object of the Seer is to proclaim the coming of God s
kingdom on earth, and to assure the Christian Church of the
final triumph of goodness, not only in the individual or within
its own borders, not only throughout the kingdoms of the world
and in their relations one to another, but also throughout the
whole universe. Thus its gospel was from the beginning at
once individualistic and corporate, national and international and
cosmic. While the Seven Churches represent entire Christendom,
Rome represents the power of this world. With its claims to
absolute obedience, Rome stands in complete antagonism to
Christ. Between these two powers there can be no truce or
compromise. The strife between them must go on inexorably
without let or hindrance, till the kingdom of the world has
become the kingdom of the Lord and of His Christ. This
triumph is to be realized on earth. There is to be no legislation,
no government, no statecraft which is not finally to be brought
into subjection to the will of Christ. J ap is thus the Divine Statute
Book of International Law, as well as a manual for the guidance
of the individual Christian. In this spirit of splendid optimism
the Seer confronts the world-wide power of Rome with its
blasphemous claims to supremacy over the spirit of man. He
is as ready as the most throughgoing pessimist to recognize the
apparently overwhelming might of the enemy, but he does not,
like the pessimist, fold his hands in helpless apathy, or weaken
the courage of his brethren by idle jeremiads and tears.
Gifted with an insight that the pessimist wholly lacks, we can
recognize the full horror of the evils that are threatening to
engulf the world, and yet he never yields to one despairing
thought of the ultimate victory of God s cause on earth. He
greets each fresh conquest achieved by triumphant wrong, with
a fresh trumpet call to greater faithfulness, even when that faithful
ness is called to make the supreme self-sacrifice. The faithful
are to follow whithersoever the Lamb that was slain leads, and
for such, whether they live or die, there can be no defeat, and so
with song and thanksgiving he marks each stage of the world
strife which is carried on ceaselessly and inexorably till, as in
civ THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
i Cor i5 24 27 , every evil power in heaven, or earth, or under the
earth is overthrown and destroyed for ever.
2. Methods of the Seers generally psychical experiences
and reflection or reason. Prophecy and apocalyptic for the most
part use the same methods for learning and teaching the will of
God. The knowledge of the prophet as of the Seer came through
dreams, visions, trances, and through spiritual, and yet not
unconscious, communion with God wherein every natural faculty
of man was quickened to its highest power. When we wish to
distinguish the prophet and the seer, we say that the prophet
hears and announces the word of God, whereas the seer sees and
recounts his vision. But this definition only carries us but a
little way, for these phenomena are common to both. Hence
we must proceed further, and deal with the means which the
seer uses in order to set forth his message. These are psychical
experiences, and reflection or rather reason embracing the powers
of insight^ imagination, and judgment.
Psychical experiences. These consist of (a) dreams; (b) dreams
combined with translation of the spirit ; and (c) visions.
(a) Dreams. Dreams conveying a revelation. Dreams
play a great role in Jewish apocalypses. They are found in
Dan 2 1 4 5 y 1 ; in i Enoch 83-90, 2 Enoch i 2 etc.; Test.
Naph. 5 1 6 1 7 1 ; 4 Ezra n 1 i2 3 I3 1 - 13 . Such dreams are
assigned to a divine source and are regarded as conveying
revelations of God. Now such dreams are in many of these
passages called visions : cf. Dan 4 5 7 1 S 18 ^- ; i Enoch 83-90, where
the two dreams 85 1 are called two visions in 83 2 ; Test. Levi,
where the vision of 8 1 is called a dream in 8 18 ; Test. Naph.,
where what is called dreams in 7 1 is called visions in 5 1 ; 4 Ezra,
where what is called dreams in n 1 I3 1 is called visions in
I2 io j.,21. 25 J^IT j n 2 g ar t ne Seer seems to have waking
visions, except in 36 1 53 1 .
Now in these apocalypses dreams and visions are equally
authoritative sources of divine knowledge as well as in the O.T.
Cf. i Sam 28 6 - 15 , Deut I3 1 3 , Jer 23 25 32 27 9 298, Joel 2 28 . But it
is remarkable that dreams fall into the background in the ist
cent. A.D. in Christian literature. 1 Thus the Hebrew Test.
Naph. (date uncertain) 2 1 4 1 7 L 5 speaks only of visions, and in
3 13 treats a dream as no true source of divine knowledge. See
my edition of the Test. XII Patriarchs, pp. 221-223. In the
N.T. dreams are not divine means of revelation unless in Matt
T 2o 2 i2-is. 19. 22 2^. Hence it is only visions that are recounted
1 This is not the case in the Talmud. Belief in dreams was the rule, and
disbelief the exception. Cf. Berakhoth 55-58, Sanh. 30*, Ber 28 a , Hor I3 b .
Sirach, on the other hand, declares that dreams are vanity, 31 (34) 1 " 8 . See
Jewish Encyc. iv. 654 sqq.
DREAMS AND VISIONS CV
in the Apocalypse. It is not even said that the Seer fell asleep
and saw a vision. It is simply said, " I saw." In 4 Ezra, on the
other hand, sleep precedes the visions in n 1 I3 1 and in 2 Bar
3 61 53 1 ) though in other sections this element of the dream is
wholly wanting.
(b) Dreams combined with a translation of the spirit of the
Seer. Test. Levi 2 5 " 9 5 1 - 7 . This combination reappears in
Hermas, Vis. i. I. 3, d</>v7ri/wcra *cat irvevpa. /xe ZXafttv KCU aTrrJvey/ceV
//. oY avoSias TIVOS.
(c) Visions. In these the ordinary consciousness seems to
be suspended, and sensible symbols appear to be literally seen
with another faculty. These visions fall into three classes.
(a) Visions in sleep. All the dreams mentioned in i. (a}
above which are called visions by the writers could
be brought under this head. Cf. Test. Lev 8 L 18 .
(ft) Visions in a trance. Cf. Ezek i 1 , Test. Jos 19*, 2 Bar
22 1 55 l-3 7 61 } ActS I0 10 , ApOC jlOaqq. (^y ev 6>>?/ CJ
Trvet yuari) and passim where /cat etSov is used. Yet
the latter pay be otherwise explained, as we shall see.
(y) Visions in which the spirit is translated. Ezek 3 12 - 14 8 3 ,
Dan 8 1 2 , i Enoch yi 1 - 5 , 2 Enoch 3 1 , 2 Bar6 3s <Ki-,
Asc. Is 6-1 1, Apoc. 4 1 iy 3 2i 10 . St. Paul (2 Cor
i2 3 ) does not know whether in his vision he has
experienced an actual translation of the spirit
or not 1
(8) Waking visions. Daniel seems to experience a trance
when awake in io 5 , Stephen in Acts 7 55 , Zacharias
in Luke i 11 - 20 . The fundamental ideas underlying
some of the shorter or even of the more elaborate
visions in our author may belong to this category,
such as i 10 20 4 1 8 y 9 - 17 8 3 5 1414. 18-20 I5 2-4 20 n-i5
2 j 5a. 4d. 5b. l-4abc 2 2 3-5 f
3. Value of such psychical experiences depends not on their being
actual experiences, but on their source^ their moral environment, and
their influence on character? Of the reality of such psychical
experiences no modern psychologist entertains a doubt. The
value, however, of such experiences is not determined by their
reality, but by facts of a wholly different nature. Real psychical
experiences were not confined to Israel. They were familiar
at the oracular shrines of the ethnic religions. The most
1 For similar psychical experiences in heathenism, cf. Reitzenstein,
Poirnandres, 5, 9 sq. etc. ; Dieterich, Eine Mithras -Liturgie.
2 See on the whole question of this chapter, Joyce, The Inspiration of
Prophecy, 1910; Gunkel, Die Wirkungen des heiligen Geistes, 1899; Weinel,
Die Wirkungen des Geistes J" d der Geister, 1899.
cvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
celebrated of these was the ancient world Oracle at Delphi.
This Oracle exerted generally a good influence on Hellenic life.
But the hope of continuous progress by such agencies among
the Greeks was foredoomed from the outset owing to two
causes the first being their association with polytheism and
other corrupt forms of religion, and the second being the failure
of Hellas to respond to the moral claims as it had done to those
of the intellect. But it was otherwise in Israel, where seers such
as Samuel prepared the way for the prophet, and moral and
religious claims received a progressive and ever deepening
response. Now prophet and seer alike had dreams, visions,
and trances, and these psychical experiences in Israel were
distinguished from those of the heathen seers not by their
greater reality, for they were in the main equally real in both
cases, but by quite a different standard, i.e. by the source from
which they sprang, the environment in which they were produced, and
the influence they exercised on the will and character. In all these
respects prophecy and apocalyptic were duly authenticated in the
O.T. as they are in the N.T.
4. Literal descriptions of such experiences hardly ever pos
sible. The language of the seer is symbolic. In regard, therefore,
to the visions recounted by our author and other O.T. and
N.T. visionaries, the main question is the character of the
religious faith they express and the religious and moral duties
they enforce. Whether they are literal descriptions of actual
experiences is a wholly secondary question. A literal discription
would only be possible in the case of the simplest visions, in
which the things seen were already more or less within the range
of actual human experience, as, for instance, in Amos 8 1 2
" Thus the Lord God showed me : and behold a basket of
summer fruit. And he said, Amos, what seest thou? And I
said, A basket of summer fruit." Cf. Jer iiii. issqq.^ B ut j n
our author the visions are of an elaborate and complicated
nature, and the more exalted and intense the experience, the
more incapable it becomes of literal description. Moreover, if
we believe, as the present writer does, that behind these visions
there is an actual substratum of reality belonging to the higher
spiritual world, then the seer could grasp the things seen and
heard in such visions, only in so far as he was equipped for the
task by his psychical powers and the spiritual development
behind him. In other words, he could at the best only partially
apprehend the significance of the heavenly vision vouchsafed
him. To the things seen he perforce attached the symbols more
or less transformed that these naturally evoked in his mind,
symbols that he owed to his own waking experience or the
tradition of the past j and the sounds he heard naturally clothed
SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCE AT ITS HIGHEST cvii
themselves in the literary forms with which his memory was
stored. Thus the seer laboured under a twofold disability. His
psychical powers were generally unequal to the task of apprehending
the full meaning of the heavenly vision, and his powers of expression
were frequently unable to set forth the things he had apprehended.
In the attempt to describe to his readers what was wholly
beyond the range of their knowledge and experience, the seer
had thus constant recourse to the use of symbols. Hence in his
literary presentment of what he has seen and heard in the
moments of transcendent rapture, the images he uses are
symbolic and not literal or pictorial. In fact, symbolism in
regard to such subjects is the only language that seer and
layman alike can employ. The appeal of such symbolism is
made to the religious imagination. In this way it best discloses
the permanent truth of which it is the vehicle and vesture.
5. Highest form of spiritual experience. There is a higher
form of spiritual experience than either that of the prophetic
audition or the prophetic vision. In this higher experience the
divine insight is won in a state of intense spiritual exaltation, in
which the self loses immediate self-consciousness without
becoming unconscious, and the best faculties of the mind are
quickened to their highest power. Therein the soul comes into
direct touch with truth or God Himself. The light, that in such high
experience visits the wrestling spirit, comes as a grace, an insight
into reality, which the soul could never have achieved by its own
unaided powers, and yet can come only to the soul that has
fitted itself for its reception. In such experience the eye of
the seer may see no vision, the ear of the seer hear no voice, and
yet therein is spiritual experience at its highest. Such experiences
must ever be beyond the range of literal description. They can
only be suggested by symbols. They cannot be adequately
expressed by any human combination of words or sounds or
colours. At the same time such spiritual experiences of the seer
have their analogies in those of the musician, poet, painter, and
scholar.
6. Reason embracing the powers of insight, imagination, and
judgment. In the manifold experiences enumerated in 2, 4-5,
the use of the reason is always presupposed, but as the secondary
and not the primary agent in action, save perhaps in 5. Under
this heading, however, we deal rather with the normal use of the
reason, while the seer makes (a] an arrangement of the materials
so as to construct a divine theodicee or philosophy of religion ;
(b] in his creation of allegories ; (c) in the adaptation of traditional
materials to his own purpose and their reinterpretation ; (d) in
the conventional use of the phrase " I saw."
(a) Arrangement of materials. Now, whereas the collected
cviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
works of a prophet do not necessarily and in point of fact never
show strict structural unity and steady development of thought,
it is otherwise with the seer, and above all other seers with the
work of our author, which exhibits these characteristics in an
unparalleled degree. The reader has only to consult the Plan
of the Book (pp. xxiii-xxviii) to be assured of this fact. The work
of the artist and thinker is seen not only in the perfectness of the
form in which many of the visions are recorded, but also in the
skill with which the individual visions are woven together in
order to represent the orderly and inevitable character of the
divine drama. For not a single vision, save the three that are
proleptic, can be removed from the text without inflicting irre
parable damage on the whole work. The philosophical and
dramatic character of J ap is due to the Seer as a religious
thinker. On the other hand, the individual visions, where these
are not freely constructed or borrowed from sources, are due to
his visionary experiences. Apocalyptic, and not prophecy, was
the first to grasp the great idea that all history, alike human,
cosmological, and spiritual, is a unity.
(b] Allegories freely constructed. The seers make use not
infrequently of allegory. Allegories are generally freely con
structed and figurative descriptions of real events and persons.
With this form of literature we might compare Bunyan s Pilgrim! s
Progress. Their object is to lay bare the eternal issues that are
at stake in the actual conflicts of the day. Dan n, i Enoch
85-90, 2 Bar liii-lxxiv, 4 Ezra 11-12, are undoubtedly freely
invented allegories.
The work of the seer is not affected injuriously by his
adoption of this literary form in order to publish his message to
the world. The question of importance is not the form in which
it is conveyed, but the nature of the religious conviction which has
therein found expression. The Seven Seals and the Seven Bowls
may in part be ranked under this division and in part under the
next.
(c) Adaptation of traditional material. Our Seer had many
sources at his disposal, and he has freely laid them under
contribution, re-editing and adapting them to their new contexts.
If we admit his right to construct allegories freely to convey his
message to the Church, he had the same right to use traditional
material for the same purpose. In fact, all the Jewish writers of
apocalypses did so. The sealing of the 144,000, y 4 8 , and the
Heavenly Jerusalem, 2i 9 -22 2 - 14 15 - 17 , are constructed and re
written largely out of pre-existing material, but their meaning is
in the main transformed. In not a few cases the sources have
not been wholly adapted to the contexts into which they have
been introduced by the Seer. See p. Ixii sqq.
DOCTRINE OF GOD Cix
(<I) Conventional use of the phrase "/ saw" Just as the
prophet came to use the words "thus saith the Lord," even
when there was no actual psychical experience in which he
heard a voice, so he came to use the words "I saw" when there
was no actual vision. The same conventional use of both these
phrases belongs to apocalyptic as well as to prophecy. They
serve simply to express the divine message with which the
prophet or the seer is entrusted. How far this use prevails in
J ap would be difficult to determine. We might, however, place
The Letters to the Seven Churches under this category. These
letters, if the present writer s hypothesis is correct, were written
by our author during the reign of Vespasian. They are assigned
to Christ in our text in the words TO irvwpa Ae yei (2 7 - 1L 17 etc.).
This is quite in keeping with the usage of the N.T. For the
words of the prophets practically claim a divine authority. Cf.
Acts 5 lsqq -, i Cor 5 4 - 5 , i Tim i 20 . Such words are not merely
men s words; cf. raSe Ae yei TO Tn/cS/x.a, Acts 2i n , as Agabus
declares, also 7 56 . In i Tim 4 1 the words TO 7n/ev/x,a p^Tws Ae yei
are equivalent to "a certain prophet has said." In these ex
pressions the person of the prophet is ignored. Now our author
claims to belong to the fellowship of the prophets, and he can
rightly use the phrase TO Tn/ev/xa Ae yei to express his convictions
as a prophet.
XII.
SOME DOCTRINES OF OUR AUTHOR.
The chief theme of the Apocalypse is not what God in Christ
has done for the world, but what He will yet do, and what the
assured consummation will be. It is therefore the Gospel of
faith and hope, and seeks to inspire the Churches anew in these
respects ; for that the end is nigh. As it sets forth its theme, it
instructs, though incidentally, and its teaching is always fresh
and in some respects unique.
i. The doctrine of God. If the doctrine of God were drawn
only from the direct statements which the Apocalypse makes on
this subject, though in some respects it would transcend the level
reached in the O.T. (as in its teaching on God s fatherhood, etc.),
in many others (such as His infinite mercy and forgiveness) it
would fall far short of it. Many scholars have emphasized this
peculiarity of the Apocalypse, and insisted accordingly on the
Jewish character of its doctrine of God. But to draw such a
conclusion betrays a total misapprehension of the question at
issue. The Christian elements are not dwelt upon because they
can all be inferred from what the Book teaches regarding the
CX THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
Son ; for all that the Son has and is is derived from the Father.
Hence the conception of the Father under this heading must be
completed from that of the Son in the next. The conception is
on the whole severely monotheistic.
(a) First as regards the ethical side, God is holy, righteous,
and true. He alone is holy (/xovos ocnos, i5 4 i6 5 : cf. 4 8 6 10 ) ; He
is the True One, 6 10 (a\.r)0u>6s dA^rys in our author), who keepeth
covenant ; with this truthfulness is associated His righteousness in
judgment, i5 3 i6 7 ig 1 - 2 . From these spring His wrath against
sin, 6 17 ii 18 i9 15 ; and His avenging of all the wrongs done on
the earth, 6 10 iQ 2 . He is the Judge of all the dead, 20 11 15 .
(b) The gracious attributes of God are not brought forward,
but are rather to be inferred from the fact that He is called the
Father of Jesus Christ, i 6 2 27 3 5 - 21 I4 1 , and the Father also
of all such as conquer, 2i 7 , and will dwell with them and
be their God for ever, 2i 3 . Herein is the consummation of all
the world s travail. The divine world is to come into the world
of history and realize itself there, seeing that all things come from
God and end in God. But this idea belongs in part to (c).
(c) God is everlasting and omnipotent. First, as everlasting, He
is designated as 6 r)V /cat 6 uV /cat 6 ep^o/xei^o?, I 4 4 8 ; 6 aV /cat 6 r)v,
II 17 l6 5 (see vol. i. 10 sq.) ; 6 GJV ts r. atui/as r. atwi/an/, 4 9 io 6 J 5 7 .
Next, He is omnipotent. Our author s favourite expression for
this idea is /cuptos (>l6 14 IQ 15 ) o Oebs 6 Trai/ro/c/oarwp, 4 8 ii 17 i^ 3
i6 7 - 14 IQ 6 - 15 2 1 22 ; He is also designated 6 Seo-TroVr/s, 6 10 ; o/cuptos
Lwv, II 15 ), II 15 I4 1 3 i5 4 j Kvptos 6 0eos, 22 5 ; 6 /cvpios /cat 6
T7/XWI/, 4 11 . But though omnipotent, His omnipotence is
ethically and not metaphysically conceived. It is not uncon
ditioned force. That He possesses such absolute power is an
axiom of the Christian faith, but He will not use it, since such
use of it would compel the recognition of His sovereignty, not
win it, would enslave man, not make him free. Hence the
recognition of this sovereignty advances part passu with the
advance of Christ s Kingdom on earth, and each fresh advance is
followed by thanksgivings in heaven ; for the perfect realization
of God s Kingdom in the world is the one divine event to which
the whole creation moves, 4" 5 13 7 12 n 15 .
(d) He is the Creator, 4 11 i4 7 . Yet see 2 (c) on the cre
ative activity of Christ.
(e) He is the Judge of all the dead, 20 11 15 .
2 Jesus Christ. The teaching of our author on this subject
is very comprehensive. Only the main points of it can be dealt
with under the following heads, which are not always logically
distinct (a) The Historical Christ. () The Exalted Christ.
(c) The Unique Son of God. (d) The Great High Priest.
(*) The Pre-existent Christ. (/) The Divine Christ,
DOCTRINE OF CHRIST Cxi
(a) The Historical Christ. He is most frequently designated
by His personal name "Jesus," i 9 i2 17 i4 12 etc., occasionally by
the originally official name "Christ," u 15 i2 10 2o 4 - 6 , and by the
combination of the two, i 1 - 2 - 5 22 21 . He is of Israelitish birth,
being the Root of David, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, 5 5 , and
born in the midst of the Jewish theocracy, I2 1 3 - 5 , i.e. the yvvij
Trept/3el3X.-r)fjivr] TOV rjXiov. That there is no reference here to the
Virgin Birth is clear from the fact that our author is here using
a Jewish source, which naturally represented the Messiah as one
born naturally in the midst of the community. Besides, "the
woman " has other children (i2 17 TWI/ XOLTT&V TOV o-Tre p/xaros avTTjs).
Thus the faithful are sons of this woman as Jesus is. On the
other hand, they become sons of God, 2i 7 , which Jesus is originally
and uniquely (i 6 2 27 3 5 - 21 I4 1 ). He has twelve apostles, 2i 14 ;
His crucifixion in Jerusalem is referred to, n 8 ; His resurrection,
i 5 - 18 , and ascension, 3 21 i2 5 .
(b) The Exalted Christ. Nowhere in the N.T. is the glory of
the exalted Christ so emphasized. He is said to be " Like a
Son of Man," i 13 I4 14 an apocalyptic expression first applied to
the Messiah in i Enoch 46 1 , denoting a supernatural Being in
dignity above the angels. He is described as the Faithful
Witness, the Sovereign of the dead, the Ruler of the living, i 5 ;
as the resurrection and the life, and so the exclusive Mediator
of salvation (e^cu ras /cXcis TOV OO.VO.TOV KOA. TOV aSov, I 18 ). He
is the Supreme Head of the Church, the Centre of all its life
(ev //.e o-o) TWI/ Av^i/taji/, i 13 2 1 ) and the Master of its destinies (<i\^v
<h/ T-fj oeia x L P^ avrov do-repas eTrra, i 16 ), chastening its individual
members and judging them from love and in love, 3 19 ; promis
ing them that conquer in the coming tribulation every blessing
of the Kingdom of God, 2 7 - 1L 17 - 26 - 28 3 5 - 12 - 21 ; embracing them
in a perfect fellowship, 3 20 , and glorifying all who depart in this
fellowship with the beatitude pronounced by God Himself, i4 13 .
And even over those who are without the borders of the Church,
He exercises a silent yet real sway, which more and more will
come into manifestation and break in pieces the hostile peoples,
2 27 i2 5 iQ 15 ; for He is "King of kings and Lord of lords,"
i; 14 iQ 16 . And to Him is committed the Messianic judgment,
L 7 j^U. 18-20 I nll-21 2O 7-10 22 12 .
(c) As Unique Son of God^ Pre-existent and Divine. Whereas
the faithful become sons of God, 2i 7 , He is Son of God essentially,
i 6 2 18 - 27 3 5 - 2 i 141. He is "the Word of God," i 9 13 , "the Holy,
the True," 3 7 , even as God is, 6 10 ; "the First and the Last," i 17
2 s 22 i3b . K tne Aip na an( j t h e Omega, the Beginning and the End,"
22 i3 titles that are used by God of Himself in 21 as denoting
the source and goal of all things. In the light of these words we
can rightly interpret 3 14 17 d/a^ Tijs KTIO-CWS rov Ocov. This does
cxii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
not mean the first KTIOTIS of God (as in Prov 8 22 ), but the active
principle in creation the atrux or cause. The words, " I am He
that liveth and was dead, and behold I am alive for evermore,
i 17 18 , recall to some extent the divine name "which is, and which
was, and which is to come," i 4 4 8 . He sits with God on His
throne, 3 21 y 17 i2 5 , "the throne of God and the Lamb, 22 1 - 3 .
The divine worship offered to Christ in 5 12 is described in the
same terms as that offered to God in 4 10 , and the same hymn of
praise is sung in honour of both Christ, 5 13 , and God, 7 10 , 1 and
during the Millennial reign the saints minister to Him as
to God, 2o 6 . Many designations which belong alone to God in
the O.T. are freely used of Christ. He is described in i 14 - 15 in
terms used of the Ancient of Days in Dan 7 9 . He searcheth the
heart and the reins, 2 23 , as God in Jer ly 10 , Ps 7 10 . His are the
seven eyes that are sent out into all the earth, 5 6 , as are those of
Yahweh, Zech 4 10 : as Yahweh s garments in Is 63 L 2 , His are
sprinkled with blood, i9 13 ; and as Yahweh in Deut io 17 , He also
is Lord of lords, i; 14 . Our author thus appears to co-ordinate
God and Christ. Yet the relation is one rather of subordination
than of equality. He never goes so far as the author of the
Fourth Gospel. He does not state that God and Christ are one,
nor does he ever call Him God. And yet He is to all intents
and purposes God the eternal Son of God, and the impression
conveyed is that in all that He is, and in all that He does, He
is one with the Father, and is a true revelation of God in the
sphere of human history. Only in three definite respects is He
represented as second to the Father. First, absolute existence
is not attributed to Him as to the Father the idea conveyed
by the words, 6 u>i KCU 6 ty KCU 6 epxo/xei/os, i 4 4 8 (n 17 i6 5 ).
Yet see i 17 2 8 22 13 above. Next, the final Judgment belongs to
the Father alone, 20 11 15 . Thirdly, though He is the active prin
ciple in creation, 3 14 , it is the Father who is the Creator, 4 11 i4 7 . 2
1 Our author is deeply conscious of the impassable gulf that separates the
creature and the Creator, and the mediating angel sternly refuses such worship
on the ground that it is due to God alone, 22 9 .
2 It must not be overlooked that Christ s fitness to undertake the shaping of
the world s destinies is attributed to His faithfulness unto death. He had
earned it by His self-sacrifice :
"Worthy art thou to take the book
And to open the seals thereof;
For thou wast slain,
And hast redeemed unto God with thy blood
Men of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,
And hast made them unto our God a kingdom and priests,
And they shall reign upon the earth," 5 9 " 10 .
Again in 2 26 ~ 2S Christ promises to make those that conquer rulers over the
heathen even as He too had received this power from His Father, and in 3 21
DOCTRINE OF CHRIST cxiii
(ct} As Great High Priest: Lamb of God. It is probable
that Christ is represented as a priest in i 13 where He is "clothed
with a garment down to the foot." But this idea is wholly over
shadowed by another, expressed by the designation "the Lamb,"
where Christ is not the Priest but the Lamb slain. This desig
nation occurs twenty-eight times in our author in reference to
Christ. But in this phrase two ideas quite distinct are com
bined, 1 the most prominent one a Christian development is
that of the Lamb as a victim apviov . . . ws eo-^ay/xeVov, 5 6 - 12
i2 n i3 8 and elsewhere. The second idea derived from
i Enoch and Test. XII Patr. is that of a lamb who is a leader
either a spiritual leader, as in 7 17 i4 L 4 , cf. i Enoch 8Q 45 where
Samuel is so symbolized, or a military leader, 5 6 , i.e., a lamb
" with seven horns and seven eyes," that is, a Being of transcen
dent power and knowledge : the Messiah is so symbolized in
i Enoch Qo 38 , Test. Jos iQ 8 . 2 This conception, which is borrowed
in the main from Jewish Apocalyptic, comes to the front in ly 14 ,
where it is foretold that the ten Parthian kings will war with the
Lamb and the Lamb will overcome them TO apviov viKTJcm
avrov s (cf. Test. Jos. i9 8 , in footnote 2 below, for the same words
applied to the Jewish Messiah).
But these two ideas are merged together by our author, as we
see in 5 6 . The Lamb is at once the triumphant Messiah, lead
ing His people to victory, and the suffering Messiah who lays
down His life for His people. This latter conception is non-
Jewish. 8 But after the death of Christ this fact was soon
to make them share in His throne even as His Father had made Him to
share in His throne because of His having proved a conqueror.
1 See Expositor, 1910, vol. x. 173-187, 266-281. Spitta, Streitfragen der
Gcschichte Jesu : Das Johannes- Evangdium ah Quelle der Geschichte Jesu,
1910. I have strengthened the evidence adduced by Spitta by further facts
from I Enoch and the Testaments in the next note.
2 This usage is well attested in i Enoch, where, 89 45 (i6i B.C.), Samuel as a
leader is called a lamb, and likewise David and Solomon, Sg 45 - 48 , before they
were anointed kings. All the faithful in the early Maccabean period are also
called lambs, 90- 8 , but all these are without horns. In go 9 - 12 , however, there
arise "horned lambs," and Judas Maccabaeus is such a lamb "with a great
horn." Thus "the horned lamb" is a symbol for the leader of the Jewish
Theocracy. But it is also used of the Messiah in i Enoch 9<D 38 and in the
Test. Joseph I9 8 (109-107 B.C.), where the words, -jrpor)\eev d/uiv6s, /cat ...
iravTa TO, drjpla 6pfj.wv KO.T ai/roO /cat eviirrjo ev avra 6 d/j.v6s, refer to one of the
Maccabees, most probably to John Hyrcanus. Now, since the author of the
Testaments regarded John Hyrcanus as the Messiah (see my edition of Test.
XII Patr. pp. xcvii-viii, Reub 6 7 12 , Levi 8 14 18, Jud 24 1 3 , Jos I9 5 9 ), it
follows that the term "lamb," or more particularly "horned lamb," was in
apocalyptic writings a symbol for the Messiah. In our author the former
appears in I7 14 , the latter in 5 6 . In I3 11 the second Beast assimilates itself to
the horned lamb, i.e., to ,he Messiah : see vol. i. 358.
3 See Dalman, Der leidende und der sterbende Messias der Synagoge im
ersten nachchristlichen Jahrtausend^ 1888.
h
CX1V THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
explained, as already foretold under the influence of such a
passage as Is 53 7 " As the lamb that is led to the slaughter, and
as a sheep that before her shearers is dumb, yea, he openeth not
his mouth." In Acts 8 32 83 this passage is interpreted of Christ.
Under the designation " the Lamb," therefore, there lies the
ideas of sacrifice and triumphant might. Out of love to man
and with a view to redeem him, Jesus sacrifices Himself (i 5
TW dyaTroWt fjfjLas /ecu Xvaravri ^/xas CK raV d/xapTtaV
CTrooycrev ^as /JcuriAciW, tepee? TU> 0eu> : 5 9 eax^ayrys Kat
ru> $ew eV TW at/zaTt crov CK Tracr^s ^>vX^s . . . K
TO) 0ew ^/xaiv /?ao-tAetW Kai tepets). The conquest of sin is only
to be achieved through self-sacrifice. Nothing but the self-
sacrifice of holy love can overcome the principle of selfishness
and sin that dominates the world. The Lamb who conquers
is the Lamb who has given Himself up as a willing sacrifice.
But the principle of love going forth in sacrifice is older than
the world, i3 8 the Lamb was slain from its foundation. And he
who would follow Christ must conquer in like fashion (3 21 6 VIKWI/
8w(7(o aura; Ka$tVat yaer e/xou eV rw $poVo> fjiov, o>s Kayo) evi /oycra
Kat K(iOi<ra /xcra TOV Trarpos JJLOV cv TW 6povu> avrov). The aim of
Christ s work is not the cancelling of guilt, but the destruction
of sin in the sinner, his spiritual deliverance and redemption.
Only by His life and death can He win man from sin : this is
the cost incurred. Hence the figure of purchase is used 5 9 i4 3 ,
but there is no suggestion of a ransom paid to God or a lower
being.
Hence, since the Lamb as the Redeemer stands in the midst
of the throne of God, 5 6 7 17 , and the throne of God is His throne,
22 1 - 3 , everything that is affirmed of the Son is to be affirmed of
the Father. The Son is a revelation of the Father on the stage
of the world s history. Hence, as the Father is supreme in
power, He is supreme in love going forth in sacrifice. Thus the
principle of self-sacrificing love belongs to the essence of the
Godhead. God s almightiness is not only a moral force, as we
have already seen (see i (c) ad fin. \ but a redemptive one,
which can only realize itself in moral and spiritual victory.
Thus divine omnipotence and divine love and self-sacrifice are
indissolubly linked together for the world s redemption from
eternity and for evermore.
3. The Spirit. There is no definitely conceived doctrine
of the Spirit in our author. In i 4 the editor sought to introduce
the doctrine of the Trinity by inserting Kat 0.71-0 ruv CTTTO.
Tri/ev/xaTwr TWV ei/uJTTiov TOV Opovov avrov : see vol. i. 1113. -^ u ^
such a grotesque conception has no place in our author. In the
words TO 7n/vju,a Ae yet the Spirit of Christ is meant in 2 7< n - 17> 29
3 6 - 13 - 22 ; for in all the seven Epistles the Speaker is Christ.
DOCTRINE OF WORKS cxv
The same is true in i4 ls 22 17 . See vol. ii. 179 ; vol. i. Introd.
xi. 6 (d).
4. Doctrine of Works. The necessity of works is strongly
enforced in our author, since men s works follow with them, and
men are judged according to their works, 2o 12 22 12 , which are
recorded in the books, 20 12 . 1 These doctrines imply man s free
will and self-determination. On the other hand, the term
"book of life," i3 8 i; 8 , seems to express divine predestination.
But this is not necessarily so. It need express nothing more
than God s omniscience from the beginning of the world. The
words K\rjTOL, K\KTol Kcu TTioTTOL, i y 14 , set forth God s share and
man s share in man s salvation : the call (K^CTIS) remains
ineffective without faith (TUO-TIS) a word which in our author
means faithfulness or fidelity in 2 19 i3 10 , and can also be so in
2 13 I4 12 .
But what does our author mean by " works " ? These are
not observances of the Mosaic Law, since our author never
mentions it and nowhere admits of any obligation arising from
it. Nor does it mean isolated fulfilments even of the command
ments of God or of Christ. They stand for the moral character
as a whole, and are not in their essence outward at all though
they lead of necessity to outward acts. But, so far as they
issue in outward acts, they are regarded by our author simply as
the manifestation of the inner life and character. That this is
our author s teaching will be seen from the two following pas
sages. In 2 2 the " works " of the Church of Ephesus are defined
as consisting in "labour and endurance." The first of these is
certainly manifest. In 2 19 we have a very instructive definition,
oTSa crot) TO. epya K<XI TTJV ayaTnyv KCU rrjv TTICTTIV KCU Tryv StaKOvi av
Kat Tijv VTTO/XOVTJV. The first /cat is used, of course, epexegetically.
" Love, faith, service, and endurance " define the epya. See vol. i.
371 sqq. In 3 2 watchfulness is enjoined, and 2 10 faithfulness
unto death. The " works of Jesus," 2 26 , are those which originate
in faithfulness to Jesus.
The righteous acts of the martyrs not to be identified with their
white garments. The righteous acts of the saints are thus,
according to our author, the manifestation of the inner life and
character the character a man takes with him when he leaves
this life. From this it follows that the clause TO yap fivc-a-ivov
TO. SiKaiwjuaTa TWV dyiW earn/, in ig 8 , misrepresents the teaching
of our author and is an intrusion. For neither the righteous
acts nor the character of the martyrs form the garment of their
souls, seeing that the souls of the martyrs in heaven, 6 11 , are
described as lacking: such garments for a time, though they
1 In 2 23 the judgment is not eschatological, but that which takes place in
this world.
cxvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
possess righteous acts and righteous character in a supereminent
degree: see Introd. vol. i. 184-188. Hence the garments cannot
be identified with the righteousness which they take with them,
I4 13 , but with the spiritual bodies which are assigned by God to
them, which in 6 11 (note) and 3 5 (note) are described as white
garments. Faith has an heroic quality in our author. It
leads to endurance, 2 19 , to faithfulness in persecution, 2 13 i3 10 ,
even when this ends in death, 2 10 i4 13 . In 2 13 i4 12 Trio-rig is
followed by an objective genitive, in 2 19 13 by a subjective.
In the latter case it means "fidelity" or "faithfulness." In
fact it could be so rendered in all four passages.
5. The first Resurrection, the Millennium, and the second
Resurrection. Since these subjects are so fully dealt with in the
Commentary, I shall content myself with summarizing the results
arrived at there.
The first Resurrection. Only the martyrs share in the first
resurrection, 2o 4 6 . These reign with Christ for 1000 years in
the Jerusalem that, coming down from heaven, 2 i 9 -22 2 - u - 15 - 17 ,
forms the seat of the Millennial Kingdom (see vol. ii. 184). To
them is committed the re-evangelization of the world, 2i 24 22 14 - 1T ,
which is promised in n 15 i4 6 7 15*. Into the Holy City pour
the nations of the earth, and are healed of their spiritual diseases,
2 1 24 " 27 . Without this city are sorcerers and fornicators and
murderers, 22 15 . At the close of this kingdom the unrepentant
nations rebel afresh and are destroyed, and thereon follows the
final judgment. See vol. ii. 182 sqq.
The second Resurrection. The former heaven and earth
vanish before the final judgment. Only the dead arise for
judgment by God. These are the righteous who had not
suffered martyrdom, and the wicked. The former come forth
from the "treasuries" or "chambers," 2o 13a , the latter from
Hades. From our author s teaching elsewhere we are to infer
that the righteous are clothed in spiritual bodies but that the
wicked are disembodied, vol. i. 98. Since this body appears to
be the main organ by which the soul expresses itself or receives
impressions in the world of thought and righteousness, the
wicked have thus involuntarily but inevitably ostracized them
selves from this world. Selfishness and sin have brought about
their natural penalty, the isolation of every sinner, and finally his
destruction in the lake of fire. See vol. i. 184-188, ii. 193-198.
Judgment. The judgment of all the living on the earth is
committed to Christ, from the Seven Seals onwards to the
destruction of Gog and Magog. The Messianic judgment deals
with the living: God s judgment with all the dead, save the
martyrs who, having attained to the first resurrection, are not
subject to the second death, 2o 6 , and such others as during the
GRAMMAR OF THE APOCALYPSE cxvii
Millennial Reign enter the city and eat of the tree of life, 22 U .
All the remaining righteous coming forth from the " treasuries " *
and the wicked from Hades 2 receive their final award.
XIIL
A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE APOCALYPSE.
CONTENTS,
i. Noun, adjective, and verb forms, p. cxvii. 2. The article,
p. orix. 3. Pronouns, p. cxxi. 4. The verb, p. rxxiii. 5.
Prepositions, p. cxxvii 6. Conjunctions and other particles,
p. cxxxiv. 7. Case, p. cxxxviii 8. Number, p. cxli. 9.
Gender, p. cxlii. 10. The Hebraic Style of the Apocalypse,
p. cxlii.
i. Greek needs to be translated into Hebrew in order to
discover its meaning, p. cxliv. (a) Resolution of par
ticiple into finite verb, p. cxliv. (b) Resolution of
infinitive into finite verb, p. cxlvi. (c) Hebrew construc
tions impossible and unintelligible in Greek, p. cxlvi.
(d. e. f) Further Hebraisms, (g) Secondary meanings
of Hebrew words attributed to Greek words where
these words agree in their primary meaning, p. cxlvii.
(h. i) Other Hebrew idioms literally reproduced,
p. cxlviii.
ii. Other commonplace Hebraisms, p. cxlviii. iii. Hebrew
constructions with occasional parallels in vernacular
Greek, p, cxlix. iv. Certain passages needing to be
retranslated in order to discover the corruption or
mistranslation hi the Hebrew sources used by our
author, p. cL
ii. Unique expressions, p. clii. 12. Solecisms due to slips
on the part of our author, p. clii. 13. Primitive corruptions
due to accidental or deliberate changes, p. cliv. 14. Con
structions in the interpolations conflicting with our author s use,
p. civ. 15. Order of words, p. clvi. 16. Combination of
words, p. clix.
1 See the necessary emendation of the text, vol. i. 194-198.
* Hades means only the abode of unrighteous souls in our author : see
voL i. 32, voL ii. 197 ad fin. On the " Ahf" see YoL L 239-242.
cxviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
i. Noun, Adjective, and Verb forms.
(i.) Nouns. Words ending in -pa form their gen. and dat. in
pyS) P2?> as f-a^aipT;?, i3 14 . 1 fjia.xp.ipri, i3 10 (* w ). On the various
theories as to the origin of this late change, see Thackeray, Gr.
141, where also he states that in the LXX out of 79 examples
of pdxaipa in the gen. and dat. the 17 forms are certainly original
in only 2. -pys forms become practically universal under the
Early Roman Empire.
(ii.) Adjectives. XP V(7 ^ AtfC (for x/oucrrp), I i3 j j s formed on
the analogy of apyvpav. The contracted form xpvo-ovs occurs
always (15 times) in our author, elsewhere in the N.T. 3 times.
The best uncials are only at variance in 2 1 . On the other hand,
/?a0ea (pdOy, N 025), 2 24 , is original.
(hi.) Verbs. (a) Irregular or unusual forms. Present. oYi/r/,
2 2 (only once so in LXX) for SiWcrat, presupposes Svi/o/^cu (see
Thackeray, Gr. 218). It is found in the poets and in prose
writers from Polybius onward, d^ets, 2 20 , and d<i ovo-6i/, n 9 ,
presuppose d<tco (which is found in Eccles 2 18 ) and not atftfyfu.
Schmiedel suggests a present d<e a> (Thackeray, 251). 6\Sto, 3,
and dTroSiSow, 22 2 , presuppose StSow, but SiSoWiv, i7 13 , 8iSo>/u.
In like manner dTroXA^wv, 9 11 (so also Jer. 23 1 BA, Sir 2o 22 ),
presupposes dTroAAvo) as 8en<vvovTo<s does Sei/cvvw (cf. Ex 25 8 ;
Thackeray, 245). All these instances but the first show the
transition from forms in -/xt to -co forms.
(b) Imperfect and Aorists with a instead of *. forms, or ending
in -a or-av. et^ai/, 9 8 - 9 (tfA). aTn/A^a, 2 io 9 (A : -6ov, tfC 025. 046).
a.7rf)\0av, 2 1 1 (A : -6ov, 046. -0ev, 025): aTr^A^av, 2 1 4 (A : -0ev, K 046).
d^Kas, 2 4 (AK C - C - 025. 046 : -Kes, N*C). tlSa, i; 6 (AN (tSa):
025) : ()T8a, 17 s (A : etSov, N 025). Treorarc, 6 16 (A 025) :
i8 4 (Ax). See Thackeray, Gr. 211-212.
(f) Perfects with termination -es (2nd sing.) for -as,
(a) 2 3 (AC) ; TreTTTw/ce?, 2 5 (. -/ca?, AC 046). It is rare in the LXX
(Thackeray, Gr. 215) and in the papyri. See Robertson, Gr.
337. I have generally with A adopted the -a? form, (ft)
Perfects ending in -av f Tre TrrtoKai/ f, i8 3 (AC. 7re7rra>Kacriv, K 046:
TreTTW/cav 025 : TreTrwKacrii/, IIO, 175^- Rd. -TTCTrdrtKev) : ciprjKav, ig s
(AS 025) : [yeyovai/ 2i 6 AN C : ycyova, X 025. 046]. This termina
tion is found in Asia Minor as early as 246 B.C. and in Egypt in
162 B.C. It is found in Cretan inscriptions, and Robertson traces
its origin to Crete (Gr. 336).
In 8 2 we have e<mJKao-u/. But it occurs in an interpolation.
1 It is noteworthy that in I3 10 N 025. 046 twice change paxalpri into
against AC, and that 025. 046 make a corresponding change in I3 14 ,
against MAC.
2 Cf. KaTtewa Ps. I42 9 (RTtf c - a ). See Thackeray, Gr. 2\l.
THE ARTICLE cxix
Hence our author did not apparently use the perfect ending in
-curt.
(d) Various Aorist forms. avdfia, 4 1 , dvd/?a.T, n 12 : eppeOr),
6 11 9 4 : o-r?7pio-ov, 3 2 (AC 025) : Tretv, i6 6 . According to Thackeray
(Gr. 64), Treiv (or TTIV) occurs 21 times, while TTICIV occurs 97 times
in the LXX (AB).
(^) Pluperfect form. 7 11 icrr^Keto-ai/ instead of etor^Kco-av.
This -eto-av is found regularly in the LXX (Thackeray, Gr. 216).
As regards the beginning of the word, its usual form in the
LXX is lo-rrj/ceiv (Thackeray, Gr. 201).
(/) Augment. 3 2 l/xcAAov (AtfC 025) : io 4 rj/xeAAov (AC 046).
Our author uses eSwaro, 7 9 (AtfC 046), i4 8 (AC), i5 8 (AC : ^Sw.
X 025. 046). Hence it should be read in 5 3 with 8 against A
025. 046. In dvoiyw/zi our author augments the preposition in
fjvoi&v, 6 3 , tyj/otyr;, u 19 i5 5 , ^voi x^o-av, 2o 12 (**), and trebly
augments the participle in ^vewy/xe i/os, which should perhaps be
read in 3 8 with K 025 against dvewy/^eVo? (AC 046), seeing that only
046 supports dvewyjueVos in 4 1 io 2 - 8 iQ 11 against the other chief
uncials.
2. The Article.
(i.) The article introduces conceptions assumed to be familiar
in apocalyptic, though mentioned in the text for the first time :
io 1 17 Ipis, io 3 at cTrra PPOVTO.L: cf. also n 3 i2 14 i6 12 . With
great aptness the art. is used in rov TroAe/xov, i6 14 , eis TOV 7roAe//,ov,
2o 8 , TOV TroXe/xov, iQ 19 , because the war here is the great Mes
sianic war at the world s close. On the other hand, compare
the phrase ets TroXc/Aov, 9 7 - 9 .
(ii.) The generic art. (Blass, Gr. 147) is regularly found with
^Xtos (except in 7 2 l6 12 22 5 ), yi}, OdXaa-cra, ovpavo?.
(iii.) In the case of ordinal numbers, when the ordinal
precedes the noun it is preceded by the art. ; when the ordinal
follows the noun, the art. is repeated: cf 4 7 6 3 i3 12 20 2i 8 .
(iv.) The art. can appear with the predicate when the
subject and predicate are convertible or identical. 1 Cf. i 17 - 20
2 23 3 17 I7 18 l8 23 [^8] 2I 6.8 22 13.W After O TOS the pred . has
the art. on this principle; cf. 7 14 u 4 - 10 14* 19 20 5 - Q4] .
(v.) (a) When an adjective or participle follows its noun, the
art. is repeated if the noun has the art. When the adjective
stands between the art. and the noun, the emphasis lies on the
adjective ; when it follows with the repeated art, both noun and
adjective are emphasized, 2o 9 rrjv 7roA.iv r^v ^yaTny/xeV^, 2i 2 - 10
rrjv 7roA.iv TT/V dyi av the City par excellence and the Holy City in
contrast to the earthly Jerusalem spiritually called Sodom and
1 In i 20 the second ^irrd is an interpolation and the al tirrd belongs to the
predicate. See vol. ii. 389, footnote,
CXX THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
Egypt, II 8 : cf. 8 6 01 ... ayycAoi 01 e^ovT5, ly 18 rj TroAis 17
(b) The same rule holds good in the case of prepositional
phrases coming after an articular noun : 1 i 4 rat? k-rrra eKK/byo-iatg
rat? tv rrj Acria : 2 24 : 5 5 6 A.eW 6 IK r. <f>v\yjs : II 16 II 19 I4 17
i6 3 - 12 i9 14 - 21 2o 8 - 13 . Hence in the titles of the Letters to the
Churches we should always read r<3 dyye Au) r<3 iv . . . e/c/cAryo-ias
and not TO> dyyeAw TT}S eV . . . cKKXr/cri a?. A is right here three
times and C once. See also Order of Words, p. clvi sq.
Again in i5 5 the text 6 vaos T. o-joyv^s T. ^aprvpiov ei> TO)
ovpavul, which is impossible in other respects, wrongly omits the
art. before eV T<5 oupai/w. It rightly appears in n 19 6 raos T. 0eov
6 ei> r. ovpai/u). In our author prepositional phrases and genitives
never intervene between the art. and its noun, but follow the noun,
the former always preceded by the repeated art. 1
(vi.) Phrases which occur for the first time without the art.
have the art. prefixed on their recurrence. 4 6 " 8 recrarepa <3a . . .
TO. recro-epa (i)a : 5 6 " 8 apviov . . . TOV apviov : I3 16 17 ^apay/xa . . .
TO xapay/xa : i^ 2ab OdXcucrarav vaXivrjv . . . T. Oa\. r. va\. etc.
(a) Hence in n 16 the art. must with X C C 025. 046 (against
N*A which om.) be read before ctKoo-t reWape?. Hence,
further, it follows that 22 17 vSwp ^w^? Soopeav must be trans
posed before 2i 6 TOV VOO.TOS T^? ^w^s Swpeav. The need for
the rearrangement of 2o 4 -22 has been shown at length in vol.
ii. 144-154.
(b) In i7 3 , however, we find ywat/<u KaO^^v^v CTTI O^piov
although the 0-qpiov has been frequently mentioned previously.
Similarly in I4 1 the art. is omitted before exarov Teo-trepa/corra recr-
o-ape? ^iXiaSes although they have already been described in 7 4 8 .
This omission is due in the former case to our author s use of a
source, and in the latter to his incorporation of an independent
vision of his own. If he had had an opportunity of revision,
we must assume from his careful use of the art. elsewhere that
he would have inserted the art. in both cases.
(vii.) Omission of Article. (a) The art. is omitted possibly
owing to Semitic influences in i 20 ayyeAoi T. e. eK/oVryanon/, 2 9
o-waya>yr) T. 2arai/a, 6 7 , 6 16 cbro 7rpoo"oWov r. Ka^/xevov, 2 y 2 - * I5 2
1 TV j3\a<T(j>ri/uiia.v K r&v \ey6vTtav in 2 9 is difficult, tf s 1 - 2 read TTJV K,
while 025 and several cursives om. ^/c. Either of these readings removes the
difficulty. But IK T. \ey6vTuv is here to be taken partitively. Hence : " the
blasphemy of certain of those who say," etc. Thus the art. could not be
repeated before K r&v XeydvTwv. This is better than the explanation given
in my notes in vol. i. 56. See, however, under 5. vi. (a) on IK.
2 In 2O 11 o3 dirb TOV irpoo-ibwov should, according to our author s usage, be
ov ci7r6 TrpocrwTrou avTov or 08 airb irpoa&irov. This anomaly seems due, like
others in 2O 4 -22, to the disciple of the Seer who edited these chapters after the
Seer s death.
PRONOUNS cxxi
/a0apas rov Oeov, 2 1 12 vtwv Icrpa/^A, 2 1 14 SooSeAca 6vojU,ara T. 8.
a7rooTdAa>v, 22 2 eis OcpaTrfLav T. eOvwv.
(b) The art. is frequently omitted in prepositional phrases.
I2 11 I3 3 : ey Oavdrip, 2 23 : ev Trvpi /cat 0etu>, I4 10 :
-qv, 2 10 : cf. also 2 22 i3 10 .
(<:) The art. is omitted before proper names. I-qo-ovs and
are always anarthrous. We have 6 Xpio-ro s when used
alone, n 15 i2 10 2o 4 - 6 , but anarthrous in I^o-ovs X., i 1 - 2 - 5 . In TU>
BaAa/c, 2 14 , the art. is inserted because the name is indeclinable.
In i6 12 the art. before E^pa-nyi/ may point to the earlier mention
of this river in g 14 . The text in 2 6 - 15 presents a difficulty.
Ni/coAatYun/ is first with the art. and then without it. The noun
in 2 6 may be treated as a description of a certain class, and then
treated as a proper name in 2 15 . In the predicate the art. is
found before proper names: cf. 6 8 [8 11 ] i2 9 ig 13 2o 2 . #eds
always has the art. except in 7 2 and in 2i 7 where it is in the
pred. Kvptos, when alone, has the art., cf. n*-8.i5 j DU t we find
ev Kvptw, i4 13 , and Kupios /cvpiW, ly 14 ip 16 . When combined with
other names, 6 Kvptos 6 $eds, 2i 22 22 6 , 6 K^pios IT/O-OVS, 22 21 , but also
6 ^eos [i 8 ] 4 8 19 22 5 . In the vocative we find Kvpie, i5 4 ,
6 #eos, ii 17 i5 3 i6 7 , or the Semit. voc. 6 Kv ptos 6 $eo s, 4 11 .
(viii.) The art. with the infinitive occurs only in i2 7 (rot)
TroAc/xryo-at), where, however, the construction is a pure Hebraism
and is equivalent to a finite verb in Greek. See vol. i. 322. In J,
on the other hand, we have the ordinary Greek construction of
?rpo rov before the infinitive in i 48 i3 19 i7 5 , and of Sta TO before
it in 2 24 .
(ix.) When a noun or participle preceded by the article
follows a noun (in the gen. dat. or ace.), and should therefore be
in the gen. dat. or ace., it may in our author, according to
Hebrew usage, stand in the nom. : cf. i 5 O.TTO I^o-ov Xptcrrov, 6
/xaprvs 6 Trto-Tos, 2 20 ryv ywat/ca Iea/:?eA, rj Aeyoucra. On this
Hebraism see below, p. cxlix sq.
3. Pronouns.
(i.) Possessive. On vernacular and ordinary possessives see
notes on 2 2 - 19 and footnote in vol. ii. 208, where it is shown
that though o-ov may precede or follow its noun, the genitives of
avTos can only follow. The genitive is found before its noun in
the best authorities (A vg s 1 - 2 ), in 2i 3 avroiv 0eds; but the text is
manifestly corrupt, and the wrong order may be due to the
editor of 2o 4 -22. It is also found in i8 5 , but this is a source.
See Abbott, Gr. 414 sqq., 60 T sqq. e>ds only once in 2 20 . l
1 J has it 39 times. In J we find also (ij^repos only in I J I 3 2 2 ) <r(5s,
tdios (15 times), not one of which occurs in our author. Seeing that
cxxii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
(ii.) Personal. (a) avros is used as an emphatic personal
pronoun, 1 cf. 3 20 i4 10 i9 15 ( Wj ) 2i 7 . It is used intensively ( =
"self") in [i4 17 ] iy n (source) iQ 12 . The phrase Kat auros, "he
also," " himself also " (in J y 10 ), seems not to belong to our author
except in the phrase d>s /cat aurot, 6 n , ws Kat avrij, i8 6 (a source) :
cf. ws K<ly<6, 2 27 3 21 . It occurs, however, in a Greek source, ly 11 ,
and in an interpolation, i4 17 . In i4 10 the Kat before avros is a
Hebraism and not to be translated. Kat avros in 3 20 iQ 15 ^) 2i 7
= " and he." avros has lost this meaning in modern Greek and
becomes a demonstrative.
(b) tavrov is found twice between the art. and its noun in
io 8 - 7 . Here the intervening eavrov is very emphatic. See
Abbott, Gr. 415.
(hi.) Demonstrative. (a) oSc occurs seven times and refers to
what follows, but not once in J. (b) oSros refers to what precedes,
7 14 ii 4 - 6 [i4 4 ] etc. B.ut not always in J, i J. Cf. J 6 29 is 12 :
i J i 5 5 14 where it refers to an explanatory clause introduced by
?va, lav, or on. (f) e/ceu/os is used only as an adjectival pronoun
in our author in temporal phrases, 9 6 n 13 , but in J constantly
as a substantival pronoun. See Abbott, Gr. 283 sqq.
(iv.) Indefinite. ets = "a": cf. 8 13 tvbs dcrov, Q 13 <wv^v /itav,
i9 17 ei/a ayyeAov. Not in J. Both authors, however, use els IK;
while J uses cts TIS *, n 49 , once in this sense, or simply TIS with
a noun, 4 46 5 5 , or with a proper name, 1 1 1 i2 20 . ri is found only
in ci TIS, edV TIS in our author, save in 7 1 (?).
(v.) Relative. (a) oorts is mostly used of a class of persons
or things, i 7 2 24 9 4 etc. ; but it is also used of an individual, u 8
i2 18 i9 2 : cf. i 12 . Similarly in J. I have followed the advice
given in Abbott s Gr. (218, footnote) and rendered ocrrts generally
by " that," which " introduces a statement essential to the com
plete meaning of the antecedent," and os by " who " or " which "
words which carry no such meaning.
(3) This relative is never attracted to the case of its ante
cedent 2 in our author, though this attraction is frequent in J and
in i J 3 24 .
^/x<5s and kindred possessive adjectives had all but ousted /u.ou in Asia Minor,
Moulton (Gr. 40 sq.) infers that our author must have been a recent immi
grant there. If this is right, J must have been settled there for some time.
The possessive ^/*6s and <r6s are disappearing in the papyri, and in modern
Greek no possessive adjective exists. See Robertson, Gr. 684.
1 J also uses avros in this sense, but it is unemphatic. When he wishes
to express emphasis he frequently uses tKelvos, which our author does not use
in this sense. He only uses it twice as a demonstrative in two phrases ex
pressing time. See Abbott, Gr. 283 sqq. J uses ai/r6s together with the
personal pronoun or proper name, 2 24 3 28 4 2 - **, but not so our author.
- It is once found in a source, i.e. i8 6 ,
THE VERB cxxiii
4. The Verb.
(i.) Present and future tenses. (a) The text wavers frequently
between the present and the future. But these changes are not
arbitrary. 1 The context must be carefully studied in each case.
Thus in certain contexts the future is rightly used, since the con
text is obviously prophetic : cf. 7 16 sqq ov 7reii/acrou<nv en ov$
Suj/rfo-ovarw en, KT\. These words occur at the close of a vision
where all the verbs dealing with the actual vision are rightly
given in the present or past. Similarly in i4 10 i7 14s< i- we have
pure prophecies. In other cases where we have the pres.
instead of the future or the past, this may be due to a Hebraism ;
for the Hebrew imperfect may, according to the context, be
rendered either as a past, present, or future : cf. 9 8 s< w- 17 " 20 I3 11 ^
The translator is often at fault in the LXX, and a writer whose
thoughts naturally shaped themselves in Hebrew could hardly
escape rendering the Hebrew imperf. in his thoughts by a Greek
present : cf. 5 10 paaiXtvova-iv. At times, however, when the
present takes the place of the past, the change may have been
made deliberately with a view to dramatic vividness.
(b) epxo/>H does not come under these considerations. The
Seer uses the pres. of this verb as a pres. or a future. In fact he
never uses the future except in compounds, i.e. 3 20 eio-eAcuo-o /x-ai,
2o 8 c^eAcvoreTcu. He is, therefore, perfectly acquainted with the
form of the future of the simple verb, but he avoids it. J uses
it once, i4 23 , and both the above-mentioned compounds in io 9 .
In i4 8 he connects it with a future 7raA.iv 2p;(o//,ai *<" TrapaA^^o/xat.
(c) Again the future is used alike in dependent and inde-
1 Chap. 1 1 seems to be very confused. In the introduction to that
chapter (vol. i. 269-273) we have seen that it is a source used by our author
for a special purpose. No unity of time appears to be observed in it. The
r61e of the prophet is sometimes uppermost, sometimes that of the seer. This
disorder, which is most probably due to the fact that our author is using
traditional materials, will be obvious from the following resume. In the
vision of Jerusalem and the Temple the seer receives a prophecy, n 1 " 8 , that
Jerusalem shall be trodden under foot (Trar^ffova-iv) for 3! years, and that the
two witnesses shall prophesy during this period. The scene then shifts appar
ently to the actual period of the witnesses, II 4 6 ; but the presents tKTropeuerai,
Kareffdiei, etc. , can be taken as futures. In 1 1 7 " 8 the text uses future verbs
and foretells the death of the witnesses. In 1 1 9 " 10 it reverts again to the
present, describing the events that follow on their death save in 7r^fj.\f>ov(riv,
II 10 (but the presents here also are practically futures). Finally, in n 11 - 13 the
text changes into the past, and represents the reception of the witnesses into
heaven as a past event. But herein the pasts can represent vividly the
prophetic future. [See Driver, Tenses, 14 (7), 81 ; Is 9 1 8 .] Hence n 3 13
is a prophecy rather than a vision. The past verbs in 2O 9 10a are to be similarly
explained. Futures occu>- before and after them. But in 2O 9 10 it is only the
author s familiarity with Hebraic usage that leads to this usage of the perfect,
whereas ii 1 18 is translated from a source.
cxxiv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
pendent clauses where it has a frequentative sense, and is in such
case best rendered by the present, as in 4 9 " 10 orav Swo-ovo-iv . . .
Soav . . . Treo-oiWai. But in this passage the futures on the
basis of Hebraic idiom could be rendered by a past, and thus
the text would state what the Seer actually saw in this vision and
not recount a general practice.
(ii.) Imperfect (Past). (a) The past imperf. is found only in
the case of nine verbs : aKoXovOtiv (2 times), SiSacr/ceiv ( i ), Bvvaa-Oai
(4 never in aor.), eti/eu (17), e^etv (5 etx av > 9 8 9 )> fXaUw (i),
XaXeii/ (2), Xe yetv (i), cmj/ceu/ (i in a source, i.e. I2 4 ). It is
therefore of infrequent occurrence. But it is used with special
force in relative clauses, i 12 2 14 6 9 : also in descriptive sentences,
5 4 Kat 2/cXcuoi/, 5 14 [6 8 ] i9 14 2 1 15 . In y 11 wmj/ceio-ai/ (pluperf.) is
used as a past imperf. = " were standing."
(b) But the place of the past imperf. (or historic present) is
frequently taken by the (imperfect or perfect) participle : ex* "
(for etxty, or possibly in one or more cases for ex et )> j16 4 7 8 6 2 5
IO I2 2 1 : eKTropevo/xej/Ty, I 16 : /ca^r^uevos, 4 2 :
g 13 . This use of the participle for a finite verb is
frequent in late Hebrew (very frequent in Aramaic, customary
in Syriac), and its displacement of the past imperf. in our author
is no doubt due largely to Hebraic influences.
(iii.) Past Aorist and Present Perfect. These at first sight
seem to be used in certain instances interchangeably : cf. 5 7 y 14
8 5 i9 3 etc. But the following study of these Greek tenses and
their English equivalents shows that this is not so.
(iv.) Greek Aorist and its rendering into English. Since the
Greek and English aorists do not altogether correspond, it is of
great importance to determine the points wherein they differ.
Wey mouth (On the Rendering of the Greek aorist and perfect into
English, 1890) has gone elaborately into the subject. See also
Moulton, Gr. 135 sqq., whose conclusions I have for the most
part accepted. On the use of the aor. as a perfect in J, see
Abbott, Gr. 323 sqq.
The past aorist * in English does not always correspond to
the Greek aorist. The Greek aorist has three uses, (a) When
this aorist is used as the historical tense in pure narrative, the
English past aor. is the right rendering. (6) The Greek aor.
The ordinary nomenclature of English tenses is very misleading.
past perf. (= pluperf.) . had smitten. The Greek has corresponding
tenses for the most part. Pres. aor. Xito (cf. rapayyfbXu, Acts i6 18 : d<J)io/j.ev,
Luke 1 1 4 ), pres. impf. Xuu, pres. perf. XlXuira : past aor. Xwa, past impf.
f\vov, past perf.
RENDERING OF GREEK AORISTS AND PERFECTS cxxv
can be timeless or refer to an indefinite time-, cf. 2 4 d^/oxs, J 15
ZftXrjOrj. Here the Greek must be rendered by the pres. perf.
in English ; for this perfect, besides connoting the continuance
of a completed action its usual meaning, can refer, outside
the pure narrative, to an indefinite past, and be practically time
less. (c) The Greek aor. can refer to an event that has just
happened, and must also in this sense be rendered by the English
pres. perfect, i 19 a etSes "what thou hast seen."
I will here append a list of the passages where the aor. should
be rendered by the English pres. perfect. 1 Opinions will, of
course, differ as to whether certain aorists come under (b) or (c).
The following passages fall naturally under (b\ where the aor. is
practically timeless, i 6 KOL tiro^a-tv, " and hath made us " : 2 4 : 2 24
eyvooo-av = " have recognized " = " know " : 3 4 OVK e/xoXwai/, " have
not denied " : 3 8 er^p^o-as . . . KCU ov/c fjpvrjo-ay, " hast kept . . .
and hast not denied " : 3 10 eVi^o-as : 5- 10 ^yopao-as . . . eTrot-
770-019 : y 14 ZirXwav , . . eAev/cavav : 1 1 18 wpyiV^o-av : I4 4 rjyopdo--
Oyo-av: I4 8 l8 2 tTrecrei/ 7recrev . . . c yeVero, "has fallen, has
fallen . . . has become." But these last three words could be
explained under (c), though the fact that Rome has become the
abode of unclean birds shows that the burning of it is far back
in the past. Similarly iy 2 eiropveva-av . . . e/xe$ixr$^(rai/, iy 12
OVTTW \a/3ov, ly 17 eScoKei/ : eKoAAr^^crav and e/xr ^yaovevfre in l8 5 ,
l8 6 aTre Sw/cev . . . tKtpacrev, l8 7 loogaaev . . . ecrrpTyvtao-ci/, l8 14
a.7rfj\0v . . . aTToAero. Under (c) when the aor. refers to events
that have just happened and must be rendered by the English
pres. perf., come the following passages : i 19 a etSes, "which thou
hast (just) seen": 2 21 e8wKa . . . /cat OVK ^eXT/crej/ 2 = " I have
given . . . but she has refused ": i^e So fl?;: n 15 - 17 eyeVero . . .
e/foo-t Aeucras : n 18 fjXOev, which recurs in the same sense in i4 7 - 15
l8 10 i9 7 : !2 10 yeWo . . . e^X^: I2 12 /care ^: [l4 15 l^pdvOrj]:
I4 18 ^K/xacrav : l6 5 e/cpiva? : i8 16< 19 JJLLO. <Spa r/p^jaco^?; : iS 20 e/cptvev :
ig 2 e/cpivev . . . e^eSi/oyo-ei/ : IQ 7 - 8 lyroijaacrcj/ . . . eSo^r; : 22 16
(v.) Greek Perfects and their rendering into English, Blass
(Gr. 200) and Moulton (Gr. 143, 145) admit the occurrence of
pres. perfects as aorists in our author. There are only two verbs,
etXry^a and elpr/Ka, which are so used. The former appears to
be so used in 5 7 S 5 , though the R.V. takes it as = a present, and
Robertson (Gr. 899) defends it in both cases as a "dramatic
colloquial historical perfect." But the context is certainly in
1 The R.V. h as freely acknowledged this meaning of the aor. in the N.T.
(in Matthew 65 times), but not so frequently in our author as it should be.
Nor is it always clear on what principle the Revisers recognize, or refuse to
recognize, this use.
3 The failure to recognize this use of the aorist here led to the change of
rj6t\i]<Tev into 0Aei.
CXXvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
favour of the aorist sense, 1 and the same perfect (Thackeray, Gr.
24) occurs in this sense in Dan Ixx. 4 30b . As regards ei/j^Ko, in
7 14 i9 3 , no doubt as to the aoristic sense can be entertained.
(vi.) Aorists used by our author and his sources. (a) Of
itrrTi/xi 2 our author uses la-TaOrjv, 8 3 i2 18 , whereas eWr/v is used in
his sources, n 11 i8 17 . (b) Again our author uses e#au/xacr#r;i/, i$ 3
= " I wondered " (as a middle : always passive in </ except in
one doubtful instance Thackeray, Gr. 240 n.), whereas tOavfjLao-a
is used with the same meaning in source ly 6 - 7 as in J and
generally in Greek, (c) Our author uses yvoiyrjv in connection
with the temple, n 19 i5 5 , and rfvoixOyv in connection with the
books, 2o 12 ( Wj > (as in Dan 7 10 o ). Since Matthew and Luke
in Acts use both forms in connection with the same subjects, no
safe inference is possible here.
(vii.) Imperative. The aor. imper. occurs about 40 times in
our author : the present 20 times, nine of these in chaps. 1-3.
The aor. imper. is sharper and more urgent than the present,
and while the latter "is used in general precepts (even to individ
uals) on conduct and action," the former is used "in injunctions
about action in individual cases" (Blass, Gr. 194). Hence we
may distinguish 3 11 K/xxrei o e;(is and 2 25 o e^ere K/xxrr/crare in
connection with their contexts.
With negatives, /XT; with the pres. forbids an action already
begun : i 17 2 10 /XT) <o/?o), 5 5 /XT) /cAate, while ^YJ with the aor.
subj. or imper. forbids an action not yet begun : 3 6 6 rov olvov /XT)
0*81/070779, y 3 /XT) aBiKTJarrjTe TT)V yvjv, io 4 ox^paytow . . . /cat /XT) avra
y/oai/fTTs, ii 2 22 10 . Thus our author s usage agrees at once with
the classical and later usage (cf. Moulton, Gr, 124 sqq. : W.
Headlam, Class. Review, xvii. 295). But in J this usage is not
observed. Thus in 3 7 we find /XT) flau/xao-T/s occurs when we
should expect /XT) #au/xae, as is clear from 3 4 , and in io 37 he uses
/xr) -mo-revere where the context would lead us to expect /XT) TRO--
revo-Tjre. In all other cases //.TJ with the imper. is rightly used in
J. See Moulton, Gr. 125 sq.
(viii.) Infinitive. (a) Our author generally uses the aor. inf.
save in the case of certain verbs. Thus /^AeWv is never found
1 This use of efXi?0a as an aorist is certainly strange, seeing that our
author uses e\a[3ov in 5 8 io 10 i; 12 (source) 2O 4 ; aor. subj. 3" i8 4 (source) ;
aor. imper. io 8 - 9 22 17 ; aor. inf. 4 11 5 9 - 12 6 4 .
2 The pres. perf. of this verb, tffrijKa ("I have taken my stand "), is used
as a pres. imperf. (hence="I am standing") in 3 20 , and in like manner
the past perf. ei<TT^KLv is used by our author as a past imperf. in 7 11 ; but in
I2 4 (a source) we find ecrT-rjKev from CTTTJ/COJ in the same sense. Some editors,
however, read &rr7?Ke here (cf. <ri)/>ei in the preceding clause).
8 This is the general rule; but it needs qualification: cf. Moulton, 125.
Some scholars maintain that the above distinction is a growth, which
"beginning in classical times was nearly crystallized in N.T. Greek." Cf.
Moulton, 247.
PREPOSITIONS CXxvil
in the aor., even in the indicative. In 22 8 we should read l/
with A. In the rest of the N.T. it occurs once in the^aor.
imper., Acts 3 4 . crrpe^etv occurs in ll 6 (source). Kara/fotWiv,
i3 13 . After ^e AAeu/ the pres. follows inf. regularly (10 times)
except in 3 2 - 16 i2 4 . In J the pres. inf. follows without exception.
The usual construction in classical Greek is /xeXXeiv with the
fut. inf.
(b) On the infinitive = a finite verb in a conditional clause
and also in the principal sentence, see i3 10 n., and below, p. cxlvi.
(c) On the infin. with the art. = a finite verb, see i2 7 n. and
also below, p. cxlvi. These three cases are pure Hebraisms.
(d) The infinitive follows aios, 5 2 - 4 - 9 - 12 , where J i 27 puts Iva.
cum subj.
(ix.) Participle. To the use of the participle for a finite verb
attention has already been drawn : see above, 4, ii. (b\ Present
and perfect participles occur frequently, but never the future
part. The last is found once in J 6 64 . 6 e>xV l/0 is, however,
practically a future participle. It is remarkable that the genitive
absolute is wholly absent from our text, though it is of frequent
occurence in J.
The indeclinable use of Ae ywv or Acyoi/res == "ibfcO as in 4 1
5 11-12 IT i. 15 I4 6 come s properly under the head of Hebraisms.
(x.) The omission of the copula in principal or relative
sentences does not call for consideration here, as it is of constant
occurrence throughout the N.T. The omission of the copula
after iSov ( = n3Pl) is encouraged through Hebrew precedent. Cf.
Blass, Gr. 74 ; Robertson, 395 sq.
5. Prepositions.
Moulton (Gr. 98) gives the statistics for the relative frequency
of prepositions in the N.T. For every 100 times that eV occurs
he finds the relative frequency of the prepositions with which we
are here concerned as follows : eis, 64 ; oc, 34 ; rt 32 ; TT/JO?, 25 ;
Sta, 24; OTTO, 24; Kara, 17; /xera, 17 ; VTTO, 8. Calculating J in the
same way (though the numbers are to be taken as only approxi
mately correct) : ev, loo; eis, 83; e/c, 73; TT/OOS, 45; Sia, 26; /texa, 25;
aTTo, 18; eTrt, 16; /cara, 4. Here we observe that e/c is nearly
as frequent as eis, that e^t is half as frequent as it is normally
throughout the N.T. In fact the numbers vary in every case.
A comparison of the numbers (which are only approximately
trustworthy) in our author is instructive : eV, 100 ; CTU, 89 ; e /c, 87 ;
ets, 49; yaerct, 33 ; own), 23 ; Sta, II ; Kara, 5-; Trpog, 5. 1 Here the
most notable differences are in the case of ri (J ap 89 -J 16), Sia
1 These numbers refer to the entire text, including sources and interpola
tions.
cxxviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
(jap 1 1 - J 26), xpos (J ap 5 - J 45). Also the order of priority in
frequency is very different. In the three classical historians
(Herodotus, Thucydides, and Xenophon), according to Helbing
(quoted by Moulton, 62 n) cts slightly exceeds iv in frequency,
whereas in twelve writers of literary Koivrj it occurs nearly twice
as often. Here our author diverges from the literary KOLV-TJ in
using ev more than twice as often as ets, while the KOIVTJ uses eis
nearly twice as often as lv. On the other hand, our author approxi
mates closely to the Koivrj in his frequent use of ri, and therein
diverges strongly from the rest of the N.T. See also Robertson,
Gr. 556 sq. But these differences between J ap and J are not half
so striking as those that emerge in the individual treatment of
the prepositions.
(i.) dm = "apiece," in 4 8 dva Trre/svyas ? Cf. J 2 6 . Found
also in Matthew and Luke. The phrase ava /xe o-ov, 7 17 , is a
compound preposition, but avd is an adverb in ava cts IKCUTTOS
in 2 1 21 . These latter uses not in J.
(ii.) dinS. 36 times, (a) with /xaxpo^ev, i8 10 - 15 - 17 (source).
Not in J.
(<)=" at a distance from," i4 20 CXTTO oraStW, cf. J n 18 2i 8 .
Not elsewhere in N.T. It is not necessary to explain it as a
Latinism ; cf. Moulton, Gr. 101 sq. ; Robertson, Gr. 575;
Abbott, Gr. 227. It is found in Strabo, Diodorus, and Plutarch.
For an analogous construction with /xera, cf. Test. Reub. i 2 /^era
<T>7 8vo T^S reAevr^5 : T. Zeb. i 1 //.era ovv Bvo vrr\ rov Oavdrov a
construction also found in Plutarch. And with Trpo, cf. J I2 1 ,
Amos (o ) i 1 4 7 .
(c) diro irpoawirow. This phrase occurs three times, 6 16
i2 14 20 11 . In the last instance, however, it has a strange
form, (XTTO TOV TrpocrojTrov, to which we shall return pre
sently. In all three cases the phrase is the equivalent of
"OSD. In 6 16 20 11 it = " from the presence of." It could be
taken in this sense also in i2 14 if it is connected with TreV^rat,
but the fact that sixteen words intervene is against this
explanation in our author. Hence the phrase, owing to the
Hebrew it presupposes = " because of." The woman s stay
of three and a half years in the wilderness is "owing to" or
" because of the serpent." This is an ordinary meaning of ^DE
in Hebrew. O.TTO alone is used in this sense in Matt i8 7 . In
2O 11 the art. in airo TOV TT/SOO-WTTOV is quite exceptional. It
appears only a few (three or more) times in the o so far as I am
aware, and in two of these some MSS omit it. In our text also
046 and many cursives omit. But since As 025. 2040 attest
it, it goes back to the archetype as edited by the Seer s disciple.
For two other departures from the Seer s usage in 20 4 11 , see vol.
ii. 182. This phrase is absent from J.
PREPOSITIONS cxxix
(d) Abnormal use of airo before 6 wv. This is deliberate on
our author s part.
(e) After passive verbs : aTrc/cTai/^o-ai/, g 18 ; ^roi/xao-fickov, i2 6 .
This came to be the rule in later writers.
(f) After a.7rcpxo-6aL and cwroAAvi/ai, i8 14 : d^atpeti/, 22 19 :
KpviTTtLV, 6 16 (a,7ro 7rpoo-(o7rov, where J I2 36 has simply (XTrd) : <evyeiv,
Q 6 20 11 (J I0 5 ).
None of the above usages appear in J save (b) and one
instance of (/).
(iii.) S x pi- 2 10 26 I2 11 i4 29 i8 5 (source).
(iv.) 8tci. (a) with gen. i 1 2i 24 . In J 15 times, (b) With
ace. 1 6 times and 45 in J.
(v.) 6ts. eis follows fta.XXf.Lv when the noun after ets is not a
person, cf. 2 10 - 22 S 5 [7 - 8] i2 4 - 9 - 13 i 4 19 (**> i8 21 2 o 3 - 10 - 14 - 15 , save
in i4 16 (interpolated) where we have fldXXeiv . . . CTTI T. yrjv.
Contrast i4 19 . But CTTI when the noun is a person, cf. 2 24
j3a.\Xu e</> v/xas (cf. i 17 ). Similarly after Kara.fta.tvav we have ets
TT)I/ yi?!/, i3 13 , but eirt revs avOpwTrovs, i6 21 . Our author uses
either ei? TT?* y^v, 5 6 6 13 8 7 9 L 3 i2 4 - 9 - 13 i4 19 i6 L2 etc., even
after Tirm-civ, 6 13 9 1 , though this verb in other phrases is
followed by ri, 6 16 7 11 [8 10 ] n 16 , or eVt T^S 7775 (see on liri
below). L<S occurs about 78 times.
(vi.) IK. This preposition is of very frequent occurrence
about 135 times.
(a) Partitive Genitive. As subject, 1 1 9 /JAeVovo-iv e* TWV Xawv :
cf. J 7 40 i6 17 . As object, 2 10 e u/oi/, 3 9 5 9 (in 2 17 we have
genitive alone rov /xai/i/a : cf. 2 J 4 IK ran/ TCKi/wv). CK occurs often
after els in a partitive sense : cf. 5 5 6 1 7 13 etc., but in I7 11 (source)
IK TWV 7rTa=" one of the seven." For els e/c, cf. J i 41 6 8 - 70 - 71
7 50 etc. This appears to be the best explanation of 2 9 rrjv
^Aaor^yatai/ e/c TWV Acyovrcov, 1 "the blasphemy of certain people
who say " ; or the IK may be simply a sign of the genitive. Hence
" the blasphemy of," etc. : cf. J 3 1 avOpwiros C K T. 3>apto-cuW : or
better, Aesch. Eum. 344, v/xvog Epii/wW, "hymn of the Erinyes";
Soph. Ant. 95, 77 e e/xoO Suor^SovXia.
(^) CK . . . aTTo, 3 12 2 1 2 - 10 , where the prepositions may
signify respectively heavenly origin and divine mission. But
in J i 44 7 41 - 42 n 1 (Abbott, Gr. 227 sqq.) these mean respectively
" native of" and "resident in."
(c) CK follows a variety of. verbs, ye/x^eti/, eKTropevevOai, e/<8t/civ
(involving a Hebraism), eaA.eu/>ii/, ^epx^crOai, Ip^eo-^a
(i8 20 (a source) involving a Hebraism), X.afMJ3dveLv } Avciv,
1 This phrase is explained also as "blasphemy arising from" (cf. J 3 25 ) ;
but in our author we should expect in this case j3\acr<j>r]fj,lav rty K. In 6 4
the K is rightly omitted by A after ryv elp^v^v [^/c] TTJS yrjs. If the ^K is
retained it is to be taken with Aa/Set?, as in 5 7 io 10 i8 4 (source).
cxxx THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
7TOTie/, (ayetv, ^opra^co ^ai. It follows dyopaeiv,
5 9 ; but this verb is followed by Trapd, 3 18 , and airo, i4 3 - 4 . In i8 3 - 19
TrXovretv is followed by e/c and in i8 15 by a-n-o.
(d) IK is used after a passive : cf. i3 18
iS 1 e</>umcr$77 CK T. So^rys aurov.
(e) K = "by reason of," 8 13 CK T. <wvo>v, i6 n
. . . K T. 7TOVCOV aVTWV.
(/) ex is used with the material of which anything is formed :
cf. i8 12 7rav O-KCVOS K gv\ov. This usage is common to Greek
and Hebrew : cf. Xen. Symp. 8, o-Tpdrev/xa e epao-rwj/ : Aesch.
Suppl. 953, e/c KpiO&v fj-eOv. See (#) above ad fin,
(vii.) ejjnrpoaOei . This twice occurs in a local sense in the
phrase e/ATrpoo-fov TW 7ro8o>v, i9 10 22 8 , the first of which is an
intrusion : also as an adverb in 4 6 . In J its meanings are various :
it denotes superiority in i 15 - 80 , priority in time in 3 28 , and has a
local sense in io 4 i2 37 .
(viii.) iv. This preposition occurs nearly 157 times, (a)
The most noteworthy use of ev in our author is its in
strumental use. Thus it occurs 33 times, whereas it does not
occur at all in J (save in a quasi-instrumental sense in the
phrase h TOVTW : see Abbott, Gr. 256), nor yet in the
Pauline or Catholic Epp. save once in 2 Pet. It is found 34
times in the Synoptics (according to Moulton and Geden), 3
times in Acts, and 3 in Hebrews. Moulton (Gr., pp. 12, 61, 104)
thinks that the publication of the Tebtunis Papyri (1902) has
" rescued the instrumental w from the class of Hebraisms " in
the case of ev fjLaxaLpy, Lk 2 2 49 , and eV pa/SSw, i Cor 4 21 . To this
claim Abbott (Gr. 256 n.) rejoins effectively. But even though
the instrumental eV does occur in the papyri sporadically (where
the influence of Jewish traders may have been at work), this
fact cannot account in any case for the preponderating use of
eV in our author. No adequate explanation can be found save
in its origination in a mind steeped in Semitic. Even Moulton
(p. 6 1 n.) concedes that this e> " came to be used rather excessively
... by men whose mother tongue was Aramaic." But this
concession in the case of our author is quite inadequate, kv
is used instrumentally after dyopa^etv, 5 9 : dSi/cetv, g 19 : dTro/crctVeiv,
2 23 6 8 9 20 I3 io<**) I9 2i. fioffartfa*, i4 10 : icaiW, 192; but without
ev, [8 8 ] 2 1 8 (due to editor ?) : /caraKcuctv, 1 7 16 l8 8 : /cav/xart^eiv, l6 8 :
2 : /a0apieiv, I4 2 : Aev/catWiv, 7 14 : Avctv, i 5 : /uyvwai, 8 7 :
II 6 ig 15 : TrXamv, ig 20 l8 23 : 7repi/3aAAecr#eH, 3 5 4 4
Troi/xau/eiv, 2 27 I2 5 I9 15 : TroXe/aciv, 2 16 (I9 11 ): ^pvcrovv,
i8 16 . iv is used locally after KaOi&iv in 3 21 (* & ) (but lirl c. ace. 2o 4 ) :
i Cf- 2 2i [ 22 j 9 2o. 21 ^ii. p T a,voeiv airb is found in Acts 8 22 and Jer 8 s
(LXX). But fifvavoelv etc does not occur in the LXX. It probably represents
JD nw in our author s mind.
PREPOSITIONS cxxxi
after KaToiKeiv, i3 12 (but this is not our author s use. He uses
eVi c. gen.).
(b) eV is used temporarily in i 10 2 13 g 6 io 7 ii 13 etc.: see
temporal phrases without eV in i8 10 - 16 - 19 /ua &pa (source).
(f) ev is used generally after y/oa</>eiv, i 3 i3 8 2o 12 - 15 2i 27 22 18 - 19
(but eis is found in i 11 , and eW in i7 8 : see under eVi).
(d) eV is found in the phrases ev rfj Seia x et P l j l16 : *v i"fi ^ e l j
2 1 : e v r. x ei pt> 6 5 7 9 Ic>2 tc. ; but eVi ryv 6"eiav, 5 1 . Also in
ev </>a>v?7 /xeyaX?7, after Xe yeiv, I4 7 9 (but without eV in 5 12 8 13 ).
eV is never used in this phrase after /cpaeiv, 6 10 7 2 io 3 (see vol. i.
260 ad fin., ii. 22 ad init.) except in passages from another hand
or source, i4 15 i8 2 . It is also omitted in this phrase after <<oveiv,
i4 18 . ev ju,e oro> is always followed by gen. i 13 2 1 4 6 etc. ; hence 2 7
ev /ue cro) TO) TrapaSeio-u) in N cc 025 is either a conflation of two texts
or a correction of the later.
(ix.) eVcomov. Very frequent : 34 times, but only once in J,
i.e. 2o 30 , and twice in i. 3 J.
The frequent occurrence of this word, which, it is true, is
found sporadically in the Koivrj (see Moulton, Gr. 3 pp. 99, 246), is
best explained as due to Semitic influence.
(x.) efrQev, i4 20 .
(xi.) eird^w. Only twice. Really an adverb but used as a
preposition, 6 8 2o 3 .
(xii.) em. About 143 times l in all (74 with ace., 13 with
dat, 56 with gen.). This preposition is used very idiomatically
by our author, and several of the uses are of his own devising.
It is therefore of primary importance to be acquainted with
these.
(a) eTrt in various phrases :
(a) ri -n}s yf)<>, 5 3 - 10 - 13 7 1 IO 2 - 5 - 8 etc. never eVi T^V yr}v (for
i4 16 is an interpolation). If our author wishes to use yr?v he
writes ets rr/i/ y^v, 5 6 6 13 8 5 g 1 etc. See vol. i. 191. (ft) CTT! r^s
0a\d(ro"f)<s so always. 5 13 * 7 1 io 2 - 5 - 8 except in i5 2 , where the
eVi T-^V $aAao-o-av seems due to its being preceded by ta-ravai,
which always in the case of other nouns is followed by evri with
the ace. See vol. i. 262 ad med., ii. 34 ad init. Our author s use
comes out forcibly in 7 1 fva //,r) Trve ^ ave/xos CTTI TTJ<S yrjs fJLrJTt CTTI
rrj<; ^aXacrcr^s /r^re CTTI Trav (X 025 cf. 7^^ o^8e JAY) . . . ?rav
Kavfjia : g 4 2 1 27 ) 8eV8pov. Observe the eVi with the ace. at the
close, (y) eVt T^V (ra<s) /ce^aX^v (-as). Only in I2 1 do we find
eTTt Trjs Kf(^aX.rj<s. See vol. i. 300 Sq., 303. (8) evrt TO /ieVojTrov, or
1 These numbers are only approximately true. Different texts yield
different results.
* The context would suggest here the rendering "in the sea." Such was
the view of many of the ancients. Thus K reads eV ry daXfoa-g, and is
supported by Pr gig vg s 1 2 arm bo eth.
cxxxii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
if he uses the pi. eVi rcov /XCTWTTWV. See vol. i. 206 ad med. In
i4 9 we find t eVt TOV /ACTWTTOV f ; but this verse is corrupt. See
vol. ii. 15 ad fin. (e) The above forms are rigid. But in
phrases composed of eVi and x t/ P or ^ 8eta our author uses the
gen. or ace. : cf. e?rt TYJS ^et/oos avrwv r^s Seias 13 16 , e^ri, T^S Seias
i 20 , and eTTtr^v x"/ 30 ^ T 4 9 2C)1 4 : 7r * ^^ Scfw^i 5 1 . See vol. i. 335
ad med.
(b} cTTt with some case of Opovos (or ve^eX^) determined by
the case of the preceding participle Ka.OrjiJ.tvos. This is one of
the most remarkable idiosyncrasies of our author. When the
part, is in the nom. or ace. it is followed by rl TOV Opovov : when
the part, is in the gen. it is followed by ri TOV Opovov : when in
the dat. by eVi TO> 0/odVo). 1
, N A , fern TOV Qpovov
(a) o Kaurmei/os I / \ V , /% \
v N " a, 4 (or eiri Tiny j/eAeXrif)
rot/ Ka0Ti|aei o^ ) \_\9\ /
[(Or TTt TOJ/ ITTTTOl ).
So in 4 2 - 4 6 2 - 6 ii 16 i4 14 ig 11 . This usage of our author is
generally not observed in the interpolations or edited portions.
Thus 9 17 T. Ka6r)/j.vov<s 7r f aurtof f seems due to a reviser of
the preceding words : i4 16 6 KaOrj^vo^ err! T. ve^eA^? (AN : T.
vc<f>\r}v, C 025) occurs in the interpolation i4 15 - 17 : 20 11 TOV
KaOypevov ir avrov (A : eTravw avroi), tf), and 7 15 6 Ka^rj/xei/os CTTI
t T. Opovov f (Ax : TW Opovu, 025. 046), are due to the editor of
2O 4 -22. 2 1 5 6 KaO-rjfJLevos 7Tt T. ^poj/w, is a primitive corruption.
On i4 6 see vol. ii. 12.
(/?) TW Ka0T]fieV<{> em TW Opoi/w. So 4 5 13 y 10 i9 4 . In 6 4 TO?
Ka^. CTT* t avrov t is a primitive corruption, while TW KaO. ?rt T.
ve<^eA^5 occurs in the interpolation, i4 15 17 .
(y) TOU KaOrjfJieVou em TOU Opo^ou. So 4 10 5 1 - 7 6 16 : cf. zy 1
(TT}S KaOr)fj,evr)S 7rl vodrtav ig 1 - 21 (TOV KaOrj/jL^vov eVt TOV ITTTTOV
both times). Hence ip 18 TWV KaOrj^vwv eir f avTots f (A:
avTov? K) seems to be a primitive corruption. 025. 046 and
cursives read rightly eV avruv. These MSS may have preserved
the original reading here, and A may be corrupt.
(c) era is used after certain verbs, (a) fiaXXeiv eVt with
ace. 2 24 i8 19 (source) : ((3) -ypafaw ITTL with ace. 2 17 3 12 ly 6 - 8
(source) ig 16 . In I4 1 the gen. eVt TWI/ /xeTWTrwv after ypdfaw is
due to our author s predilection for the gen. pi. in this phrase :
see under (a) above, (y) e*x tv ^ 7rt/ w i tn ace. 1 6 8 - 10 - 12 - 17 .
1 It is noteworthy that this participle in the nom. and ace. is followed by
tirl with the ace. in five passages of the six where it occurs in the rest of the
N.T., Matt 9 9 , Mark 2 14 , Luke S 27 2I 35 , J I2 15 : exception, Acts 8 ; and that
when it is in the gen. it is followed by 4iri with the gen. in Matt 24 3 27 19 :
exception, Mark I3 3 . But whereas these may be coincidences, in our author
the use is a law. In Mark I3 3 we have Kadyntvov followed by efr, whereas
Matt 24 3 has M T. 6pov$ r.
PREPOSITIONS cxxxin
(8) lo-TOivai eTrt with acc. 3 20 loriy/ca 7Tt ryv Bvpav (contrast
J l8 16 cumj/cec TT/JOS rfj Bvpa\ y 1 8 3 II 11 I2 18 I4 1 I5 2 . (e)
Ka#ieu/ eTrt with acc. 2o 4 . () KOLTOIKZLV ri with gen. See vol. i.
289, 336, ii. 12 ad fin. This construction is characteristic alike
as to meaning and form. Two other constructions are found in
i3 12 172 where they appear due to sources : (17) KoVreo-fleu liri with
acc. i 7 = "to wail because of" (but in Zech. i2 10 (o ), 2 Sam.
ii 26 (A) "to wail for"). So far as I am aware this usage is not
Greek, ffyy 1DD could be rendered " wail over him," as in Zech.
i2 10 , or "wail because of him," as the text requires here. Has
our author assigned to eVt a meaning that belongs only to $y ?
We could also render the Greek "to wail in regard to him."
In i8 9 this phrase =" to wail over." (6) TTITTTCLV CTTI with acc.
6 ie 7 n. 16 310 !!. i6 s but with e rt\v yrjv, 6 13 9 1 , since our
author does not say ITT\ rrjv yrjv (see (a) above), (i) O-K^I/OW en-i
with acc. 7 15 . (K) nBivu with acc. i 17 , but in io 2 with
eTrt rr}<s OaXdo-crrjs in conformity with his usage (see (a) above).
(X) //.aprupetv and 7rpo<f>rjTeviv are followed by rt ( = " con
cerning") with dat. in 22 16 (N 046) io 11 . ITTL has this meaning in
J i2 16 CTT avroJ ycypa.fjifjLva. But in 22 16 A vg bo read tv. See
eTrt with dat. after SeSeo-^at, 9 14 ; opyi&o-Bai, 12 17 ; cv<j>paLV<T0ai, i8 20 .
(d) After eova-ia evrt there follows sometimes the gen. 2 26 n 6b
(source) i4 18 2o 6 : sometimes the acc. 6 8 i3 7 i6 9 22 14 . J has
neither of these constructions, but the gen. without CTTC, ly 2 ,
or the inf. i 12 5 27 io 18 (Wj) etc. A similar usage occurs in i7 18
/JcuriXciav CTTI ( = " Over ") TW /SacriXewv : cf. Rom. 9 5 .
(xiii.) icard. (a) with gen. 2 4 - 14 - 20 Kara crov, "against thee."
Once in J i9 n in the same sense, (b) With acc. (a) =
"according to," 2 23 i8 6 (source) 20 12 - 13 . (ft) Temporally in 22 2
Kara ^va. (y) Distributively in 4 8 ev Kaff /: cf. J [8 9 2i 25 ].
(xiv.) KUKXoOej as a prep, in 4 3 - 4 : as an adv. in 4 8 .
(xv.) KU K\W as a prep. 4 5 11 7 11 .
(xvi.) jierd. 52 times (41 with gen. and IT with acc.). (a)
/xTa with gen. after aKoXovOcw [6 8 ] i4 13 ( = "to accompany"):
XaXetv, i 12 io 8 I7 1 2 1 9 - 15 : Motycvciv, 2 22 : [/AoXwecr&u, i4 4 ] :
16 y?7 T ^4 T *,14 a
II 7 I2 17 I3 7 I9 19 : 7roXe/A6tv, 2 16 I2 7 13* iy 14 a
decided Hebraism, only in our author in the N.T. An
occasional instance of it has been found in the papyri : iropvevciv,
i7 2 i8 3 - 9 (source). This construction is not classical Greek,
which requires the ace. So also /aot^evetv. 1 (b) pcrd with ace. is
only found in the phrase [JLCTCL Tavra, except in II 11 /xera ras rpets
1 Perhaps we might trace it to such an expression as that in Is. 23 1
pun niD^DD "?3 n nnjt. iropveteiv perd is found in Ezek. i6 34 , but the
Hebrew does not explain the per A. Similarly ?jto ( = fj.oL-x.tteu>) is followed
by DN (=/*Td) in Jer. 29^ ; but not o , which gives /J.OIXWJ>TO ras yvvaiKas.
Cxxxiv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
^ue/oag. /Acra ravra has two meanings in our author its ordinary
one, "after these things," i 19 4 2 9 12 2o 3 , and a technical one,
which, when combined with etSoi/, always introduces a new and
important vision, 4 1 7 1 - 9 15* iS 1 iQ 1 . On the value of this
phrase as a canon of criticism, see vol. i. 106, footnote. This
usage is found in J : (cf. 2 12 3 22 4 43 5 1 6 1 y 1 iQ 38 ) as introducing
a new section.
(xvii.) irapd. 3 times (2 with gen. and i with dat). In J 35
times (26 with gen. and 9 with dat.).
(xviii.) irpos. 8 times (i with dat. and 7 with ace.). In J, on
the other hand, xpos with ace. occurs about 100 times, and with
the dat. 4. Ti-po? c. dat. is found in our author only once, i 13 ;
elsewhere in N.T., Mark 5", J i8 16 20 11 - 12 ( **>. He uses Trpos
with ace. after verbs of motion, 3 20 io 9 etc. (6 times). 7rpo? =
" against," in I3 6 r/i Oi^fev TO oTo/x,a avrov ei9 /3A.ao-(/7/uas Trpos r.
Oeov. Here ets would be more natural: cf. Mark 3 29 , Luke i2 10 ,
Acts 6 11 . This preposition is much more varied in meaning in J.
(xix.) UTTO. Only twice, and one of these in an interpola
tion, 6 8 .
(xx.) UTTOK<TW. 4 times. Really an adverb but used as a
preposition.
6. Conjunctions and other Particles.
(i.) d\Xd. 13 times, but over 100 times in J and 20 times in
i. 2. 3 J.
(ii.) av. (a) As a particle in a relative clause av occurs only
twice, in 2 25 a^pt ov av ^w, and in 14* OTTOVO.V vTrdyei (A : -y N 025.
046). J, on the other hand, uses av 5 times in the sense of
"if" (alone in the N.T.), and 22 times as a mere particle in
relative or conditional sentences.
(b) But our author uses ecu/ also as a mere particle after ocrot,
3 19 i3 15 (source). With the same meaning it recurs in n 6 OOTOLKL^
lav (source), but as a conjunction followed by a subjunctive in
320 [ 2 2 18 - 19 ]. eav fjirj is followed by the subj. 2 5 3 3 , but in 2 22c (an
interpolation) by the indicative. 1 In J ecu/ is once used as a
1 Thus 6.v is substituted for &v 3 times (3 19 and u 6 I3 15 sources) out of 4.
Moulton (Gr. 43) states that in pre-Christian papyri the proportion of Mr to
&v was 13 to 29, but in the 1st cent. A.D. this proportion was 25 to 7, in 2nd
A.D. 76 to 9, in 3rd A.D. 9 to 3, in 4th A.D. 4 to 8. av occurs last for &v
in a 6th cent, papyrus. It will be seen, therefore, that the proportion in our
author, 3 to I, agrees nearly with that in the papyri of the 1st cent. A.D.,
25 to 7.
It is significant of the character of tf that it changes di> into &v in 3 19 I3 15
and thus represents our author as using tav only i out of 4 times. C changes
it in ii 6 . Notwithstanding the untrustworthy character of 025. 046, they are
here more trustworthy than X in this respect.
But Thackeray (Gr. 67), with a large body of papyri at his disposal, gives
CONJUNCTIONS AND OTHER PARTICLES cxxxv
mere particle in i5 7 . Otherwise frequently as a conjunction
followed by the subjunctive. J uses av 14 times in the apodosis
of an impossible supposition, but our author does not use this
construction.
(iii.) apri, i2 10 , and O.TT apri, i4 13 . It is hard to decide whether
apTi = "a.t this moment," as occasionally in J (see Abbott, Gr.
25 sq., 199), or "at this present time," as contrasted with past or
future time a later meaning belonging more properly to vw,
which J uses very frequently but not our author.
(iv.) axpi. Always followed by subjunctive in our author :
2 25 (axpi ov) 7 3 I5 8 20 3t 5 . In I7 17 we find a^pt TeAeo-^orovrat.
But this is a source.
(v.) Y<*P- drc. 17 times. In J nearly 70.
(vi.) 8e. 6 times. Very frequent in J and with different
shades of meaning : see Abbott, Gr. in loc.
(vii.) el. i is found only in combination (a) with rts: 1 n 5a
[n 5 ^] i3.io(**) 148.11 2o 15 (et ns oi>x) a very common com
bination not once in J : (b) with /^ ( = " except "), 2 17 9* i3 17 i4 3
i9 12 2 1 27 . This use is found in J 3 13 6 22 etc. : or with Se ^ ( =
"otherwise"), 2 5 - 16 : also in J i4 2 - u . But J uses the former
combination in other idioms.
(viii.) ew0ei/ (as adverb = eo>) n 2 5 1 (some MSS).
(ix.) en. 1 8 times, including a restoration of ert for eVt in 7 16 .
22 11 is an interpolation.
(x.) Ico S . With subjunctive ( = "tiH"), 6 11 . In J with ind.
9 18 2 1 22 - 23 . In various combinations in J.
(xi.) i&ou. 26 times. In J 4. J uses tSe (15), but our
author does not.
(xii.) IVa. Final clauses introduced by Iva 2 followed by the
subj. 33 times, and by the ind. 13. (The latter is unclassical :
Attic uses OTTO;? with ind.) In J Iva is followed by the subj.
save thrice out of nearly 140 times. Iva ^ is followed by the
subj. 9 times and by the ind. 2 : in J only by the subj. As our
author never uses the past subjunctive (or optative) it is interest-
the statistics as follows. In pre-Christian papyri 5s dv, 16, 8s &v , 78 : in
i/A.D. 39 and 5 respectively ; in ii/A.D. 79 and 13 ; in iii/A.D. 13 and 5 ; in
iv/A. D. 12 and 7. These amended numbers show more clearly how the
scribe of X introduced later forms into his text.
1 et rts is only found once in the Johannine writings outside the Apoca
lypse 2 J 10 e? TIS fyxerat. Here the case is put as an actual occurrence,
and the coming as a real event. Hence this form does not militate against
Johannine authorship.
2 In my commentary I have followed Blass in taking iva in I4 13 as almost
equal to 6rt " in that." But here also it may express purpose. Thus yuctK-
dpioi ol vfKpol ol ev Kvpiy airodv^ffKOvre^ . . . Iva avaira.-fjffovTai = " Blessed
are the dead that die ii. the Lord : yea, saith the Spirit, in order to rest,"
etc. Cf. 22 14 and J S 56 9 2 rls ij^aprev . . . Iva. rv0X6s yevv-^efj ; n 15 , and see
Abbott, Gr. 114-128, who insists that iva expresses purpose in J.
cxxxvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
ing to observe the sequence of tenses adopted by him after Iva
Or iv a. fjLrj.
Pres. ind. followed by pres. ind. . . i
pres. subj. . . 5
t SLOT. subj. . . 7.
,, fut. ind. . . 4
Past. ind. pres. subj. . . 5
aor. subj. . . 13
fut. ind. . . 7
Fut. ind. fut. ind. . . i
Imperative
(pres. or aor.) pres. subj. . . i
aor. subj . . 2
(xiii.) pi. Never with the participle in our author, but 10
times in J and n times in i. 2. 3 J. /XT; with pres. imperative, i 17
2 10 etc. ; with aor. subj. 6 6 7 3 io 4 , the use of these two tenses
being carefully distinguished; see above, p. cxxvi. /XT; . . .
//.Tyre . . . /XT;T, 7 1 8 : also /XT; . . . ovSe . . . ovSe in 9 4 , but
never /XT) . . . /xT;Se, as in J (bis) who never uses /xT/re ; nor /x;8e
. . . /XT;Se. ovSe /XT; . . . ovSe, 7 16 .
(xiv.) oiriarQev as prep, i 10 4 6 , as adv. 5 1 .
(xv.) oirurw as prep. i2 15 i3 3 , and also in i 10 (xC) io 10 in NC
025.
(xvi.) oirou, 2 13 (**) ii 8 2o 10 . In the latter two passages there
is the combination oVov KCLL. In sources used by our author
there is a Hebraism in connection with this word : oVou . . .
eKL, i2 6 - 14 : OTTOV . . . e7r avTaiv, i7 9 ; but this Hebraism never
appears to come from his own hand. In 14* we have OTTOU av
virdyei (AC : corrected into vTrdyr) in X 025. 046). This use
of <iV here is to be rejected, according to Blass, Gr. 207, 217 ;
Robertson, Gr. 969. See, however, under OTO.V : also Vocabulary
of G. T. (Moulton and Milligan) under av.
(xvii.) oadKis. ii 6 (source).
(xviii.) OTO.V. This particle takes the aor. subj. 9 5 ii 7 i2 4
i7 10 2O 7 , or the pres. subj. io 7 iS 9 , 1 or the fut. ind. 4 9 , or even
the aor. ind. 8 1 . In the last passage the use of orav in orav
yvoL^cv (corrected into ore in X 025) is quite incorrect according
to Blass (Gr. 218). Yet it is found in the KOIVIJ : cf. Mark n 19
orav oi/^e eyeVero e^eTropeuero ea> T. TroXeoog : Ex 1 6 3 : cf. a>s av
in Gen (Tischendorfs ed.) 27 30 w? av e^A^ev laKw^S, of a single
definite action in the past. oVav, however, with the indie, generally
denotes indefinite frequency (an unclassical usage) : cf. Mark 3 11
1 As Abbott (Gr. 385) points out, Srav with the pres. subj. refers to the
coincidence of time between the action of the pres. subj. and that of the
principal verb.
CONJUNCTIONS AND OTHER PARTICLES cXxxvii
ii 25 : similarly OTTOV av, Mark 6 56 . On oVav with fut. ind. see
Robertson, Gr. 972.
(xix.) ore occurs 13 times and always with aor. ind. In J
21 times (4 with fut. ind.).
(xx.) on. 63 times, (a) Abbott, Gr. 154 sq., points out that
the suspensive use of on " is almost confined to the Johannine
writings and the Apocalypse." Here <m = "because," and he
cites as examples outside these writings Gal 4 6 , i Cor i2 15 . 16 ,
Rom 9 7 . In J I 50 (OTL CITTOJ/ <roi . . . 7rrTveis) I4 19 I5 19 i6 6
2o 29 . In like manner in our author we must render 3 10
" Because (on) thou hast kept the word of my endurance I also
will keep thee," 3 16 - 17 iS 7 . 1
(b) Besides the suspensive use of on, where the on clause
precedes, the word most frequently introduces a subsequent
clause giving a ground or reason, and so it is to be rendered
" because " or " for." Cf. 3 4 4 11 5 4 - 9 6 17 etc. etc.
(c) Next it means " that " after eTSov, oTSa, yiyvwo-Kw, ex<o Kar -
Tiros or O/AI/U/U, 2 2 - 4 - 20 - 23 3 1 - 8 - 9 - 15 io 6 etc.
(d) Finally, it is used before direct discourse (i.e. on " recita
tive")^! 7 i8 7 .
(xxi.) ou = " where " [i7 15 ]. Our author as also J uses 6Vou
and not ou.
(xxii.) ou. We find ov . . . ouSV, 7 16 9 2( > i2 8 2o 4 2i 23 : ov . . .
OVTC, 9 21 : ouSei9 . . . ovot . . . ovot . . . oure, 5 3 : ouSeis . . .
OVTC, 5 4 .
(xxiii.) ou jjiT). 15 times. Always followed by subj. in our
author except in i8 14 (source), which may be an interpolation in
this source, seeing that elsewhere in this source it is followed by
the subj. See vol. i 59 ad med. In J 3 times with ind. out
of 17.
(xxiv.) oucu. This interjection is followed by the dat. in our
author in 8 13 . In i2 12 (a source) by the ace. In i8 10 - 16 - 19 (a
source) by the nom. It is a noun in 9 12( **> ni4(**>.
(xxv.) ouKen. io 6 : in i8 1L14 with neg. (source). 12 times
in J.
(xxvi.) oui/. (a) Used of logical appeal 6 times, i 19 2 5 - 16 etc.
(b) Narrative or continuative ovv does not occur once, and
only a few times in the Synoptic Gospels. In J ovv occurs nearly
200 times, and the majority of these apparently in a non-illative
or purely continuative or narrative sense. Only 8 times does it
occur in the words of Jesus : all the rest in the narrative portions.
But Abbott (Gr. 470 sqq.) finds difficulties in many of the Johan
nine uses of ovv. He pertinently remarks (p. 479, footnote) : " the
1 On the ground of thib and a few other similarities of style Abbott (Gr.
I S5) suggests that "the author of the Gospel may have been a disciple or
younger coadjutor of the author of the Apocalypse."
cxxxviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
absence of narrative ow in Revelation is important, because . . .
it is largely made up of narrative, so that we might have expected
narrative ow in abundance if it had been written by the hand
that wrote the Fourth Gospel." The word occurs only once in
i. 2. 3 J.
(xxvii.) OUTTW. 1 7 10. 12 (source). 13 times in J, i J once.
(xxviii.) cure. We find ovre . . . ovre, 315.16 920 2I 4. ou S e v ts
. . . ovre, 5 4 .
(xxix.) Tr\V = " only," 2 25 : cf. Phil. 3 16 for this meaning.
Blass (Gr. 268) would assign this meaning to irX-^v also in i Cor.
ii 11 , Eph 588, Phil 4 14 .
(xxx.) 8e = (a) " hither," 4 1 1 1 12 ; (b) metaphorically ( = " here
is need for"), 1310. is I4 i2 I7 9.
(xxxi.) w9. (a) On this important particle, see vol. i. 35 sq.,
where it is shown that it has in our author several uses unknown
elsewhere in the N.T. but found in the LXX. One use is there
omitted.
(b) In a comparison the same case follows w? as that which
precedes it. This, of course, is the usual construction. Cf. 2 18
T. 6<$aA/x,ot>s avrov w? <Aoyu Trupo s, 9 8 - 9 I2 15 I3 3 l8 21 2 1 2 22 1 .
Hence l6 13 eTSov . . . Tn/evjua/ra rpta . . . a>s f f^drpa^oL f is
either a slip or due to an interpolator. It is due to the latter,
as we see on other grounds.
(c) Observe that our author never uses Ka#ws though it
occurs nearly 180 times in the N.T. In J it occurs 31 times
and 13 in i. 2. 3 J. J uses o>s in a temporal sense ( = "when")
about 20 times, but J ap , i. 2. 3 J never. Our author uses o>s as a
word of comparison about 73 times (only once with a numeral),
J 13 times (8 times with a numeral).
(d) In 22 12 u)s = "according as," followed by substantive
verb a usage not found elsewhere in the Johannine writings.
(xxxii.) oiairep. io 3 .
7. Case.
(i.) (a) The nominative stands in the case of a proper noun
without regard to the construction, in place of the case normally
required. 9 11 oi/o/xa ex et ATroXAvwv. This is good Greek (cf.
Xenoph. Oecon. vi. 14, rovs c^ovras TO o-e/xvov oi/o/xa TOUTO TO /caAos
T Kaya#ds), but it comes from the hand of the editor and not
from the author, whose construction will be found in 6 8 .
(b) Nominativus pendens. Since in our author this usage is
a Hebraism, it is dealt with under that heading.
(ii.) (a) Genitive absolute. This construction does not exist
in our author, though it is employed often in J and with more
elasticity of meaning than is found in the Synoptists : see
CASE cxxxix
Abbott, Gr. 83 sq. In the ApOC. I7 8 OavpacrO^arovraL 01
KaroiKowres ... wv ... /8A7roj/T(ov is not a gen. abs. But
for this intervening wv the text would have read /SAeVovres or
orav /^AeTTcocriv.
() Temporal genitive. This genitive denotes the whole
period of time during which something happened : 4 8 y 15 ^/xe pas
Kat VVKTOS a phrase that should be restored in 8 12 2i 25 .
(iii.) Dative, (a) Instrumental dative. This dative is of
infrequent occurrence. It is found in 4 4 Trepi/SefiXrjfjievovs i/y,cmois,
[Q 13 ySe/^a/x/xevov cu/zart, i8 21 op/x^/mri jSXrjOrjcreTaL (source), 22 14
rois irvAaxrtV eicreX^cocrtv, 2 1 8 [8 8 ] Kato/xeV^ Trupt , I5
5 1 Kareo-^payio /Aevov (T<f>pay L<rLV, 17* l8
jLuyaAT? is found after Aeyeii/, 5 12 (6 1 ) 8 13 (yet with eV, i4 7 - 9 ) :
after /<paeiv, 6 10 y 2 io 3 ip 17 (but with ev in passages from another
hand, i4 15 i8 2 ) : after <u)veu/, i4 18 . This instrumental dat. is
mostly replaced in our author by lv (see above, p. cxxx, under eV),
or occasionally after passive verbs by lv or a-n-o.
(fr) Dative of time, /una <Spa in ig 10 - 16 - 19 (source) is difficult.
It seems to mean "in the course of an hour." Hence we
should expect ev />ua cupa, just as in i8 8 we have ev /ata T7/xepa or
else /x6a? ^epas, "in the course of one day." Yet see Blass,
Gr. 1 20.
(c) Hebraic dative. 2i 8 rots Se SetAots ... TO /xepog avrwv.
See below, p. cxlviii (ti) (6).
(iv.) Accusative of point of time. 3 3 Troiav wpai/. Cf. J 4 52
See Abbott, Gr. 75 ; Acts 20 16 r^v rj^pav rrj<s
This usage (Blass, Gr. 94) occurs in connection
with wpa in Attic Greek and in the papyri. Moulton, Gr. 63.
(v.) Vocative. There are nearly 60 examples of the nomina
tive with the article used as a vocative in the N.T. It has a
double origin ; for it was well established both in Greek and in
Hebrew. In Greek l it carried with it a rough peremptory note,
and in the N.T. this note still survives : cf. Mark 9 25 TO aAaAov /cat
KCDC^OJ/ 7rve{;/xa : J IQ 3 ^aipe 6 j3acnX.vs r. lovSauov. In the latter
passage there is a note of derision : /foo-iAev r. lovScuW 2 would
have conceded the justice of Christ s claims. In the tender ^
Trats eyeipe, Luke 8 54 , Moulton (Gr. 70) finds "a survival of the
decisiveness of the older use."
But the Hebrew vocative with the art. carries with it a
different and often a more dignified note. It can be used in the
most respectful form of address to kings, or in a minatory sense
1 Blass (Gr. 69) quotes Aristophanes, Frogs, 521, 6 TTCUS d/coAotftfei ( = " you
there, the lad I mean, follow").
2 Moulton (Gr. 71) observes that Mark s use of this phrase in I5 18 "is
merely a note of his imperfect sensibility to the more delicate shades of Greek
idiom."
cxl THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
to inferiors: cf. Is 42 18 , Joel i 2 - 13 . But it is never used in
addressing God in the O.T. (except possibly in Neh i 5 , Dan 9 4 ). 1
Yet since the LXX generally renders K and DN"6 in the vocative
by 6 0eo s, the solemn use of this vocative appears to have
originated with the LXX, being a higher development of the
usage already found in Hebrew. Our author appears therefore
to have been influenced in this direction by the LXX : cf. 4 11
6 Kvpios KCU 6 0eos 77/A(ov, 2 6 10 6 SetTTTOT^s 6 ayios, I2 12 I5 3 i6 5
jg4. 20 j^ j n contrast with this prevailing usage, we find,
however, Kt pie 6 tfeos, n 17 I5 3 i6 7 : Kvpie, lya-ov, 22 20 .
(vi.) Verbs with different cases or constructions.
(a) <XKOUU>. Our author uses this verb with gen. of person,
51. 3. 5 313 T 65. 7. an( j acc of thing, i 3 7 3 9 16 22 8 . 3 But d/coveti/ takes
both the gen. and ace. of the thing, as, for instance, with ^wi/rj.
Now in J O.K. <a>i>?7s 4 = to hear so as to obey: cf. 5 25 - 28 io s - 16 ,
while tt/<. <f}wrjv = \.o hear without further result: cf. 3 8 5 37 ,
similarly OLKOVW \6yov and Aoywi/. See Abbott, Gr. 435 sq.,
Johannine Voc. 116 (footnotes). This distinction does not
exist in our author, save apparently accidentally. Thus in 3 20
ii 12 (&C 025 but not A 046) a*. <f>wf)s="to obey." In 9 13
I0 4. s ui2 I2 10 i4 2 (Wr) i8 4 ig 1 - 6 the phrase O.K. </>coi/>jv does not
express obedience to, or regard of, the voice, as in J it would
connote. Here the phrase means "to hear intelligently," "to
understand." But d/<. ^wvr/s has exactly the same force in i4 13
i6 x 2 1 3 . Hence our author does not observe either the usage of
J nor the well-known one of Acts 9 7 where O.K. ^>wv^s="to hear
a sound " (without understanding its meaning), and in 9 4 26 14 O.K.
<j><i>vrjv= " to hear intelligently " 5
(b) ypd<j>ea6au Always ypcx^etr^at ev TW /3i/3\iii> in our author :
cf. (i 3 ) 2o 12 2 1 27 and especially i3 8 ; but in source, ypa</>. CTTL TO
PLJS^LOV, iy 8 . This latter construction is found in quite other
phrases : 2 17 CTT! r. ij/rjtfiov . . . yeypa/x^ievov, 3 12 I9 16 .
(c) 8t86i/ai. This verb is followed by the partitive gen. (TOV
a) in 2 17 ; not so elsewhere in N.T.
(cC) euayYeXi^en . In io 7 c. ace. of person, and in i4 6 with
CTTI c. ace.
The rest of the N.T. uses the middle of this verb and
frequently c. ace. of person. It does not occur in J in any
1 This usage, however, was well established in Aramaic, which had three
different ways of making the noun definite when it was to stand in the
vocative. See Kautzsch, Gr. des Btblisch. Aramaischen, p. 148 sq.
2 6 /tfyuos as a vocative is not found except in this passage (Abbott).
3 In 5 13 we have TTO.V Krlfffia . . . -fJKova-a \tyovras (al. X^yoj/ra), the idea of
Jhe thing prevails and not that of the person ; hence the ace.
4 In classical Greek " to hear a sound."
5 In i. 2. 3 J aKoueiv takes a gen. of the person and an ace. of the thing
except in 3 J 4 where it is followed by an ace. of the person.
NUMBER cxli
form. In Attic this verb takes ace. of thing and dat. of
person.
(e) irpoaKuyeif. The cases with this verb are dealt with in vol.
i. 211 sq. Our author clearly uses Tr/ooovcvi/eiv with dat. only of
the worship of God. When the verb takes the ace. it is homage
or inferior worship that is designed. Abbott ( Voc. 137) shows
that " the Synoptists reserve the ace. for the worship due to God
or God s Son," in contrast with the use in the LXX or that of
our author. Next (138 sqq.) he discovers in the Samaritan
Dialogue in J 4 and in the Temptation narratives in the Synop
tists " a deliberate differentiation of the two Greek constructions "
\_Trpoa-Kvvfiv, c. ace. ( = worship of), and c. dat. ( = prostration to)]
in which the Evangelists "appear to use 7rpo<rKwe u> with the ace.
as meaning such worship as ought to be paid to God alone."
Thus though Trpoo-KwetV c. dat. occurs in J 4 21 - 23a Q 38 , it has not the
full meaning of worship which is implied in 4 2bb - 24 . Hence our
author and J again differ here.
(/) Trepif3<XXe<r0cu 1 1 times c. ace. ; once c. ei/.
(g) (jximteiy. In 2 1 23 c. ace: in 22 5 <j>. ZTT avrovs. Here
there appears to be a Hebraism : see p. cxlviii (h) (i).
8. Number.
(i.) When several subjects follow a verb and the first is in
the sing., the verb is in the sing. : cf. 8 7 g 2 - 17 n 18 i2 10 i8 20 ig 20
20 11 ; but if they precede, the verb stands in the pi. : cf. 6 14 i8 17
2o 13s( i-. So also in J :.see Abbott, Gr. 307.
(ii.) (a) The neuter plural is generally followed by the pi.
verb : cf. I 19 (a etcrtV), 3 2 4 (a OVK e/x,oXwav), [4 5 ] 5 14 (ra reVerepa
<3a eXeyov), Q 20 (a ... Swai/rat), II 18 15* i6 20 (opr/ . . . evpeOrjarav),
20 12 2 1 4 . The pi. verb may precede the neuter pi.: cf. 4 9
(Soxrovcriv TO, wa), II 13 (aTTCKravOrjcrav . . . oi/o/xara) [i6 14 (elcrlv
yap Tri/ev/xara)], l8 23 (eTrXavrjOrjcrav Trdvra ra. ZOvrj), 2 1 24 . This
construction can generally be explained Kara o-vi/taw, the neuter
nouns being conceived of as masculine or feminine.
(b] But the sing, verb occasionally follows the neut. pi. : cf.
I 19 (a/xeXXet), 2 27 [($1/17) . . . <rwrpt)8eTai ?], 4 8 (ra. reoxrepa ^<3a . . .
e^coi/ 1 ), I3 14 (a eSo^), I4 13 (ra yap epya . . . aKoXov^et), i8 14
(ra. XtTrapa . . . a.7r<oXero), IQ^- 4 (TO, CTT par evjjia.ro. . . . -^/coXo^et) }
less often the sing, verb precedes : cf. 8 3 (eSoOrj . . . 0u//.ia/xaTa),
(iii.) The plural verb follows certain collective nouns in the
sing. : o^Xos TroXvs . . . ecrrwres, 7 9 : o^Xov TroXXov . . . Xcyovrcov
ig 1 - 6 , but generally In J this noun has the sing, verb except in
1 But it is better to take lx w " h 6 * 6 a s influenced by the tv ra0 tv preceding
it.
cxlii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
6 24 7 49 i2 12 . In J 7 49 i2 12 oxAos is accompanied by a participle
in the sing, (in its collective character) and by the verb in the
pi. (as conveying the idea of separate individual action). See
Abbott, Gr. 307. Aaos has the pi. verb in i8 14 and 777 in i3 3 - 4 .
9. Gender.
(i.) As a rule the concord of gender is observed, but there
are many exceptions. The greater number of these can be
explained as constructions Kara o-weo-iv. Thus 4 7 u>oi/ e^wv,
4 8 ra reWepa a>a . . . Aeyovres, I3 14 rw Orjpiu 05 c^ei, I7 11
OrjpLov . . . avTOS oySoos ecrrtv, I7 16 TO, Se/ca Kcpara . . . /cat TO
Orjptov, OVTOL. In i5 12 atos (A) TO apviov is to be similarly
explained, though in 5 6 I4 1 apviov has the part, in the neuter.
Similarly 7 4 \L\LOL^ eo-^payior/xeVoi (cf. also I4 3 ), I9 14 TO.
o-Tpareu fjLO.ro. evSeSv/xevot, 5 6 Trvf.vfJio.Ta. d7reoraAju,eVoi, 5 13 TTOLV KTicr/xa
. . . AeyovTas (tf), 9 5 e8o^ auTots (/.. cwcpi Ses). With (J>a>vq there
are several such wrong concords : 4 1 17 <(m/r) . . . Aeyon/ : cf.
also 5 1L 12 9 13 - 14 ii 15 . In i2 5 vtoV, apo-ei/ is peculiar.
(ii.) The gender of vaAos 2i 18 is nearly always fern., but our
author in making it masc. has the sanction of Theophrastus.
10. The Hebraic Style of the Apocalypse.
The Hebraic style of the Apocalypse has been acknowledged
in a general sense till the present generation, but scholars have
hitherto done little to establish the fact by actual and detailed evi
dence. Now, owing on the one hand to this fact that the Hebraic
character of the Apocalypse had not been established by actual
proofs, and on the other to the vast mass of fresh knowledge of
vernacular Greek brought to light by the researches of Grenfell,
Hunt, Thumb, Moulton, Milligan, and others, a new attitude
has recently been adopted by certain scholars on this question,
and some have gone to the extreme length of denying altogether
the presence of Hebraisms in the Apocalypse except in sections
that are translated from the Semitic. Thus Professor Moulton
(Gr. 8-9) affirms that "even the Greek of the Apocalypse itself
does not seem to owe any of its blunders to Hebraism. The
author s uncertain use of cases is obvious to the most casual
reader . . . We find him perpetually indifferent to concord.
But the less educated papyri give us plentiful parallels from a
field where Semitism cannot be suspected. . . . Apart from
places where he may be definitely translating a Semitic document,
there is no reason to believe his grammar would have been
materially different had he been a native of Oxyrhynchus,
assuming the extent of Greek education to be the same."
HEBRAISMS OF J AP cxliii
This is not only an extravagant, but, as we shall presently
discover, a wrong statement of the case, and called forth a
rejoinder from Professor Swete (Apoc? p. cxxiv, note), who
wrote: "It is precarious to compare a literary document with
a collection of personal and business letters, accounts, and other
ephemeral writings ; slips in word-formation or in syntax, which
are to be expected in the latter, are phenomenal in the former,
and if they find a place there, can only be attributed to lifelong
habits of thought. Moreover, it remains to be considered how
far the quasi-Semitic colloquialisms of the papyri are themselves
due to the influence of the large Greek-speaking Jewish
population of the Delta." My own studies, which have
extended from the time of Homer down to the Middle Ages,
and have concerned themselves specially with Hellenistic Greek,
so far as this Greek was a vehicle of Hebrew thought, have led
me to a very different conclusion on this question, and this is,
that the linguistic character of the Apocalypse is absolutely
unique}-
Its language differs from that of the LXX and other versions
of the O.T., from the Greek of the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha,
and from that of the papyri. Of course it has points in common
with all these phases of later Greek, but nevertheless it possesses
a very distinct character of its own. No literary document of
the Greek world exhibits such a vast multitude of solecisms.
It would almost seem that the author of the Apocalypse
deliberately set at defiance the grammarian and the ordinary
rules of syntax. But such a description would do him the
grossest injustice. He had no such intention. He is full of
his subject, and like the great Hebrew prophets of old is a true
artist. His object is to drive home his message with all the
powers at his command, and this he does in many of the
sublimest passages in all literature. Naturally with such an
object in view he has no thought of consistently breaking any
rule of syntax. How then are we to explain the unbridled
licence of his Greek constructions ? The reason clearly is that,
while he writes in Greek, he thinks in Hebrew, and the thought
has naturally affected the vehicle of expression. Moreover, he
has taken over some Greek sources already translated from the
Hebrew and has himself translated and adapted certain Hebrew
sources. Besides he has rendered many Hebrew expressions
literally and not idiomatically constantly in his own original
work and occasionally in his translations. His translations
1 In the next edition of Moulton s Prolegomena, the Hebraic style of the
Apocalypse is accepted, ~s its editor, Mr. Howard, has informed me. Dr.
Moulton changed his mind owing to the evidence I gave on this subject in.
my Studies in the Apocalypse, pp. 79-102.
cxliv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
in a few cases presuppose corruptions in the Hebrew sources.
But this is not all. He never mastered Greek idiomatically
even the Greek of his own period. To him very many of its
particles were apparently unknown, and the multitudinous shades
of meaning which they expressed in the various combinations
into which they entered were never grasped at all, or only in
a very inadequate degree. On the other hand, he is more accurate
in the use of certain Greek idioms than the Fourth Evangelist.
Notwithstanding its many unusual and unheard of expressions,
the Book stands in its own literature without a rival, while in
the literature of all time it has won for itself a place in the
van.
I will now give a list of the chief Hebraisms in the Apocalypse
which are sufficient to prove that it is more Hebraic than the
LXX itself.
(i.) The Greek text needs at times to be translated into Hebrew
in order to discover its meaning and render it correctly in English.
(a) The resolution of the participle in one of the oblique
cases (gen. dat. or ace.), or of an infinitive, into a finite verb in
the following clause, which finite verb should have been rendered
idiomatically in Greek by a participle or by an infinitive
respectively. We have here a frequent Hebrew idiom which
cannot be explained from vernacular Greek and which, not
having been recognized, has led to mistranslations of the text
in every version of the Apocalypse down to the present day. 1
1 This idiom is attested in the N.T. outside the Apocalypse in 2 John 2
did TT]V dXr/deiav TTJV fdvovcrav v y/juv Kal fjieQ ft/j.u>v ftrrcu = "for the truth s
sake which abideth in us and shall be with us." So rightly the A.V., but
wrongly in the R.V. Col I 26 rb /mvarrjptov r6 diroKeKpv/Afj^vov dirb r&v aluvuv
. . . vvv 5 4(pavep&6r), is another example.
Long after I had* discovered these Hebraisms and recognized the necessity
of translating them idiomatically as such, I found that several of the versions
had recovered the right rendering purely from the consciousness of the
translators that the Greek text could not be taken literally as it stood.
Two of the Greek uncials, in fact, and very many of the cursives, have
actually altered the Greek so that it represents idiomatically the Hebrew
idiom. Thus X reads, tffT&ras . . . ^%ovras Ki6dpas T. deov Kal a dovras, in
I5 2 * 3 , and 046 and many cursives read Kal iroL^ffavTi in I 5 instead of Kal
tTTolyaev and -7) \tyei . . . Kal didd<TKi for T. \tyov<rav . . . Kal diddffKei
in 2 20 . These are simply emendations, and they are emendations which
represent idiomatically John s thought in Greek, but do not represent what
he wrote. The translators of the versions restored the true sense in several
passages by conjecture from a study of their contexts. Thus in I 5 Pr fl
gig vg (arm?) s 2 eth render " qui dilexit et fecit" (r dyajruvri
in 2 2 and 2 9 Pr gig vg s 2 eth render "qui se dicunt . . .
et non sunt " (T. \tyovras . . . Kal OVK dfflv] : in 2 20 gig s 1 - 2 arm eth =
qui dicit . . . et docet (T) \tyovffa . . . Kal 5i5d<r/ca)> 2 s3 arm 1 - 2 - 3<x =ego
sum qui scruto . . . et do (ty& efyu 6 tpavvuiv . . . Kal Sc6<rw) : in 7 14 Pr gig
vg s 1 arm eth = qui venerunt (or veniunt) . . . et laverunt (ol tpx6fJ-evoi . . .
; in I4 2 " 3 743. 1075 2 arm b eth = citharizantes et cantantes
HEBRAISMS OF J Ai> Cxlv
"It is," writes Driver (Hebrew Tenses, 163), "a common
custom with Hebrew writers, after employing a participle or
infinitive, to change the construction, and if they wish to subjoin
other verbs, which logically should be in the participle or
infinitive as well, to pass to the use of the finite verb." Here
we have the explanation of a dozen of passages in our author,
which have been generally mistranslated in all the versions.
In a few cases they are rightly translated, and then only
through deliberate emendation of the text. 1
The idiom of a participle continued by a finite verb is
rendered literally into Greek in the LXX in Gen 27 33 , Is i4 17 ,
and idiomatically in Is 5 8 - 23 , Ezek 22 3 . But it is rendered liter
ally comparatively seldom in the LXX, whereas in our text it
occurs ten times and most probably eleven originally, as we
shall see presently. In a few cases the Syriac, Latin, Bohairic,
and A.V. are right, but probably unconsciously. This idiom
emerges in the first chapter in 5 " 6 and recurs in 18 2 2 - 9 - 20 - 23 3 9 7 14
14 2 " 3 I5 3 . (a) In I 5 " 6 we have TO> dyaTruJVTi T7/xas /cat Xvaavri ^/xas
. . . /cat eTj-ofyo-ev ^/xas /focrtXciW, which should therefore be
rendered, " Unto Him that loveth us ... and hath made us,"
and not as in R.V. " Unto Him that loveth us ... and He made
us." (/?) The failure to recognize this idiom in i 18 has led most
scholars to mispunctuate the text, and the rest, like Wellhausen
and Haussleiter, to excise 6 oh/. The translation of 6 wv KCU
eyevo /r/p ve/cpds should be i 17c "Fear not: I am the first and
the last, i 18 And He that liveth and was dead." Thus we
recover the right sense, (y) Again we have in 2 23 eyw dpi 6
epawoov . . . /cat Swcrw another example of this idiom = " I am
He that trieth . . . and giveth." Here the Hebrew in our
author s mind would be Tin^l jnan or even fritf 1 ! : cf. Dan 1 2 12 ,
and see vol. ii. 392 n. For a further treatment of this idiom the
reader can consult the note in vol. i. 14 sq. (8) Next, attention
should be drawn to 2o 4 , where originally I feel assured there was
another instance of this idiom ; for the otrtves in TWV TreTrcAe/ao-yLtcvwv
. . . /cat omves ov 7rpo(TCKvv7)(rav is obviously an insertion made
by John s literary executor, who edited 2o 4 -22 after John s death.
(Kidapi6i>Twv ... /cat $8ov<riv) : in I5 2 3 # Pr fl vg s 1 arm eth = stantes
. . . habentes . . . et cantantes (eo-Twras . . . ^xomts . . . /cat $dov<rii>).
Thus we discover the strange fact that in the above passages many of the
ancient versions represent idiomatically and accurately the thought of John,
where all but universally the modern versions do neither. The modern editions
of these versions frequently punctuate wrongly the above passages, and con
sequently mislead the student.
1 These passages are trer f ^d by modern editors as anacoloutha They are,
however, nothing of the kind : they are normal constructions in the grammar
of the Apocalypse. Sometimes editors have sought to get over difficulties
they fail to understand by mispunctuating the text.
Cxlvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
See vol. ii. 182, 183. The insertion of omves is against our
author s usage. In practically every instance the failure to recog
nize this idiom has led both to a mistranslation of the text and a
misrepresentation of the meaning. Since the various instances
of this idiom are dealt with as they arise, alike in the Com
mentary and Translation, I will bring forward only two more
here to show how important it is that it should be accurately
rendered, (e) In I4 2 3 17 <f>u>vi] rjv rjKovcra ws KiOapipSwv KiGapi^ovTdtv
eV rats Kt$apats avruv l KOU aSovcrw a>? a>S>)v Kairrjv = " The voice
which I heard was as the voice of harpers, harping with their
harps and singing as it were a new song " : () 2 20 r) Ae yovo-a
eavn/f irpo^rjTiv /cat StSdV/cet = " who calleth herself a prophetess
and teacheth " (hot "and she teacheth," R.V.).
(b) In i3 15 we have a resolution of the infinitive into a finite
verb in the following clause as in Hebrew (see quotation above
from Driver s Hebrew Tenses}. Thus at l^66t] t o-vrrj f Sowai
. . . Kcti 77-0117077 = Etyni ... nrp J17 jD^I = " And it was given
unto him to give . . . and to cause." See vol. ii. 420, footnote.
(t) Just as in (a, b}, the constructions under this head are quite
impossible and unintelligible as Greek, but are full of meaning
as literal reproductions of a Hebrew ididm. (a) The first is i2 7
6 M.L\arjX KCU ot ayyeXot avrov TOV (> J< 46) TroAejtx^crat. We
have here a classical Hebrew idiom: see vol. i. .p. 322. The
words rightly understood are most vivid : " Michael and his
angels had to fight with the dragon." It is remarkable that the
MSS allowed this astonishing Greek to survive in any form.
(ft) The same idiom recurs in i3 10 where only A has preserved
it in a slightly corrupt form : et TIS . . . a.7roKravOr)vai, f avrov f
i/ fJ-ax^Pfl aTroKTavOfjvai. (-OV6 ^ n - - 2 ^.^ "K?N) = " if any
man is to be slain with the sword, with the sword must he be
slain." In vol. i. 356, I have shown that the Greek translators
found great difficulty in rendering this idiom, and resorted to at
least half a dozen different ways. The same idiom is to be
found in Ethiopic. In /cavo-wv co-rat (Luke i2 54 ) the carat is
rendered by the Eth. lamedh before the infinitive. Thus our
author introduces a new use of the inf. into Greek which none
of the grammarians has recognized.
(d) Again an expression may be possible in Greek as regards
form but wrong in regard to sense. Thus in 2 22 /?a AAo> efc
K\ivr)v as a piece of Greek is meaningless in its context but full
of significance if retranslated into Hebrew. See vol. i. 71.
1 Here all modern editors insert a full stop before KCU $dov<Tii>. Both the
Syriac versions could be rendered teal q.S6vTb)v. The Bohairic requires this
rendering here. It is true that s 1 has an internal corruption =
Kidapl^ovTa tv TOIS Kaddpais avrov s nai $8ovTas.
2 Cf. Ezek 26 15 for this form of the Niphal infinitive.
HEBRAISMS OF J AP cxlvii
(e) The finite verb in Hebrew is translated literally, when
idiomatically it should be rendered by a participle. Cf. i 16 ^
oi/as avrov a>s 6 r//Uos <au/ei ( = TK 1 ENDED) = " his face was as
the sun shining" (not "shineth"). See vol. i. 31.
(/) The Greek phrase Kvpios 6 #eo<j 6 ira.vTOKpa.rwp requires to
be retranslated in order to punctuate and translate it rightly. It
should not be punctuated as in WH with a comma after Kvpios
and another after 0eos. In fact no commas should intervene at
all. The entire phrase is found in 2 Sam 5, i Kings iQ 10 - 14 ,
Hos i2 5 < 6 ), Amos 3 13 4 13 5 14 etc. ( = niN3Vn TOM m.T), and often
Kvpios ira.vTOKpa.TiDp, Hab 2 13 , Hag i 2 - 5 , Zech i 3 . Next it is to
be observed that 6 iravTOKparup in all these cases is a rendering
of JYlNItt (with or without the art.) following the construct case.
Hence 6 ira.vTOKpa.Twp is the equivalent of a gen. in Greek
dependent on the noun that precedes it. Thus nothing not
even a comma (as in WH) should intervene between 6 0eos and
6 iravTOKpa.T(Dp. They belong inseparably together, and 6 TTO.VTO-
KpaT<ap is never separated in the LXX from the noun of which
it is an attribute, nor does our author ever disjoin 6 0eo s and
6 Tra.vTOKpa.Twp : cf. 4 8 ii 17 i5 3 i6 7 - 14 iQ 6 - 15 2I 22 . 1 Thus we see
that on textual grounds i 8 (Kvpt-os 6 0eos, 6 w KCU 6 v /ecu 6
epxojuevos, 6 TravTo/cparwp) is the interpolation of an ignorant
scribe, who was unacquainted with the origin of this divine
title. The context also is against it. See vol. ii. 38, n. 4.
Furthermore, it follows that it is not to be rendered "the
Lord God, the Almighty," as in R.V., but as "the Lord God
Almighty."
(g) When Hebrew and Greek words agree as to their primary
meanings, the secondary meanings of the Hebrew words are in
a few cases assigned to the Greek. Here retranslation is
necessary, (a) In lo 1 we have the extraordinary phrase ot iroocs
avrov ws oTvXot THUG S. Here, as I have shown in vol. i. 259 sq.,
TrdSes is to be rendered as "legs." (/5) Again Troi/xcuVeu/ is to be
rendered as "to break" in 2 27 i2 5 ig 15 for the same reason: see
vol. i. 75 sq. (y) Again in i 5 the primary sense of TT/DWTOTOKOS,
"firstborn," is eclipsed by the secondary denoting "chief" or
"sovereign" which secondary sense it derives originally from
1 Hence it is clear that K 025. 046 Pr gig vg s 2 wrongly insert ^aDv
between 6 6e6s and 6 TravTOKparup in IQ 6 . A s 1 bo arm eth Cyp rightly omit.
It is noteworthy that in 4 8 the scribes of some eight cursives and arm 1 sub
stituted <ra(3aud for 6 6e6s under the influence of the LXX of Is 6 3 , and thus
arrived at the impossible text ffa.j3a.ud 6 TravroKpariop. Clearly they did not
know that 6 ira.vTOKp6.Twp was a rendering of aa(3awd. Possibly this latter
word was originally a marginal gloss explaining the origin of 6 Tra.vTOKpa.Twp.
It is significant of the independence with which our author deals with O.T.
phrases that he changes ITUUS m,T ( = /ctf/nos (rafiadd, LXX) in Is 6 3 , on which
his text is based, into /ctf/nos 6 6ebs 6 ira.vTOKpa.Twp in 4 8 n 17 I5 3 i6 7 19" 2 1 22 , or
into 6 0ebs 6 iravTOK. in i6 14 I 15 .
cxlviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
the Hebrew -1123. Cf. Job i8 13 where mo TD3 = " the most
deadly disease," and Is i4 30 D^T t n i O3="the poorest." See
note on i 5 in the Commentary. (8) Possibly in i 7 KOTTTCCT&U -m
we have an instance in which a secondary meaning of f>y is
assigned by our author to ri.
(h) Other Hebrew idioms literally reproduced in the Greek
need to be retranslated in order to appreciate their exact
meaning, (a) 2 23 8a>o-w="to requite," as fm in Jer. i; 10 on
which 2 23 is based. (/?) 3 8 SeSoo/ca CVCOTTIOV o-ov 6vpav="I have
set," etc. See vol. i. 41. (y) 3 9 180^ 8tS = " behold I will make ":
vol. i. 41. (8) 5 6 eV /xeVo) . . . ev /ieVo) = " between . . . and":
see vol. i. 140. (e) 6 1 Xeyovro? o>s <f>wr) (AC 046 and most
curss.) /fyovT/}?. Here o>s <o>v?7 = 7ip3, which our author may
have had in his mind, and which = ws <j>wr) or d>s ^WVT?. By a
slip our author wrote the former. The same misrendering is
found in Is 5 17 etc. : see vol. i. 161. () i2 n IvtKrja-av 8ta TO at/xa
TOV apvLOv . . . /cat ovK r)-ya7rr)(Tav, KrX., where the /cat is to be
rendered by "seeing," as vav in Hebrew. The /cat ( = vav)
introduces a statement of the condition under which the action
denoted by IviKYja-av took place. See footnote 7, vol. ii. 417.
The same Hebraism recurs in i8 3 ig 3 . (rj) i2 14 airo
Trpoo-wTrov TOV o^ew? = iyn3n S 32D "because of the serpent":
see vol. i. 330. (0) 2I 8 rot5 8e SeiAots ... TO /xe/aos avT(i)V =
Dp^n 3^ l| 3^ The dative is to be explained as a repro
duction of the Hebrew idiom where P introduces a new subject :
see vol. ii. 2l6, footnote, (t) 22 5 6 #eos (am crei CTT O.VTOVS. Our
author uses <ometv as a transitive verb in iS 1 2i 23 , and naturally
we expect it to be used as such here. Moreover, the context
itself is against using it here intransitively ; for " God will shine
upon them " is not a likely expression. If, however, we under
stand "His face" as in the Hebrew, Ps n8 27 , we can render
<amv transitively as in iS 1 2i 23 and give a most excellent
meaning to the passage : " will cause his face to shine upon
them " : see vol. ii. 210 sq.
(ii.) Other Hebraisms. (a) 3 20 /ecu introducing the apo-
dosis (cf. io 7 i4 10 ). (b) 5 7 (cf. 8 3 17! 2i 9 ) ?X0/ /cat
L\r)<f)V. (c) 6 8 6 Ktt$T^l/OS CTTai/W ttVTOl! OVO/Xtt ttUTW 6 $dVaTOS =
"I3"J ID^ V^y 3D"in. Here observe the non-Greek sense assigned
to <9oWos: cf. 2 23 i8 8 . (d) 6 1 ^lav eK = "the first of." (<?) 8 3 tW
8wcrt (/.<?. ^v/xta^ara) Tats ?r/3oo-U^at? = " to offer it upon " = nflJTJ
ni^BH ^y: Cf. Num IQ 17 Or l8 12 . (/) IO 8 vTraye Xa/Se. (^) I2 5
vtov apo-ei> = "l3T |3. (/^) I3 8 oi/o/xa = ovo/JLara (cf. I7 8 ).
(f) The future is to be rendered by the pres. in 4 9 10 ; for
here the future represents the Hebrew imperfect in a frequen
tative sense. Thus orav 8wo-ovo-tv . . . 8oav . . . Treo-owTai,
"when they give . . . glory . . . they fall down." This mis-
HEBRAISMS OF J AP cxlix
translation of the Hebrew imperf. is often met with in Greek
translations. Its occurrence in our author, who thinks in Hebrew,
is therefore very natural. See vol. ii. 399, footnote. The future
in i3 8 Trpoa-KwrjcrovcrLv should be rendered as Tr/ooo-e/cwow ( =
Hebrew imperf.).
(k) The present in Q 6 is to be rendered as a future, where
(fjtvyet represents the Hebrew imperf. in our author s mind : as a
past imperf. in 7 10 Kpd^ova-w, I2 4 o-vpei, i6 21 KaTa<aryi.
(iii.) Hebrew constructions are reproduced, parallels to
which are found occasionally in vernacular Greek.
(a) Nominativus pendens. This construction is found in 2 26
3 12. 21 viKcoi/ 8(joo-(o auT<3, 6 8 6 Ka^/xevos eTravw avrov 6Vo/x,a
avrw. 1 In other passages, however, our author has assimilated
the construction more to the Greek construction by changing the
nom. into the dat., 2 7 - 17 (2i 6 ) TU> VI/COH/TI SaVco avr<$, 6 4 TU>
Ka^^/xeVa) eV f O.VTOV f cBodrj avrol : cf. Matt. 5 40 . This construc
tion is very frequent in the LXX owing to its frequency in the
Hebrew.
(l>) The oblique forms of the personal pronoun are added to
relatives. 3 8 rjv ouSeis Swarai /cAeurat avr^v, y 2 ois l860rj avrots,
7 9 ov . . . avroV, 138- 12 20 8 : cf. also I2 6 - 14 (OTTOV . . . CKCI) ly 9
(OTTOV . . . eV avrCov). The pronoun is, of course, pleonastic in
the Greek but not in the Hebrew, where, since the relative is
uninflected, it supplies the inflection needed. This pleonastic
use of the pronoun is found also in Mark i 7 ( = Luke 3 16 ), y 25
9 3 (ota . . . OIITWS), 13, J i 27 , Acts i5 17 . Examples of this idiom
occur exceptionally in the KOU/TJ. It is found also in Early
English. But in our text its frequency is due to Semitic
influences.
(<:) (a) A noun or participial phrase, which is dependent on
or in apposition to a preceding gen. dat. or ace., may stand in
the nom., if it is preceded by the art., though Greek syntax would
require it to agree with the oblique case that goes before
it. This peculiar idiom is derived from the Hebrew, accord
ing to which the noun or phrase which stands in apposition
to a noun in an oblique case remains unchanged. Instances
of this usage occur in the LXX ; but what is a rare phenomenon
in the Greek version of the O.T. (cf. Ezek. 23 7 - 12 ) 2 is a well-
established idiom in the Greek text of the Apocalypse. 3 Our
1 This occurs also elsewhere in the N.T., Matt 4 16 I2 36 , Luke I2 10 ,
Acts 7 40 .
2 This anomalous construction is concealed by the wrong punctuation in
Swete s edition in both passages, and in one of them in Tischendorf s. But
the art. does not occur in the Greek, as it was not in the Hebrew.
3 This idiom occurs exceptionally in the noivi), and as a blunder in other
languages. But it is not a blunder in our author. Moulton s attempts to
explain away this Hebrew idiom are just as idle as his attempt to explain TOV
cl THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
author has, in fact, adopted a Hebraism into his Greek, and
naturalized it there. Thus it has become a marked character
istic of his style: cf. i 5 2 13 - 20 3 12 [8 9 ] 9 14 i 4 12 20 2 . In these
passages observe that the nom. is always preceded by the art.
I 5 SLTTO Ir)(rov XpioTOv 6 /xapTDS 6 TTttTTO?, 2 20 Trjv ywauca Iea/3eX,
y] Xeyovcra eavrr/v vrpocfrvJTiv, 3 12 T^S KCUVT^S lepoucraX^/x, rj /cara-
/3atVouo-a, [8 9 Ttov KTio-ftartoi/ . . . ra e^oi/ra j^v^as]. How
readily a Jew could adopt or fall into such a solecism when
using an inflected language, is illustrated by Nestle (Textual
Criticism of the Greek Testament, p. 330), who notes the following
gem from Salomon Bar in his translation of the Massoretic note
at the end of the Books of Samuel (Leipzig, 1892, p. 158), "ad
mortem Davidis rex Israelis." (/3) If the art. is omitted, then
the word or phrase is put in the same case as the noun that
precedes it. Contrast 9 14 TW dyyeXw, 6 e^wv T. craXTuyya, and 7 2
9 17 I3 1 I4 6 I5 2 iS 1 2O 1 ayyeXov . . . l^ovra rrjv K\LV. (y) But
this rule does not apply to Xe ywv. Thus in i4 6 we have eTSoi>
aXXoi/, ayycXov Trero/xevov . . . e^ovTa evayye Xiov. . . . Xeytuv. But
Xeywv (or Xeyovres) stands by itself: it appears almost indeclin
able. This may be due to the fact that it may reproduce Tfow
in our author s mind. Cf. 4 1 ^ <jf>wv>) . . . Xe yon/ : 5 11 6
avTcoi/ . . . Xeyovres, II 1 eSo^ yu,ot KaXa/nos . . . Xeyan/,
l . . . Xeyovres. This solecism is, of course, found in
the LXX: cf. Gen 15! 22 20 3 8 13 4 5 16 4 8 20 etc. (3) ^ov follows
an ace. when not preceded by the art. in 5 6 apviov CO-TT/KOS . . .
e ^iov, I 4 14 ojjLOiov vlov avOpwirov, ^wv, I7 3 Ovjpiov . . . e^wv. But
in 5 6 i7 3 it seems corrupt for c^oi/. In i4 14 e^wv is right and
Ka^/xei/ov o^otov, which precedes, is a slip for nom.
(iv.) (a) There are passages which need to be retranslated in
order to discover the corruption or mistranslation in the Hebrew
sources used by our author.
We have already seen (see p. Ixii sqq.) that our author made use
of sources some of which were Greek, though originally written in
Hebrew ; others which he found in Hebrew and rendered into
Greek. As it chances, we are only concerned under the present
heading with the Hebrew sources which our author himself
translated ; for the passages which presuppose mistranslation or
a corrupt Hebrew original are i3 3 - n and i5 5 - 6 . (a) As regards
i3 3 I have shown in vol. i. 337 that lOavfjida-Orj . . . OTTICTW TOV
OrjpLov is corrupt, and that the corruption did not originate in the
Greek but in the Hebrew; for since i3 3c - 8 and iy 8 are doublets
(the latter being an independent rendering of a purer form of the
in I2 7 Nearly every one of his references to the Apocalypse needs
to be corrected. Robertson (Gr. 414 sq.) is too much influenced by Moulton,
and like all other grammarians fails to recognize this Hebraism and most
others in the Apocalypse.
HEBRAISMS OF J AP cli
Hebrew original), we are enabled to discover the origin of the
corruption. Thus the clause in i3 3c = iTnn nnNB . . . nonni,
where the "nriND is corrupt for rn&OD, or rather rn&O3 = fiXe-n-ova-a.
Thus we have : " the whole earth wondered when it saw the
beast," which brings it into line with i; 8 "they that dwell on
the earth shall wonder . . . when they see the beast." But the
evidence for this restoration cannot be appreciated, unless the
reader turns to p. 337 of this vol., where the two passages are
placed side by side, (ft) In i3 n we have the extraordinary
statement that the second Beast had two horns like a lamb and
spake like a dragon ! The first idea may be suggested by Matt. 7 15
" Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep s clothing,
but inwardly are ravening wolves." See, however, vol. ii. 451 sq.
But what is the explanation of the second idea "he spake like
a dragon " ? A dragon does not speak. If the text had read
"like the dragon," it might have recalled the temptation of Eve
in Eden. But the lack of the article can be explained by the
translator s reading pjfD as P3H2 instead of pliri| ; and, since
Kal IA.aA.ei = "mm, the latter is most probably corrupt for TlNm, as
in 2 Chron. 22 10 (cf. 2 Kings n 1 ). Thus i3 llc should be read:
" but he was a destroyer like the dragon." This brings our text
into line with Matt. 7 15 (quoted above) and prepares us for the
statement in i3 15 that this second Beast put all to death that did
not worship the first Beast, (y) Again in i5 5 - 6 there are two
expressions, fjvoiyrj f 6 vao< riys CTKrjvfjs rov fjiaprvpcov f tv TO>
oupava>, and ev8eSv/Ayoi f XiOov f KaOapov Aa/XTrpoi/, which are
clearly corrupt. Inferior MSS (025. 046) have corrected the
second into \ivov. A new vision begins with these verses. It
is clear that no Jew writing originally in Greek could have used
either of the obelized phrases. But, as I have shown in vol. ii.
37 sq., what is most probably the true text can be discovered by
retranslation into Hebrew. In the first passage, i5 5 6 vaos rr/s
O-KT/V^S rov paprvpiov ev T<3 ovpavw = D^DKG "WE ?riN PDN1, which
was corrupt for D^DKG^ DTI^K 73T1 = 6 vabs rov Otov 6 eV TW ovpavu,
a phrase which we find exactly in ii 19 accompanied by the same
verb fyoiyri and the repeated article. In i5 6 f XiOov f is to be
explained by a mistranslation, of W ? which can be rendered
either by Ai flos, /xap/xapos, or by /3uWivos. Here the latter, of
course, is the right rendering.
() These two passages naturally lead to the inquiry : Did
John translate the Hebrew source himself, or did he adopt an
independent Greek version of it ? The fact that every phrase
and construction in i5 5-8 are distinctly our author s, furnishes
such strong evidence tor the former hypothesis that it seems
necessary to accept it. If this is right, then we must conclude
Clii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
that our author inserted here a translation which, while repro
ducing exactly the corrupt Hebrew before him in i5 5 and a
wrong rendering of a Hebrew word in 15, would have been
corrected later, if he had had the opportunity of revision.
Repeatedly we find traces of unfinished work in our author,
which a revision would have removed. Thus i2 14 16 i8 4 (see
vol. i. 330-332, ii. 96 ad fin.) are meaningless survivals of earlier
expectations. Unhappily the work was revised by one of his
disciples who was quite unequal to the task, and to whom we
owe some of the worst confusions in the Book. See, however,
p. Ixiv ad fin.
(c) For other passages which need to be retranslated in
order to discover their meaning, see i8 22 (/AOVO-IKWI/), i8 19 CK rfjs
ii. Unique Expressions in our Author.
(i.) i 4 dTro 6 wi/. Our author knows perfectly the case that
should follow aTTo, but he refuses to inflect the divine name.
See vol. i. 10.
(ii.) i 4 6 o>i/ KCU 6 rjv KOL 6 tpxoptvos : cf. 1 1 17 i6 5 ; see vol. i. 10.
(iii.) i 13 i4 14 o/xotoi/ vlov dv0/oo)7rov: see vol. i. 27.
12. Solecisms due to slips on the part of our Author.
We have now dealt with our author s grammar, first in so far
as it is normal or abnormal from the standpoint of the Greek
of his own age, and next in so far as its abnormalities are due to
Hebraisms.
We have found that these abnormalities are not instances
of mere licence nor yet mere blunders, as they have been most
wrongly described, but are constructions deliberately chosen by
our author. Some of these belong to the vernacular of his own
time, some of them do not. Many are obviously to be explained
as literal reproductions in Greek of Hebrew idioms, and some as
misrenderings of Hebrew words or phrases in the mind of the
author or in his Hebrew source, and some half dozen as due to
corruptions in the Hebrew documents laid under contribution by
our author either directly or through the medium of Greek
translations.
Thus from a minute study of the text from this standpoint of
grammar I have found it possible to explain that is, to bring
within the province of the normal and intelligible all but about
a score of passages. By our comprehensive study of our author s
grammar we are the better equipped for recognizing the character
of the remaining solecisms that cannot be explained from his own
usages or vernacular Greek or the influences of a Semitic back-
SOLECISMS DUE TO SLIPS OF AUTHOR cliii
ground. The bulk of these solecisms, though not all, are simply
slips of our author which a subsequent revision would have re
moved, if the opportunity for such a revision had offered itself.
These are :
(i.) I 10 JJKovcra. <j>u>vr]v . . . o>s <raA-7rtyyos f Aeyotxr/ys f (for
\eyovo-av) : cf. 6 6 i4 3 I6 1 where the construction is normal.
(ii.) I 15 ot TroSes OLVTOV o/xotot ;(aA/coAt/:?dV(p a>s ev /catuVa) f TTCTTV-
pw/xeVsf (for TreTTvpw/xeVw, a correction rightly introduced in N,
some cursives, s 1 - 2 etc.).
(iii.) I 20 TO fjivo-rijpiov TCOJ/ CTTTO, do-repcov . . . /cat f ras CTTTOI
Av^vta? f (for TWV e. Av^vtcov).
(iv.) 2 27 o-vt/Tpi/^erat for arvvrpifitjo-ovTai or crwrpt^et (?).
(v.) 4 4 /cat /cv/cAo^ev TOV Opovov t Opovovs . . . reo-crapay . . .
7rpeo-/3vTpov<s Ka^^/xevovs Trept/^e/^A^/xcVous . . . o~T(f>dvovs XP V "
o-ovsf. In place of the accusatives, nominatives should be read.
I have shown (vol. i. 115) that 4* was introduced subsequently
by our author to prepare the way for 4 9 11 . He seemingly in
serted it as the object of eTSoi/. It is obviously a slip.
(vi.) 6 1 Aeyoi/ros o>s f <f>uvij f, where we should have <on/ij : see
10. i. (h). (e) above, and vol. i. 161.
(vii.) 6 14 ws fiifiXiov f eAio-o-o/xcvov f. This is rightly corrected
in K and some cursives into eAio-o-o/xevos.
(viii.) y 9 f 7repi/?e/?A>7/xeVotis f aroAas AevKas. This is obviously
a slip for the nom. In this sentence A Pr vg omitted icat iSov
and changed, with the exception of earo/res, the following nomina
tives into accusatives.
(ix.) I o 8 77 <f>a>vr] r)v rjKOvcra . . . fAaAoikrav . . . /cat Aeyovcrav f
(for AaAovcra . . . /cat Aeyovcra : see vol. i. 267).
(x.) n 1 e<So0r7 /xot /caAa/tos . . . Aeywv (source). This may be
only an abnormal construction to which partial parallels are found
in the LXX : see vol. i. 274.
(xi.) 1 1 3 Trpo<f>r)Tvorov(nv . . . f TrcptySeySA^/txevous f.
(xii.) ii 4 at eVwTrtoi/ rov /cvptov . . . f eo-rcures f. Since Our
author s sense and usage here require the at lo-rwo-ai, the par
ticiple in the masc. and without the art. is a slip.
(xiii.) I3 3 Kat fJLiav K T. Kc/>aAoj^ avTov ws e(rc/)ay/>iev^j/. This
is a slip exactly like that in 4 4 above. It is an addition of our
author, and was added seemingly as the object of etSov in I3 1 .
(xiv.) 14 6 - 7 etSov aAXov ayyeAov Trero/xevov . . . ^ovra . . .
t Aeytov f. But it is perhaps best to take Aeywv as a Hebraism =
ibN? : cf. 4 1 . For analogous cases see p. cl ad med.
(xv.) I4 14 eTSov /cat tSov ve^eAr; AevKif, Kat errt rr]v vec^e Ar/v f
KO.6TJfJI.tVOV OfJLOLOV f VLOV avOpWITOV, ^O)V. Cf. 4 2 ClSoy Kttt tOOl)
Opovos . . . Kat 7rt . Opovov Ka^ tici/os, 1 9 11 eloov . . . Kai loov
tTTTTos ACVKOS, /cat 6 /cafl^cj/os CTT airov, where we have the normal
construction.
cliv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
(xvi.) I4 19 TTJV Xrjvov . . . f TOI> fjieyav f.
(xvii.) iQ 20 T7]v \LfjLV7jv TOV Trvpos f T^S Kato/xevtys f. The fact
that the Hebrew and Aramaic words for " fire " (i.e. $K and K$X)
are feminine, may have led to our author s forgetting himself for
the moment and writing T^S Kato/xtV^s. In Rom n 4 we have rf)
BaaX instead of rw BaaX. This is frequently found in the LXX of
the prophetical books and occasionally of the historical, because
it goes back in the mind of the translator to n$3, which mentally
he substituted for {>jn. The influence of the Hebrew is to be
traced in Mark i2 n ( = Matt 2i 42 ), where in the quotation from
the LXX (Ps n8 28 ) the avrrj^nw, though we should expect
TOTO. Cf. Gen 35 19 - 27 36 1 , Ps io2 19 n 9 50.56 etc . Possibly in
i3 15 of our text the fern, avrfj in eSo tf?? avrfj may be due to rpn ;
and the fern. art. in 17 ovat (i 9 12 n 14 ) may be explained by the
gender of njn.
(xviii.) 2 I 9 TO)J/ C^OVTWf TOLS 7TTa 0iaA.ttS f Ttol/ ye/AOl/TCOl/ f T<OV
CTTTO. TrXrjy&v. It is hard to explain how such a slip as TWV yeju,oV
run/ (AK 025) could have arisen, but if one investigates one s
own slips, it is often impossible to account for them. Our
author would no doubt have corrected this phrase into ras y*/*-
owras as certain cursives have done, rather than into ye^ovVas as
046 and many cursives. For the participle is used attributively,
following TOLS . . . <}>Ld\a<s. Contrast i5 7 .
(xix.) 2 1 14 TO ret^os r^5 TrdXeco? f C^ODV f.
(xx.) 22 2 v\ov 00175 f Trotojv f . . . aTToSiSow. Here our
author would no doubt have corrected TTOIOJV into TTOIOW, as is
done in K 046 and most cursives ; for he knows the gender of
gv\ov: cf. 22 14 i8 12( ^. If the gender of ^ led to his writing
he would on revision either have corrected or written
u s so as to bring it into line with the former participle.
13. Primitive Corruptions due either to (a) accidental
or (b) deliberate changes.
These are due to an early scribe, or in some cases (7 15 2o 4 - llt13
2 1 25 22 12 ) to the editor.
(i.) (a) I 20 at Xv^yiai at cTrra [eTrra] eK/cA^cnat eto-iV. This Order
of the numerals (see below, 15, iv., and vol. i. 224, footnote, vol. ii.
389, footnote) is in some respects normal in our author ; but as
WH observe, "it is morally impossible that TUJV k-n-ra IKKX^O-MV
should be followed by kirra. cKKXrjo-iai without the article "...
"the second kirra . . . must be an erroneous repetition of the
first, due to the feeling that the number of the lamps was likely to
be specified as well as of the stars." Besides, we should expect
NON-JOHANNINE CONSTRUCTIONS civ
the art. before the second e-rrrd, since the predicate is coexten
sive with the subject. (See chap. xiii. 2. iv.)
(ii.) (a) 6 4 TO) KaOifficvtf iir f avrov f.
(iii.) (b] 7 15 6 Ka^/xej/os CTTI f TOV Opovov f.
(iv.) (tf) 8 12 f 17 -ty/xepa Kat 17 vv 6^,0005 f for i^aepas Kat o^oi tos
I/VKTO S (as in Bohairic).
(v.) (^) 9 17 TOVS KaflrjfAtvovs ITT f avTeov f. Contrast I9 19 - 21 .
(VI.) (fl) I4 9 7Tt f TOV /X.6TOJ7TOV f.
(vii.) (a) I9 18 TCOV Ka@7]/jiev<Dv CTT f airrovs f (A).
(viii.) (3) 2O 4 TWV TreTrcA-eKio-juei/wv . . . Kat [otTires] ov Trpoa--
eKvvrja-av. A correction by the editor of John s Greek.
(ix.) (b) 2O 11 TOV KaOrffjif-vov eV f avrov f. Editor s correction
of John s Greek as in 7 15 9 17 .
(x.) (b] 2O 13 eSwKev f ^ ^aXacrcra f r. ve/c/aov? TOIJS ev f avTrj f.
This was a deliberate change on dogmatic grounds. See note
in loc.
(xi.) (a) 2 1 5 6 Ka^ /xevos CTTI f TU> ^/oovw f.
(xii.) (a) 2 1 9 f TWV ye/xovrcov f AN 025 for ras ye/xovaas.
(xiii.) ($) 2 1 25 ot TrvAaiFes aur^s ov pr) K\icr6to(riv ^/xepas f vv
yap OVK eo-rai eKetf. This change was probably due to the
editor. It originated in a misunderstanding of the text. In
place of the last five words we should restore /cat WKTO?. See
note in loc.
(xiv.) 2 I 27 f TTttV KOLVOV f. Read TTttS KOIVOS.
(xv.) (ft) 22 12 ws TO tpyov eo-Ttv avrov. This order, which is con
trary to our author s own usage, is, like other departures from
our author s usage in 2o 4 -22, to be traced to the editor. See
below, 15, ii. (b).
14. Constructions in the interpolations conflicting with
our author s use.
i 8 6 $os, 6 wv . . . 6 TravroKpoLTtop. See above, 10. i. (f\
2 22 ecu/ /o; iJieTayorjaoucrik. Our author does not use the indica
tive after eav fjitj.
8 11 Kat T. ovo/u,a T. curTepos X^yeTai e O Ai/av0os. Our author
does not use Aeyetv but KaA.tv in this sense: cf. i 9 n 8 i2 9 i6 16 .
This addition is made in an interpolated section ; whether before
or after it was interpolated cannot be determined.
9 17 T. KaOrjfjLvov<s cir auTWK ( the construction John s editor
prefers, being better Greek : cf. y 15 9 17 20 11 in 13 above, and
i4 15> 16 in this section).
14 15 TW Ka0?7yu,va> evrt TT]
14 16 6 Ka^/xevos t..l Tt]S
I5 1 is an interpolation, since independently of other grounds
it misuses Kat eTSov to introduce the Seven Bowls, where we
clvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
should expect /ACTO, ravra. eTSov. Since the latter phrase, which
is used to introduce new paragraphs or sections, is found in i5 5 ,
we see that the subject of the Bowls is there mentioned for the
first time.
l6 2c TOVS Trpoovcwowras TTJ eiK<m avrov. Our author would
use the ace. here : only the dat. in reference to God.
l6 13 cISov . . . TrvevfJiara rpia . . . <ws ftarpa^oi. (AN C 046
min p ) Here our author would have written fiarpdxovs (so cor
rected text in K* min p ). See on o>s, p. cxxxviii.
i6 19 ets rpia P- PTJ. Wrong order. Our author would say
/xepr; rpta.
1 7 9 orrou rj yvvr] KaOrjraL eir aurwi . Our author does not use
this construction, but oVov alone: cf. 2 13(Ws) n 8 2o 10 .
i7 15 ou fj iropvr) KaOyTai. Our author uses oVov, not ov.
i8 13 KOL ITTTTCOI/ . . . KOI (Tto/AaTwv. An addition conflicting
alike with the syntax and the sense of the context.
ig 10 Trpoa-KvvfjcraL aurw (i.e. an angel). See note on i6 2c above.
15. Order of the Words.
The Apocalypse is notable for the clearness, simplicity, and
uniformity of its phrasing. When once our author has adopted
a certain combination of words he holds fast to it as a general
rule. This is an essential characteristic of his style. There is
rarely any variation in the words or in their arrangement. How
profoundly J differs from our author in this respect the reader
will see by consulting Abbott s Gr. 401-436, where it is proved
by hundreds of examples that J shows a subtle discrimination
in availing himself of the manifold variations of order which are
possible in Greek expressing various subtle shades of meaning.
So far as the outward form goes our author s style is essentially
monotonous when compared with that of J. And yet notwith
standing this absolute simplicity and apparent monotony, there
is no sublimer work in the whole Bible. J works like a
miniature painter, but our author like an impressionist on an
heroic scale.
(i.) The Article. (a) A noun in the genitive never stands
between the article and its noun, but always follows it. This
rule is without exception. In J, on the other hand, we find i8 10
TOV TOV dpxtepe ws $ov\ov. If, however, the article is omitted in
the case of both nouns, then the noun in the genitive case can
precede the noun that governs it : cf. 7 17 fays Tr^yas v(5arcuv.
(b) Nor can participial or prepositional phrases stand between
the art. and its noun. 1 If these stand in an attributive relation,
1 It is quite otherwise in J 8 18 (and I2 49 ) 6 Tr^^as /me Trarrjp. Contrast i6 5
rbv Tr^u^cwrd ju,e), 8 31 roi>s 7re7rKrrewc6ras atfry lovdatovs.
ORDER OF WORDS clvii
they must follow the noun with the art. repeated : cf. n 19 6
TOV 6eov 6 cv raj ovpavw. But when the noun is anarthrous, such
a prepositional phrase can precede the noun, just as an anarthrous
noun can precede the noun that governs it, as in 7 17 . This
occurs only in the titles of the letters to the Churches. Thus in
2 1 we must read with AC Pr TO> dyyeAw rw iv E<eVa> e/c/cA^o-ias,
and similarly throughout the seven letters, although in the case of
three all the MSS have been corrected and normalized. Lach-
mann and WH recognized that this alone was what our author
wrote, though neither they nor later editors were aware of the
rule universally observed by him throughout J ap , that a pre
positional phrase is never inserted between the article and its
noun. Hence the reading adopted by Tischendorf, Alford, Weiss,
Von Soden, etc., rrjs lv E<ro> KK\., is without justification.
Our author could not write so. Besides, since it is his rule to
repeat the art. before a prepositional phrase following an articular
noun in an attributive relation, it follows that we should read ro>
dyyeAw r<3. From the combination of these two usages emerges
the strange piece of Greek, yet one that is essentially our author s
TW ev E^ecrw e/cKA^o-tas. 1
(c) But though a participial or prepositional phrase may not
intervene between the art. and its noun, it is inserted many
times between the art. and the participle dependent upon it :
II 16 01 . . . Trpcor/3vTpoL ot IvwTTiov TOV Qcov KaOrjfjicvot, I4 13 I7 14
i9 9 ; also n 4 i2 12 i3 6 - 12 i8 9 - 17 etc.
(ii.) The Pronoun. (a) The genitive of the possessive noun
does not precede its noun, unless when it is used unemphatically
(i.e. vernacularly) : see notes in vol. i. 49, 68 sq. ; Abbott, Gr.
414-422, 601-607. But in our author avrov, cun-^s, avrwv are
never found in this unemphatic position except in 18 (source),
though very frequently in J and a few times in i. 3 J.
(b) Again the genitive of the possessive pronouns (/xov, i?/j,cov,
o-ov, V/MOV, avrov, avrcov) is never separated from its noun. 2 It
occurs roughly over 300 times or more. Hence i2 8 ovSc TO TTOS
1 WH (N.T. in Greek, ii. "Notes on select Readings," p. 137) point
out that inscriptions in Asia Minor connected with temples dedicated to
the Emperor always omit the art. before vaov, as in dpxtepeus TTJS A<rias
vaov TOV tv E0^cry, Ki^i /cy, Ile/rya/^, etc., just as r^s is omitted before
4KK\fja-ias in our text. But independently of this our author s usage requires
the reading which even A has only preserved three times.
In the case of all the seven titles this construction has the support once
of a cursive and always of one or more versions. See crit. note on 2 1 of the
Greek text in vol. ii. 244.
2 When a noun is followed by an attributive adjective, the pronominal
genitive is generally inse^ ed between them : cf. 2 4 TT/J/ dydirrjv crov ryv irpwTTjv,
2 i9 ^12 io 2 - 5 i3 16 i4 19 . The genitive of the noun can be separated by an attri
butive adjective from the noun it depends on : cf. IQ 17 r6 O,TTVOV 7-6 jj^ya TOV
6eov : also 6 17 i6 14 . Here the emphasis is laid on the gen.
clviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
&v en is against our author s style, 1 also i8 14 o-ov rrjs
TT)S i/ar^s (on other grounds we have found that 18 is a
source) : and also 22 12 ws TO epyov eo-rlv avrov, where the wrong
order is probably due to the editor.
This is all the more remarkable seeing that in J the genitive
both of the noun and of the possessive pronoun is very
frequently separated from the noun that governs it : cf. i 49
/SacriAevs eT TOV 1(rparj\, 2 15 3 19 98. 6. 28 (**) I2 2.47 I3 6. 14 T gi7 I9 35
2o 23 . See vol. i. 304, footnote.
(c) OVTOS always follows its noun. Not so in J, where it both
precedes and follows its noun. The latter is the emphatic
position in J : see Abbott, Gr. 409. Often in J the point of a
passage depends on OVTOS being pre- or post-positive.
The oblique cases of ovros never appear in the position of an
attribute any more than the possessive pronouns. 2 Hence even
in i8 15 (source) we have ol e/xTro/aot TOVTWV, though the attributive
position would be the more regular: see Blass, Gram. 169.
Contrast J 5 47 rots CKCLVOV ypa/*,/Aacriv (classical as regards CKCIVOV
and its position).
(d) oAXos is always pre- positive, though generally post-positive
in the LXX as in Hebrew.
(iii.) The Adjective. The adjective as a rule follows after the
noun it depends on. But there are certain exceptions. In i 10
we have lv rrj KVpidKy ^/Aepa, 3 8 fjuKpav Svvafitv, 2O 3 /xiKpov ^povov
(yet xpovov fjiiKpov in 6 11 ), i3 3 (source) o\rj r) yfj (elsewhere
always post-positive 3 10 6 12 i2 9 i6 14 ). //.eyas is always post
positive except in I6 1 /xeyaA^s <^a>n}$ (always elsewhere in our
author the adj. is post-positive in this phrase i.e. 18 times).
i8 21 (source) rj /AcyaA.?; TroAis. tcr^vpos is once pre-positive in i8 2
(source) lv ur\vpq. <pa>vfj. Elsewhere post-positive (5 times, in
cluding i8 10 ).
Thus, save in four passages of our author (i 10 3 8 j.6 1 2o 3 ), the
adjective always follows the noun. The other instances (i3 3
i8 2 - 21 ) are in sources.
(iv.) The Numerals. The usage of our author in regard to
1 When this fact is taken into account together with the five other uses
that equally conflict with his style (i.e. I2 1 iirl TTJS Ke<f>a\rjs instead of tirl T.
Ke0aATji>), I2 6- 14 STTOU . . . tKfi (instead of tiwov alone), I2 7 TOV before the inf.
(whereas inf. is used in the same sense twice without TOV in I3 10 ), I2 12 oi
ovpavoL (instead of ovpavt), oval TTJV JTJV (instead of ouai TT? 777 : cf. 8 13 ), the
statement in vol. i. 300 sqq. must be withdrawn. Our author therefore did
not translate 12 himself, but found it already translated into Greek, and then
edited it to suit his main purpose : from his hand come 5s fi4\\ei
de
in 1 2 5 : I2 6 (modelled on I2 14 ) : 6 #0ts 6 a/3%cuos 6 Ka\ovfjLvos . . .
(3\ri6-r], I2 9 : TU>I> adeXfiuv rjfJi&v in I2 10 I2 11 : OTI eldev and OTL . . . els TT]I> yTJv
in I2 13 I2 17 " 18 . See Commentary in loc.
2 This does not hold of eaurou. In io s< 7 this possessive occurs in the
attributive position, which is its normal one. See Blass, Gram. 168 sq.
COMBINATIONS OF WORDS clix
the order of the numerals and the words they depend on, which
is on the whole definite and peculiar to himself, is given in vol.
i. 224, and especially in the footnote. In the footnote in 1. 15 ab
imo, for " exception, xvi. 19," read " the clause KCU lyive.ro . . . ets
rpia fjitpr) is an interpolation " : and for the last five lines read : " In
the case of eTrra, iy 9 (in i 20 the second eTrra is an interpolation;
8 2b is recast and in part interpolated, and i3 3b belongs to a source),
Se/ca, I7 12 (in I3 1 KCU 7ri r. KepoLTwv O.VTOV SCKO. SiaS^ara is inter
polated), SwSeKci, 2 1 21 , when the subject contains any of these
numerals preceded by the article and is followed by a noun and
the same numeral in the predicate, the latter numeral without
the article precedes the noun, unless the subject and predicate
are coextensive."
To the above one point needs to be added. When a
numeral is connected with x l ^ l *Ses it always precedes it. Cf.
ScoSeKo. in y 4 " 8 2 1 16 and the compound numbers in I4 1 - 3 . Hence
ii 18 XiAuxSe? cTTTa (source) is against our author s order. The
numerals are never separated from the nouns they qualify : hence
iy 13 /x,i ai/ fyovo-Lv yyw/xrjv (046 min m ) is a late change.
(v.) The Verb. (a] The verb generally precedes its subject
and almost always its object except in sources such as n 1 13 (see
vol. i. 272 sq.) and 18. In other sources translations from
Hebrew such as T 2. 1 7 the order is Semitic.
(b) Again the verb and its object are rarely separated by pre
positional or other phrases. This holds absolutely in the case of
OLKOVCLV (frwvrjv (ffiwvrj^). Hence A, f]Kov<ra. tfrwvrjv /xeyaX^v oiricrOfv
/AOV, is right in i 10 , and not &C 025, r//c. OTUO-CO /xov <j>. //<.
(c) The insertion of a relative or conditional clause between
a conjunction and the verb it introduces is only found in the
sources ustd by our author, I2 4 <W orav TCKY) TO re/cvov avrrjs
$ 15 Iva. oaoi . . . Trpoo-Kwryo-cucru . .
1 6. Combinations of Words.
Our author always writes dcrrpaTrat KCU <a)vcu KCU
Cf. 4 5 ii 19 i6 18 . He observed that the do-rpaTreu precede the
ppovrai and wrote accordingly. But the editor who interpolated
8 7 ^ 12 and made many changes in the adjoining context to adapt
it to his interpolation, was apparently unaware of the order of
these natural phenomena or the usage of his author : see 8 5
l KO.L <oovat KCU. ao"Tpa.Trai.^
1 This non-Johannine order is not mentioned in the list of grounds for
rejecting 8 7 12 in vol. i. 218-222.
clx THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
XIV.
ORIGINAL AUTHORITIES FOR THE TEXT GREEK MSS AND
VERSIONS, AND AN ATTEMPT TO ESTIMATE THE RELATIVE
VALUES.
A complete study of the critical problems of the text is
quite impossible in the space at our disposal. It is possible,
however, to arrive at trustworthy results regarding the relative
values of the uncial and some of the chief cursive MSS. The
question of the versions is a much more difficult one ; but even
in respect to these, conclusions approximately true can be
arrived at.
i. The relative values ofAttC 025. 046. 051 according to their
respective attestation of certain Greek and Hebraistic constructions
in our author, which are in some cases unique in Greek literature
and in others rare or comparatively rare save in our author.
(a) The most notable of these constructions which is practically
unique is one which occurs seven times, once in the title of each
letter to the Seven Churches. Thus in 2 1 John unquestionably
wrote TW dyyeAcp ro> ev E^etrw eK/cA^o-ias and not T. dyy. rr}? ev E.
eKKAr/o-tas, as we find in most texts of J ap . Lachmann in
Germany recognized this as the original text, and Hort (and to
a minor degree Souter) in England. These scholars were
influenced purely by the weighty testimony of A in three of
the seven passages, and C in one. In addition to this evidence,
Hort invoked that of Primasius (in all seven passages), 1 and the
Vulgate (in one passage). To these I am able to add the
support of two cursives, 2019. 2050, and of four versions, i.e. arm
for all seven passages, s 1 for four, s 2 for two, and gig (2 1 ) and sa
1 When I combined the evidence of the MSS and versions for the seven
passages in vol. ii. p. 244 (Appar. Crit.), I had either not seen or had for
gotten Hort s note on this question in his Commentary (p. 38 sqq.), where
he claims that Primasius supported the true text in all seven passages. In
my table I only claim Primasius as attesting the true text in four, where his
evidence is incontrovertible. The ground on which Hort claims the support
of Pr in 2 8 - 12 3 14 is the fact that ecclesiae precedes the name of the Church in
the cases of Smyrna, Pergamum, and Laodicea. This order is also found in
vg for Sardis (3*). Now Hort argues that this "transposition ... is
interpretative of T<" (as in Epiph. 455 B, ry dyyAy T?)S 4KK\r]<rlas rtf tv
Qvaretpois). Thus, according to Hort, ecclesiae Pergami (Pr) supports the
original text, whereas Pergami ecclesiae (vg s 2 bo) supports the later
corrected text. If this argument is right the evidence for the original text
is considerably greater than might otherwise be supposed, s 1 supports it in
2 8.7 37-14. arm . j n 2 i2 2", arm/3- y in 2 18 , arm 1 - in 2 8 , fl in 2 1 . In the
readings of s 2 I have followed Gwynn ; for my three texts of s 2 have been
normalized and agree in giving the late reading in all seven passages.
RELATIVE VALUES OF THE UNCIALS clxi
each for one. The evidence is given in a collected form in vol.
ii. p. 244, save that Pr should perhaps be added, as Hort urges,
to the evidence given under 2 8 - 12 3 U and vg under 3 1 . I have
already remarked that Lachmann on the basis of AC, and Hort
on the basis of these reinforced by Pr vg, accepted the above
readings on purely documentary authority. This authority,
when further reinforced as it is in my Appar. Crit., is quite
sufficient to establish the form ro> dyye Au) rw ev . . . c/c/cA^cn as
as original in all seven passages. 1 But my study of grammar of
J ap has thrown further light on the subject, and made it clear
that John could not, consistently with his usage throughout the
rest of J ap , have written otherwise. The grounds for this
statement are given in my Gram. 15. (i.) (b\ vol. i, Introd.
p. clvi sq.
In this extraordinary piece of Greek we have a first class
means of distinguishing between the trustworthiness of our
various authorities. When we apply this test, the result is very
significant. Of the uncials, K 025. 046. 051 have corrected TO>
ayye Aw TW in every passage into the normal construction TW
dyyeAw rf)<s. On the other hand, A has retained the original
construction in 2 1 - 8 - 18 and C in 2 1 (preserving a hint of it also
in 2 18 ). Of the 223 cursives, 2050 directly supports it in 2 12 ,
2019 indirectly in 2 1 , and 2040 indirectly in 2 8 .
Thus the vast superiority of A (C) to K 025 is at once
obvious. All the MSS have been corrected or normalized to
some degree, but this process has been thoroughgoing only in
K 025. 046. 051 and the cursives.
When we apply this test to the versions, Pr (though in some
respects of very mixed value) comes to the front in four passages
and arm in all seven: s 1 in 2 1 - 12 - 18 3 1 : s 2 in 2 18 3 1 : sa in 2 12 :
like arm, if Hort s contention is right (see note, p. clx), Pr in the
remaining three passages, fl in 2 1 , and vg in 3 1 . But Tyc gig
K 025. 046 and the cursives (with three exceptions) show no
knowledge of the original text, eth would represent either order
in the same way.
(b) The next construction which is of a unique character in J ap is
that which follows, 6 (TOV) Ka6rjfj.fvo<s (-ov) eVt TOV Opovov, TOV
KO.6rm.ivOV 7Tt TOV OpOVOV, T(U KaOyfJieVlt) 7Tl TW 0/OWU). For thCSC
constructions see vol. i. p. cxxxii. These constructions occur
28 times. Two of these are found in a wrong form in the
interpolation i4 15 17 , and two in 20 11 2i 5 where the wrong
construction save in 2 1 5 is to be traced to the editor.
In the remaining 24 cases A is right in 20 and wrong in 4
1 Weiss (Textkritische Untersuchungen, 64 sq. note) has wholly failed to
recognize the next text here. Similarly Bousset and nearly every editor save
Lachmann, Hort, and Souter.
I
clxii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
(i.e. 6 4 y 15 9 17 ig 18 ) : C (defective) is right in 9 and wrong in 2
(6 4 9 17 ) : N is right in 17 and wrong in 7 (i.e. 5 13 6 4 - 16 7 15 9 17 14
i9 18 ) : 025 right in 16 and wrong in 8 (i.e. 4 2 - 9 5 13 6 4 7 15 9 17 14
i9 4 ): 046 right in 17 and wrong in 7 (4 6 4 - 16 7 10 - 15 9 17 i4 6 ).
C 025 correct the text rightly in i4 16 and 025. 046 in 20 11 .
From the above statistics we conclude that K 025. 046 are
practically of equal value. A stands much above them.
(c) In the case of certain Hebraisms we find X 025. 046
correcting the text, but not AC. There is a Hebrew construction
in which the participle is resolved into a finite verb in the
succeeding clause, which our author has used at times. See
vol. i. 14 sq. In i 5-6 our author wrote TO> dyaTroWt . . . /cat
eTrot^o-ci/. Here the finite verb must be translated as if it were
TToirjo-avri. 046 min p have actually so corrected the text. Again,
i5 2 3 X min p correct the Hebraism ex VTas 3/ca ^ aSovo-ii/
into e?x OVTas B Ka aSoj/ras. Another Hebraism, i.e. in 2 20 ,
TY)V yvvcuKa . . . fj Aeyovcra . . . /cat SiSacrKei, is corrected by N c
025 min p into rr)i/ ywauca . . . rrjv Ae yowai/, but by 046 min nm
into ?) Ae yci. The same Hebraism in 3 12 rrj<; Kcuvfjs lepovo-aXTJ/x,
^ KaTa/3a.LVOV(ra is corrected by N c into rrjs K. lep. r?7<; KaTa/BaLvova-rjs,
and by 046 into r) /cara/Saim. Again in i2 7 6 Mi^a^A. Kal ot
ayyeXot OLVTOV rov 7roXe/x^(rai, X 046 min m omit the TOV. In I3 10 ,
where the same Hebraism occurs twice, every uncial save A and
all cursives remove the Hebraism by drastic corrections. In 19
X 025. 046 min pl Tyc Pr gig vg s 2 arm 3a insert ^a<m> between
6 0eos and 6 -rravroKparwp, against A min 3 Cyp s 1 arm 2 - 4 bo sa eth.
This insertion is not only against our author s usage, but also
against the regular translation of the divine name. See Gram.
10. (i.) (/), p. cxlvii. Such examples show the vast superiority
of A (C) to K 025. 046 as witnesses to the primitive type of text.
2. The absence of conflate readings from A (C) and their
(rare) occurrence in N 025. 046 support the distinction already
established between these MSS. In i7 4 N (s 2 ) reads avrfjs KOL rfjs
yfj<s, where avrr/s is the reading of A al m Tyc vg s 1 arm 2 eth, and
T^S yr}s that of 046 al pm gig arm 3 . Cyp Pr read rfjs y^s oA^s, and
bo ( = avrr]<s /x,era TT/S y^s) conflates this reading with that of A.
In 4 T K alone reads u>s o/xoiov avOpuTru. This may be a confla
tion of W9 avOpuirov (A, etc.), and o/xotov only preserved in 2018.
In 6 1 - 5 - 7 K 046 min m read epx ov KC " ^ e > an d in 6 3 K min 12
alone attest this reading. But since the phrase KO.\ iSe is not used
by our author, but /ecu tSov, this phrase is clearly an early intrusion.
But 046 min m Pr gig vg f - , which insert Kal tSe (or Kal tSov, Pr
gig vg f - %), omit KOL eTSov in the words that follow. Since this
form of the text is as old as the 4th century, the text of K is prob
ably conflate.
In 2 15 025 min p read 6/xoiws o /uo-w a conflation, though
RELATIVE VALUES OF THE UNCIALS clxiii
is found as yet only in a few cursives and arm a . Again in 2 7 , where
AtfC 046 have Iv T. TrapaSeiVw, and I. 35 fv ^eo-w TOV TrapaSeiVov,
025 reads tv //.eVa) TO> Tra/oaSeib-w, which may be either a conflation of
the above two or else a correction of the latter.
In 046 i9 12 we have the conflate reading ovo/xara yeypa/i/xeVa
Kai ovo/xa yeypayn/xei/oi/.
3. 7/fo readings 1 <?/ //fo uncials taken singly and also in
groups of two. The evidence of this section confirms the provisional
values assigned to these MSS in 1-2.
Even a cursory study of the statistics on p. clxiv is illuminating.
It shows that A stands almost alone in the first class, though
in some respects C belongs to this class. But it is better to put
C in the second class by itself, seeing that it is so weak when it
stands alone. But in combination with A it is different.
In comparing C and the combinations into which it enters
with other MSS, we have to bear in mind that more than a
third of it is missing. Hence, when we read in Table I.
that AC are right in combination 36 times, we have to raise
this number to 54 (or less). Thus AC in combination are
nearly twice as often right as AK or A 025, and more than twice
as many times as A 046. The combinations of C and N with
either 025 or 046 are very weak. Another point to be borne in
mind is that 025 is also defective. About one-fourteenth of it is
missing. Hence, whereas A 025 are right 36 times in combina
tion (reckoning columns one and two together), in Table I.
we should raise this number to 38 (more or less). Thus it
follows that 025 is, when standing alone, right oftener than
C, X, or 046, and when combined with A it is right oftener than
Ax or A 046 in combination. In the third class, therefore, to
which we must relegate K 025 and 046, 025 stands first according
to this reckoning. As regards N and 046, the former takes
precedence of the latter, and is in certain respects much superior
to it.
1 1 am beholden to Mr. Marsh for the materials on which Tables I.-III.
are based. They are to be regarded as approximately, not literally, exact. I
have not taken account of 051 since I possess no complete collation of it, and
it is very late. It is defective, eleven chapters being missing. Its value is
not as great as one of the best cursives, as its readings in chaps. 12. 1 6 will
show. In chap. 12 it agrees with cursives against all the other uncials in
reading rlKretv, I2 4 , ^/ceZ 2 , I2 6 , in omitting fier avrov, I2 9 . In I2 5 it omits Iv
(a mere correction) with 025 and cursives, and in I2 6 it omits &cet J with C
and cursives. In I2 3 it is right with A 025 (ptyas Trvpp6s), and in I2 12 with
A and cursives in reading ot ovpavol. In i6 4< 10 * 12 ( + (LyyeXos) it agrees
with cursives against uncials, also in i6 14 (5ai/u.6vwv and els Tr6\e^ov) i6 15
(fi\irov<riv). In i6 8> 10 - 14 it agrees with X and cursives against all other
uncials : in i6 3 (fukra) with K 025. 046 and cursives against A, in i6 18 (ol
&v6pwTroi) with X 046 and cursives, in i6 12 (dvaroXutv) with A. The readings
of 051 given in this edition are derived from Swete s Commentary.
clxiv
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
TABLE I.
Right readings.
Probably
right-
adopted in
text with
alternatives
in margin.
Possibly
wrong-
placed in
margin.
Wrong.
Peculiar to the
MS or pair of
MSS named
among the
uncials. Ortho
graphic variants
in brackets.
A 1
55( + tit)
7
12
154
229 ( + 27)
C
i
I
6 7
69 ( + 10)
N
4 (2 18 * l8 12 22")
2(l2 2 l9 20 )
...
414
425 (+47)
K c
...
...
12
12 ( + i)
NCC
...
...
7
7
025
4(5 3 i 4 ii i8 11 i9 14 )
2 (4 4 5 13 )
5
103
046
3
...
350?
AC
36
...
...
2
38 ( + 13)
AN
30 (tit)
2
i
3
37( + i6)
A 025
3
6
3 ( + 1)
2
43 (+4)
A 046
24
7
...
2
33 ( + 21)
Co25
2
..
12
14
C 046
I (?)
...
6
7
Cx .
2
...
12
16
K 025
2
..
5
21
28 ( + 12)
tfc 025
...
..
i
4
6
N 046
7
2
5
44
59( + S)
025. 046
4 ( 4 4 6 8 i9 18 2 1 12 )
2
i
28
49
The classification of the uncials from the above data is thus :
TABLE II.
Class i.
iii.
A
C
025 N 2 046
If, further, to the number of times in which each MS stands alone
in preserving the original text we add the number of times in which
each of the five MSS, AC 025 K 046, enters respectively into
combination with one or other of the remaining four (in such
groups as AC, A 025, AN, A 046, C 025, etc., i.e. groups of two),
we arrive at the following results, allowance having been made
for the lost sections of C and 025.
1 Weiss (Die Johannes- Apokalypse: Textkritische Untersuchungen, p. 147)
is of opinion that A preserves wholly unsupported upwards of 60 right
readings, C 4 and K 8. Though I have followed quite different lines of
investigation, my results do not differ much. They are slightly more in favour
of A as against K- Gwynn s estimate of the readings peculiar to each MS
differs alike from those given above and by Weiss. See Apoc. in Syriac, p.
xliii sq.
2 The inferior character of the text of N for J ap has been amply proved both
by Weiss and Gwynn, Apocalypse of St. John in Syriac, p. xl sqq.
RELATIVE VALUES OF THE UNCIALS
clxv
TABLE III.
A.
C.
025.
M.
046.
Standing alone .
62
I
6
6
3
In combination . .
155
59
49
46
47
217
60
55
52
So
This table confirms the results of Table II. save that K is nearer
to 046. If we combine the results of these two tables, 025 still
shows itself to be a better MS than N.
4. The Uncials in groups of three or more and their evidence.
Hitherto we have given the evidence of the uncials individually
or in groups of two. We shall now study them in groups of three
or four, where they attest the original text. I have only space to
apply this test in chaps. 1-4. Divergences in orthography are
not reckoned as variants.
TABLE IV.
ANC.1
ANC 023.
ANC 046.
AN 025.
AN 046.
AC 025.
AC 046.
j4. 5. 6
j4. 9. 12. 16. 18
j5 2 3. 7. 15
3 7 4 5. 8. 11
4 2. 8. 11
j!3 2 2. 9. 24
2 10. 16. 17
2 27
2 2. 5. 7. 10. 13. 14 (Ms). 24
3 7
= 4
= 3
3 3.7
= 3
= 4
o2 (bis). 3. 7. 9. 12
= 5
= 6
= 19
AC 025. 046.
AC 046.
A 025. 046.
NC 023.
NC 025. 046.
NC 046.
C 025. 046.
j7. 16. 20
2 10. 17
j8. 18 -,14
I92 20
j<5. 7. 20
j!2 2 16. 17
3 7
2 7. 18. 19. 20
= 2
4 1. 4. 9. 10
= 2
2 2. 18. 22
= 3
^3. 9. 14
= 7
= 6
= 10
1 According to Weiss (op. cit.), AtfC have preserved the original text only
2O times over against 025 and 046. This would in all probability nearly
agree with the results above arrived at. For since this combination is right
only 4 times according to the above table, the number of times it is right for
the entire book would apparently lie in the neighbourhood of 20, as Weiss
states. It is therefore a wrong basis on which Gwynn (op. cit. p. xlviii)
proceeds when he assumes that " the consent of XAC represents the consent
of the uncials" and uses it as a "standard by which to compare P and Q."
AKC 025 represents " the consent of the uncials."
clxvi
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
If we study this table we find that the several MSS enter
into the above combinations as follows :
A
C
025
K
046
63 times.
61
55
46
40
There are two points that call for explanation here, (a) First
the numbers of C 025 K 046 seem unduly large as compared with
those of A, seeing that A belongs to the first class, C to the
second, and 025 X 046 to the third, according to our classifications
at the close of 3. But there is really no difficulty here. If C 025
X 046 are to be right at all, they can only be right as members
of groups of MSS, seeing that they are hardly ever right when they
stand alone. C and in a less degree 025 represent a good secon
dary uncial text, while N 046 uphold this text in a considerably
weakened form, X replacing it to a considerable extent by readings
often of an early date, and 046 by readings of a later growth.
(b) Since only i~3 19 of C is preserved in the four chapters
we are considering, it follows that the number 61 of C must be
raised proportionately, say to 70 or thereabouts (for the variants
in chap. 4 are fewer than in 1-3), so that it would stand above A.
This appears to conflict absolutely with the classification arrived
at in 3 ad fin. But in (a) this difficulty is in the main sur
mounted, and when to the explanation there offered, we add the
fact that C is comparatively free from the obvious foolish slips of
the scribe of A, 1 it is surmounted wholly. As critics have
generally recognized, the scribe of C (or of the MS on which C is
based) either found a more accurately written text than that in A,
or else he eliminated most such slips, and with them many of the
original readings which have survived in A. C is far freer from
obvious slips and obvious corruptions than A.
Thus this fourth table in the main confirms the first. AC
stand apart, and but for its almost absolute lack of correct
singular readings C might be put side by side with A. The
results arrived at in regard to 025 K 046 agree exactly with those
of Table II.
The conclusions arrived at with regard to the absolute pre
eminence of A is confirmed by the study of the papyrus Frag
ments of the Apocalypse: see vol. ii. 447-451.
5. The character of the Versions. The versions differ
1 Compare in I 1 rou doti\ov (A) for
i<rr (A) for tv Irjaou : in I 12 XaXe?
in I 6 A > yfi&v : in I 9 tv
for AdXei : in I 16 > txw v l2 * v T -
for M r?}s 5etas. On the other hand, A "alone is characterized by
singular readings which are to be accepted, not as divergences from a standard
text, but as survivals of the primitive and authentic text " (Gwynn, p. liv).
RELATIVE VALUES OF THE VERSIONS clxvii
greatly from the Greek MSS in regard to the character of their
testimony. Each Greek MS of J ap possesses a certain character
of trustworthiness or untrustworthiness, and this character it
maintains on the whole throughout. But this is not so in the
case of most of the versions. In the chief Latin versions we
find side by side the best and worst readings. The following
examples drawn from what survives of fl J and the parallel sections
in the other versions and Greek MSS will suffice to prove this.
Thus in i 4 drro 6 <5v (AKC 025) is supported by fl gig vg (s 1 - 2 )
arm bo eth, while Pr supports 046 O.TTO Oeov 6 &v (and Tyc a
further development of this reading). In i 5 \vcravri (AtfC) is
supported by Pr fl gig (s 1 - 2 ) arm, while Tyc vg bo eth support
025. 046 Xova-avTL. In I 6 /8tt(riXetav iepeis AN*C 046 is supported
by Tyc (fl) vg d , but the corrected text N c /foo-iAa av KO.L Upets by
Pr gig vg d arm 1 - 3 - 4 - : 025 arm 2 - 3 - a read /Jao-iAeis KCU Upcis : 046
/3acriAeioj> lepets, while S L 2 bo = /JacriAet aj/ tepariKr^, and eth =
/ftcunA. ayviav. In i 8 the addition -fj apx^ K0 ^ ( T ) T ^s N* is
supported by Tyc gig vg bo against AN C C 025. 046 Pr fl (s 1 - 2 )
arm eth. In i 9 fyo-ov Xpicn-oi) N cc 046 is supported by Tyc Pr vg d
s 1 - 2 arm 2 - 3 - a against Ir/o-oi) AN*C 025 fl gig vg d arm 4 bo eth.
In i 13 roii/ Xv^vtcov AC 025 is supported by Tyc Cyp Pr fl s 1 - 2
arm 1 - 2 - 4 - a bo eth against TWV e-n-Ta Xvyy^v K 046 gig vg arm 3 . In
i 16 ws 6 -^Xtos <f>atvi AC 025. 046 Tyc gig vg S L 2 arm 1 - 2 - 3 - a eth
against <cuVei ws 6 ^Acos N Pr Cyp fl arm 4 (?) bo. In 2 1 r<3
dyye Ao) TO> AC Pr [in Comm.] (fl?) s 1 arm 4 against r<p ayy.
r>}s N 025. 046 Tyc gig vg arm 1 - 2 - 8 -* bo eth. In 8 7 6 Trpwro?
Ax 025. 046 s 1 2 arm 4 against 6 TT/DCOTOS ayycAo? 2020 al Tyc
Pr gig V g arm 1 - 2 - 3 -" bo eth. In 8 9 TO rpirov A 025. 046 s 1 - 2
against T. rptVov /xepos X Tyc Pr fl gig vg arm bo sa eth.
In 8 12 all the uncials and cursives are wrong. The true sense
is either preserved or recovered in bo eth and partially in
Pr fl. In Q 2 /ox/uVov /u-eyaArjs AN 025 Tyc Pr fl vg arm 1 - 2 - a
bo eth against /ca//,. Kaiojaevrys 046 s 2 and nap. /xey. /caio/xei/^s
2020 gig s 1 arm 4 (~?). In 9 4 CTTI TWI/ /ACTWTTWJ/ AN 025 gig
V ga. c. d a g a i ns t ^ L T- ^r^^ avrSv 046 Tyc Pr fl vg f - * v s 1 - 2
arm (bo) eth. In 9 6 ^evyet A(x) 025 against fav&rai 046 Tyc
Pr fl gig vg s 1 - 2 arm bo eth. In n 16 jov 6eov AxC 025 Tyc Pr
fl gig vg s 1 arm 1 - 2 - 4 - a bo eth against T. Qpovov r. Ocov 046 s 2 arm 3 .
In ii 19 6 ev T. oupavuJ AC gig fl arm bo eth against ei/ r. ovp. N
025. 046 Tyc Pr vg s 1 - 2 and rfc Siafl^s avrov (> Tyc bo) AC
025 Tyc gig vg s 1 - 2 arm 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 bo against T. SiaOrjKrjs rov 6eov K fl
eth : T. Sia^K^s Kvpiov 046. In 1 2 3 /aeyas irvppos A 025 Tyc vg s 1 sa
eth against Trvppos ^,yas NC 046 Pr fl gig s 2 arm bo. In i2 6 e/cet
1 There are only 61 verses in fl (Codex Floriacensis), i.e. i l -2 l , 8 7 -9 12 ,
Ii_ 16 -i2 14 , I4 15 -i6 5 . fl does not show such remarkable faithfulness to the
primitive text in the later sections as in I 1 -2 1 .
clxviii
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
AK 025. 046 s 1 arm 3 - 4 : > C Tyc Pr fl vg s 2 arm 1 - 2 - (bo ?) eth.
In i4 16 eOepto-Orj ^ 717 all Greek MSS and Versions (-vg f - v fl
arm 1 - 2 - 3 - a ) against eOepio-ev T. yfjv vg f> v fl arm 1 - 2> s - a : > bo. In
i4 18 6 ex<ov AC Tyc gig vg s 1 - 2 arm eth against ex wv N 02 5-
046 Pr fl bo: 4>a*vrj AN 046 Tyc fl gig vg s 1 arm 1 - 2 - 3 -" eth
against Kpavyfj C 025 s 2 bo: r/K/xcurav at oTa<uA.ai
fl gig vg s 1 - 2 against
025
046 arm eth : > bo.
In i5 2 CK T. Orjp. Kal IK T. ci/covos avTov AC 025 s 1 - 2t arm 1 * 2< a
against K Pr fl, which > c/c 2 . Tyc gig vg bo eth give a different
construction. In I5 3 aSovcriv AC 025. 046 against aSoi/ras N
Tyc Pr fl vg bo eth : TWI/ c6vG>v AK C 025. 046 (Pr) fl gig bo
eth against TWV atwi/wv K*C Tyc vg s 1 - 2 . Here arm 2 - 8 - 4 - a is con
flate. In i5 4 (f>o(37]6Y) AC 025. 046 Pr fl gig arm bo against <pofi.
o-e K 051 Tyc vg s 1 - 2 eth. In i5 6 ot exoi/reg AC s 1 - 2 arm bo
eth against X OVTCS K 02 5 4^ (Tyc Pr fl gig vg) : c/c TOV vaov
A^C 025 Tyc fl gig vg s< L > 2 arm 4 bo eth against 046 Pr arm 1 - 2
which omit: fXt^ovf AC vg d against Xivov (-ovv) 025. 046 Tyc
(Pr) gig vg d and XtvoSs fl bo : > eth. In I6 1 /xeyaAr/s </>wv^s AC
046 (arm 4 ) bo sa against <j>wf)<s /xey. X 025 Pr fl gig vg s 1 2
arm 2 - 3 - a : ^wv^s eth. e/< TOV vaov AtfC 025 Tyc Pr fl gig vg s 1 - 2
arm* against 046 arm 8 which omit : while arm 4 bo sa eth = IK TOV
ovpavov and arm 1 - 2 - 4 = iv r. m<3 : eTrra 2 AttC 046 Tyc Pr gig vg
s 1 - 2 arm against 025 fl bo eth which omit. In i6 3 Sew-epos Atf c
025. Tyc Pr fl gig vg arm 4 eth against oevr. ayyeXos 046 s 1 - 2
arm 1 2> 8 - a bo. In i6 4 ras Tr^yas A^C 025 Tyc Pr fl gig arm bo
against eis T. Tr^yas 046 s 1 - 2 eth.
Now, taking the Latin and Syriac versions in the above thirty-
three passages (8 12 i4 16 i5 3a not being included) we arrive at the
following results :
Tyc.
Pr.
fl.
gig-
vg.
Si.
52.
Right .
17
14
18
21
I4(l6)
21
16
Wrong . .
14
16
15
IO
13(12)
9
14
We are not to conclude that these numbers indicate the pro
portion of right to wrong readings throughout J ap , though they
may be in some cases approximately true. They establish
the fact, however, that the Latin versions contain an astonishing
mixture of good and bad readings. Thus in these sections gig is
the best of the Latin, being right twice as often as it is wrong :
next come fl Tyc vg, which are oftener right than wrong. Pr
comes last, being oftener wrong than right, though, as we have
already seen, it preserves more original readings in chaps. 2-3
RELATIVE VALUES OF THE VERSIONS
clxix
than all the other Latin versions together, s 1 - 2 compare favour
ably with the Latin, s 1 being right more than twice as many times
as it is wrong, and s 2 being oftener right than wrong. Unfortun
ately there is no critical edition of s 2 .
A further and very important fact emerges from this study of
the Latin versions, and this is that a text akin to 046 and its
allies (often tf and less often 025) was well established between 200
and 350 A.D. and possibly earlier.
Let us now compare the above results regarding the versions
and the readings in AtfC 025. 046 for the same sections. We
find
A.
M.
N c .
c.i
025.
046.
Right .
33
IS
3
23
23
14
Wrong . .
14
...
5
9
19
These results confirm on the whole the conclusion reached at the
close of 3. A stands by itself; next comes C as a good second ;
then 025 ; and closing the list at a long interval N and 046.
From the above study, therefore, we conclude that all the ver
sions may in a given case support a reading that is wholly wrong.
In the order of general trustworthiness they stand as follows :
s 1 gig s 2 Tyc fl vg Pr. But in the case of certain peculiarly
difficult readings ( i (a) ad fin. above) the version that is here
last, i.e. Pr, is equal to the first, s 2 comes next, fl and vg in third
place, and gig Tyc 2 last.
We have not as yet taken account of the respective values
of arm bo sa eth.
6. The Armenian, Bohairic^ and Ethiopic Versions. The
Armenian version is difficult to compare with the other versions.
In Mr. Conybeare s edition five texts are distinguished, arm 1 - 2 - 3 - 4
and arm*. The last is a recension of the i2th century. The four
first represent various forms of the Old Armenian. Of these
arm 4 stands apart from arm 1 - 2 - 8 . Conybeare describes arm 4 as a
recension of the 8th century, and arm 1 - 2 - 3 as texts of the fifth.
Conybeare rather throws discredit on arm 4 , but it is in many
respects the best of the Armenian texts. It frequently stands
alone against arm 1 - 2 - 3 - in supporting the true text. In the
sections which we have used for purposes of comparison, i.e. the
sixty-one verses which alone survive of fl, there are two conflate
1 C is defective in some of these sections.
2 It must be borne in mind that there is no critical text of Tyc. Tyc may
appear in better company when this is published.
clxx
THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
readings in arm. Thus arm 4 (together with 2020 gig s 1 ) reads
Ka/jitvov /zeycxA.^? KCUO/ACK^S in Q 2 , and arm 2 - 3 - a read TWV aiwvwv
KCU (3a<ri\v<s TrdyTwv TWV $vu>v in 15^.
In the next place, an adequate comparison of the Bohairic
and Ethiopic is difficult. In Horner s edition of the former the
translation of only one MS is given. The readings of the other
MSS are given in the Appar. Criticus, but not translated. Mr.
Horner has, however, translated the variants for me and I append
the results below. The Ethiopic version which I have used is
that of Platt. It is wholly uncritical. Hence the results given
here are to be regarded as only approximately right. Despite
such disadvantages, bo and eth show clearly that they have a
character of their own.
arm 4 (alone
arm 1 - 2 - 3 - 4. o.
against one, two,
or more members
bo.
eth.
of arm 1 - 2. 3. a).
Right .
20
8
14
17
Wrong .
13
2
15
13
Where arm 4 and one or more of arm L 2> 3 - a agree, their
evidence is recorded in the first column. Where arm 4 is right
over against arm L 2 - 3 - a it stands in the second column, arm 4 is
only twice wrong against combinations of arm 1 - 2> 3 - a .
It is now possible to arrange the versions in the order of
their merit in the sections preserved in fl, i.e. i 1 -2 1 , 8 7 -9 12 , n 16 -
i2 14 , I4 15 -i6 5 .
In this arrangement, according to the number of the right
readings which they attest, it must be borne in mind that s 2 eth
and Tyc are wholly uncritical texts. They may be better or
worse than they appear here. Furthermore, while it is true that
s 1 arm are foremost both in regard to the quality and the
number of their right readings, Pr, which has the fewest right
readings, has preserved most important readings lost in nearly
every other Latin authority, and also in bo eth. This holds
true of bo in 8 12 , which in this passage has alone preserved the
original or else restored it.
Versions in order. S 1 .arm gig s 2 eth Tyc fl vg bo Pr.
If we arrange these versions in classes in relation to each
other and not to the Greek MSS, we should arrive at the
following result :
Class i. arm 4 s 1 gig arm x - 2 - 3 - a .
ii. eth s 2 Tyc vg.
iii. bo Pr.
THE UNCIALS clxxi
I have not taken account of sa in the above classification, as
I do not possess a continuous collation of its text. For some
hundreds of its readings I am indebted to Rev. George Horner.
Judging from these, I should be inclined to place it in the second
class. The reader will observe that in 2 12 it enjoys the honour
of attesting the original text together with 2050 s 1 arm 4 - a against
all the uncials and all the remaining versions.
7. Relations of bo sa eth to each other. These versions form
one group over against the rest, (a) bo eth continually support
each other throughout J ap generally in agreement with some
other authorities, but at times they stand alone. As an instance
of the former, cf. ig 10 where with Pr they add on before
(rwSofXo? : of the latter, iS 1 IK + TOV TrpocrwTrov avrov /cat : 2l 4d +
K(H (>bo) iSoi> Trdvra Troi-rjOrjo-ovrai (tTTOL-rjO-rjarav, eth) Kaivd : 2 1 18
(crit. note ad fin.) : 22 3 (crit. note ad fin.).
(b) bo sa agree against eth and all else in 20 11 pfyav 6p6vov
( r \ J rest): in 2 2 18 -fort before c dV TIS bo sa agree with certain
authorities against eth and others: ig g KOL Aeyet /xot 2 with Atf
etc. : > eth N etc. : 20 11 17 yfj KOL 6 ovpavos with Atf etc.
(instead of 6 ovp. K. rj yfj with 35. 432 Pr eth).
(c) bo sa eth stand alone in i8 2 rj fjifyaXfj + 17 vroXts : 20 1 in
transposing order of aXva-w ^ydX-rjv : 2i 5b Tronycrw Trdvra Kaivd.
bo sa eth agree with some other authorities in I6 1 rov ovpavov
42. 367 arm (for TOV i/aov) : i6 6 : 19: 2i 3 ovpavov 025. 046
etc. (for Opovov).
(d) sa eth agree with certain authorities against bo: i8 19
owu 2 with AC etc. : > bo with K etc. ig 9 TOV ya/xou with AK C
etc. : >bo with N* etc. 22 14 TrAwovres T. crroAas avrw with A^
etc. against TTOIOWTCS T. ei/roXas avrov bo with gig 046 Cyp etc.
(e) bo eth agree against sa: ig 19 avruv bo eth K etc. against
avrov sa A etc.
(/) bo stands against eth : i8 6 irorypiu eth AC etc. against
TTOT. avrrjs bo etc. i8 12 v\ov bo NC etc. against Ai 0ov eth
A etc.
The above are a few examples from chaps. 16-22.
8. Character of the uncials as regards their textual
value.
A, C. These two MSS present the normal uncial text just as
046 and in some degree 025 present the normal cursive text.
But whereas C is most carefully written, this is not true of A,
which is seriously affected by copyists blunders. C exhibits
fewer singular readings than any other uncial (about 67), and
these singular readings, moreover, with a single exception, possess
no special interest. Here it is that it differs in kind from A and
calls for different classification. A contains over 150 singular
readings, and of these 56 (if not 63) preserve the original. Thus
clxxii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
whereas C s singular readings take no particular direction, A s
are pre-eminent as being certainly right in over 60 passages.
K. This MS " is of all the five MSS far the least worthy of
regard as representing a ^defensible form of the text; it is
aberrant rather than divergent from the rest, to the point of
eccentricity." So Gwynn (pp. cit. p. xliv) rightly judges. When
it stands alone, it is only right in four passages. The bulk of its
variants are unquestionably scribal blunders and corruptions of
an early date, and call for no further consideration. A consider
able part of the remainder represents an ancient element foreign
to the normal uncial text and finds large support in the versions
and to a less extent in certain cursives. Other variants connect
K with the normal cursive form of text, but these are not
numerous.
025. 046. These MSS are so widely sundered that they
differ from each other in kind. While 025 represents on the
whole the uncial type of text, 046 represents the cursive type.
While slightly over half the variants of 025 from the other uncials
find support among the cursives, more than four-fifths of the
variants of 046 find such support.
But though 046 is largely cursive in character, its record
compares favourably with K, considering its late date. We have
already seen (see Table I. p. clxiv) that whereas K alone preserves
6 right readings (reckoning together columns one and two)
against the rest of the uncials, 046 preserves 3. Again AK in
combination are right 33 times, A 046 are right 31 times.
Once more, from the results arrived at in 4 we learn that,
whereas K enters into groups of three or more MSS attesting the
right text 45 times, 045 does so 40. ^
025 and 046 are to be further distinguished from each other
in this respect, that whereas 046 represents the close amongst the
uncials of a long process of correction which began in the 2nd
century, 025 represents to a considerable extent a deliberate
recension of the texts of the 8th cent, or earlier. That 025 is
the result of a deliberate recension is easy to prove. Nearly
forty times it differs from the other uncials in correcting or
improving the Greek text from the standpoint of Greek syntax.
Thus in I 4 we have Trvev/xarwi/ a+eorii CI/COTTIOV. I 5 TO)
dyairY]aaim. I 6 /focrtAeis KCU tepets. I 9 crvy/coivcovos lv ry 0\iif/ei
Ka l ( -f l v TTJ) /3acn,/Wa. 2 9 rrjv /3Aacr<?7/uav /^ ran/ AeyoVrwv. 2 13
ei/ T. ^jue pais + iv ats. 2 17 SWO-<D avra> + (fxxyeii . 2 20 TT)V ywat/ca
. . . TY]I> Aeyoucray. 4 1 f) (jiuvr) . . . Aeyoucra. $ 2 Krjpvaro-ovTa
y^ <toi/f7 jueyaAfl. 5 6 apviov . . . t\ov. 7 9 o^Xos . . . eo-rojres,
. A . . TTc/x/tySAijfima, 8 13 dyyeXou Trero/xeVov. This change is
due not to the scribe s idea of syntax, but of the sense of the
passage. 9 14 (f>a>vr]v . . . A.e yow<xv, lo 1 /cat ^ */HS, corrected
CURSIVES COLLATED FOR THIS EDITION clxxiii
according to sense of context. The scribe knew no better. 1 1 4
eAatat - corwaai. The above examples are sufficient to prove the
fact of a deliberate recension. On the influence of this recension
on 35. 205 and other cursives, see under 35. 205, p. clxxv sq.
The following cursives the list is provisional agree with
046 in giving the latest form of text :
fi49 i75 3 2 5 )
J 8. 35** -{201 617 456 V 337. 632*. 919.920. 1849. 2004. 2040(1-1 1 7 ).
(386 1934 468*J
046 contains many readings of so late a date that they are
not supported by any version. These are of the inferior cursive
type. A few examples will suffice. Thus in i 12 046 with
cursives reads icai-ft/cei: i 16 x t P* O.VTOV rfj Seta: 2 25 di/oi ^w (for
av ?/to) : 3 2 ct7ro/8aXA.iv for aTroOaveiv : 3 4 oAiya e^eis oyo/xara
(order) : 3 7 ei /XT) 6 ai/oiywv.
9. Cursives collated for this edition. The list of the 22
cursives collated for this edition is given in vol. ii. p. 234,
where attention is drawn to such as are defective. Of these the
most interesting and valuable are 2020. 2040. 2050.
2020 is a good cursive and would stand close to 025 N in the
third class. It agrees with A 2019 in 2 18 and in i 10 save that
for oTucrflev it reads OTTIO-CO, and with A and certain cursives in i 6 .
Over against seven agreements with A, it supports K in 18
passages and 025 in 13.
920. 2040. 2040 (xi-xii cent.). 920 (x cent.). Though
2040 is written by the same hand throughout, it exhibits two
distinct types of text From i-u 7 it is of the late cursive type
and seems to have been copied from 920 (x cent.). These two
MSS contain unique readings in the following passages : 3 5 TWV
t<swT<&v : 3 8 TO, epya (for TOV Xoyov) : 3 12 ra> wo/xari (for rw vaw) :
4 9 -f Kal Trpoaicun!]o > aKm (-<rou<rii , 920) TO) aW6 and another
addition in 8 2 . In 4 10 they omit evuiriov r. Opovov and have
other omissions in 4 4 5 12 y 4 9 9 . They invert the order in 3 8
and attest the same impossible readings in 5 1 6 14 7 1 9 5 .
From ii 9 to 20 11 where it ends, the text is largely free from
corruptions of the later cursives. It often supports A against
most other authorities (cf. ii 11 flo-fjXOtv ei/ avrots, i2 12 ot ovpavoi)
and N and less often 025. But its excellence is still more
clearly shown by the fact that in n 9 -2o n it agrees with the
majority of uncials against the majority of cursives. The latter
half, therefore, of 2040 is of so high a character as to entitle it to
be ranked with 046, and after N.
2050. This MS, which consists only of 1-5, 20-22, and was
clearly copied from a defective MS, stands in point of excellence
alongside the uncials. In about 80 passages it agrees with the
clxxiv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
majority of the uncials against the majority of the cursives.
Thus in i 4 it reads 0.73-0 6 wv with AtfC 025 al 20 fl gig vg s 1 - 2 bo
against 046 and most cursives. In i 9 i/ Iryo-ov with NC 025.
2020 gig vg s 1 bo against the rest ; Irja-ov (without Xpto-Tou) with
AX* 025 al 5 fl gig vg- d arm a against the rest. In i 12 KO.L (without
Kt AN 025. 045 al Tyc Pr fl vg s 1 2 bo against the rest. In i 13
Avxvtwv (without preceding k-rrra) ACP al 10 Tyc Pr fl s 1 - 2
arm 1 - 2 - 4i a bo against the rest. In 2 13 >ra Zpya a-ov /cat (added
by 046 al pl s 2 arm 3 -") with AtfC 025. 2020 and versions ( s 2
arm 3 - ) : 6 TTIO-TOS pov AC 61. 69 Or 8 s 2 against rest. These
suffice to show the character of this cursive. This cursive shows
some slight affinities with A, as in i 13 4 4 5 4 22 11 etc., and still
more with X. Thus with the latter it agrees in i 8 ( + fj ap\r) /o-A.),
i 15 TrcTTvpco/xeVo) (a correction), i 17 circOyKcv, 2 20 4 20 etc. It agrees
with 025 in I 15 XC^-KW Ai/?ai/w, al 6 : 2 20 rrjv Aeyovcrav (also N c al 5 ), etc.
This cursive has a conflate reading in 2 27 /cat a-wrpiif/ci
avrovs a)? ra crKtvrj TO. /cepa/u/ca (rvvrpifB^rai. Such a conflation is
not found in any other MS or in any version. But gig arm 4 bo
eth read o~vvTpi\l/ei O.VTOVS. Is 2050 influenced by gig or some
ancestor of these versions? In i 16 2050 with 920. 2040 Tyc fl
gig vg read oeia avTov against all other Greek authorities. Is
there a trace of Latin influence here ?
149. 386. 201. Of these 201 was not collated for this
edition. The first of these cursives, 149 (xv cent.), is a slavish
copy of 386 (xiv cent). It reproduces it where it is absolutely
wrong : cf. 2 14 cStSacr/cev T. BdXaa/x, 3 14 -YJ apx*] TVJS Trtcrrcws, I4 19
i8 4 XdOrjTe. In 13 it reads KaroiKoiWas with 201 against 386.
2019 otKowras. Where 386 is quoted in the Appar. Crit. it carries
149 with it, unless 149 is quoted to the contrary. 201 (xiii
cent.) is a member of this group. It agrees with 149. 386 in
unique (or almost unique) readings in 3 2 (> TrcTrA^pay
TJ apxn Trjs TTto-rea)?: IO 2 CTTI rrjv yrjv (also i) : II 4 ot
I4 18 fiordvas: I5 6 ot 7rra ayy. C K TOV vaov ot IXOVTC
7r\-rjyd<i (also s 1 bo): i6 17 TOV Opovov + TOV Oeov. This is a con
flation of TOV Opovov, A 046 al pl , all versions ( - gig) and N TOV
Oeov, i8 7 elfju Ka^ws, 2o 4 cSoO-r) teptfjMj and others. This group
gives a late cursive text.
175. 617. 1934. These cursives form a group, but one much
less closely connected than the one immediately preceding. In
2 19 they stand alone in reading x l/ p va v Trpamov, and in iy 15
a eISes+ KOL rj yvvrj : with 141. 242 in 6 17 in reading o-w^i/ai. In
the following passages these cursives attest the same text in con
junction now with one set of authorities now with another not
consistently with any io 8 if i8 8 - 22 I9 7 -".i3 2 o 12 2i 6 - 27
22 s. 12. 13. 16. 20. 21 jycj an ^ fij^ several times agree where 1934
diverges: i8 16 i9 20 2O 5 2i 3 22 5 etc. and generally in conjunction
3 14
CURSIVES COLLATED FOR THIS EDITION clxxv
with the 025 text. This group gives a very late form of the
cursive text, except in chapters 16-22 where they agree generally
with 35. 205.
325. 456. 468. The first two members of this group are
closely connected. They stand alone in adding in Kara a-ov in
2 5 and the marginal note lv aXXw B in i4 20 , in omitting KCU
evMTTiov . . . avrov in 3 5 and \(av . . . rcraprov o>ov in 4 7 , in
reading (325**) Su> in 4 9 and xpovov for In XP- fu-Kpov in 6 11 , in
omitting ye/xouo-as in i5 7 . In very many passages these two
cursives attest the same text in conjunction with a variety of
others : cf. 6 17 7 5 8 2 9 2 - 9 i4 8 etc. 468 agrees frequently (but
apparently always in conjunction with others except in 1 5 ol ayy.
ol eTrra) with 325. 456. See I 6 /cat TronjcravTi rjplv /8ao-iXeiov
teparev/za and >ets r. cuwvas, 2 22 /?aAa>, 3 2 TIJ/O^CTOV, 7 2 TOV Oeov
aWos. See also 9 6 - ll i4 14 .
35. 205. 205 may be directly derived from 35, though other
links may have come between. They stand alone in 3 2 Kvpiov TOV
0eov, Q 18 TWV rpiwv TOVTWV TrX^ywi/. In conjunction with a variety
of uncials, these two cursives agree in over no passages. This
number would be still greater but that i8 14 -2o 9 ( = one page of
205) was not photographed through an error of the photographer.
Hence for the number no we should read 120 or thereabouts.
But dealing with the passages actually given in the Appar. Crit. 35.
205 agree 20 times with each of AN 025 and AtfC 025 ; 3 times
with each of AN and AtfC; 2 times with AC 025; 5 with A;
i with A 046. All these are first class groups, and nearly all the
readings so attested are right. Thus so far 33. 205 exhibit a good
uncial type of text. But 35. 205 show affinities with another
type of readings, a considerable number of which have origin
ated with the recension of 025, which they have followed 28
times, and almost always wrongly.
The influence of this recension of 025 : is seen clearly in
i. 35. 67s(?). io4(?). 205. 468**. 62o(?). 632**. 1957. 2015.
2019 (?). 2023. 2036. 2037. 2038. 2041. 2067, etc. I add here
three examples of the influence of 025 on later MSS. 2 5 e/cTreV-
rw/cas (instead of TreVrwKas) 025. i. 35. 104. 205. 620. 1957.
2015. 2023. 2036. 2037. 2038. 2041. 2067. 2 17 + d,7ro before TOU
jaawa 025 (where the slip vAov in 025 is rightly corrected in
later MSS). i. 35. 6i m e. 104. 205. 468**. 620. 632. 2015. 2023.
2036. 2037. 2038. 2041. 2067. 2 9 p\ao-<f>r}fj,iav IK (>O25) rwv
Aeyoi/Twv. Here this obvious correction is followed by i. 35.
205. 1957. 2015. 2019. 2023. 2036. 2037. 2038. 2041. 2067
Or 8 .
Of groups of the second or third class 35. 205 follow NC
1 35, but not 205, adopts the correction of 046 in 3 12 , i.e. ?}
Some 20 other cursives do likewise.
clxxvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
025, N 025. 046, K 046 once each: K (or K c ) C 025 3 times:
X 025. ii : K 6.
205 presents two conflate readings in i3 14 i4 6 .
Thus group (35. 205) has quite the value of an uncial
superior in the main to 046, but falling short of 025.
10. Origen s so-called text in this edition Or 8 . Whether
the text which accompanies undoubted scholia of Origen is
really the text of Origen, Harnack in his edition (Der Scholien-
kommentar des Origenes zur Apokalypse Johannis, 1911), p. 81,
leaves undecided. He claims that it is a text of the highest
character of the loth century, which " though it may not prove
to be even a rival of C, perhaps even not of A, is at all events
on an equality with X and 025, while it is certainly superior
to the text of 046 and Andreas."
But this text is not deserving of such praise, (a) It has
nothing to do with the text that Origen used. I will compare
the texts in a few passages. In 3 7 Or 8 reads : raSe Aeyet 6
ayyeXos dA^ivos ... 6 dvotywv /cat ovoVis /cXetVet auTYjr /cat /cXet toi/
/cat ouSets dvocyet, t jar) 6 dvotywi/ /cat ovSeis dvotei. Here, as the
Appar. Crit. in loc. shows, the text which Origen used differed
in two respects (see heavy type) in this verse, and agreed in
these with the text of this edition. Or s alone is conflate. It
combines /cat /cAetW . . . dvotyet (the text of A 025) and et ^
6 di/otywv . . . dvotet (the text of 046 and most cursives). Again
Origen > d/covcn; T. c/xoviys /xov /cat always when quoting 3 20 , but not
so Or 8 . This may be an accident. In 5 1 Origen reads eo-wtfev /c.
oiricrOev and also ///:rpo<r#ei /c. OTTKT^CJ/, but Or 8 ZcrwOcv K. e<o$ev.
In 5 5 Origen rightly reads di/otat, but Or 8 6 dvot ywv with 046 and
cursives. In 7 3 Origen reads /XTJTC T. 6dXao-o-av, but Or s /cat T.
OdXao-a-av, and a^pt against Or 8 a^/ots ov. In i 6 Origen (c. Celsum,
viii. 5) has /3ao-iA.etav where Or 8 gives merely a cursive reading.
A multitude of such divergences will be found in Harnack s
work (p. 76 sqq.). In the face of such divergences it is
impossible to identify Or 8 with the text of Origen. 1
But a more important task awaits us. We have to define
the relations of Or 8 and determine its position with reference to
the main texts of J ap . We shall find that this position is not high
amongst the uncials, as Harnack would have it, but low amongst
the cursives. It will not be necessary to bring forward the entire
evidence, but the following will suffice.
(a) Or 9 is full of corrections like 046, or rather in dependence
on it. In i 20 it reads dore/awi/ <m/ with 046. But our author
never uses the attracted relative. After 046 it corrects 2 20 TT)V
1 Naturally some points of agreement are found. Cf. the addition with
K alP in I 8 dpx^] Kal r^Xos and others, for any MS of J a P has of necessity many
points of contact with every other.
ORIGEN S SO-CALLED TEXT clxxvii
ywat/ca . . . f) Xeyovtra into TTJV yw. . . . r) Xeyet, and 3 12 rrjs
Kawfjs lep. y KaTafiaivovcra into T. /catv^s lep. /cara/fotVei. With
cursives only it corrects io 8 XaXovcrav . . . Xeyovo-av into XaXovcra
. . . Xeyovcra. Now this last correction is most probably the
correction of an original slip of the author, but the other
two constructions are Hebraisms in the text and should not
have been altered. 5 10 /Jao-tXeiav /cat tepees into /?ao-tXets K. tepets.
(b) It makes additions to the text with 046 : 2 13 + ra Ipya <rov
/cat : and with K 046 : 2 9 + TO. epya /cat.
(c) In 8 12 we have a conflation of A and 046 : /cat TO rpirov
avrrjs pr) <j>dvy fjfjiepa /cat f] T^txepa JJL-TJ <f>dvy TO rptrov avrfjs, where
046 comes first and A second. Another conflation appears in
4 8 (see (g) below).
(d) A few of the passages where it follows 046 and some
cursives. I 10 <<DVT)V airier (a JJLOV fJLfydXrjv : I 12 /cat + e/cet : 2 10 TraOtlv :
t 8ov + 8rj. 817 does not belong to our author s vocabulary. 2 14 +
/cat before c/>ayetv : 4 4 TOVS Opovovs + TOVS : 4 7 > ws before dV0p<6-
TTOV : 4 11 ^yaaiv + o aytos 5 5 6 ai/otywv (where the text is dvotai) :
9 2 KdfjLivov /cato/xevry?.
(^) Directly or indirectly it follows 025 in the following correc
tions. 2 9 rr)v f3\a.(r<f)r]/jLLcw TOJV XeywTtov : 2 17 Swcrco avrw+^ayetv :
7 9 0^X05 . . . TrpLp/3\.r)fJiVOl.
(/) (9r* w #<?/ unfrequently without any support but that of
cursives. I 16 Seta avrov X a P t/: 2 14 s eStSa^ev TOV BaX. : 3 7 TOV
before Aauei S : 3 18 tva eyxpiory : 5 13 oo-a <TTtv : 6 9 (rc/>payicr/>ivwv
(for ccr^ay/Aei/cov !) : io 4 ypa<#>^? with only 205: n 7 >/cat orav
TX<rco(rtv with 617. 920. 2040 arm 2 3 : I3 7 TroXe/xov Trot^crai.
(^) Thus every step we have taken proves in an increasing
degree the secondary, eclectic and cursive character of the text.
It now remains to define the group of cursives with which it is
most intimately connected. These are 6 1 (xvi cent.) and 69 (xv
cent.). With these cursives it agrees against all other authorities
in the following : 4 6 Kat (for a co-rtv) : 4 8 Kv/cXo0ev ecrw^ev /cat
ew0ej/, where 61. 69 have /cv/cX. c^ofov K. ZorwOev conflations of
/cv/cX. K. cra>0ev Ax etc., and /cv/cX. K. Z&Bev 1957. 2050: ii 5
e/cTTOpevcreTat : I3 6 TroXe/A^o-at (instead of Tronjo-at) : I3 15 aTro/cTai/-
^vat (instead of ti/a . . . aTroKTavOuxrw). In 3 18 with 69 alone
Or 8 reads <j>avrj for (f>avcpuOr].
Again with 61. 69 al 8 Or 8 agrees against all authorities in i 6
/JacrtXctov teparcv/xa : with 046 in I2 16 eveySaXev (where 6 1. 69,
however, have dveXa/Sev) : in 3 9 yvwcrct with N 69 yvway.
From (g) it follows that Or 8 belongs to a very small and late
group. So far as is known as yet, Or 8 61. 69 are the only
members of this group. It could not well have originated earlier
than the gth or loth century. Hence it should be numbered as
cursive 2293.
clxxviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
ii. Some account of the Versions.
(i.) Latin Versions : (a) Tyconius ; (&) Primasius ; (c) Codex
Floriacensis ( = fl) ; (d") Codex Gigas ( = gig) ; (e) Vulgate.
(a) Tyconius. There is no critical edition of this text. Dr.
Prinz has such a text in preparation. The readings in the
Appar. Crit. of the present work are taken from Professor Souter s
"Tyconius Text of the Apocalypse, a partial restoration," J.T.S.,
April 1913.
(b) Primasius ( = Pr). Haussleiter has published a critical
edition of Primasius text in his work, Die lateinische Apocalypse,
1891, pp. 80-175.
(c) Codex Floriacensis ( = fl). Only fragments of this Latin
version made in Africa survive. These amount to 61 verses:
I-2 1 , 8 7 ~9 12 , n 16 -i4 14 , I4 15 -i6 5 . They are preserved in a
palimpsest in the National Library of Paris No. 6400 G
(formerly in the library of Fleury). This palimpsest has been
deciphered and published by Vansittart, Journal of Philology, iv.
(1872) pp. 219-222; Omont, Bibliotheque de Pecole des chartes,
xliv. (1883) pp. 445-451, Belsheim in 1887 ; Berger, Le palimpseste
du Fleury ) 1889; Haussleiter in his edition of Primasius, 1891,
and a recent collation in i^o6 y J.T.S. p. 96 sqq.
Pr and fl render mutual service to each other. They make
the detection of intrusions of vg in one or other of these two
versions an easy task. The canon of criticism here is that where
Pr and fl differ, such variants as agree with vg are to be rejected
and the remainder to be retained as the older text.
(d) Codex gigas ( = gig). This codex of the xiii cent., formerly
in Prague, is now in Stockholm. It contains the whole Bible,
but only Acts and the Apocalypse are Old Latin. This codex
was edited by Belsheim in 1879, but inaccurately. For the
collation used in the present work I am indebted to Professor
White, who has put at my service the fresh collation made by
Dr. Karlsson in 1891 for John Wordsworth, bishop of Salisbury.
It appears to have an Italian character (Gregory).
(e) Vulgate ( = vg). I have used Professor White s Editio
Minor of the Vulgate Novum Testamentum Latine, Clarendon
Press, 1911. In this edition the following seven MSS
vg a. c. d. f. g. h. v) are used .
a Amiatinus (vii-viii) cent. g Sangermanensis (ix).
c Cavensis (ix). h Hubertianus (ix-x).
d Armachanus (812 A.D.). v Valliqellanus (ix).
f Fuldensis (vi). \
ii. Syriac Versions : (a) Philoxenian, (d) Hkrkleian or Syriac
Vulgate.
THE VERSIONS clxxix
(a) Philoxenian ( = s 1 ). This version was discovered and
edited by Professor Gwynn in 1897. He ascribes it on good
grounds to the 6th century. It is perhaps the most valuable of
all the versions, its only rival being arm 4 (see p. clxvi sqq.). It is
remarkable that with the Armenian versions it has many readings
in common with the Latin versions (see Gwynn, p. cxliii), where
these differ from all Greek MSS (though the list is not quite
correct). Thus in 5 4 s 1 arm 1 Pr read XVO-O.L ras cr^paytSas avrov
for j3X.7Tiv avro : in I3 10 S 1 gig Sa eth read ei/ /xaxatpa aTTOKTavOr)-
a-erat : in 9 17 s 1 Tyc Pr gig vg arm 1 - 2< 3 a read rov oro/mro? ; but
this is found in one Greek cursive 35. The presence of a common
Latin (?) element in s 1 arm sa eth calls for investigation. Most of
this element, no doubt, goes back to lost Greek MSS, but there
appears to be a residuum of Latin readings which made their
way into s 1 arm and other versions.
s 1 exhibits conflations in 5 10 6 2 n 11 i8 17 6 CTTI ran/ TrXoiW CTTI
TQTTOV TrXewv.
Gwynn puts forward two hypotheses to account for the form
of the text of s 1 . The translator formed the text for himself,
taking as basis our main exemplar, but modifying it to the
extent of about one-third by the introduction of readings from a
secondary subsidiary exemplar. Otherwise he followed a single
exemplar in which the primary and secondary factors stood to
each other in the ratio of two to one.
(b) The Harkleian ( = s 2 ). This version was made about
6 1 6. As yet no critical edition of the text has appeared. It
preserves very ancient readings lost in most of the Latin versions,
but it is decidedly inferior to s 1 . See above, p. clxviii, and
Gwynn (op. rit.\ pp. Ixxi-lxxv, Ixxxi-lxxxiv.
iii. Armenian Versions. The Armenian version was
admitted into the Armenian canon in the i2th century through
the agency of Nerses. But the Armenian version was known in
the earliest years of the 5th century. There are in reality two
distinct Armenian versions. The first is exhibited in arm 1 , arm 2 ,
arm 3 , arm a , which on the whole form, notwithstanding many
differences, a homogeneous whole over against arm 4 . Arm 1 - 2 - 3
represent the sources of the older and unrevised text, and
arm a the Nersesian i2th century recension, which was based on
arm 1 - 2 - 3 etc. Arm 4 and arm 1 - 2 - 3 represent, according to Cony-
beare, "two independent renderings of a common Greek text."
But this statement needs drastic revision. The Greek source
of arm 4 differed very much from that of arm 1 2 - 3 . Conybeare
ascribes arm 1 - 2 - 3 to a 5th century text and arm 4 to a redaction
of the early 8th.
As in the case of s 1 , so here the Latin element is evident.
In iQ 1 arm 2 this influence is undeniable. Thus, where the
clxxx THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
Greek has o^Aou TroAAov, vg a - c> T have tubarum multarum^ and so
arm 2 . This corruption could only have arisen in Latin, i.e.
tubarum corrupt for turbarum. The same corruption reappears
in i9 6 , where o^Xov -rroAAov is rendered by Pr vg*- c d - f - v by
tubarum (-ae -vg) magnarum (-nae vg).
Conybeare thinks that the early Armenian version " was made
from an old Latin copy, or perhaps from a bilingual Greco-
Latin codex." The latter appears the more probable, but the
question requires thorough investigation, not only in regard to
arm, but also in regard to s 1 bo sa and eth.
It is much to be regretted that Conybeare did not print in
its entirety arm* alongside arm 1 - 2 - 3 - *, seeing that it represents a
more ancient type of Greek text than arm 1 - 2 - s - a . Arm 4 is alone
complete, and yet neither is its text nor even a single variant from
it given in Armenian. Only English renderings of the variants and
of i6 17 -i9 18 are supplied. It is rather strange for a scholar, who
is editing both a text and a translation, to translate two chapters
(i6 17 -i9 18 )from a text which he does not give, and print a text (arm 2 )
of these chapters, which he does not translate save in the case of
its variants. For the text of arm 4 he refers his readers to Dr.
F. Murat s edition of it " in the great university libraries of our
country," or "to the Armenian Convent of St. James in Jerusalem."
Students of the J ap cannot be other than most grateful to
Dr. Conybeare for his edition of the Armenian version, but it
does not bear the character of a final one.
(d) Bohairic Version ( = bo). The Bohairic (or Memphitic)
version has been edited with great care by the Rev. G. Horner.
This editor prints J ap from the Curzon MS 128 with variants from
other MSS. He has provided an English version of this MS,
but unfortunately the variants are not translated. The result is
that the reader who does not know Bohairic cannot get to know
anything beyond MS Curzon 128.
(e) Sahidic Version ( = sa). The same scholar is engaged on
an edition of the Sahidic. He has most generously supplied the
present editor with some hundreds of readings from this frag
mentary version. This version appears to agree more with A
and its allies than do bo eth.
(/) Ethiopic Version ( = eth). Only two uncritical editions of
this version exist that of Platt and that contained in Walton s
Polyglott. I have used the edition of Platt published in 1899,
and only consulted the other version that is printed in Walton s
Polyglott.
Bo sa and eth form one group as we have already seen, but
their exact relations cannot be determined till critical editions
of the three are accessible, and a scholar who has a mastery of
the three languages takes the task in hand.
GENEALOGICAL TABLE OF AUTHORITIES clxxxi
The Archetype of John, completed about 95 A.D.
Edited soon after 95 by an unknown disciple with many dislocations
of the text and interpolations
Correction of text begins in
the 2nd cent, and goes on
steadily but sporadically
towards a normalized form
of text
Most primitive forrn\
(280-450 A.D.) of
text, in which cor
rection has made
some progress
F i F 3 F 4
(3rd to 5th cent.)
A somewhat normalized and
very corrupt form of text
which replaces a whole class
of the author s constructions
by more normal Greek
I
F 2 ( 4 thcent.)
K(4th cent.)
025
(8th cent, recension)
many cursives
2040 no. 2050
(loth cent.)
35- 205
(loth cent.
!
046
8th cent.
Main body of
cursives
1 Possibly these three versions should be represented rather as
but the uncritical text of eth does not easily admit of this arrange
ment.
bo
1
clxxxii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
For the meaning of the above symbols and abbreviations of
MSS and versions, see vol. ii. pp. 227 sqq., 234 sqq. For F 1 - 2 - 3 - 4
(i.e. Papyri Fragments), see vol. ii. pp. 447-451.
Though the above table must in many of its features be
regarded as purely hypothetical, the editor is convinced of its
general accuracy down to Atf F 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 : also that, though C
belongs to the family of A, it has been influenced by that
of X, besides showing signs of frequent correction.
So far the evidence is on the whole clear. Henceforth the
relations of the MSS and versions can only be partially and,
until several important questions are investigated, provisionally
represented. 025 and 046 are certainly descendants of A
and K, or of the families of which these are representatives ;
for 025. 046 preserve primitive readings lost in Atf. Thus in
4 4 eVi r. Opovovs ( + TOVS 046) ei/coo-t reWapas Trpecr/^irrepovs is
undoubtedly right where AN are wrong and C is defective ; for
s 1 - 2 arm 2 - 3 - 4 -" Pr gig vg bo eth here support 025. 046. In 6 8
6 OavaTos of 025. 046 is right, where A is corrupt and Ctf wrong.
In 9 10 ovpas 6/xoias (TKop7TLOL<s of 025. 046 is again right against
the greater uncials, and also in iQ 18 TWI/ /<a^/x,eVwv CTT cumov.
This fact cannot be represented in the above table.
Further, a study of 025. 046 shows that these two MSS are
connected ; for they have 36 (more or less) readings in common
against AtfC. This connection is accordingly represented in the
above table. But 025 and 046 are related differently to A and
K. 025 is more closely associated with the text of A, and 046
with that of X. Moreover, 025 shows signs of a deliberate recen
sion, whereas 046 exhibits rather signs of a progressive correction.
But these MSS have other connections. Thus in i4 18 025 unites
with C in reading Kpavyfj (a wrong reading) against <j>wf) of
AS 046 : in i4 13 in reading eV Xpto-rw against kv Kvptw of all other
MSS. This connection is represented in the above table.
Certain cursives, i.e. 35. 205. 2040 (ii 8 -2o n only). 2050
preserve some original readings lost wholly in N 025. 046
(see clxxiii sqq.). These cursives are in many respects as valuable
as the later uncials, while in a few they are superior.
Of the remaining cursives a considerable number follow for
the most part 025, while the main body appears to follow 046.
But the exact differentiation of these cursives has not yet been
investigated.
Turning from the Greek MSS to the versions, we enter on a
more difficult task. Of the versions, Tyc sa eth and s 2 have not
yet been critically edited. All the materials for such a critical
edition of bo are given in Homer s edition of the Bohairic N.T.,
but they are accessible only to Coptic scholars. The internal
relations of the Latin versions Tyc Pr fl gig which are still un-
METHODS OF INTERPRETATION clxxxiii
determined, and likewise the influence of the Latin versions (or of
the Greek MSS from which a large part of this peculiar (?) Latin
element may be derived) on arm s 1 bo eth form attractive
problems for future researchers.
Since we know that the Latin versions (or their Greek pro
genitors) exercised some influence on arm and s 1 , I have placed
these versions in close connection on the above table. But the
Latin influence on bo eth is not represented, nor is s 2 even men
tioned.
XV.
THE METHODS OF INTERPRETATION ADOPTED IN
THIS COMMENTARY.
In my Studies in the Apocalypse I have given a short history of
the interpretation of the Apocalypse, dealing with each method
as it arose, its contribution to the elucidation of our author, its
developments, or, it may be, its final condemnation and rejection
at the bar of criticism. Here there is no historical treatment of
the subject, but merely an enumeration of the methods, which
have stood the test of experience and been found necessary for
the interpretation of the Apocalypse.
i. The Contemporary- Historical Method. This method
rightly presupposes that the visions of our author relate to con
temporary events and to future events so far as they arise out of
them. The real historical horizons of the book were early lost.
Yet, even so, traces of the Contemporary-Historical Method still
persist in Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Victorinus of Pettau. But
with the rise of the Spiritualizing Method in Alexandria this
true method was driven from the field and lost to use till it was
revived by the Roman and non-Roman Christian scholars of
the i yth century. These scholars established as an assured
result that the Apocalypse was originally directed against Rome.
The Apocalypse is not to be treated as an allegory, but to be
interpreted in reference to definite concrete kingdoms, powers,
events, and expectations. But, though the visions of our author
related to contemporary events, they are not limited to these.
For, as I have said in vol. ii. 86, " no great prophecy receives its
full and final fulfilment in any single event or series of events.
In fact, it may not be fulfilled at all in regard to the object against
which it was primarily delivered by the prophet or seer. But if it
is the expression of T great moral and spiritual truth, it will of a
surety be fulfilled at sundry times and in divers manners and in
varying degrees of completeness " in the history of the world.
2. The Eschatological Method. But the Apocalypse deals
clxxxiv THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
not only with contemporary events but also with future events.
So far as these future events arise naturally out of contemporary
events their elucidation can to a certain extent be brought under
i. But the last things depicted by our author contain a
prophetic element. These in a certain sense arise out of the
past and yet are inexplicable from it. The future events depicted
in the Apocalypse are not to be treated symbolically or allegori-
cally (save in exceptional cases), but as definite concrete events.
3. The Chiliastic Interpretation. Strictly speaking, Chiliasru
forms a subdivision of Eschatology. But in point of fact there
are interpreters who, while applying the Eschatological Method
rightly on the whole, treat everything relating to Chiliasm in
our author purely symbolically. But the prophecy of the
Millennium in chap. xx. must be taken literally, as it was by
Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Victorinus of Pettau. These writers
were acquainted with the original interpretation of this chapter.
But this interpretation was soon displaced by the spiritualizing
methods of Alexandria. Tyconius, adopting these methods,
rejected the literal interpretation of chap, xx., treated the Millen
nium as the period between the first and second advents of
Christ. Jerome and Augustine followed in the footsteps of
Tyconius, and a realistic eschatology was crushed out of existence
in the Church for full 800 years. The Eschatological Method,
including Chiliasm, was revived by Joachim of Floris (arc.
1200 A.D.), but the latter element was again abandoned for some
centuries and declared heretical by the Augsburg and Helvetic
Confessions. In England, where these Confessions were without
authority, Chiliasm was revived by Mede, Sir Isaac Newton, and
Whiston.
4*. The Philological Method in its earlier form. This
method was resorted to in the i6th cent, as a counsel of
despair. The Church and World-Historical Methods which
originated in the i4th cent, as well as the Recapitulation Method
of Victorinus had, combined with other more reasonable
methods, been applied to the Apocalypse by numberless scholars,
with the result that the best interpreters of the i6th cent,
confessed that the Apocalypse remained more than ever the
Seven-sealed Book.
But the value of the Philological Method was only in part
recognized. The chief philological problems were either not
recognized at all or only in part, and so this method failed to
make the indispensable contribution that could be made by it
and by it alone, and that could put an end to the wild vagaries
of the Literary Critical School which had its founder in Grotius.
To this method I will return after 9 under the heading 4 b .
5. The Literary- Critical Method. It the methods just
METHODS OF INTERPRETATION clxxxv
mentioned were the only valid methods, and if at the same time
the absolute unity of the Apocalypse were assumed as given or
proved, then large sections of it would have to be surrendered as
unsolved and unsolvable. But there is no such impasse. ILI the
Apocalypse there is no such rigid unity of authorship and con
sistency of detail as has been constantly assumed. A new
method of interpretation was initiated by Grotius the Literary-
Critical. Grotius, observing that there were conflicting elements
alike in tradition and within the text itself, conjectured that the
Apocalypse was composed of several visions written down at
different times and in different places, some before and some after
the destruction of Jerusalem. This method finally gave birth to
three different hypotheses, each of the three possessing some
element of truth, but especially the third. These hypotheses are :
(a) The Redactional-Hypothesis.
(t>) The Sources-Hypothesis.
(c) The Fragmentary-Hypothesis.
(a) The Redactional-Hypothesis. Many interpreters have
availed themselves of this hypothesis, but a thorough study of
John s style and diction makes it impossible to recognize the
Apocalypse as the result of the work of a series of successive
editors, such as we recognize in the Ascension of Isaiah. That
the Apocalypse suffered one such redaction appears to the present
writer to be a hypothesis necessarily postulated by the facts ; see
vol. i. pp. 1-lv, vol. ii. pp. 144-154.
(b) The Sources- Hypothesis. This theory assumes a series of
independent sources connected more or less loosely together as
i Enoch. That this theory can be established to a limited
extent, I have sought to show in 7 1 3 7 4 8 n 1 13 12. 13. 17. 18
(see pp. Ixii-lxv). Some of these sources are purely Jewish,
or Jewish-Christian in origin, and one at least of them i.e.
chap. 12 is derived ultimately from a heathen expectation of
a World Redeemer (see vol. i. 310-314). But this theory,
which breaks up the entire book into various sources, cannot
explain the relative unity of the work as a whole nay more,
a unity which might be described as absolute in respect to its
purpose steadily maintained from the beginning to the close,
its growing thought and dramatic development, its progressive
crises, and its diction and style, which are unique in all Greek
literature.
(c) Fragmentary- Hypothesis. From the above two forms of
the Literary-Critical Method we turn to its third and most satis
factory form the Pigmentary-Hypothesis a most unhappy
designation. This hypothesis presupposes an undoubted unity
of authorship, though the author has from time to time drawn
clxxxvi THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
on foreign sources (as we have pointed out in the preceding
section), and has not always assimilated these fragmentary
elements in all their details to their new contexts.
6. Traditional - Historical Method. This method was
applied first by Gunkel to the Apocalypse, and subsequently by
many other scholars in an extravagant degree. Each new
apocalypse is to some extent a reproduction and reinterpretation
of traditional material whether in the form of figures, symbols,
or doctrines. Hence it is necessary to distinguish between the
original meaning of a borrowed symbol or doctrine and the new
turn given to it by our author. This is done in the introduction
to each chapter in this Commentary. In nearly every case our
author has transformed or glorified the borrowed material.
.Thus the sealing in 7 1 8 , which in its Jewish source carried with
it the thought of security from physical evil, is a pledge of God s
protection from spiritual evil. The doctrine of the Antichrist as
it appears in our author is unique : see vol. ii. 76-87, where the
various stages of the development of this idea are given.
Occasionally details in the borrowed material are inapplicable to
our author s purpose (see notes on i2 13 16 i8 4 ), or possibly
unintelligible to him. In these cases he omits all reference to
such details in his interpretation of the source of which he has
availed himself. But it is probable that these defects and
inconsistencies would have been removed by our author if he
had had the opportunity of revising his book.
7. Religious- Historical Method. There are certain state
ments and doctrines in the Apocalypse which could not have
been written first hand by a Christian. These are in some cases
of Jewish origin, but others are ultimately derived from Baby
lonian, Egyptian, or Greek sources; see vol. i. 121-123 on the
Cherubim, vol. i. 310-314 on the doctrine of a World-Redeemer.
The order of the twelve precious stones, see vol. ii. 165-169, points
to our author s knowledge of the heathen conception of the
City of the Gods and of contemporary astronomy, and his
deliberate deviation from them.
8. Philosophical Method. Apocalyptic is a philosophy of
history and religion. The Seer seeks to get behind the surface
and penetrate to the essence of events, the spiritual motives and
purposes that underlay and gave them their real significance.
Hence apocalyptic takes within its purview not only the present
and the last things, but all things past, present, and to come.
Apocalyptic and not Greek philosophy was the first to grasp the
great idea that all history, alike human, cosmological, and
spiritual, is a unity a unity following naturally as a corollary of
the unity of God. And yet serious N.T. scholars of the present day
have stated that apocalyptic has only to deal with the last things !
BIBLIOGRAPHY clxxxvii
9. Psychological Method. Are the visions in the Apocalypse
the genuine results of spiritual experience? That our author
speaks from actual spiritual experience no serious student of to-day
has any doubt. The only question that calls for solution is the
extent to which such experience underlies the visions of the
Apocalypse. On pp. ciii-cix the present writer has made an
attempt to discuss this question.
4 b . The Philological Method in its later form. This method
has already been dealt with in the order of its historical appear
ance under 4* above. But its value in determining some of the
chief questions of the Apocalypse has never yet been appreciated.
It has therefore been all but wholly neglected, and no writer has
made a really serious study of the style and diction of our
author save Bousset, and that only in a minor degree. Hence
on every hand individual verses and combinations of verses
have been unjustifiably rejected as non-Johannine, and others
just as unjustifiably received as Johannine. After working for
years on the Apocalypse under the guidance of all the above
methods, I came at last to recognize that no certain conclusion
could be reached on many of the vexed problems of the book
till I had made a thorough study of John s grammar. On pp.
cxvii-clix I have given the results of a study extending over
many years. In not a few respects it is revolutionary. To give
a few examples. As regards John s Greek it shows that con
structions (such as To3 dyye Aw ro> eV E^eW), and so in the other
six passages), which every modern German scholar has rejected,
were exactly the constructions which a complete study of John s
grammar required. Next, this study revolutionizes the translation
of the Apocalypse. Frequently it is not the Greek but the
Hebrew in the mind of the writer that has to be translated.
Thirdly, as regards large sections which have been rejected by
most modern scholars as non-Johannine, this grammar shows
that such sections are essentially Johannine and vice versa.
XVI.
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 1
Editions. Greek Commentaries. The Apocalypse does not
owe much to Greek expositors. The earliest were probably the
best. Fragmentary expositions are preserved in Justin and Irenaeus
1 This bibliography abbreviated as much as possible. For fuller biblio
graphies in various directions the reader should consult Liicke, Einl. in d.
O/enbarung*, 518 sqq., 952 sqq. ; Bousset, Offenbarung Johannis, 1906, pp.
48-118; Holtzmann-Bauer s Hand-Co?nmentar, \v. 380-390; Walch, Bibl.
clxxxviii THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
which are referred to by Jerome, De vir. illustr. ii. g. The two
earliest complete Commentaries by Melito (cf. Eus. H.E. iv.
26. 2) and Hippolytus (Jerome, op. cit. 61) are lost. Clement of
Alexandria (Eus. H.E vi. 14. i) commented on the Apocalypse,
and Origen recorded his intention of so doing, In Matt. 49
(Lommatzsch, iv. 307). That his Scholia on the Apoc. have
been preserved is highly probable : see p. clxxvi. Commen
tary by Oecumenius (discovered by Diekampf; see Sitzungs-
berichte der Kon. preuss. Akad. der Wiss., 1901, 1046 sqq.).
The Commentary ascribed by Cramer (Catena, viii. p. vi, 497-
582) to Oecumenius is, according to Diekampf, a compendium
of Andreas (ed. Sylburg, 1596; Migne, P.G. cvi) and Arethas
(Cramer s Catena, viii. 171-496; Migne, P.G. cvi).
Latin Commentaries. Victorinus (iii cent.). This Commen
tary appears in a shorter and in a longer form. For the latter
see Migne, P.L. v. Haussleiter is engaged on a critical edition.
Tyconius (iv-v cent. See Souter in J. T.S. xiv. 338 sqq. A critical
edition is promised by Haussleiter) ; Primasius (vi cent., ed. by
Haussleiter, Die Lateinische Apocalypse, 1891); Apringius (vi
cent. ed. by Fe rotm, Paris, 1900). Bede, Ansbertus, Beatus,
Hayino, and others carried on the tradition of the Church in
the West.
There were some Syriac Commentaries, the most important
of which is that of Barsalibi (see Gwynn in Hermathena, vi-vii).
In the mediaeval period the most important commentator
was Joachim, abbott of Floris, 1195 ( e< ^- Venice, 1519, 1527).
Commentaries since the Reformation. Since the Reformation
the number of writers on the Apocalypse is almost beyond count.
Only a few of the chief names can be given. Erasmus, Annota-
tiones in N.T., 1516; Bibliander, Comment, in Apoc., 1549; Bui-
linger, In Apoc. Condones, 1557; Ribeira, In sacram b. loannis
. . . Apoc. Commentarius, Lyons, 1593; Pereyra, Disputationes
selectissimae super libro Apocalypsis, Venice, 1607 ; Salmeron, In
Johannis Apoc. Praeludia, 1614; Alcasar, Vestigatio arcani sensus
in Apoc., Lyons, 1618 ; Juan Mariana, Scholia in . . . N.T., 1619 ;
Brightman, Revelation of St. John, 1616; Cornelius a Lapide,
Comm. in Apoc., 1627; Mede, Clavis Apocalypseos, Cambridge,
1627; Grotius, Annotationes, 1644; Hammond, Paraphrase and
Annotations upon the N.T., 1653 ; Coccejus, Cogitationes in Apoc.,
1673; Marckius, In Apoc. . . . Commentarius, Amsterdam,
1689; Vitringa, AvaKpurts Apocalypsios*, 1719; I. Newton,
Theol. selecta, iv. 760 sqq. ; Stosch, Catalogus rariorum in Apoc. Joannis
Commentariorum ; Elliott, Horae Apocalypticac, iv. 275-528. In my
Lectures on the Apocalypse, pp. 1-78, I have combined a bibliography and a
history of the interpretation of the Apocalypse, as Bousset and Holtzmann-
Bauer have done, though on a smaller scale than Bousset.
BIBLIOGRAPHY clxxxix
Observations upon . . . the Apoc., 1732; Bengal, Offenbarung
Johannis, 1740; Wetstein, N.T. Graecum, 2 vols., 1751-52,
Amsterdam; Eichhorn, Commentarius in Apoc., Gottingen, 1791.
Amongst the Commentaries of the nineteenth century should be
mentioned : Vogel, Commentationes vii. de Apocalypsi, Erlangen,
T8n-i6; H. Ewald, Comm. in Apoc. Joannis, 1828, die Johan-
neischen Schriften, Gottingen, 1862; Liicke, see Studies, below;
Ziillig, Offenbarung Johannis, Stuttgart, 1834-40; M. Stuart,
Comm. on the Apoc?, 1845 ; De Wette, Erklarung der Offenbarung,
1848; Hengstenberg, Die Offenbarung . . . erldutert, Berlin,
1849-51; Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae*, 4 vols., 1851; Ebrard,
Die Offenbarung Johannis, 1853; G. Volkmar, Commentar zur
Offenbarung, Zurich, 1862 ; C. Wordsworth, New Testament, vol.
ii., London, 1864 ; Kliefoth, Offenbarung des Johannis, Leipzig,
1874; C. J. Vaughan, Revelation of St. John, London, 1870;
J. C. A. Hofmann, Offenb. Johannis, 1874 ; A. Bisping, Erklarung
der Apoc., Miinster, 1876; C. H. A. Burger, Offenb. Johannis,
J&77; J. P- Lange, BibelwerW, 1878; E. Reuss, Apocalypse,
Paris, 1878; W. Lee, Revelation of St, John, London, 1881 ;
Diisterdieck, Offenb. Johannis*, Gottingen, 1887; W. Milligan,
Book of Revelation, London, 1889; Simcox, Revelation of St. John,
Cambridge, 1893; Kiibel, Offenbarung Johannis, Munich, 1893;
Trench, Comm. on the Epistles to the Seven Churches 1 , 1897;
Bousset, Offenbarung Johannis, Gottingen, 1896; new ed. 1906;
Benson, The Apocalypse, London. 1900; C. A. Scott, Revelation
(Century Bible}, Edinburgh, 1902; Crampon, E Apocalypse de S.
Jean, Tournai, 1904; Th. Calmes, Paris, 1905; H. B. Swete,
Apocalypse of St. John*, London, 1907 ; H. P. Forbes, New York,
1907 ; Hort, Apoc. of St. John, i.-iii., London, 1908 ; Holtzmann-
Bauer, Offenbarung des Johannis* (Hand- Comm.), Tubingen, 1908 ;
J. M. S. Baljon, Openbaring van Johannes, Utrecht, 1908 ;
Moffatt, Revelation of St. John (Expositor s Gk. Test.), London,
1910; E. C. S. Gibson, Revelation of St. John, London, 1910;
A. Ramsay (Westminster N.T.), 1910; Diobouniotis und
Harnack, Der Scholien-Kommentar des Origenes zur Apokalypse
Johannis, Leipzig, 1911 ; J. T. Dean, Edinburgh, 1915.
Studies, Exegetical and Critical. Liicke, Versuch einer voll-
stdndigen Einleitung in die Offenbarung Johannis 2 , Bonn, 1852;
F. Bleek, VorUsungen uber d. Apocalypse, Berlin, 1859; F. D.
Maurice, Lectures on the Apocalypse, Cambridge, 1861 ; Milligan,
Discussions on the Apocalypse, London, 1893 ; Selwyn, The Chris
tian Prophets and the Prophetic Apocalypse, London, 1900 ; F. C.
Porter (Hastings D.B. iv. 239-266), 1902 : Messages of the Apoc
alyptical Writers (pp. 169-294), London, 1905 ; W. R. Ramsay,
Letters to the Seven Churches, London, 1904; E. A. Abbott,
Notes on N.T. Criticism, 1907, pp. 75-114, Johannint Grammar
CXC THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN
1906 valuable also for the student of the Apocalypse;
Charles, Studies in the Apocalypse*, 1915.
Studies mainly Critical. These are frequently quoted in my
Commentary simply under the author s name with page. Volter,
Enstehung der Apokalypse (designated as " Volter i." in my Com
mentary), Freiburg, 1885 ; Offenbarung Johannis (as "Volter ii."
in my Commentary), Tubingen, 1886; Das Problem der Apok
alypse (as "Volter iii."), Freiburg and Leipzig, 1893 ; Offenbarung
Johannis (as "Volter iv."), Strassburg, 1904; Vischer, Offen
barung Johannis , Leipzig, 1886; Weyland, De Apokalypse van
Johannes, Groningen, 1888; Schoen, UOrigine de V Apocalypse,
Paris, 1887; Spitta, Offenbarung des Johannes , Halle, 1889;
Erbes, Offenbarung Johannis , Gotha, 1891; Schmidt, Die Kom-
position der Offenbarung Johannis -, Freiburg, 1891 ; Bousset, Zur
Textkritik der Apokalypse, (Textkritische Studien zum N.T.),
Leipzig, 1894; Rauch, Offenbarung des Johannes, Haarlem, 1894;
Hirscht, Die Apokalypse und ihre neueste Kritik, Leipzig, 1895;
J. Weiss, Offenbarung des Johannes, Gottingen, 1904; Well-
hausen, Analyse der Offenbarung Johannis, Berlin, 1907.
Texts. B. Weiss, Die Johannes- Apokalypse (Textkritische
Untersuchungen und Textherstellung), Leipzig, 1891, 2nd ed.
1902; Souter, N.T. Grace, 1910; Moffatt (Expositors Greek
Testament), 1910; Von Soden, 1914. Von Soden s is the least
satisfactory of modern texts so far as the Apocalypse is con
cerned. Notwithstanding all the work done in recent years on
the text of the Apocalypse, that of Westcott and Hort remains
the best, though the text presupposed by Bousset is in some of
its details superior. Of these scholars, Westcott and Hort alone
have recognized that the right text in 2 L 8 - 18 3 L 7 - u is TW dyyeAw
TO), though among the uncials A has preserved it only in three
passages and C in one. Souter follows A in 2 1 - 8 but not in 2 18 .
Von Soden has rejected the right reading in the seven passages,
and branded it (p. 2070) as a " Willkiirlichkeit " on the part
of the scribe of A. A knowledge of John s grammar would
have made the adoption of r<3 dyye A.a> T^S ev . . . eK/c
impossible on the part of any editor.
Versions. See vol. i. pp. clxvi-clxxi, vol. ii. 234 sq.
SOME OF THE ABBREVATIONS USED IN THIS WORK.
Versions. 1
Aq. or a .... Version of Aquila or a.
A.V Authorized Version.
LXX or o . . . . Septuagint.
1 For those used in the Greek text see vol. ii. 227-235.
ABBREVIATIONS CXCl
R.V ....... Revised Version.
Symm. or a- . . . Symmachus.
Theod. or . . . Theodotion.
Abbott, Gram. . . Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 1906.
,, Voc. ... Johannine Vocabulary, 1905.
Blass, Gram. . . . Blass, Grammar of N.T. Greek (transl.
by Thackeray), 1898.
D.A.C. ..... Hastings Dictionary of the Apostolic
Church.
D.B. ..... Hastings Dictionary of the Bible.
J ....... The Fourth Gospel.
1.2.3} ..... Johannine Epistles.
J ap ...... The Apocalypse.
K.A.T? .... Schrader s Die Keilinschriften und das
alte Testament, edited and rewritten by
H. Zimmern and H. Winckler, 1903.
M.-W. s Gram. . . Moulton s edition of Winer, 1882.
Moulton, Gram. . . Moulton s Grammar of N.T. Greek**,
vol. i., 1906.
MT ..... . . Massoretic Text.
N.T ....... New Testament.
O.T ....... Old Testament.
Robertson, Gram. . Robertson, Grammar of the Greek of the
N.T., 1914.
S.B.E ...... Sacred Books of the East (edited by Max
Miiller), Oxford.
Thackeray, Gram. . Thackeray, Grammar of the O.T. in
Greek, vol. i., 1909.
T.L.Z. ..... Theologische Literaturzeitung.
Weber 2 ..... Weber s Judische Theologie, 1897.
WH ..... Westcott and Hort, The N.T. in Greek.
Volter i ...... See above under the Section " Studies
mainly Critical."
,, ,,
Z.A.T.W. . . . . Zeitschrift fiir die Alttestamentliche Wis
senschaft.
Z.f.N. T.W. ... Preuschen s Zeitschrift fiir die Neutesta-
mentliche Wissenschaft.
Z.K. W. or Z.K. W.L. Zeitschrift^ fiir Kirchliche Wissenschaft
und Kirchliches Leben.
Z.W.T. ..... Zeitschrift fiir Wissenschaftliche Theologie.
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA.
VOLUME I.
Page 215, line 22 ab imo. After "unexampled" add "except
perhaps in Aq. Ex. xxiv. 16."
Page 224, footnote, line u. After "xvi. 19 " add " (an inter
polation)," and see the emended form of this note in vol. i.
Introd. p. clix ad init.
Page 294. Paragraph beginning " It is noteworthy," etc., was
written before I recognized that xvi. 5 b -y should be restored after
xix. 4.
Page 297, line 8. Delete "A slip for the dative." See also
text in vol. ii. 306 : 415, 416 footnote.
cxcil
THE REVELATION
OF ST. JOHN.
CHAPTER I.
i. The Contents and Authorship of this Chapter.
THE Superscription (i. 1-3) falls into three parts, each part of
which in turn is formed of three elements. The first sets forth
the source of the Apocalypse, the second its contents, and the
third the blessedness of those who receive and fulfil its teachings.
As regards the source it was God by whom the Apocalypse was
given to Christ : it was Christ who sent His angel and signified
it to John : it was John who bare witness to it as from God and
Christ. As for its contents these were the word of God and
the truth attested by Christ, which were embodied in the visions
which John had seen. As for the blessedness that attends on
its reception this blessedness is to be the portion of those that
read it in the Churches, of those that hear, and of those that
observe it.
After the Superscription follows the Introduction (i. 4-8),
which is composed of three stanzas of three lines each. In these
John salutes the Seven Churches, invoking upon them grace and
peace from God, which is and which was and which is to come, 1
and from Jesus Christ. Of these two Divine Beings he proceeds
to speak more definitely of Christ in 5-7 and of God in 8.
Christ is the faithful witness, the sovereign of the dead, the ruler
of those that rule the living. To Him is to be ascribed glory
and power, inasmuch as loving us with an everlasting love He
hath redeemed us from our sins and endowed us with the offices
of kingship and priesthood unto God (i. 4-6), and will speedily
come in the clouds whose advent His crucifiers will witness to
their cost and the heathen-hearted nations with fear and anguish.
Of God our author does not speak in the third person, but intro-
1 The clause that follows relating to the seven spirits is an interpolation
(see note in loc.).
VOL. I. I
2 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [l. 2.
duces the Supreme Being as declaring : I am the Alpha and the
Omega the Lord of the past, the present and the future.
In i. 9-20 we have the Seer s call by the Son of Man and his
vision of the Son of Man, standing in the midst of seven golden
candlesticks and holding seven stars, risen and glorified. By
Him the Seer is hidden to write what he saw and to send it to
the Seven Churches. Any paraphrase of this sublime descrip
tion of the Son of Man would only hopelessly weaken it. It
may, however, be observed that it contains the attributes of the
Ancient of Days and of one like a Son of Man in Daniel (vii.
9, 13) as well as of the nameless angel in Dan. x. 5-6, and that
nearly every phrase in this description of the Son of Man (13-16)
and of His words (i7 c -2o) recurs in ii.-iii. to which it forms
an introduction, just as x. does to xi. 1-13.
In I7 c -i8 the Son of Man declares who He is (even as God
does in 8), i.e. the First and the Last, He that liveth and was
dead and had thereby become the holder of the keys of death.
As such He bids the Seer afresh to write what he saw, and to
learn the mystery that the seven candlesticks were the Seven
Churches and the seven stars the heavenly ideals of the Seven
Churches, which could only be realized through Him.
As regards the authorship of this chapter, whilst there is no
evidence either in point of idiom or diction against its being
from the hand of John the Seer, there is, as I have shown in the
summary in 2, the most positive evidence for its derivation
from him.
2. Diction and Idiom.
There can be no question as to the authorship of this chapter.
Alike in its diction and its idiom it is from the hand of John
the Seer.
(a) Diction. This subject is dealt with in detail in the notes.
But the results can be shortly summarized and some of the chief
parallelisms in phraseology within the rest of the Book empha
sized. But first of all it is to be observed that whereas none of
the diction and phraseology is against our author s use, much of
it is specifically Johannine and all of it in keeping with his use.
I. 1. &iai TOIS SouXois auroG, a Set yekeaOcu Iv rdxei. This
clause recurs as a whole in xxii. 6 and in part in iv. i. fctwu/u
is characteristic of our author in its apocalyptic sense.
TW SouXw auroG iwayi/Tji,. Cf. xi. 18, rots SouAots a-ov r.
2. e>apTupT]aei . Cf. xxii. 16, 18, 20.
T. \6yov T. OeoG KCU T. fxaprupiai irjaoG. Cf. i. 9, vi. 9, xii. 1 1
(T. Xoyov T. /xaprvpcas), 17 (T, (taprvpiav Ir/Q-QV only ancl in xix. 10),
xx. 4,
I. 2.] DICTION AND IDIOM 3
3. p-cucdptos . . . T. Xoyous T. Trpo<|>Y)Teias Kal TTjpoGrrcs. Cf.
xxii. 7, 10. We have here the first of the seven beatitudes in
this Book : cf. xiv. 13, xvi. 15, xix. 9, xx. 6, xxii. 7, 14.
6 yap Kcupos eyyus. Cf. xxii. IO.
5. 6 fxdprus 6 marcs. Cf. ii. 13, iii. 14-
6. eTrou)(Ti> T^jJids |3a<riXeiaj>, tepeis. Cf. V. IO.
els TOUS aiwvas [T. aiucooi/J. Cf. i. 1 8, iv. 9, 10, v. 13, vii. 12,
x. 6, etc. But in Gospel and i and 2 John always ets TOP aioW.
8. TO A Kal TO Q . . . 6 a>y KCLI 6 rjk Kal 6 epxc/xe^os, 6 irai -
TOKparup. Cf. i. 8, iv. 8, xi. 17, xvi. 5, xxi. 6, xxii. 13.
Ku pios 6 6e6s ... 6 irarroKpaTUp. Cf. iv. 8, xi. 17, XV. 3,
xvi. 7, 14, xix. 6, 15, xxi. 22. naj/To/cparwp occurs eight times
in the rest of the Apocalypse and not once elsewhere in the N.T.
except in an O.T. quotation (2 Cor. vi. 18).
10. eyci/ojxiqi iv ir^eujxaTi. Cf. iv. 2.
12. jSXe ireii . Our author uses this verb twice in i., once in
iii. and thirteen times in the rest of the book, and never in the
aorist ; for in xxii. 8 A is to be followed.
13. opuoi/ uiw d^pwirou. Only elsewhere in xiv. 14, in this
form in all literature.
eySeSujJievov TroSi^pir) Kal TTpiea)<T|j.ei>ov irpos TOIS fxaoTOis j^wi tji
Xpuaai . Cf. XV. 6.
14. ot 6(|)0aXjaol aurou a>s 4>X6 irupos. Cf. ii. 1 8, xix. 12.
15. r\ <j)coi-rj aurou a>s (j)W T) uSdrcui iroXXaii . Cf. xiv. 2, xix. 6.
16. r\ ovj/is aurou a>s 6 rjXios. Cf. x. i.
e\<t)v CK TTJ Se^ia x l P* L a " TO J darepas lirrd. Cf. ii. I, iii. I.
CK TOU (TTOfiaTOS auTou pojji(}>aia SIOTOJAOS o^eia. Cf. ii. 1 3
17. 6 irpwTos Kal 6 eaxaros. Cf. ii. 8, xxii. 13.
19. ou^. Here used (probably owing to its fourfold occur
rence in ii.-iii.) of logical appeal, never of historical transition
as in the Fourth Gospel: cf. ii. 5, 16, iii. 3, 19. In the later
chapters our author uses Sia TOVTO instead : cf. vii. 15, xii. 32
[xviii. 8]. Thus this entire chapter is most closely connected
by its distinctively Johannine phraseology with ii.-vi., x.-xi.,
xiv. -xvi., xix.-xxii. Let us now turn to the most striking idioms
in this chapter.
(b) Idiom. These are dealt with fully in the notes. But we
shall mention a sufficient number to confirm beyond question
the conclusion- that this chapter comes from the hand of our
author.
I. 4. diro 6 &v KCU 6 r\v Kal 6 epxofAeyos. On this wholly
abnormal construction with (XTTO, which is nevertheless quite
intelligible in our author and yet not in any other, see note in loc.
As regards 6 o>v . . . /^ A o/xcvos this title recurs wholly or in part
in i. 8, iv. 8, xi. 17, xvi. 5.
0. Irjaou XpioroG, 6 pdpTu? TTIQTOS, This anomalous con*
4 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [l. 3.
struction of the nominative in apposition to an oblique case
recurs ii. 13, 20, iii. 12, vii. 4, viii. 9, ix. 14, xiv. 12, 14, xx. 2.
That this solecism is characteristic of our author cannot be
denied, since it occurs so frequently, whereas it is exceptional in
the KotvrJ and the LXX, in the latter of which it is clearly, as in
our author, a Hebraism.
5-6. TW ayoLTTuvri . . . KCU eiroiTjo-ei . This Hebraism recurs
frequently in our author: cf. i. 18, ii. 2, 9, 20, iii. 9, vii. 14, xiv.
2-3, xv. 3.
10. $v>vf\v . . . ws adXTriyyos Xeyoucnjs. Here we should
expect Xeyouo-ai/. But cf. iv. i.
13. OJAOIOI/ uloi> drOpanrou. Cf. xiv. 14 for this otherwise
unexampled construction. See Additional Note, p. 36.
16. exwy = etxe or e xet as elsewhere in our author : cf. x. 2,
xii. 2, XXI. 12, 14. Moreover, e/CTropevo^e^r; is used as e^tTropet ero
in this same verse. In our author these are Hebraisms, though
this usage is found occasionally in the Koivrj. Again, the
Hebraism 17 oi/^s avrov o>? 6 ^/Xios <^aiVct though not found else
where in this Book, is closely akin to our author s many
Hebraisms, especially in connection with o>s = 3. See p. 36.
20. TOLS eirrd Xux^as this is a slip for the genitive. There
are other analogous slips in our author, which are best explained
as due to his not having had an opportunity to revise his text.
Thus this chapter is connected by Johannine idioms with ii.-
iv., vii.-xii., xiv.-xvi., xx.-xxi. There can be no doubt as to the
genuineness of the text.
3. Order of Words.
The order is Semitic. Thus the verb is before the subject
and object once, before the subject twice, before the object five
times. It stands at the beginning of the clause or sentence
followed by adverbial phrases eleven times. On the other hand,
the verb follows the subject (9) once, the object (a pronoun)
once. The participle, where it stands for a finite verb, occurs
once at the close of a clause (i6 b ). These facts are in keeping
with our author s style.
The word cbroKaXv^is is not used as the title of any work
before the time of our Apocalypse, though it is used by St. Paul
exactly in the same sense of minor revelations : cf. i Cor. xiv.
26. So far as the word itself goes it is found in Sir. xi. 27, xxii.
22 (fjLva-rrjpiov cbroKaXui/ eoos), xlii. I, while aTTOKaXvTrreij/ is found in
Amos iii, 7, a7roKaAvi//r; TrcuSeiav TT/JOS TOVS SouXovs avrov TOVS
I. 1-3.] THE SUPERSCRIPTION 5
7rpo</>r/ras, in the sense of a " revealing " of something hidden.
In the second passage we have an approach to the use of the
word in our text. In Theodotion s rendering of Daniel the
verb dTTo/caAmrreiv is used exactly in the sense of the noun
ciTroKdAui/ris in the title: cf. ii. 19, 22, 28, 29, 30, 47, x. i. It
appears in the title of 2 Baruch " The Book of the Apocalypse
of Baruch the son of Neriah" the publication of which was
nearly contemporary with that of our Apocalypse. It signifies a
vision and its interpretation. Elsewhere in the N.T. it is found
with the same meaning in the Pauline Epistles (Rom. xvi. 25;
2 Cor. xii. i ; Gal. i. 12, etc.). In i Pet. i. 7, 13, iv. 13, Luke ii.
32, etc., this word is not used in quite the same sense, but means
rather, manifestation, appearance. dTro/ca Aui/as is found also in
Classical Greek in the sense of to lay bare, to disclose, in Plato,
Protag. 352 D, Gorg. 460 A; while aTroKaAvt/as is found in Plutarch,
Paul, Aemil. 14, Cat. Maj. 20, Qiiom. Adul. ab Am. 32 .(OLTTOK.
ujaaprta?) in the sense of a laying bare. The verb frequently
bears this meaning in LXX, and the noun once. But the special
religious meaning of a7roKaAvi/as in Greek and revelatio in Latin
was unknown to the heathen world.
cbroKdXuijHs Iwdvcou was the title of our Book in the 2nd
cent: cf. Murat. i. 71 sq. : "Scripta apocalypse(s) etiam johanis
et petri tantum recipimus." That the Book was ever known by
the bare term u7roKaAui/as cannot safely be inferred from Tertullian,
Adv. Marc. iv. 5, or Irenaeus, v. 30. 3 (TOV KCU ryv ATro/caAv^tv
eoupaKoTos) ; for in both these passages the context clearly defines
whose apocalypse is in question. V. 30. 2, " Propter hoc non
annumeratur tribus haec in Apocalypsi," would.be more relevant
here ; but even this passage is wholly indecisive, since the author
ship of the Apocalypse is stated in v. 26. i.
I. 1-3. THE SUPERSCRIPTION.
1-3. The Superscription, which sets forth (i) the source of
the Apocalypse, (2) its contents, and (3) the blessedness of those
who receive its teachings, (i) There are three definite stages in
the transmission of this Apocalypse from its source to its publica
tion. First it is God Himself who gave it to Christ to make it
known unto His servants ISw/cev curro> 6 $eos Sci^at T. SovAois
avrov . . . ei/ ra^et (cf. the declaration of God in xxi. 6 b -8), and
the statement as to God s sending the angel, in Setai . . . cV
ra^ei in xxii. 6. Next, Christ sent and signified it through His angel
to John ecrr^u,ui/v aTrocrTet Aas Sia TOV dyye Aov avrov rw SovAw
avrov Ia>avn7 (cf. the declaration of Christ in xxii. 6-7, 16, 13,
12, 10, i8 a ). Thirdly, John bare witness to this Apocalypse
accorded by Christ to him, i.e., the word of God and the truth
6 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [l. 1.
attested by Christ rov \6yov rov 6cov KOL ryv n-aprvpiav Ir;croi)
Xpiaroi), oo-o, etSev (cf. the testimony of John in xxii. 8-9,
20-21). This correspondence between i. 1-2 and xxi. 6 b -8,
xxii. 6-21, is, therefore, not accidental. But if we desire further
confirmation of the close connection of 1-3 with the xxi. -xxii.,
we have it in the repetition by Christ in xxii. 7 of the beatitude
pronounced by John in i. 3.
(2) Its contents are "the word of God and the testimony of
Jesus Christ, everything that He saw." Here there are three
elements corresponding to the three agents mentioned above.
First, there is the word of God. Secondly, this word is attested
by Christ. Thirdly, it is seen by John in vision.
(3) The blessedness of those who receive and observe its
teachings. Here, again, there is a threefold division : blessed is
he that reads them in the public assemblies : blessed is he that
hears these prophecies : blessed is he that observes them.
1. diroKdXuvJ/is Mrjo-oG Xpiorou. The genitive here is subjective.
The revelation is given by Jesus Christ to John as God gave it to
Him. Cf. John vii. 16, rj c/w-^ SiSa^ 1 *) OVK ZCTTLV e/x j) dAAa TOV
//,e, and iii. 35, v. 20 sqq., 26, xvi. 15, etc. The title
Xpio-ros is found only here and in verses 2, 5 : I^o-ous
alone nine times; Kuptos Irjcrovs twice (xxii. 20, 21); Kv ptos
once only, xiv. 1356 Kvptos avrwv (xi. 8). Xpto-ros, when used
alone, always has the article (xx. 4, 6, +avrov, xi. 15, xii. 10. In
the Johannine Epistles Ir/aoiis Xpto-ros occurs nine times, I^o-oCs
six, 6 Xptoros three times.
Tjf eSwKey aurw 6 6e6 Sei^ai TOLS 8ou\oig avrou. Cf. Amos
iii. 7, ov fj.rj iroLrjcreL Kvptos 6 0eo? Trpay/xa eav jjirj airoKa\v\f/r) TraiSeiai
Trpos TOVS SovAous auroi; TOUS Trpo^ras. In our text the servants,
who are God s servants (O.VTOV), are the Christian prophets. Cf.
x. 7, xi. 1 8, xxii. 6. Setcu. This word is characteristic of our
author when it means to communicate a divine revelation by
means of visions.
a Set ye^e crOat Iv rd^i. The Sei denotes not the merely hasty
consummation of things, but the absolutely sure fulfilment of
the divine purpose. That this fulfilment would come " soon "
(ei/ Tct^ei : cf. xxii. 6; Deut. ix. 3; Ezek. xxix. 5 (not in Mass.);
Luke xviii. 8 ; Rom. xvi. 20), has always been the expectation of
all living prophecy and apocalyptic, a Set yeveV&u is drawn from
Dan. ii. 28 (a Set yei^eo-^at eV ecr^arwi/ rail/ ^/xepan/), 29. a ...
eV ra^et recurs in xxii. 6.
lcrf]^a.vv a Johannine word : cf. John xii. 33, xviii. 32, xxi.
19. It is Christ that is the subject of the verb here.
dirooreiXas. Cf. xxii. 16, where Christ sent (eVe/xt/M-) His
angel, and xxii. 6, where God sent (aWo-retAe) His angel. Once
again this verb is used in v. 6. dTrocrre AAeu Sta = TH r6t?> Ex.
I. 1-S.J THE SUPERSCRIPTION
IV. 13; Matt. xi. 2, Tre/Ai^as Sia TWV iiaOrjruv O.VTOV : Acts xi. 30,
a7ro<rTeiXaj/TS . . . Sia ^etpos Ba/3va/?a.
2. 05 ejj.apTu pTjaej . /xapTvpeu/, which is found four times and
always with the ace. in our author for this is the best way of
treating xxii. 18 occurs more frequently in the Johannine
Gospel and Epistles than elsewhere in the N.T. (i.e., 33 + 10 = 43
times). The aorist c^aprvp^a-fv ?.s epistolary : the author trans
ports himself to the standpoint of his readers.
joy Xoyoy TOO Oeou /ecu TTJI/ jAaprupiay irjaou Xpiorou = the reve
lation given by God and borne witness to by Christ (subjective
genitive). It means the Christian revelation as a whole in i. 9, vi.
9, xx. 4, but in the present passage the expression is limited by the
words that follow o<ra eW to the revelation made in this Book.
Kindred expressions occur in xii. 17, ras eVroXa? rov 6cov KO.L . . .
rrjv (j.aprvpLav Ir/crou, and xix. 10, rrjv /xaprvpiav Irjarov: but in the
last passage the phrase may have a different meaning in the tradi
tional text, and Ir/o-ot! be the objective genitive. The Aoyos rov
0eov is not to be limited in our text to the O.T. It embraces
the entire revelation of God which now in its fulness is attested
by Christ.
oaa elSey. These words limit, as we have said, the scope of
the two preceding phrases. On the significance of elSev in our
author, see note on iv. i. We should observe how the ministry
of angels (i d ) and the visions of the Seer are here closely com
bined, as also later.
3. This verse consists of a stanza of four lines. We have here
the first of the seven beatitudes in the Apocalypse (xiv. 13, xvi.
15, xix. 9 a , xx. 6, xxii. 7, 14. The last beatitude, which is pro
nounced by Christ and is given in xxii. 7 b (for the present text of
xx. 4-xxii. is in disorder),, reaffirms the beatitude here pronounced
by John.
6 wayivucTKuv. This is not the private student but the
public reader, the di/ayi/oxm?? or lector, as the sing. 6 dvaytvw<TKo>v
as opposed to the plural oi axovovrts shows. At the close of the
first century A.D., the reader was probably any suitable person
who was nominated for this purpose by the presbyters or president
from among the congregation. The reader in time acquired an
official position and became a member of the clergy, and is first
m entioned in this capacity in Tertullian (De Praescr. 41). The
books which were read were originally those of the O.T., as in
the synagogues, and afterwards the books of the N.T., as well as
the sub-apostolic epistles : cf. Justin Martyr (Apol. i. 67), ra
ttTro/xvry/xovev/xaTa ro)V aTrocrroAwv 17 TO. o-uyypayuy>iaTa rtov irpo<f>r]Tuv
di ayivtoo-KeTcu. This practice of reading at public worship was
adopted from the Jews : cf. Neh. viii. 2 ; Ex. xxiv. 7 ; Luke iv.
16; Acts xiii. 15 ; 2 Cor. iii. 15. Amongst the Jews the Scripture
8 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [l. 3, 4.
lessons from the Law and the Prophets could be read by any
member of the congregation, but if any priests or Levites were
present they took precedence. The earliest mention of the read
ing of the Prophets is found in Luke iv. 17, Acts xiii. 15 (comp.
Megilla iv. 1-5) ; but they were not read on week-days nor on
Sabbath afternoon services, but only at the chief service by one
person (Megilla iv. 5) on the morning of the Sabbath. See
Schiirer 3 , ii. 456.
01 d/coiWres . . . KCU TYjpoGrres. These two participles are, as
the Greek shows, to be taken closely together. These two lines
therefore reproduce the words of Christ in Luke xi. 28, /mctKapioi o!
aKovovres TOV Xoyov TOV Oeov Kal </>iAcur<rovTeg. Cf. also John xii.
47, eav TL<S [Aov aKOvcrrj T. p^/xarwi/ KO.I /x>) <f>v\dr). But our author
does not use <vAa<ro-eiv, and replaces it with the familiar Johannine
word ryptiv. Ps. i. represents on a large scale this combination
of faithful reading and faithful living.
TOUS Xoyous TTJS Trpo<f>Y)Tetag. Here as in xxii. 7, 10, 18 the
Seer claims for his Book a place in the forefront of prophetic
literature.
6 yap Kaipos YY U S- These words relate to the blessedness
of those who are faithful in the present evil time; for they will
not have long to wait; the season of their deliverance is at hand.
Cf. Rom. xiii. II ; I Cor. vii. 29, 6 Kaipos trwe(rraA./AeVos eortv.
The beatitude, of course, is true in itself independently of the
time of consummation (cf. xxii. 7), but the closely impending
recompense is repeatedly dwelt upon by our author to encourage
his readers in the face of universal martyrdom.
4-8. INTRODUCTION. JOHN S GREETING TO THE
SEVEN CHURCHES.
4. loxWrjs rcus eirra eKK\T]<7icus. This is the usual form for
beginning a letter (cf. Gal. i. i, etc.). Indeed the whole Book
from i. 4 to its close is in fact an Epistle.
rats eirra 6KK\Tjcriais rats iv TTJ A<na. The article before eTrra
refers proleptically to ver. n, where these Churches are enumer
ated. Other Churches existed at the time with which the Seer
must have been familiar, such as Colossae (Col. i. 2, ii. i),
Hierapolis (Col. iv. 13), Troas (Acts xx. 5 sqq.), Magnesia
(Ignatius, Ad Magn. i. i), Tralles (Ignatius, Ad Trail, i.).
Why the particular seven Churches mentioned in i. ii were
chosen by our author cannot now be determined (see, however,
note on i. n) ; but the fact that seven were chosen, and no more
and no less, can occasion no difficulty. For seven was a sacred
number not only in Jewish Apocalyptic and Judaism generally,
1. 4.] INTRODUCTION 9
but particularly in our Author: cf. i. [4*] 12, 16, iv. 5, v. i, 6
[viii. 2], x. 3, xi. 13 [xii. 3], xiii. i, xv. 6, 7, 8, xvi. i, xvii. i,
etc.
iv TT( Aaia. According to the usage of the Maccabean Books
(i Mace. viii. 6, xi. 13, xii. 39, xiii. 32; 2 Mace. Hi. 3, x. 24;
3 Mace. iii. 14 ; 4 Mace. iii. 20), Asia embraces the empire of the
Seleucids. In the Sibylline Oracles, iii. 168, 342, 350, 351,
353-4. 367, 381, 3 88 > 39i> 45> 599> 6ll > iv - i ?i> 7^, 79, J 45>
148, v. 99, 118, 287, etc., the extension of the term varies at
times apparently comprehending the entire continent, at others
restricted to the coast cities and the lower valleys of the Maean-
der, Cayster, etc. But on the transference of the kingdom of
Attalus in. to Rome, the Roman province of Asia conterminous
with the limits of this kingdom was formed in 133-130 B.C., and
this province was subsequently augmented by the addition of
Phrygia in 116 B.C. *H A<rta in the N.T. is all but universally
(contrast Acts ii. 9) identified with Proconsular Asia.
X<ipiS upr KCU eip^Yj diro 6 &v KCU 6 f\v KCU 6 epj(6p.i>os
[KCU, diro T&V euro, iryeujxaTwi rwi ivwtriov TOU 6povou aurou].
5. Kal diro l-rjaou XpicrTou, 6 jxaprug 6 moros.
In these three lines the second is beyond question an inter
polation of a later hand (probably early in the 2nd cent.).
Since xxii. 8-9, and (possibly) xix. 9-10 are from the hand of our
author, he cannot have put forward such a grotesque Trinity as
the above. In the passages just cited the worship of angels (see
note on xxii. 8) is denounced in most forcible terms, and from
the class of subordinate beings co-ordinate with the seven arch
angels we cannot exclude "the seven spirits." The Seer cannot
therefore have accorded divine honours to these seven spirits at
the very opening of his Book. Moreover, when this interpolation
is removed, we have three stanzas of three lines each beginning
with x^P L<s 4 b j an d ending 7 at <j>vXal rfjs yr)<s. Thus in 4 b ~5 a
as in 5 c -6 a only God and Christ are mentioned.
4 b . x^P 1 ? f"" "a! cipTJnrj. These words do not form a mere
salutation, for this has been given in the preceding words, but
a benediction from God. Grace and peace cannot be said to
emanate from angels even from the seven archangels. The
Xapts here is the favour of God and of Jesus Christ. It is only
found once again in our author, i.e. in xxii. 21, where this spiritual
endowment is derived from Jesus Christ. See notes on x^P^
and dprjvr) in Sanday s Romans, 10 sq., 15 sq. ; Milligan, i Thess.
i. i. The dpr)vrj is the harmony restored between God and man
through Christ. In all the Pauline Epistles these are said to
proceed from GoJ the Father and from Jesus Christ, just as in
the original text here. In i and 2 Timothy we have the fuller
form x^P L ^ cA.os, dprjvrj. Moreover, in nine of the Pauline
IO THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [I. 4.
Epistles the phrase is exactly as here, x^P ts vfi v K0 ^ ti-pyvn,
while in i and 2 Timothy it stands as in the preceding
sentence.
diro 6 <ov Kai 6 TJy KCU 6 ep)(6jtiei>os. Cf. i. 8, iv. 8, and 6 on/ K. 6
5^ in xi. 17, xvi. 5. We have here a title of God conceived in
the terms of time. The Seer has deliberately violated the rules
of grammar in order to preserve the divine name inviolate from
the change which it would necessarily have undergone if de
clined. Hence the divine name is here in the nominative. It
could have been preserved in classical Greek, i.e. O.TTO rov 6 wi/.
But our author shows no knowledge of this construction. But
there are other irregularities as, for instance, 6 fy. The fy is
said to have been used because there was no past participle of
dpi. But this does not really explain ty nor yet 6. Besides he
could have used 6 yeyovws(cf. xvi. 17, xxi. 6) or 6 yevo/xevos (i. 18).
I offer, therefore, the following explanation. Our author could
have written here 6 o>v /cat ^v, in keeping with a Hebraism which
^frequently avails himself of; for 6 on/ Kai rjv would be an exact
reproduction of the Hebrew irrn ninn. See note on 5. Herein
we have a probable explanation of rjv. It is harder to explain
the 6 which precedes it. The article here may be inserted before
the ty since it accompanies the other two elements in the divine
name : 6 o>v . . . /cat 6 ep^o/xevos.
As for 6 ep^o/xevos, where our author returns to the participial
construction, it is clear that he uses epxo/x/os, instead of eVo/zevos,
with a definite reference to the contents of the Book and
especially to the coming of Christ, i. 7, ii. 5, 16, iii. n, xxii. 7,
12, etc., in whose coming God Himself comes also.
Besides, our author does not use the future participle.
Passing now from the grammar of this clause to its meaning,
we find that this divine name was common to both Jews and
Gentiles. Thus the Targ. Jon. on Ex. iii. 14 (iTilK -I^K .TUN,
where the LXX has e yw efyu 6 u>v, and Aquila and Theod.
0-o/xat<os>croftai) has Wtb TTljn KJ^rn N1H &O^ = "EgoSUm,
qui sum et futurus sum," and Deut. xxxii. 39, mm >v nrn Kin &OK
v inE6 Tnjn wn KJKI = " Ego sum qui sum, et fui, et ego sum qui
futurus sum." Also Shem. rab. iii. f. io5 b , "Dixit Deus ... ad
Mosen : Ego fui, et adhuc sum et ero in posterum " (this last from
Wetstein). In the Greek we find analogous titles of God. Cf.
Pausanias, x. 12. 5 : for the songs of the doves at Dodona, Zeus
Tyi/, Zeus eo-ru/, Zeus eWerat : in the inscription at Sais (Plutarch,
De Iside, 9), eyw et/xi TTOLV TO yeyovos KGLL ov KOU eVo/xei/ov /cat rov e/txov
TreTrXov ouSets TTOJ BvqTMV aTTK(iX.v{f/v : in the Orphic lines, Zeus
Trpairos yeVero, Zeus uorraros dp^t/cepaui/os, Zeus /cec^aXr/, Zeus /Aeo-<ra,
Atos 8 e /c TrdVra reVu/crat. Finally, in reference to Ahurarhazda it
is stated in the Bundahis, i. 4 (S.B.E. v. 4), " Auharmazd and
I. 4.] JOHN S GREETING TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES II
the region, religion and time of Auharmazd were and are and
ever will be."
[KCU diro TW^ cirrd nveupxrwi KT\.]
Although I have without hesitation bracketed these words
as an early interpolation, we must consider the explanations of
those who have accepted them as from the hand of our Seer,
and also deal briefly with the probable origin of this concep
tion.
1. First of all we have the interpretation more or less of
Victorinus, Primasius, Apringius, Beatus among the earlier
commentators, and in modern times Alford and Swete which
regards the seven spirits here as the sevenfold energies of God
or of the Holy Spirit. In support of this view Swete quotes
Heb. ii. 4, Trvev/xaros ayiov /xep6oyx,ots : I Cor. xii. IO, Sia/cpureis
Tri/ev/umov : xiv. 32, TrvVfj.aTa 7rpo(f>r)Twv : Apoc. xxii. 6, 6 $eos TON/
Tn/ev/x-aruv r<av irpo<f>r]Tuv. " Here the spirits are seven, because
the Churches in which they operate are seven " (Swete). This
reason is less convincing than that adduced by other supporters
of this view, who trace the conception of the seven spirits to an
erroneous though not unnatural interpretation of Isa. xi. 2, 3,
whereby the six spiritual endowments that are to be given to the
Messiah were transformed into seven : cf. i Enoch ixi. 1 1 ; Targ.
Jon. on this passage; also the LXX ; Justin, Dial. 87, ITT avrov
TTvcv/Jia $eo), 77rey/.a (ro<ias KCU <nWo-ews, Tri/eu/xa /3ovXr)<s KOI to^vos,
7rvi)/x.a yv(juo~a>s KOI euo~e/3eias, KCU e^u.TrA^a et avrov irvtv^a. (frofiov
OC.QV : also 39 ; Cohort, ad Gentiles, 32, ot tepot Trpo^rat TO ev KCU TO
auTO Tirev/xa ets CTTTO. irvf.vfjia.Ta. /xept^eo-^at <^a<nv.
But that we have here to deal, not with impersonal energies
but with concrete beings, may be inferred from iii. i of our text,
where the seven spirits and the seven stars are regarded as
parallel conceptions. Further, the scribe who interpolated 4
between 4 b and 5 a manifestly regarded these seven spirits as
much concrete beings as God and Jesus Christ. Hence the
seven spirits here cannot be interpreted either as abstractions or
impersonal energies.
2. The seven spirits are to be identified with the seven
archangels. Judaism was familiar with seven archangels: cf.
Ezek. ix. 2; Tob. xii. 15; i Enoch xx. 7, xc. 21 ("the seven
first white ones ") ; T. Levi viii. 2. This number, it is said
(cf. Gunkel, Schopfung und Chaos, 294-302 ; Zimmern, in
Schrader s K.A.T? ii. 620-626; Bousset, O/enbarung, 184-187,
291 sq.), presupposes a religion of which the worship of
seven gods was a characteristic. Now we find such a religion
in the Zend with its seven Amshaspands (S.fi.E. v. row.;
xxiii. 291; xxxi. Introd. pp. xviii, xxiv, 77, 179 sq.), which in
their turn were derived from the Babylonish cult of the seven
11 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [1.4.
star deities. 1 The existence of these astral divinities Judaism
did not question any more than in earlier times it questioned
the existence of the tribal deities of the nations that surrounded
Israel, but in the interests of Monotheism, Judaism degraded
these foreign deities into angels subject beings in the service
of Yahweh. In due time the source of these conceptions was
wholly forgotten as well as the historical development involved.
Like his contemporaries, the Seer accepted the traditional Jewish
formula, God and the seven spirits, and to this formula
appended the specifically Christian element. Thus according
to Bousset originated one of the most extraordinary Trinities in
Christianity : cf. Justin, Apol. i. 6, quoted on xxii. 9. As
furnishing parallel trinities, Luke ix. 26, i Tim. v. 21 have been
adduced. But in neither passage is there any ground for such a
view. It might as reasonably be contended that every time God
and the angels were mentioned together a duality of the Godhead
was involved.
Now, if we identify " the seven spirits " and the seven arch
angels, it is inconceivable that the Seer, who issued so emphatic
a polemic against angel worship, could have inserted such a
clause as 4 between 4 b and 5*.
3. The seven spirits and the seven archangels are not
identical in the mind of the Seer, according to Bousset (on viii. 2)
and others. Whether this is so or not does not affect the
question of the originality of 4. For whatever be the dignity
possessed by the seven spirits, they were after all merely created
beings in the opinion of the Seer, and could not therefore be put
by him on a level with God and Jesus Christ or represented as
fitting objects for man s worship.
But, though 4 is due to the hand of an interpolator, the
phrase TO. 7rra Tn/ev/xara in iii. I, 6 l^v ra ITTTOL Trvev/xara TOV
Oeov KOL TOVS CTTTOL offTtpws, is a redactional addition of our Seer.
It is therefore our task to define, if possible, the nature of these
spirits. Now the conjunction of the TrvevfjLara and the dorrepc? in
iii. i suggests that they are to some extent kindred conceptions.
But this does not take us far, unless we can gain some definite
idea of the meaning of both do-re/aes and Trvev/xara in our author.
Happily this we can do in part. First, in i. 20 the eTrra acrrepe?
are definitely stated to be the dyyeAoi TWV ITTTO. tKKX-rjcnuv, and
1 Jewish tradition seemingly testifies to a certain connection between the
great golden candlestick with seven arms and the seven planets : cf. Josephus,
Ant. iii. 6. 7; Bell. Jud. v. 5. 5, tvtyaivov 6 of ptv TTT& X^XJ/GI TOVS TrXavrjras :
Philo, Quis rerum divin. haeres (ed. Cohn), 221 sq., TTJS /car ovpavbv r&v
tirrb. irKavTjTwv ^opetas ^fyiT/yUa, <TTIV i] lepa Xux^fa Kal ol ir avrTJs cirra. \vxvoi.
Josephus states also that the twelve loaves of the shewbread pointed to the
twelve signs of the zodiac : Bell Jud. v. 5. 5. Possibly these are merely
after-thoughts of both Josephus and Philo.
1.4,5.] JOHN S GREETING TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES 13
Christ is said to hold these dcrrepe?, i.e. ayyeAoi, in His right hand
in i. 1 6 : that is, to have supreme authority over them. Hence
in iii. i the seven Tn/ev/zara of God and the seven dyyeAoi of the
Churches are conjoined, as apparently kindred conceptions. We
might here for a moment turn aside to observe that in 2 Enoch
xxx. 14 angels are spoken of as stars, in i Enoch xli. 5, 7 the
stars have a conscious existence, and hence are capable of dis
obedience, xviii. 13-16, xxi. 1-6, while in Ixxxvi. i, 3 stars are
used to symbolize angels.
So much for the doWpes. Now as to Trvev/xara. Over these
also Christ has supreme authority, iii. i. In v. 6 these Tn/ev/zara
are identified with the seven eyes which are sent forth unto all
the earth, and in iv. 5 with the seven fiery lamps that burn before
the throne of God. In the former passage they are obviously
conceived as having a personal existence. As the servants of
the Lamb they are described as His eyes. That the lamps and
the eyes are identical is clear from our text and from Zech. iv. 10
where, in the vision which our Seer has in view, it is said " these
seven (lamps) are the eyes of the Lord, they run to and fro
through the whole earth."
From the above examination it may be concluded that the
Trve^/xara are angelic beings. In Jub. ii. 2 the chief orders of
spirits are called angels : cf. Heb. i. 7, 14. Whether these seven
spirits are to be identified with the seven archangels cannot be
inferred with certainty, but this identification may be regarded
as highly probable ; since thereby Christ s sovereignty is asserted
over the highest order of the angels, as it is elsewhere declared
by the Seer to be paramount over all creation.
eyuTrioK TOU 0p6i/ou. Cf. iv. 5, 6, 10, vii. 9, etc.
5. diro ITJO-OU XpioroG. Since 4 is an interpolation, the grace
and peace proceed from God and Christ as in the Pauline
Epistles. In 2 John 3 we find Trapd instead of SLTTO in a like
context. This is the last passage where the title I^croGs Xpio-ros
occurs. From this onward I?yoro{5s stands alone save in xxii. 20,
21, where we have /cvpios lyo-ovs.
6 pxpTus 6 irioTos. Cf. iii. 14; also ii. 13. This anomaly,
which recurs not infrequently cf. ii. 13, 20, iii. 12, ix. 14, xiv.
12, 14, xx. 2, is best explained as a Hebraism. Since the
Hebrew noun in the indirect cases is not inflected, the Seer acts
at times as if the Greek were similarly uninflected, and simply
places, as in the present instance, the nominative in apposition
to the genitive; i.e. o /mprvs in apposition to lyo-ov Xpto-roi).
We have here a frequent solecism in our author. While it is
found occasionally in the LXX, as might be expected in a
translation from Semitic (cf. Ezek. xxiii. 12; Zeph. i. 12), it is
here almost a characteristic construction: cf. ii. 13, 20, iii. 12,
14 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [1.5,6.
vii. 4, viii. 9, ix. 14, xiv. 12, 14, xx. 2. The participle is also put
in the nominative when the normal construction would be the
gen. or ace. Cf. ii. 20, iii. 12.
jxaprus appears only here and in iii. 14 in the N.T. in refer
ence to Christ. Christ is here conceived not in a limited sense
in reference to His earthly life or the present Apocalypse, but
as the true witness of every divine revelation (so Diisterdieck,
Bousset, and others). Cf. John xviii. 37, ts TOVTO eXr}\v6a ets rov
KOO-/AOI/ Iva. fj,apTvp-r)(TU) rrj aXrjOeLa. The phrase 6 /zapros 6 TTIOTO?,
when taken in connection with the words that follow, 6 Trpwro-
TOKOS . . . TWI/ /3ao-iA.eW TTJS yrjs, furnishes strong evidence that
our author had Ps. Ixxxix. in his mind ; for the former phrase is
found in 38, where the moon is said to be JEN: pn$3 IV (LXX,
6 //.aprvs 1 <-V ovpavw TTIOTOS), and the latter in 28,
Kaya> TrporoTOKov ("H^S) ^cro/xat avrov,
vij/rjXjbv Trapa rots /2acriAeii(rii> rfjs yfjs.
Here our author appears to have had the LXX before him.
This passage is given a Messianic reference by R. Nathan in
Shem. rab. 19, fol. n8 4 . As I made Jacob a firstborn, so also
will I make King Messiah a firstborn (Ps. Ixxxix. 28). Thus
"the firstborn" became a Messianic title (see Lightfoot, Col.
i. IS)-
6 irpwTOTOKos TW^ vcKpuv. See preceding note on Ps. Ixxxix.
28. In Col. i. 1 8 we have os ecrrti/ dpx^ 7iy>orroTOKo<; CK TWV
wv, and in I Cor. XV. 20, ey^ye/rrcu, K ve/cptoi/ a-Trap^r] TWI/
In these Pauline passages Christ s resurrection is
undoubtedly referred to, which carries with it His claim to
headship of the Church, as in Col. i. 15 Trptororo/cos Trao-^s
KTicrcw? implies His claim to headship over all creation by virtue
of His primogeniture. But the sense of being first in point of
time appears in certain passages to be displaced wholly by the
secondary idea of Sovereignty. Thus in Heb. xii. 23 the phrase
e/c/cA.T7<rta TrpcoToro/cwv emphasizes wholly this latter idea. Even
God Himself was called D^iy *?W 1TI33 ( = TrpwroTo/co? TOV KOO-/UOV).
(See Lightfoot on Col. i. 15.) Our present context appears to
require the secondary meaning of Trpwroro/cos, and accordingly
Christ is here said to be " the true witness of God, the sovereign
of the dead, the ruler of the living " (i.e. the kings of the earth
and their subjects). See note on iii. 14.
6 apxwi rail paaiXeW rt]S yrjs. Cf. Ps. Ixxxix. 28 ; also Isa.
Iv. 4.
5 c -6. We have here the second of the three stanzas which com
pose 4 b -y. The second line is to be taken as forming a perfect
parallelism with the first ; for in the TW dyaTrwi/rt . . . /c
1 In Ps, Iv, 4, PavjcJ is given as a witness (ijO to the nations.
1.5,6] JOHN S GREETING TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES 15
we have a pure Hebraism, in which the participle of the first line
is resolved into a finite verb in the second. This second line is
therefore no parenthesis, nor from the standpoint of the Seer is
there the slightest irregularity in the construction. He is simply
reproducing a common Hebrew idiom literally in Greek. The
A.V., the Syriac and Latin versions are here, therefore, right, and
the R.V. is wrong wrong as a translation and bad as a piece of
English. Hence we are to translate, "To Him that loveth us
. . . and hath made us." This Hebrew idiom recurs frequently
in our author (i. 18, ii. 2, 9, 20, iii. 9, vii. 14 (see note), xiv. 2-3,
xv. 3), and in none of the instances has it been recognized as
such by any commentator. This Hebrew idiom has become
so naturalized in our author s style that I cannot but regard the
in XX. 4, ran/ TreTreAe/cKT/xeywv . . . /cat orrises ov TrpocrtKv-
, as an addition by John s literary executor in order to make
the text better Greek. John s words were most probably T. TreTre-
Ae/ctoyxeva)! . . . /cat ov Trpocre/cw^crav. In i. 1 8 the failure to
recognize this idiom has led most scholars to mispunctuate the
text, and the rest, like Wellhausen and Haussleiter, to excise 6
on/. The eyw ct/xt ... 6 wv is to be taken closely with /cat
eyevo/xryi/ ve/cpos (cf. Amos vi. 3 for this Hebrew construction) = I
am . . . He that liveth and was dead." Hence the first two
lines
no H nt
TW dya-ircum TjjJids ical Xuaairi. As Swete well remarks, the
two participles bring out "the contrast between the abiding
ayd-n-rj and the completed act of redemption."
\uaravTL T^/JLCI? eic KT\. This is by far the best attested reading.
With the idea in Avo-avrt we might compare the somewhat kindred
dyopa^etr in v. 9 ; the Pauline eayopaetv, Gal. iii. 13, iv. 5 ; aTroAv-
T/OOKTIS, Rom. iii. 24, viii. 23 ; i Cor. i. 30 ; Eph. i. 7, iv. 30 ; Col.
L 14. The weakly attested reading Xova-avn . . . and is not
really supported by vii. 14, lirXwav rds oroAas aureov . . . ei/
TO) at/xart TOV apvtov, and xxii. 14, though these passages have
been brought forward in favour of it. For, whereas these two
passages express man s own action in the working out his own
salvation, the Xovvavn . . . a-n-o denotes God s part in man s
salvation, i.e. his deliverance from sin by Christ. At the same
time it is to be observed that this metaphor is a familiar one in
the N.T. in this connection : cf. i Cor. vi. 1 1 ; Eph. v. 26 ; Tit.
iii. 5 ; Heb. x. 22.
Swete aptly compares Plato, Crat. 405 B, where the two verbs
are brought together in a similar connection, OVKOVV 6
os K<U p d?roAiW T* KQ>\ uTroAovW rwv TCHOV TWP /cajcwF (wo? OF
1 6 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [I. 5, 6.
WH explain the corruption of \varavri into AWcravn as "due
to failure to understand the Hebraic use of eV to denote a price
. . . and a natural misapplication of vii. 14."
iv TW ai jmaTi. Here as in v. 9 eV denotes the price by means
of which a thing is bought : cf. i Chron. xxi. 24.
6. KCU TroiT)aK. As we have shown in the note on 5 c -6
above, this is a Hebraism for KCU Troirja-avri. Christ not only
delivers men from sin the negative side but also makes them
a kingdom and priests.
paaiXeicu/, Upeis. These words go back to Ex. xix. 6,
D^nb. This the LXX renders /Jao-iAetov te/oaTv//,a (see i Pet. ii.
9); Aquila, /?ao-iAeta tepeW : Symmachus and Theodotion, ftao-iXeia
tepees. The last rendering is that of our text and presupposes
D ona HD^DD. This last reading is in part supported by Jub.
xvi. 1 8, which gives "a kingdom and priests"; so also the Syriac
version of Ex. xix. 6. With this last we may compare the Jer.
Targ. on Ex. xix. 6, "kings . . . and . . . priests," and Onkelos,
" kings, priests." It is clear that our text presupposes the same
text as Symmachus and Theodotion.
Our text then means that Christ has made us a kingdom,
each member of which is a priest unto God. The kingship here
involved was to be an everlasting possession (xxii. 5). Of the
like duration of the priesthood nothing is said in the closing
chapters. As respects the priesthood, the privileges of ancient
Israel have passed over to the Christian Church. Even to pre-
Christian Judaism it was foretold that ,all true Israelites would
become in a certain sense priests priests as compared with the
nations that served them. " And strangers shall feed your flocks,
and aliens shall be your plowmen . . . but ye shall be named
the priests of the Lord : men shall call you the ministers of our
God" (Isa. Ixi. 5-6). But that this general priesthood of Israel
as regards the heathen nations was not to supersede the special
ministries of priests and Levites in the redeemed Israel is clear
from Ixvi. 21 : "And of them will I take for priests for Levites,
saith the Lord." But in the spiritual kingdom of Christ no such
distinction is recognized : all the faithful are already kings and
priests to God (i. 6). On the other hand, when the Messianic
kingdom is established the glorified martyrs will in a special
sense be kings and priests ; for in that kingdom the priesthood
and kingship of the glorified martyrs will come into actual
manifestation relatively to the heathen nations, who will then be
evangelized by them (xx. 6). eo-ovrat tepets rov Qeov /cat rov Xptarrov
KOL /3a<TL\v(Tovcriv fj.T avTov TO. ;(iA.ia crrf. But this special and
limited priesthood and kingship belong only to the Messianic
kingdom. It should be observed in this connection that, al
though all the faithful were to become kings and priests, it is
1.6-7.] SECOND ADVENT OF CHRIST I/
never implied that they should likewise become prophets. The
prophetic office may have been conceived by our author in a
limited sense and as bestowed on a limited class of men for a special
purpose. When this purpose was once achieved, the prophetic
gift may in his view be no longer necessary.
After the final judgment the limited kingship and priesthood
of the martyrs will be succeeded by an eternal kingship of all
the faithful: xxii. 5, j3aa-i\ev(rovcrw ets T. attorns T. atwvwv. But the
special priestly office will no more exist ; and so far as the priestly
blessing is given, it will be given by God Himself: xxii. 5, Kv/aios
6 0eos </>omcrei CTT aurovs (see note in loc.}.
TW 0ew KCU TraTpl aurou. The avrov is to be taken with TW
Beta as well as with Trarpt.
auT<3 TJ 86a KCU TO Kpdros, i.e. TW dyairwi/Tt KT\. Similar
doxologies addressed to Christ are to be found in v. 13, vii. 10,
2 Pet. iii. 18, and most probably in 2 Tim. iv. 18, Heb. xiii. 21,
and possibly in i Pet. iv. n. In 4 Mace, xviii. 24 we have a
good parallel in diction, as w 77 86d ets rovs aiwva? rwv atwj/wp : in
the Didache Vlii. 2, X. 5, cm crov eVrtv 17 8vVa/x,ts ical f) Soa ets rov<s
atwvas, at the conclusion of the Lord s Prayer the doxology in
Matt. vi. 13 not being original, but adopted, according to Hort,
into some forms of the text through liturgical use in Syria as
early as the 2nd century, i Chron. xxix. n, "Thine, O Lord, is
the greatness and the power and the glory," appears to be the
original source of most of the doxologies of later times. See
Chase, Lord s Prayer in the Early Church, 168 sqq.
7-8. The prophet s thought is carried forward to the Second
Advent of Christ in glory (7). It must be confessed that 8 has
no obvious links with what precedes or follows.
7. Here again we have a stanza of three lines which are a
reminiscence and an adaptation of Dan. vii. 13 and Zech. xii. 10.
In both cases, as we shall see, the text presupposed by our author
is -mainly that presupposed by Theodotion s version ; but their
combination here is best explained as due to our author s ac
quaintance with the Jewish Christian Apocalypse, which has
been worked into the text of Matt. xxiv. ( = Mark xiii. = Luke
xxi.), and which in Matt. xxiv. 30 represents this combination
as already achieved (see below). But not only does our text
agree in combining Zech. xii. 10 and Dan. vii. 13, but also in
transforming the original meaning of Zech. xii. 10. Thus, where
as in the O.T. text we have "they shall mourn for him," in
Matt. xxiv. 30 and in our text " the tribes of the earth shall
mourn (for themselves) because of Him " (eV avrov omitted in
Matt.).
The fulfilment of this prophecy of the visible and victorious
return of Christ with a view to judgment is dealt with in the
VOL. i. 2
1 8 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [1.7.
vision of the Seer in xiv. 14, 18-20, in xix. 11-21, and most
probably in xx. 7-10.
iSou epxerai jxera rwv i/e^eXaii . Cf. Dan. vii. 13, ^ajTDJ? VIN1
Kin NDN tws 123 *> Here Theodotion renders /cat ISov ucra
T": T T v:. ~ : T - : i
(LXX, 7TL =oy : cf. xiv. i4sqq.; Matt. xxiv. 30, xxvi. 64; Didache
xvi. 8 (eTrdVw), Justin, Apol. i. 5 1 sq. (e7rdVo>) ; cv = Dy, Mark xiii.
26 ; Luke xxi. 27 : cf. Dalman, Words of Jesus, 242). But the
7rt in xiv. 14 of our text is due to our author s use of KaO-tj^vov
in this connection) TOJ/ ve^eXcov rov ovpavov us vtos avOpwTrov tp\o-
/i-ej/o? (LXX, r/pxero). Cf. Mark xiv. 62, TOJ/ viov rov avOpd)7rov . . .
tp^o/xev-ov /xero, TUJI/ vec^eAwv TOV ovpavov : 4 Ezra xiii. 3. It does
not necessarily follow from the above that our author used an
early translation similar in character to that of the later Theo
dotion, but that the Semitic text he followed was such as that
followed by Theodotion.
epxerat. The idea of the impending Advent is resumed
in iii. n, xiv. 7, xvi. 15, xxii. 7, 12, 20.
O\|/T<U ttUTOf . . . KCU l%f.KVT(](Ta.V . . . Kttl KO\|/OJT(H CTT* ttUTOI/
iraaai at <J>u\a! rfjs yrj?. These words, with the exception of the
last four, are based on Zech. xii. 10 and agree for the most part
with the versions of Theodotion, Aquila, and Symmachus against
the LXX. The LXX reads /cat 7ri/3A,ei^ovTat Trpos /xe, av@* &v
/carwp^cravTO ( = *np"l) /cai Koif/ovrai ITT O.VTOV. Theod. and
Aquila, /ecu eTrt^Aei^ovrat Trpos /x,e, eis ov (<rw a>, Aquila) e^e/cei/-
Trjcrav /cat /coi/^ovrat avrov. Symmachus, eyu-Trpocr^ci/ eTre^eKevr^trav
KT\. Plere the three latter translators support the Massoretic
Dpi by e ^e/cei/rr/o-ai/. It is a question whether our author used
an early Greek version the parent of Theodotion s and others
or whether he translated directly from the Hebrew. The evi
dence on the whole is in favour of his translating directly from the
Hebrew. His use of e^eKeVr^o-av l marks his independence of
the LXX ; and the fact that e/c/cevretv is the stock rendering in
the versions of "ip"T, shows that our author s use of this verb cannot
be advanced as evidence for his dependence on any Greek trans
lation here. Whilst there is thus no trustworthy evidence of his
dependence, there is some evidence of his independence of all
the versions. This we find in oi//erat avrov, where the versions
have 7n/3\^ovraL Trpos //,e. Our author, it is true, does not use
7ri/3\7reiv, but he uses /JAermv frequently in the sense required
here. Moreover, the last words, Trcurai at <vAat -nys yrjs (found
also in Matt. xxiv. 30), are a free adaptation of the Hebrew in
Zech. xii. 12, where the LXX gives the literal rendering, fj yrj
Kara <f>v\as </>uAa5.
1 In Justin, Apol. i. 52, we find, K6\f/ovrai <f>v\T) -rrpbs 0uX^, /cat r6re 6\f/ovrai
ei s 8v 4%eKtvT-r)(Tai> : Dial. 14, 32 ; 64, Triyvu(re(r6e et s 5// t%eKevTr]<raTe ; 126,
The reference in all these passages is eschatological,
I. 7.] SECOND ADVENT OF CHRIST 19
It is noteworthy that in John xix. 37, the passage in Zechariah
is rendered in a way closely akin to that in our text oi/^ovrat ds or
e^e/ceVnyo-av. But, whereas our author applies the prophecy to
the whole world, the Fourth Gospel limits to the four soldiers
" the looking " to Him whom they had pierced. Abbott (Johan-
nine Gram., p. 247) writes : " They look to Him now in amaze
ment; they will look to Him for forgiveness and salvation." In
the Gospel the main reference is to the crucifixion : whereas in
our author it is eschatological.
In Matt. xxiv. 30 we have an analogous combination of the
passages in Daniel and Zechariah to that in our text, /ecu TOTC
TO crrj fji^tov TOV viov TOV avOpwTrov ev ovpavw /cat rore
Tracrat at <f>v\al T^S yr}? /cat oi//ovrat TOV vlov TOV
p^6/j.vov e7rt T. ve<eXoi>v. Here, as in our text, the
reference is eschatological. Swete writes that both Gospel and
Apocalypse " were indebted . . . perhaps to some collection of
prophetic testimonies." This is a good suggestion, but the ex
planation is, I believe, to be found elsewhere. A large body of
scholars are agreed that in Matt. xxiv. (as in the parallel chapters
in Mark and Luke) there are two distinct apocalypses worked
together. One of these is from our Lord, xxiv. 4-5, 914, 23-25,
32 sqq., while the other is a later Jewish Christian Apocalypse
consisting of xxiv. 6-8, 15-22, 29-31, 34, 35 (see my Eschatology*,
379-385). Now the close parallelism of our text, i. 7 and Matt.
xxiv. 30 (observe use of o\l/tcr8ai in both, as well as the phrase
Tracrai at <f>v\al TYJ<S 777? unique as regards the N.T. and the
LXX), presupposes some real connection ; and since the Jewish
Apocalypse just referred to was written before 70 A.D., it is
reasonable to conclude that the indebtedness lies on the side of
our author, and that Matt. xxiv. 30 first suggested to him the
combination of Zech. and Daniel, though the diction is mainly
his own, and due to his independent translation of the O.T.
passages ; for he keeps more closely to Daniel and Zechariah
and reproduces their text more fully.
vai, djjirji . We have here the Greek and Hebrew forms of
affirmation side by side a fact which would tempt us to take
them as synonymous, as in d/3/?a 6 iranj/o in Mark xiv. 36. But
this does not appear to be so here. And yet it is hard to bring
out the distinction. In our author d/xrjv is used (a) at the close
of one s own doxology or prayer: i. 6, vii. 12 (ad fin.), (b) It
is used for the purpose of adopting as one s own what has just
been said: v. 14, vii. 12 (adinit.\ xix. 4, xxii. 20. (c) It is used
at the close of a solemn affirmation : i. 7 (mi, d/^v). (d) It is
used as a designation of Christ : iii. 14, 6 A/xrV. Here Christ
is represented as the personalized divine Amen, the guarantor in
person of the truth declared by Him, f. Isa. Ixv. 16, jOK *r^K <
20 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [l. 8-9.
"God of the Amen," which, howexer, is by the best critics
emended into fOK <nta = " God of truth."
The meaning of vai in this context is difficult to determine-
It occurs four times in all. In xxii. 20 it denotes a divine
promise, where the d/xT/V expresses the trustful acceptance of
this promise (cf. 2 Cor. i. 20). In xiv. 13, xvi. 7, it is used to
confirm what has just been said of the heavenly voice. But in
xiv. 13 it could be taken as the affirmation of a promise by the
Spirit : " Yea in that they shall rest," etc.
If xiv. 13 is to be taken as just suggested, then, since xvi. 7 is
not from our author s hand, it would follow that in our author
va.1 "expresses," as Hort says, "affirmation or reaffirmation
divine or human," and that they are here purposely combined to
express the same ideas as in xxii. 20, " It is so, amen."
8. The Speaker is God.
TO "A\4>a Kal TO *il. This is a natural symbol for the first
and last of all things. It was known among the Romans : cf.
Martial, v. 26. Among the later Jews the whole extent of a
thing was often denoted by the first and last letters of the
alphabet, fix. Thus (Schoettgen, Hor. Heb. in loc.) Adam trans
gressed the whole law from aleph to tau (Jalkut Rub. f. 1 7*) ;
Abraham observed the whole law from aleph to tau (f. 48*) ;
when God blesses Israel, He does it from aleph to tau (f. i28 3 ).
It represented the entirety of things, and thus could fitly express
the Shekinah, Schoettgen, i. 1086. Hence it is not improbable
that "Alpha and Omega" is a Greek rendering of a corre
sponding Hebrew expression. The thought conveyed by this
title is essentially that of Isa. xliv. 6 : 0eos 2a/?aw0 - eya> TT/XOTOS /cat
eya> /ATa ravra (ji")nK pKI |^N"1 ^N rrlK3S ni!T : cf. xli. 4,
xliii. TO).
Ku pios 6 6e6s ... 6 TrarroicpdTup ( = niKnV TPK mil , Hos.
xii. 6 ; Amos ix. 5). A favourite title in our author : cf. iv. 8,
xi. 17, xv. 3 [xvi. 7], xix. 6, xxi. 22. In iv. 8 (cf. xi. 17) we have
the entire passage, /cvpios 6 $eos 6 wv KCU 6 rjv /ecu 6 ep^o/xcvos 6
TravTOKparoo/o, save that the 6 TravTo/cpartop precedes the 6 <5v.
6 TravTo/cpdYwp is not found in the N.T. outside our author save
in 2 Cor. vi. 18 in a quotation.
6 wi> Kal 6 r\v KT\. See note on i. 4. ^
9-20. JOHN S CALL AND COMMISSION. HIS VISION OF
THE SON OF MAN RISEN AND GLORIFIED.
9. Eyw Iwdmjs. Cf. xxii. 8 ; Dan. vii. 15, 28, viii. i, ix. 2
AavirjA.) ; 4 Ezra iii. i ; i Enoch xii. 3, etc. The insertion
of the name is required after 8.
I. 9.] JOHN S CALL AND COMMISSION 21
6 d8e\4>6s ujj.oii Kal (TUVKOIVUVOS iv. The absence of the article
before the second noun shows that the two nouns are to be
taken closely together. Cf. vi. n, ol o-wSouAot avroiv KO.I 01
dSeA(/>ot OLVTWV oi /xeAAovres diroKTej/j/eo-$at cos Kal avrot: xii. IO.
Here, as in its pagan use, dSeA<ds means a fellow-member in the
same religious society. With 6 dSeA<6s v^uv cf. 2 Pet. iii. 15,
6 dyaTT^TOS fjfjiwv dSeA<os ITavAos. With (TVVKOLVWVOS cf. O-WKOIVO)-
vziv in xviii. 4; and for lv after Kowon/ds cf. Matt, xxiii. 30.
Fellowship in suffering naturally was an essential mark of early
Christianity. Cf. 2 Cor. i. 7, KOLVWVOL core TWV Tra^/xdVoov : Phil.
iii. IO, KOtvcui/t av TcSv Tra^/xdrwv : iv. 14, crwKotvwvrycraj Tes //,ov ry
K TTJ 6Xu|/i Kal J3aai\eta Kal UTTOJJLOI/T) ev lyjaoG. The
here is the tribulation of the last time : cf. vii. 14, T^S dAti/rcus TT}S
p.yd\ir)<s. It is the same as the rfjs (Spas TOV Tretpaor/^ov T^S fjifX-
Xovcrrfs ep^ecr^at CTTI r^s otKOV/xev?;? oA?;? in iii. 10. This last great
tribulation necessarily precedes the Millennial Kingdom hence
Kal ySao-tAeta : but to have part in the kingdom faithful endur
ance throughout the tribulation is necessary hence Kat vTropovfi -
cf. ii. 2, 3, 19, iii. 10, xiii. 10, xiv. 12. vn-o/jLovr) being the
spiritual alchemy, which transmutes those who share in the #Au/as
into members of the /3acnAei a, can only achieve its end in
fellowship with Jesus (ei> I^crov) a Pauline conception which
recurs in xiv^jc^, but is set forth under another figure in iii._2p, .;
edv rts aKOvcrr) r?}s <^xov^s /xov Kal avoL^y TT]V Ovpav, ci(reAevcro/xat
Trpo? OLVTOV Kat SetTrv^cra) fier avrov KOL avros /xer e/xov. It is
a question whether eV I^o-ov should be connected with all three
nouns or wjth^iuTrp/xov^o^nly. Probably the latter is best : cf. i
2 Thess. iii. 5, TT)V VTTO^OV^V TOV X/KOTTOV, though the idea here is
somewhat different.
eyeyopjK ^="1 found myself in." We might conclude
from this clause that when he wrote he was no longer in Patmos.
Patmos was one of the Sporades, a barren rocky island about
ten miles long and five wide. It is first mentioned by
Thucydides, iii. 33, and later by Strabo, x. 5. 13, and Pliny, H.N.
iv. 12. 23, the last of whom states that it was used as a penal
settlement by the Romans, as were other islands, i.e. Pontia,
off the coast of Latium, to which Domitian banished Flavia
Domitilla (Euseb. H.E. iii. 18. 5), and Gyara and Seriphus in
the Aegean (see Encyc. Bib. iii. 3603).
8ia roy Xoyoi TOU 0eoG Kal TTJ^ jxapTupiai irjaou. These words
define the ground for his presence in Patmos, i.e. his preaching
of the Gospel and his loyalty to it in a time of tribulation. The
phrase T. Adyov T. 0eov Kat T. fjiaprvpiav I. here give the contents
of his preaching, whereas in 2 they describe the Apocalypse
itself: cf. o<ra etSci/. It has been urged by many scholars that
22 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [l. 9-10.
John had gone to Patmos for the purpose of receiving this
revelation, i.e. that mentioned in 2. But this interpretation
appears to be inadmissible on several grounds, i. In our
author Sta never means "for the sake of" ( = o/e/ca) receiving the
word of God, etc., but "because of," "in consequence of" the
word of God which he had preached. In other words, Sta
denotes the ground and not the purpose in this Book : cf. ii. 3,
iv. n, vi. 9, vii. 15, xii. n, 12, xiii. 14, etc. 2. In two passages
our author speaks of death by persecution in connection with
these very phrases, i.e. vi. 9, eo-<ay/x,eVeov Sia r. A.oyov r. Otov KCU
3ta T. /xaprvptW, and again in xx. 4. These passages in them
selves indicate the interpretation to be adopted in the present
passage. 3. The fact that our author has just described himself
aS (TVVKOLVWVOS V TYJ BXtytL . . . KCU VTTOfJiOVrj SUggCStS that he
has in a special and not in any ordinary manner suffered for
the faith. If he suffered no more than the average Christian, it
is not in keeping with his reticence as to himself that he should
lay emphasis on what after all was the common lot of the
faithful. 4. An early tradition, in itself not uniform nor quite
credible in its details, testifies to the banishment of John to
Patmos. Cf. Tert. De Praescript. 36, " Apostolus loannes . . .
in insulam relegatur " ; Clem. Alex. Quis dives, 42, eVctS^ yap TOV
Tvpdvvov TcXevTiycravros O.TTO -nys Har/xou rrjs v^crou /zerrJA-^ev CTTL rrjv
"E<f>o-ov : Origen, In Matt. t. xvi. 6, 6 Se Pco^atwv /3ao-tXevs, a>s fj
7ra/m8o(ris StSacrKct, /careSi /cacre TOV Itodvvrjv /JLaprvpovvra Sia TOV TTJS
d\.rjOLa<s Aoyov cts ECar/xoi/ rrjv vrjcrov. If we combine this tradi
tion with the fact cited above that Patmos was a penal settlement
(Pliny, H.N. iv. 12. 23), as well as i, 2, and 3, the evidence for
John s exile is adequate. There is no just ground for the
suggestion that the tradition arose as an elaboration of the
present passage.
1O. eyeyojATji Iv irkeujxaTi. Not merely " I was in," but " I fell
into." These words denote the ecstatic condition into which
the Seer has fallen, just as ev lavrw yevo/xei/os (Acts xii. n)
describe the return to the normal condition. We have equivalent
phrases in Acts xi. 5, etSov kv eKo-racrei, and xxii. 17, yo/eo-0cu /u, Iv
/rra<rei. Apart from extraordinary ecstatic experiences, all
Christians could be said to be eti/ai Iv TTV^V^CLTL (Rom. viii. 9) as
opposed to the faithless, who were ei/ o-apKL.
In this passage, then, eyei/o/x^v ei/ Tri/eu/xart denotes nothing
more than that the Seer fell into a trance. It was not until he
was in this trance that Christ addressed him. But in iv. 2 (see
note), where this phrase recurs, if the text is right, it must mean
something more, since the Seer is already in a trance.
iv TTJ KuptaKTJ rjfxe pa. This is the first place in Christian
literature where the Lord s Day is mentioned. Some scholars
1.10.] HIS VISION OF THE SON OF MAN 2$
have proposed to take this phrase as meaning "in the day of the
Lord," i.e. "the day of Yahweh," the day of judgment in the
LXX, Y) fjjji lpa TOV Kvpiov, and elsewhere in our text, f) fj/jiepa. f)
jj,eyaA>7, vi. 17, xvi. 14. It is sufficient to mention this inter
pretation and pass on to the generally accepted and, in the
opinion of the present writer, the right interpretation, which takes
these words to mean " on the Lord s day," i.e. the day con
secrated to the Lord. We might compare an analogous phrase
in I Cor. xi. 20, OVK coriv xvpiaKOv Beitrvov qfxxyetv. In the 2nd
cent, we have the following undisputed testimonies to the use of
this phrase for Sunday : Didache xiv. i, Kara /<vpia/o)v o
crwa^evres KXdcrare aprov : Evang Petri, 35, e7re<o)(TKv 17
ib. 50, opOpov Se T7)<s KvpiaKrjs: Ignatius, Ad Magn. ix. i,
(ra/SjSaTi^ovTfS a\\a Kara KvpuaKrjv ^wvres, kv y /cat 17 fa
<WreiA.ev : Melito of Sardis the title of one of his writings,
Kvpia/c?}?, preserved in Euseb. H.E. iv. 26. 2. Here " Lord s
Day " has become a technical designation of Sunday. Since all
these writings emanate from Asia Minor, the term may first have
arisen there, but that it was in general use before the close of the
2nd cent, may be inferred from the statement of Dionysius of
Corinth in Euseb. H.E. IV. 23. II, rrjv cn^upov ovv KVpiaKrjv dytav
fjfjitpav St^yayo^ev : Clem. Alex. Strom, vii. 12 ; Tert. De Cor. iii.,
" Die dominico jejunium nefas ducimus," etc.
The reason given by the early Christians for naming the first
day of the week " the Lord s Day," was that it was the day of His
resurrection. But how it came to be celebrated weekly and not
only yearly seems to be first explained by Deissmann (Bible
Studies, 218 sq. ; Encyc. Bib. iii. 2815 sq.). It appears that the
first day of each month was called " Emperor s Day " (SejSaor??)
in Asia Minor and Egypt before the Christian era, Lightfoot,
Apostolic Fathers^ i. ii. 714 ; nay more, according to two inscrip
tions from Ephesus and Kabala to which might be added an
Oxyrhynchus papyrus (circ. 100 A.D.) it is inferred by Buresch
(Aus Lydien, 1898, pp. 49-50) and Deissmann that Se^cum? was
a day of the week. If these conclusions are valid we can under
stand how naturally the term " Lord s Day " arose ; for just as
the first day of each month, or a certain day of each week, was
called "Emperor s Day," so it would be natural for Christians
to name the first day of each week, associated as it was with the
Lord s resurrection and the custom of Christians to meet together
for worship on it, as " Lord s Day." It may have first arisen in
apocalyptic circles when a hostile attitude to the Empire was
adopted by Christianity.
rJKoucra $uvj]v peya.\v]v omorOeV JAOU. Our author has probably
Ezek. iii. 12 in his mind, KCU dveXa/^ev /xe Trvev/xa, /ecu rj/coixra
ov <J><j>vr)v 0-6107x07} /xeyaXou. Wetstein quotes a good
24 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [1.10-11.
parallel from Plutarch, Lycurg. 54 C, oxovo-ai Se <wvr)v
TWOS eo7ricr$ei/ eTrtrijuaJi/ros a^rw . . . d>s
<ey
jaeydXtji . . . ws o-dXTuyyos. Cf. iv. I note. The
voice is loud and clear as a trumpet blast. It appears to be that
of the Son of Man (so Alcasar, Ewald, Hengstenberg, Bousset),
who bids the Seer o /^A-eVeis ypdif/ov eis /3i/3A,ioi/ (i i), and at the
close of this theophany repeats the command in 19, ypctyov ovv
a elSes. This is the natural interpretation. Diisterdieck and
Alford take the voice to be that of an unnamed angel.
dig crdXmyyos. I n <*> we have to deal with the most difficult
particle in all our author s vocabulary. See the Additional Note
at the close of this chapter on ws and o/xotos.
Xeyouotjs. We should expect Ae youo-av. But this is no
oversight of our author; for the same construction recurs in
iv. I, r) <fro)vr) rj Trpwrrj . . . ws trdATriyyos AaAova^s, when we
should expect XaXovo-a.
This connection of the participle with the dependent genitive
instead of with the governing nouns we find also in vi. 7, r/Kovcra
<wv>)v r. reraproi; wov Xeyovros, though here this construction is
very intelligible.
11-16. These verses appear to be composed of four stanzas,
the first three of four lines each and the fourth of three.
11. pXeireis. Our author, like most of the N.T. writers
(including Johannine Gospel and Epistles), uses /JXeVav and not
6pav in the present tense, except in the case of opa in the im
perative = "beware." For the future of ^XeVetv he uses
oi//ecr#eu, and for the passive aorist 6<j>6fjvai.
ypdtyov els. For other constructions with tV and eVi see i. 3,
ii. 17, iii. 12, xiv. i, xvii. 5, etc. The Seer is repeatedly bidden to
write down his visions, except in the case of the Seven Thunders.
TCUS cirra eidcXTjaiais. According to Ramsay (Letters to the
Seven Churches , p. 191), "the Seven groups of Churches, into
which the province had been divided before the Apocalypse was
composed, were seven postal districts, each having as its centre
or point of origin one of the Seven Cities, which (as was pointed
out) lie on a route which forms a sort of inner circle round the
Province." Ramsay s reason for these Seven Churches in
cluding two comparatively small towns, Thyatira and Philadelphia,
and excluding the well-known cities of Colossae, Hierapolis,
Troas, Tralles, etc. being chosen and none others, is (op. cit.
p. 183) that "all the Seven Cities stand on the great circular road
that bound together the most populous, wealthy, and influential
part of the Province, the west-central region." If delivered at
these Seven Cities, the Apocalypse would easily spread through
out the rest of the Province; for "they were the best points on
I. 11-18.] HIS VISION OF THE SON OF MAN 2$
that circuit to serve as centres of communication with seven
districts : Pergamum for the north (Troas, doubtless Adramyt-
tium, and probably Cyzicus and other cities on the coast con
tained Churches) ; Thyatira for an inland district on the north
east and east ; Sardis for the wide middle valley of the Hermus ;
Philadelphia for Upper Lydia, to which it was the door (iii. 8) ;
Laodicea for the Lycus Valley and for central Phrygia, of which
it was the Christian metropolis in later time ; Ephesus for the
Cayster and Lower Maeander Valleys and coasts ; Smyrna for
the Lower Hermus Valley and the North Ionian coasts"
(p. 191 sq.). This is an attractive hypothesis. The fact,
however, that seven, and just seven, were chosen, is determined
apparently by the sacredness of this number in the eyes of our
author. This fact, however, does not exclude the possibility
that the Seven Churches in our author were selected on the
ground of their fitness as desirable centres of publication. To
each of these centres the roll would be carried in turn and then
copied. Smyrna lay 40 miles north of EphesuSj ^j^aniurn
40 north ot Smyrna, JQyratira 45 S.E. of Pergamum, Sardis
30 nearly due S. of Thyatira, Philadelphia 30 E.S.E. of Sardis,
and J^aodicea 40 S.E. of Philaiiejptn .a (see map in Ramsay).
12. jBXe-rreii TT\V $wf]v. Cf. Aesch. Theb. 106, KTVTTOV ScSopKO.
The voice is here used for the person from whom it comes.
tjrts eXdXei [ACT e|xou. The TJTLS here represents an indirect
question, and accordingly the construction is classical. On
cXaXet fjiT /xov, see note on iv. i.
12 b . eirrdi Xuxyias xp uor <*9. O n the position of eTrra as con
trasted with its position in 16, see note on viii. 2. These seven
lampstands recall Zech. iv. 2, where, however, only one lampstand
appears with seven lamps, which, as the LXX and Vulg. rightly
testify, were each fed by a pipe from one common reservoir of
oil. In Ex. xxv. 31 sqq. there is a description of a seven-
branched candlestick (Xv^yta. = miaip), which was said to stand
outside the second veil of the Tabernacle. The candlestick or
lampstand carried seven lamps (Av xvot = nro). In our text the
lampstands are separate. Their function is to embody and give
forth the light of God on earth. Should the lamps fail to do so,
their lampstand is removed (ii. 5).
Various scholars (Gunk el, Chaos, 294 sqq.; Zimmern, K.A.T*
624 sqq.) have drawn attention to the original connection between
the seven-armed candlestick and the seven planets, and quoted
the passages from Josephus and Philo (see note on p. 12) to this
effect. But of this our Seer was probably wholly unconscious.
13-18. If the student studies the titles of the Son of Man
in these verses, he will see that they recur at the beginning of
six of the letters, but not in that to the Church of Laodicea.
26 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [l. 13-16.
Thus it seems to have been the intention of our author to
connect each of the Seven Letters with a special title. But this
intention was carried out only partially and in a superficial
manner in this preliminary sketch of his work. For, as already
observed, the title at the beginning of the letter to Laodicea is
not found in i. 13-18; and in the letters to Ephesus and Sardis
the same title is used twice : cf. ii. i, 6 Kparvv TOVS CTTTOI aoWpas
w rf} Se& p (cf. i. l6 a ), and iii. I, 6 ex wi/ r vs cirra derrepas.
Again, that the titles were intended to have some connection
with the letters in which they respectively appear is ci< j ar in most
of the cases. Thus in the letter to the Church in Ephesus the
title, 6 TreptTrarcov ev //.ecra) ra>v ITTTOI Xv^vtwv rail/ ^pvcroij/ (ii. i), is at
all events related verbally to the words of warning in ii. 5, el Se
firj . . . jav7J(ra> TTJV Xvxvtav <rov IK TOV TOTTOV avrfjs. In the letter
to the Church in Smyrna the title, os eyeVcro veicpos KCU c^crev
(ii. 8), may contain a reference to ii. io d , ytvou TTICTTOS d^pt 6a.va.rov,
KOI Swo-o) orot TOV <rT<J>avov rfls WT}S. In the letter to the Church
in Pergamum 6 l^oav ryv po/x^aiW rrjv SIOTOJUOV (ii. 12) is antici
patory ot the words in ii. l6 c , TroXe/A^cro) /ACT avrwv tv rf) po/A<aia
TOV 0-To/x.aros /xov. In the letter to the Church in Thyatira the
title, 6 e^cov rot s 6<f>0a\fjLov<s ws ^>Xoya Trupds (ii. 1 8), may be
chosen with reference to the claim in ii. 23, eyw et/u 6 cpavv&v
v<f>povs KOL KapSias. In the case of the three remaining Churches
the connection between the introductory title of Christ and the
contents of the letters is obscure except in the letter to the
Church in Philadelphia. In the letter to the Church in Sardis
the title, 6 l^wi/ ra OTTO, in/v//,aTa TOV 6eov (iii. i), may point to the
need of watchfulness (iii. 2), since the seven spirits are sent forth
by Christ to witness the doings of men (v. 4). In the letter to
the Church in Philadelphia the title, 6 \eov T^V KXetv Aavei S, 6
dvotywv *crX (iii. 7), is introduced to justify Christ s power to fulfil
His promise that He will cause the Jews after the flesh to bow
down before the true spiritual Israel (iii. 9), and will make the
latter pillars in the spiritual community of God (iii. 12). It is
Christ that shuts out the one from this community and admits
the other to it. Finally, in the letter to the Church in Laodicea
the title, 6 /taprws 6 TTIO-TOS KCU a\Trj6w6<s (iii. 14), may have reference
to the testimony given against the Laodicean Church in iii. 16-19.
The above facts show that, whereas only in the case of the
Churches of Philadelphia and Thyatira is there any sort of
organic connection between the divine title and the contents of
the letter, in the case of the rest the connection is at the best
either artificial or doubtful. Thus these titles give the impression
of being an afterthought on the part of our author inserted by
him in order to link up chap. i. (whence the titles are drawn) and
chaps, ii.-iii. This supposition gains confirmation from the fact
1.13.] HIS VISION OF THE SON OF MAN 2;
that the Seven Letters were undoubtedly written before the time
of Domitian, and in fact before our author had any apprehension
of a world-wide persecution, whereas the rest of the Apocalypse
is saturated through and through with this conviction.
13. ofjLOLov viov. Cf. xiv. 14. Here, as I have shown in
the Additional Note (p. 36) on u>s and 0^,0109, o/xotos is used
as the equivalent of u>s, not only in meaning but in construc
tion.
OJAOIOK uloi/ dyOpoj-rrou. Cf. xiv. 14. The fact that the articles
are absent (i.e. TOV vlov TOV 6.vBpu>irov) is so far from being a
matter of difficulty that in this context they could not be present.
The Being whom the Seer sees is not " like the Son of Man,"
but is "the Son of Man." But the Seer can rightly describe
Him as being " like a son of man." This technical phraseology
in Apocalyptic means that the Being so described is not a man.
Further, since Ezekiel, and particularly i Enoch xxxvii.-lxxi.
(also lxxxiii.-xc.), used the term "man" in their visions to
symbolize an angel, wos avOp&irov would most naturally bear the
same meaning in this passage. Thus OJJLOIOV vlov avOpw-Trov would
= " like an angel." Hence the Being so described is a super
natural Being, like an angel and yet not an angel. Cf. I Enoch
xlvi. i, where the supernatural Messiah is described as a " being
whose countenance was as the appearance of a man " ( = ntOEG
t^UN). Such is the literal rendering of this latter passage.
Further, there can be no doubt that long before the time of our
Seer the phrase "like a Son of Man" (t?JK -Q3) in Dan. vii. 13
was taken as a Messianic designation. Thus <J>s mos avOpuirov
in Apocalyptic is the exact equivalent of 6 wos TOV avOpuirov in
the Gospels and Acts vii. 56.
iro8i]pT]. Cf. Dan. x. 5, /ecu ISov avrfp els
/3vo-o-iva (LXX : /SaSSetV, Theod.), i.e. D^3 ^ irr? ; Ezek. ix. 2, ets
dvijp . . . evSeSuKws Troorjprj (also in 3, n) a rendering of the
same Hebrew phrase. Since in xv. 6 we have cVSeSv/xeVot
t XiOov f . . . /cat 7rpiea>0yx.eVoi irepl TO. o-TrjOrj used in reference to
angels, there is not necessarily any reference here to the priestly
character of Christ. In Ex. xxviii. 4, xxix. 5, iroorjprjs is used
as a rendering of the high priestly robe (^j&p). Cf. Josephus,
Ant. iii. 7* 4 5 o 8e dp^tepcvs . . . 7revSvcrayw,ei/os 8" e va.Kw6ov
TT^TTOLTfJfJieVOV ^tTOJVa, TToS^p^S 8" <TTt KCU OVTOS, fACtlp Ka\LTO.l Tr)V
^jaere pav yAaxrcrav, ^wvy Trcpto-^tyyerat : iii. 7. 2, where the linen
vestment of the priests is called TroS^p??? ^mm/. See also Wisd.
xviii. 24, ri yap TroSiypovs evSv/xarog rjv oAos 6 /co oy/,os. But even
if TroSrJp^s was in the mind of the Seer a rendering of ^yD, the
priestly reference is still doubtful; for the ^yv was commonly
used by men of high rank (cf. i Sam. xviii. 4, xxiv. 5, 12 ; Ezek.
xxvi. 1 6, etc.). The long robe is used here simply as an Oriental
28 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [l. 13-14.
mark of dignity, though it may have had originally a very
different meaning and origin : cf. Gressmann, Eschatologie,
346 sq.
irepie^GKTjAeVoi irpos rots paorois \pvt\v \puv6iv. This phrase
recurs in a slightly different form in xv. 6. Both this and the
preceding phrase were suggested by Dan. x. 5, eVSeStyzeVos /foSSeiV,
KOL rj 6<r<us avrov Trepie^oKr/xeV^ ei/ ^pvcrtw Q<a, where there is no
connection of any kind with the priestly dress. The golden
clasp or TTO PTTI? was worn by the king and his chosen friends
(<tAoi), i Mace. x. 89, xi. 58. The high priest also wore a girdle
(nJ3N), but it was a loosely-woven scarf: cf. Ex. xxviii. 4,
xxxix. 29 ; Lev. xiii. 7. This priestly girdle was worn on the
breast a little above the armpits : cf. Josephus, Ant. iii. 7. 2,
TroS^p?;? ^trcov . . . ov 7rioiWwTat Kara a-rfjOos oAtyov TT/S /xacr^aA^s
VTrepavto rrjv ^wvrjv Trepiayovres. -rrpos in local sense with dative
is rare in the N.T. Here only in the Apocalypse: cf. Mark v. n;
John xviii. 16, xx. n, 12.
14. -q 8e K<|>aXT] aurou KCU, at rpi)(S Xeuical a>s epiov XeuicoV [cos
Xtwt ]. Our text presupposes Dan. vii. 9 and i Enoch xlvi. i.
The former, according to Theod., Vulgate, and most com
mentators, is to be rendered : " his raiment was white as snow,
and the hair of his head like pure wool " ; while i Enoch xlvi. i
= ^ K<J>aX.r) avrov cos eptov \evKrj (or AevKoV). Thus in the first
place we explain the combination of f) KtfyaXr) and cu rpi^es in
our text. But our text diverges clearly from Theodotion s
version and the Massoretic of Dan. vii. 9 ; for the latter read
" the hair of his head like pure (i.e. cleansed) wool." But unless
we assume that the wool is white, which, of course, it sometimes
is, the comparison is not a good one. Since the LXX here has
TO rpi^co/xa rfjs Ke^aX^s avrov doo-et eptov Aev/cov KaOapov ("spotless
as white wool"), it is clear that our author had either it or the
Aramaic text presupposed by it before him. i Enoch xlvi. i
could be either "his hair was white like wool" or "like white
wool," the latter being the more likely. Hence our text agrees
with the LXX and i Enoch here against the Massoretic of Dan.
vii. 9. It should be observed that the description which in
Daniel and i Enoch belongs to the Ancient of Days, is here
transferred to the Son of Man. The term Kc<()a.\rj may refer to
the hair.
[o>s X^O This was manifestly a marginal gloss. It is
extremely awkward in its present context. Moreover, in Dan.
vii. 9 it is the raiment that is "white as snow," not the hair of
his head.
ot 6<j>6aXfjLol auroG tus <f>X6 irupos. Cf. ii. 18, xix. 12, where the
same description is again applied to Christ. The phrase is
suggested by Dan. x. 6, " His eyes were as lamps of fire "
I. 14-16.] HIS VISION OF THE SON OF MAN 29
; 2 Enoch i. 5, " Their eyes were like burning lamps." The
metaphor is a very common one in Latin and Greek, as Wetstein
has shown on this passage.
15. ol iroSes aurou OJAOIOI xaXKoXij3di/w. Here again our author
has drawn upon Daniel. Cf. x. 6, " His feet like in colour to
burnished brass" (LXX, oxrei ^aX/cos ^aa-TpdTrrwv : Theod. ws
opao-ts x ^-* o-TiX/?ovro9 (fejj n^m 172): Ezek. i. 4, 27, viii. 2,
" From the appearance of his loins and downward, fire : and
from his loins and upward, as the appearance of brightness, as
the colour of amber"; also i. 7, "they sparkled like the colour
of burnished brass" (LXX, d>s e^ao-iyxxTrrwv x a ^ K s PW O WJ
W>p n>ri3). xaX/coXi/3avos (here and ii. 18 only) is as yet an un
identified metal. Hence, whatever translation we assign it is purely
provisional. Suidas defines it as eTSos ^Xe/crpou Ti/xiwrepoi/ xpva-ov
ecrrt ($ TO rjXfKTpov dXXoTUTrov xpvcrtov /me/jnyfjifvov veXoJ KO.I \i@cia
. . . T/XeKrpov, dXXoiwo-is xpvo-i ov, fte/xty/xevov veXw KCU Ai$iots.
The word, which is of uncertain derivation, is rendered in Latin
by aurichalcum. Pliny, H.N. xxxiii, 4, writes : " Omnino auro
inest argentum vario pondere. Ubicunque quinta argenti portio
est, electrum vocatur." ix. 41, "Argentum auro confundere, ut
electra fiant." Servius on Virgil, Aen. viii. 402, " Electrum . . .
quod fit de tribus partibus auri et una argenti." Eustathius on
Od. iv. p. 150. 13, rjXe/crpos . . . /xtyyu,a TI xpvcrov /cat apyvpov.
(These last three quotations are drawn from Wetstein.)
o>S ev Kajii^w f n-eirupwjj.^^s t- So AC. But, if this is
original, it can only be a slip for 7re7rvpa>//,eVa> on the part of the
Seer, which he would have corrected in a revision of his text.
For the explanation given by Hort and Swete, that TreTrupw/xeVr/s
is explained by x a ^ KO W? c " / ou understood, is too prosaic and
intolerable, i.e. "like burnished brass as in a furnace of burnished
brass." Hence I assume that our author intended to write
TreTTvpw/xeVo) a correction which was early and rightly introduced
into the text as the following authorities testify : i.e. X, some
cursives, s 1 - 2 , vg., Sah., Eth. Viet. Thus we have the vigorous
and fitting conception : " like burnished brass as when it is
smelted (or refined ) in the furnace." Trupovv is used only in
the passive in the N.T. In the present passage and in iii. 18 it
is used as the equivalent of spv (in Ps. xii. 6, Ixvi. 10 ; Dan.
xii. 10 ; Zech. xiii. 9), of which it is the stock translation.
TJ 4>ui/T) aurou a9 <f>wi>T) uSarwi TroXXom The voice of the Son
of Man is described in exactly the same terms as the voice of
God in Ezek. xliii. 2, D^i D^O hp3 l^ip (so the Heb. but not the
LXX). Here our author rejects the corresponding simile in
Dan. x, 6 pon inp3 " like the voice of a multitude."
16. Ixwy = etxe, a Semitic idiom, though the participle is used
in the Koi^ occasionally as a finite verb. The reading of A, KO.L
30 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [l. 16.
eV TT? Seiu xeipl avrov dcrrepeg eTrra, seems to assimilate the text to
the adjoining clauses, but it may be original.
Xwy er TTJ Seia Xtipi aurou darepas eirrci. Cf. ii. I (where the
clause is probably an interpolation), iii. i. This clause is to be
interpreted purely symbolically and not literally. It means that
these seven stars were subject to him, and wholly in his power.
On the other hand the words W^v rrjv Setai/ avrov eV e/Ae in 17
are to be taken literally.
In 20 these seven stars are interpreted as symbolizing the
Seven Churches. That they were originally conceived as forming
the constellation of the Bear has been suggested by Bousset,
who quotes Dieterich (Eine Mithrasliturgie, p. 14, line i6sq.,
pp. 72, 76 sq.), where the God Mithras is represented as appearing
to the mystic . . . Kari^pvra kv Seia X t / /xoa^ov w/xov xpvareov,
os fomv apKTos ^ Kivovcra . . . TOV ovpai/oV. But, whatever may
be the original derivation of this conception, it could hardly be
present to the mind of the Seer in the present passage, else we
should have TOVS eTrra do-repas and not do-repas tTrra. The
number seven, in itself sacred, determined the number of the
Churches (i. 20), and thus by a coincidence the number of the
stars as seven. See Jeremias, Babylonisches im Neuen Testament,
24-26. But the seven stars may be the seven planets.
eic TOU orojAaTOS auToG pofxcjxxia StoTojJios 6ela eKiropeuofxenrj.
Cf. ii. 12, 1 6. These words go back to Isa. xi. 4, " He shall smite
the earth with the rod of his mouth " (here the LXX has TW Aoyo>
row o-To/xaros avrov), xlix. 2 ; "He hath made my mouth like a
sharp sword" (ws n.a.ya.ipuv 6etai/). See also note on xix. 15,
where part of the above clause recurs : cf. Heb. iv. 12 ; 2 Thess.
ii. 9; 4 Ezra xiii. 4. The sword that proceeds from the mouth of
the Son of Man is simply a symbol of his judicial authority.
Religious art has been very unhappy in representing this symbol
literally as a sword proceeding from the mouth of Christ.
popjxxia SurrojJios. Cf. Ps. cxlix. 6 (po/x<atat oYo-ro/zot = Uin
ITWB) ; Sir. xxi. 3.
CK T. orojjiaTOS . . . eKiropeuojxei/T). Cf. ix. 17, xix. 15.
TJ ovjus auToG, ws 6 rjXios 4>ati>i ei> TYJ Sumfxet auroG. o/as =
"face"; oi/as is found only here and in John vii. 24, xi. 44 in
the N.T., but this usage is not infrequent in the LXX. Part
of the clause 6 ^Xtos and V T. Sw. avrov goes back to Judg. v. 31,
" Let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth forth in
his strength" (a>? t^oSos ^At ov ei/ Svr<ftct avrov = ^10^n DSV3
o -^Xtos. Cf. Matt. xvii. 2, f\o.p^f^v TO Trpoo-toTrov avrov u>?
6 ^Xios. The faces of the righteous are also to shine like the
sun, Matt. xiii. 43 ; as do also those of the angels : x, i ;
2 Enoch i. 5, xix. i.
I. 16-18.] HIS VISION OF THE SON OF MAN 31
ws 6 ijXios <J>aiVei. We have here a Hebrew construction,
the same as in Deut. xxxii. n; Job vii. 2, ix. 26, xi. 16; Isa.
Ixi. 10 ; Jer. xxiii. 29. Hence our text = imn:Q TW KW3. The
clause should be rendered, "And his face was as the sun
shining in his strength." See Additional Note on ei>s, p. 36.
17. K.a.1 ore etSoi> aurok KT\. The Seer had in his mind Dan.
x. 7, 9, (LXX), /cat eTSov eyco Aavr)A rrjv opacnv . . . : 9, /cat . . .
eyu> rjfjirjv TTCTTTWKIOS CTTI TrpdcrwTroi/ jotov CTTI T^/V y^v. Cf. also Josh.
v. 14 ; Ezek. i. 28, iii. 23, xliii. 3.
K.a.1 e0r)K6i TT]^ SeltaK aurou . . . MTJ 4>oj3ou. Cf. Dan. x. 10,
12, 19. The /AT? c/>o/3ov is found also separately in Isa. xliv. 2;
Matt. xiv. 27, xvii. 7; Luke i. 13, 30, etc. It is used to give
comfort (cf. Matt. xiv. 27= John vi. 20; Acts xxvii. 24), and
to remind the Seer that He that is seen is no unknown one
(Spitta).
From pr} <J>oj3ov to the close of this verse there is a stanza of
four lines.
e ycu eiju 6 irpwTos KCU 6 I<rx<XTOs. Cf. ii. 8, xxii. 13. In all
three cases these words are used as a designation of Christ.
They are derived from Isa. xliv. 6 } OK rritOV mrp . . . "MD&rnb
iins ONI jiK &p, and xlviii. 12, where, of course, they are used
as self-designations by Yahweh. In both instances the LXX
diverges from the Massoretic : xliv. 6, OVTWS Aeyei . . . 0eos
a-aftauO Eyw Trpcoros Kat eyw /xera ravra : xlviii. 12, eytu ct/xt
Trpwros /cat eyco et/xt cts rov ataiva. Cf. also Isa. xli. 4 and xliii. IO.
18. This verse sets forth the threefold conception of Christ
in John : the ever abiding life He had independently of the
world ; His humiliation even unto physical death, and His rising
to a life not only everlasting in itself but to universal authority
over life and death.
K.a.1 6 wv K.a.1 eyi/(5(jit|K yeicpos. These words form the second
line of the stanza and are to be taken closely together. Here, as
in i. 5-6, ii. 2, 9, etc., the participle after the Hebrew idiom has
been resolved into the finite verb. See note on L 5-6, where it
is shown that the line should be rendered
" And He that liveth and was dead."
Most recent commentators connect the /cat 6 wv with the pre
ceding words. But in every instance, whether in Isaiah or in
the Apocalypse, the phrase " I am the first and the last " is
complete in itself, and the phrase /cat 6 an> would simply impair
the fulness of the claim made in these words. On the other
hand, when taken with /cat eyevo/xryi/ ve/cpos they are full of signifi
cance in the contrast between the ever abiding eternal life which
He possesses and the condition of physical ferth to which Jte
submitted for the sake of man.
32 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [1.18.
6 j^wy. This designation is based on the O.T. phrase Ti ta
#eos cov, in Josh. iii. ro ; Ps. xlii. 3, Ixxxiv. 3, etc.
wi> eijuu ets TOU cuojyas T&V atcuccjv. These words are used
of the Father in iv. 9, 10, x. 6. They are found in this con
nection in Dan. iv. 31, xii. 7 (cAiyn n), and Sir. xviii. i ; i Enoch
v. i.
?x&&gt; Tag K\ets TOU Oai/drou ical TOU aSou. Oavdrov and aSov can
be taken as objective genitives, i.e. the keys that lock or unlock
Hades ; or as possessive genitives, seeing that they are personified
in vi. 8, i.e. the keys held by death and Hades. 1 Hades is the
intermediate abode of only the wicked or non-righteous in our
author (see xx. 14 note; also vi. 8, xx. 13) as in Luke xvi. 23,
where it is set over against Paradise. It has the same meaning
in the Psalms of Solomon xvi. 2: cf. xiv. 6, xv. u. In our
author Paradise (cf. ii. 7) has no connection with Hades : nor
yet in Luke xxiii. 43 ; 2 Cor. xii. 4. Hades is not spoken of in
the NT as containing Paradise except in Acts ii. 27 (31), which
is a quotation from Ps. xvi. 10. Hades or Sheol, however, bears
many different meanings in Jewish literature ; see my Eschatology*,
under " Sheol " in the Index, p. 482 sq. But to return. No soul
can enter Paradise save through death. So far, therefore, death
is the avenue alike to Paradise and Hades. But by submitting to
death Christ has through His death and resurrection won complete
authority over death. It is not improbable, further, that the text
implies the same belief that underlies i Pet. iii. 18 sqq. 2 Neither
death nor Hades can resist the power of the risen Christ. It is
not only that they cannot withhold from Him the faithful that
have already died, but that Christ has entered their realm as a
conqueror and preached there the Gospel of Redemption to
those that had not as yet heard it. No soul can henceforth be
a prisoner in Hades, which is there owing to spiritual and other
disabilities, in the creation of which it had no part. This inter
pretation of the text is in keeping with the universal proclamation
of the Gospel to the heathen world, which according to xiv. 6-7,
xv. 4, was to precede the end. All wherever they were were
to hear the Gospel before the Final Judgment.
Again we have here one of the earliest traces in Christian
literature of the Descent of Christ into Hades, and the conquest
of its powers. This idea is in certain forms pre-Christian.
Thus in the Babylonian Religion we have the descent of Ishtar,
of Hibil Ziwa in the Mandaean Religion, of the primitive man
1 Sheol and death are personified in Hos. xiii. 14. They are classed
together in Ps. xviii. 6 ; Prov. v. 5.
2 Loofs, in E.R.E. iv. 662, accepts this view, and holds that the doctrine
of the Descensus underlies Matt, xxvii. 51-53, the Epistle to the Hebrews
(xi. 39 sq., xii. 22, ix. 8).
I. 18-20.] HIS VISION OF THE SON OF MAN 33
in the system of Manes (see Bousset, Offenbarung*, p. 197 sq.;
Gunkel, Zum . . . Verstandniss d. NTs, p. 72 ; Clemen, Religions-
gesch. Erkldrung d. JVT, pp. 153-156); but these non-Jewish
sources do not appear to have given birth to the Christian
doctrine of the Descensus ad Inferos, as Loofs, in his art. in
E.R.E. iv. 648-663, has shown.
K\eis TOU 6amrou KCU TOU a8ou. The power over these keys,
according to the Targ. Jer. on Gen. xxx. 22 (cf. also on Deut.
xxviii. 12), belongs to God alone: Sanh. 113% " Elijah asked for
the key of the raising of the dead. Therefore he was told :
Three keys are not committed to a messenger : those of birth,
rain, and of the raising of the dead " : Taan. 2 a . According to
the Midrash Tehillin on Ps. xciii. the Messiah is called Jinnon
because he will awake the dead (Weber 2 , 368).
19. ouV resumes the command given in n, enforced with
the authority of One who has power over death. This particle
occurs only here and in ii. 15, 16, iii. 3, 19, in our author, but
195 times in the Fourth Gospel.
& ctSeg KCU & eiaiy KCU a u.e\\i yivevQai (JLCTOL raura. These
words summarize roughly the contents of the Book. The a etSes
is the vision of the Son of Man just vouchsafed to the Seer : a
clo-iv refers directly to the present condition of the Church as
shown in chaps, ii.-iii., and indirectly to that of the world in
general ; a /AcAAei yiVeo-0ai /xera ravra to the visions from chap,
iv. onwards, which, with the exception of a few sections refer
ring to the past and the present, deal with the future. At the
beginning of iv. the Seer is summoned to heaven, where a voice
declares : 6Wo> crot a Set yevr0at /nera raOra (iv. i).
& et&es. Cf. i. 2, iv. i.
a u.e\\i yiceo-Oai fxera raura. On //.eAAet, which in our author
is generally followed by the imperfect inf., see x. 7 note; Blass,
Gram. 197, 202.
20. This verse is independent grammatically of what precedes.
The construction of the Greek is highly irregular. In the first
place, we have an accusative absolute in TO pvo-rrjpiov : in the
second we have an accusative ras OTTO, Xv^Cas where we should
expect a genitive dependent on TO /uvorr^piov. These anomalies
are not explicable either from the standpoint of Greek or Hebrew.
The second of them is best accounted for by the hypothesis that
John did not revise his work. There are, it is true, a few in
stances of the ace. absolute in the N.T. : cf. Acts xxvi. 3, yvwo-T^i/
OI/TO. o* : i Tim. ii. 6, TO /zapTvpiov Kcupois loYots : Rom. viii. 3, TO
dSwaTov TOV i/o/xov. To these we may add the instance in our
text. This construction is very rare in the papyri as compared
with earlier Greek. See Robertson, Gram. 490, 1130.
The verse is to be rendered ; " As for the mystery of the seven
VOL. I. 3
34 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [l. 20.
stars, which thou sawest in (lit. "upon") my right hand, and of
the seven golden candlesticks, the seven stars are," etc. TO
fjiva-rripLov = " the secret meaning." We have analogous interpre
tations of mysteries in xiii. 18, xvii. 7, 9.
ol eTTToi dorepes ayyeXoi rwv euro, eKK\T)Grtu>j eicri. See note
on i. 4. Various explanations of these ayyeXoi have been
given. Some scholars take them to be the actual messengers
entrusted with the delivery of the letters to the various Churches,
or the delegates sent from the Asiatic Churches to Patmos who
were returning with the Apocalypse. Lightfoot, Schoettgen,
Bengel connect them with subordinate officials of the synagogue.
Primasius, Volter (Offenbarungfohannis, iv. 159) and others con
nect them with some prominent officials of the Churches. Zahn
(RinL ii. 606) and J. Weiss (Offenbarung Johannis, 49) identify
them with the bishops of the Seven Churches. But the use of
ayycXos in Apocalyptic in general and also in our author is wholly
against making ayyeXos represent a human being. If used at all
in Apocalyptic, ayyeXos can only represent a superhuman being.
Hence the only interpretation that can be accepted is one
which does justice to the term ayyeXos. From this standpoint
two interpretations are advanced, i. The angels are guardian
angels of the Seven Churches. This interpretation can be
supported from Daniel, where the doctrine of the angelic guard
ians or patrons of the nations is definitely presupposed : cf. x. 13,
20, 21, xi. i, xii. i. It appears also in Sir. xvii. 17 ; Deut. (LXX)
xxxii. 8. In the N.T. individuals are supposed to have special
guardian angels: cf. Matt, xviii. 10; Acts xii. 15; Targ. Jer. on
Gen. xxxiii. 10, "I have seen thy face, as though I had seen
the face of thy angel": also on xlviii. 16; Chag. i6 a . But,
if these angels are conceived of as distinct personalities, this
interpretation is open to unanswerable objections ; for Christ is
supposed to send letters to superhuman beings through the
agency of John, and the letters in question are wholly concerned,
not with these supposed angels, but directly with the Churches
themselves and their spiritual condition. Hence the only remain
ing interpretation is that which takes these angels to be the
heavenly doubles or counterparts of the Seven Churches, which
thus come to be identical with the Churches themselves. Even
this last interpretation is not free from difficulty ; for it in reality
amounts to explaining one symbol "the stars" by another
symbol " the angels." Notwithstanding, we must hold fast to the
latter interpretation in some form. Perhaps the seven stars
represent in Semitic fashion the heavenly ideal of the Seven
Churches : while the seven candlesticks are the actual realization
of those ideals. Even this view is open to criticism. Notwith
standing, it seems to express best the thought in the mind of our
I. 20.] HIS VISION OF THE SON OF MAN 35
author. Christ holds in His hand (i.e. His power) these ideals :
that is, only through Him can they be realized, at \-vyvla.i at
e-Trra eTrra eKK^crtat dviv. Here, since the Seven Churches have
been definitely enumerated in i. n, we should probably with
WH regard eTrra 7rra as a primitive error for eTrra. We should
then have "the candlesticks are the Seven Churches." But not
only have the Churches been previously mentioned, but the
subject and predicate are here identical. Hence the article
should be used with the predicate as in i. 8, 17, iii. 17. See
Robertson, Gram. 768.
ADDITIONAL NOTE ON o>s AND
Our author uses o>s in several idiomatic constructions, which
if considered in relation to the bulk of his work as a whole
differentiates it from all other writings.
1. <f><Dvr)v ... a)? o-aATTtyyos = " a voice like the voice of a
trumpet." The Seer has never in his earthly experience heard
such a voice. It was a heavenly voice. The nearest earthly
equivalent he could suggest was the sound of a trumpet. But it
was not the sound of a trumpet : it was only like it (a>?). The
construction here is a pregnant one = ")B1b=~iai> blpD as in Isa.
xxix. 4, Ixiii. 2 ; Jer. 1. 9. This pregnant construction recurs in
iv. i, 7, us dv^/3c67rou = D"lSD = D"IN ^SD, and in xiii. 2, ot Tro Ses
avrov us ap/cou : xvi. 3, al/xa ws ve/cpov. The same idea is con
veyed by (b<m in i Enoch xvii. i, xxiv. 4, xxxii. 4, and by (bs
in xiv. 10, n, 13, xvii. i ; but in none of these cases have we
the pregnant construction. In xiv. 18, rpo^os o>s ^Atou, it is a
pregnant one.
2. <os is used in a certain sense as the subject or the object
of the verb as = 3 in Hebrew, and yet it does not affect the case of
the noun which follows it. It is used as the subject or, if the
student prefer, in connection with the subject in ix. 7, errt ras
K<aA.as avrcoV a>s <rre<j!>avoi. Here (os (rre^avot = ni"1DV3 = " the
appearance of crowns was on their heads." In Num. ix. 15 we
have this idiom : "There was upon the tabernacle the likeness of
the appearance of fire " (fa etSos Trvpo s) ; also in Dan. x. 18 : " then
there touched me again, one like the appearance of a man." Here
D"]K ns"iD3 (rendered by the versions o>s opao-ts avOpw-n-ov) is the
subject of the verb and = " the likeness of the appearance of a
man." As the Vulgate has here " quasi visio hominis " we can
determine the Hebrew behind 4 Ezra xiii. 2, " quasi similitudinem
hominis " (Eth. and Arab. Verss.) ; but here the o>? is connected
with the accusative, to which we shall now turn. Thus we have
in vi. 6, T/Kovo-a ws <j>d>vrjv, and also in xix. i, 6 the heavenly
36 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [1.20.
equivalent of an earthly voice. In v. 1 1 the o>5 is omitted ; for
there the voice is definitely said to be that of angels. In xv. 2,
o>5 Od\ao-o-av "the likeness of a sea "; xviii. 21, Xi&ov u>s
ov /teyuv "the likeness of a great millstone."
3. 0)5 is used simply as a particle of comparison in xii. 15,
xiii. 2, n, xxi. ii.
4. In vi. i our author has rendered ^IpD, which was in his
mind, literally and inadvertently by d>? <o>v7; (ACQ) ; but since
inpj in this context = ^p3D, it should here have been rendered by
w5 (fxDvfj. Possibly, however, our author wrote <o)v>7, which was
subsequently corrupted into ^on/rj.
5. 0)5 is used with the participle as in Hebrew. Cf. Gen. xl.
10, "It was as though it budded" (nrnsa ton). Cf. in our
text, 0)5 eo-^ay/xeVov, V. 6, xiii. 3.
6. Finally, ws is followed by a finite verb where the Greek
idiom requires the participle: cf. i. i6 c , 17 oi/as avrov o>s 6 ^Aios
<atWi, where we should expect <<uVan>. But this is distinctively a
Hebrew idiom ; for in Hebrew frequently relative sentences with
the relative omitted are attached to substantives which are pre
ceded by the particle of comparison 3 ( = ws). Cf. Isa. Ixii. i, TB^3
"ijn 1 * (LXX, 0)5 XafjLTras Kav^rjo-erat), " as a lamp that burneth." See
also for literal but unidiomatic renderings in the LXX of Isa. liii.
7 ; Ps. xc. 5. But generally the finite verb is rendered idiomati
cally by the participle in the LXX : cf. Hos. vi. 3 ; Jer. xxiii. 29,
yisD YV& KJ tDQD (LXX, o>s TreXeKvs KOTTTWI/ irtTpav) ; Ps. Ixxxiii. 15 ;
Job vii. 2, ix. 26, xi. 16.
o/xotos.
That our author uses o/xoios as synonymous in meaning with
o>s we learn from iv. 6, 6/Wa /cpvo-raAAa), as compared with xxii. i,
a)? KpvcrraXXov, and iv. 3, 0/110105 . . . A.i#o> tao-TTtSi, as compared
with xxi. n, w5 At^o) tao-TTtSi. In i Enoch also o)5 and o/x,oio5 are
equivalent in meaning : cf. xviii. 13, tSoi/ eTrra aare/aas o>5 oprj
a, and xxi. 3, re^ea/xat eTrra ro)f a.<TTf.p(av . . . 6/xotov5 opecrtv
0/X0105 is used also like o>5 in our text in a pregnant sense (see
i under 0)5) : cf. ix. 10, ovpo.5 6/x,oi o,5 o-KopTrtW: also xiii. n.
But there are two passages in our text in which our author
attached not only the same meaning but also the same construc
tion to o/aoto5 as to 0)5. These are i. 13, xiv. 14, where we have
ofjiOLov viov where we should expect o/^oiov w<3. We have seen
that he regarded o/xoto5 as = 0)5 in respect of meaning^ but these
two passages exhibit an identification of 0/^0105 with 0)5 not only
in respect of meaning but also of construction ; and thus as d>5
does not affect the case that follows it, neither does o/xoto5. That
pur author knew quite well that O/AOIOS was followed by the dativs
II.-HI. 1-2.] THE SEVEN LETTERS 37
is shown by his universal usage outside these two passages, which
stand alone in all literature in making o/xotos as the absolute
equivalent of o>s alike in construction and meaning.
CHAPTER II.-III.
i. The Seven Letters their Authorship , their present and
their original meaning.
These two chapters, to which the great vision in i. forms an
introduction, contain the Seven Letters addressed to seven actual
Churches in Asia Minor, in which their spiritual character and
environment are distinctly and concretely described. As they
stand at present, the circumstances of the Seven Churches are
to be regarded as typical of the Church as a whole. Thus in
addressing certain specific Churches, our author is addressing all
Christian Churches. In this representative sense the Seven
Churches are identified with the seven candlesticks (i. 20).
That these Letters are from the hand of our author is amply
proved by their diction and idiom ( 2).
But a close examination of the Letters shows that they
contain two expectations which are mutually exclusive ( 4),
one of which is in harmony with the Book as a whole, while the
other clearly conflicts with it. The recognition of this fact leads)
to the hypothesis that our author wrote these Letters at a date
anterior to that of the Book as a whole, before the all-important
conflict between the mutually exclusive claims of Christianity
and Caesarism came to be recognized, and that in the " nineties,"
when he put together all his visions, he re-edited these Letters.
In re-editing these Letters he made certain changes in the
beginnings of them which brought them more into harmony with
i. 13-18, and inserted certain additions which adapted the Letters
more or less to the expectations underlying the rest of the Book
( 5). It is not improbable that these Letters were actually sent
in their original form to the Seven Churches ( 6).
2. Diction and Idiom,
These two chapters, alike on the ground of diction and idiom,
come from the hand of our author.
(a) Diction. Though a few expressions are found in these
chapters and not elsewhere in our author, they do not take the
place of equivalent expressions in our author save in the case of
ovv (see ii. 5 below), but arise naturally from the nature of the
subject.
3& THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II.-III. g.
II. 1. Td8e Xfyci seven times in ii.-iii. and only once else
where in N.T., i.e. Acts xxi. n.
6 ircpnraTWj . Cf. Hi. 4, ix. 20, xvi. 15, xxi. 24.
2. ot&a. Cf. 9, 17, 19, iii. i, 8, 15, 17, vii. 14, xii. 12,
xix. 12.
T&K KoTOf. Cf. xiv. 13. TV u-irofAonii> (not in Fourth
Gospel). Cf. i. 9, ii. 3, 19, iii. 10, xiii. 10, xiv. 12. \|/eu8eis.
Cf. xxi. 8. Only once elsewhere in N.T.
4. dXXd. Cf. ii. 6, 9 (to), 14, 20, iii. 4, 9, ix. 5, x. 7, 9,
xvii. 12, xx. 6.
5. ofo. Used of logical appeal. Cf. ii. 16, iii. 3 (to), 9.
Also in i. 19, probably owing to its occurrence in ii.-iii.
iroOey. Cf. vii. 13. 13 times in Gospel. Se (also in 16, 24);
cf. x. 2, xix. 12, xxi. 8.
Ki^aw. Cf. vi. 14. Here only in our author.
7. 6 exwy ous dKOuadrw. Cf. II, 17, 29, iii. 6, 13, 22, xiii. 9
(Matt. xi. 15, xiii. 9, etc.).
TO TTkeujia Xeyi. Cf. II, 17, 29, iii. 6, 13, 22, xiv. 13,
xxii. 17.
TW laicuWi 8(oaa). Cf. 17, iii. 21, xxi. 7, 6 VIK&V
ravra.
TOU u Xou TTJS IWTJS, xxii. 2, 14 [19].
8. 6 irpaiTos ica! 6 eaxaros. Cf. i. 17, xxii. 13.
os eyeVero reKpos Kal e^acc. Cf. i. 17 and xiii. 14, xvii. 8
(to), where the demonic Nero is somewhat similarly described.
9. 0Xi v|uy. Cf. i. 9, ii. 10, 22, vii. 14.
|3Xaa<|>T]|jita> . Cf. xiii. i, 5, 6, xvii. 3.
owaywyr) TOU laram. Here only and in iii. 9. In xi. 8 we
have the same attitude towards Judaism, though the diction
differs.
10. axpi, cum. gen. Cf. ii. 25, 26, xii. n, xiv. 20 [xviii. 5].
Not in Gospel, which uses !<os OTOV (or ov) and os. Iws only
found in Apoc. vi. 10, ii.
11. OU JULY) d8lKt]0T) K TOU 6(Xl>dTOU TOU SeUTCpOU. Cf. XX. 6, 67TI
TOVTCDV 6 Se^TCpOS 6a.VO.TOS OVK ^l f.^OV(TLaV. ObsCrVC that dStKcIv
is a favourite word with our author, but is not found in Fourth
Gospel or Epp.
12. 6 x fc)l/ T< pofx^aiaf T. Sto-TOjULOk T. o^eiaK. Cf. i. 1 6, xix.
15. pofJL<f>aia is found six times in the Apoc. and only once
outside it in the N.T.
13. oirou without complementary eVct. Cf. xi. 8, xx. 10.
15. OUTWS. Cf. iii. 5, 16, ix. 17, xi. 5, xvi. 18, xviii. 21.
16. epxojicu aoi Taxu. Cf. iii. n, xxii. 7, 12, 20 ; also ii. 5.
TroXefirjo-u U.CT auTwy. Cf. xii. 7 b , xiii. 4, xvii. 14. Also
xii. 7, xix. ii, and Jas. iv. 2 without uera and nowhere else in
N.T.
II. -III. 2.] DICTION AND IDIOM 39
rrj pojj.<J>cua TOU orofxaTos fJiou. Cf. i. 1 6, xix. 15.
17. ovopa . . . Yypajj,p,eVoi> o ouSels ot8ei> el JJLTJ 6
Cf. xix. 12, ovo/ma yeypa/xyue vov o ouSeis oTSev ei /xry avros.
18. TOUS 6<f>9aXjm.ous a>9 <|>X6ya irupos. Cf. i. 14, xix. 12.
ot iroSes auToG OJJLOIOI \a.\KO\L^a.v(a. Cf. i. 14.
20. efjiou s. Here only in Apoc. but 37 times in Gospel.
21. /j-eTayoTJaai eic. This construction is nowhere else found
in the N.T. nor yet in the LXX (where ITCI or a-n-o follow), yet it
recurs in our author in ii. 22, ix. 20, 21, xvi. n.
23. eV 6owlTw = "by pestilence," as in vi. 8.
Kara TO, epya up.uk. Cf. XX. 13.
24. rots XOITTOIS. Cf. iii. 2, ix. 20, xi. 13, xii. 17, xix. 21,
xx. 5. Not in Gospel.
26. 6 yucwy . . . Swo-w aura) : see note on ii. 26.
Saiffw . . . eou(nai . On the meaning of this phrase see note
on ii. 26 as distinguished from Swa-cu . . . rrjv eou<rt av.
27. iroipxyet = " will destroy " (see note in loc.}. Cf. xix. 15
(xii. 5).
ws Kdyw. Cf. iii. 2 1 and vi. 1 1, o>s KCU atiroi, [xviii. 6] ; Gospel
uses /ca^ws eyw frequently.
iXT)<|)a. This perfect recurs in iii. 3, v. 7, viii. 5, xi. 17.
Thus five times in all. In the rest of the N.T. only three times,
Matt. xxv. 24 [John viii. 4 in the irtpiKoirri] i Cor. x. 13.
28. rok dore pa TOI> -npuivov. Cf. XXli. 1 6.
III. 2. ylvov ypi]yopwv. For this combination of yiyvecr&xi
with a participle, cf. xvi. 10, eyeVero . . . eo-KorcofieVr;. Gospel
i. 6 only.
eu prjKa . . . ire-n-XTjpwfjieVa. For combination of tvpLo-Ktiv with
part, or adj., cf. ii. 2, v. 4, xxi. 15. For TreTrX^p. alone, cf. vi. ii.
TOU 0eoG JJLOU. Cf. iii. 1 2, where this phrase occurs four times,
iii. 12 was added when our author edited the book as a whole
in the nineties.
2-4. For the indubitable connections between 2-4 and xvi.
15 see notes on both these passages, xvi. 15, however, appears
to have belonged originally to this Letter where it probably
followed on iii. 3 b .
4. dXXd. See note on ii. 4 above.
ara. = " persons." [Cf. xi. 13.] ejxoXuKii/. Cf. xiv. 4.
io-ouCTU . Cf. xxi. 24. Iv Xeuicots. Cf. vi. II, vii. 9, 13,
xix. 14. aioi elo-ti/. Cf. [xvi. 6], where the clause recurs.
5. Tr6pi{3aXeiT(u Iv ifAariois XCUKOIS- Cf. iv. 4, vii. 9. aXeiv|/a>.
Cf. vii. 17, xxi. 4 (in a different connection). TTJS |3ipXou -rijs
WT)S. Cf. xxi. 15, xiii. 8, and |3i{3Xu>y T. . in xvii. 8 [xx. 12].
7. 6 ayios 6 dXT]0ii>6s. Cf. vi. 10, where the same epithets are
applied to God. Observe that dA?7$u/os = " faithful," a meaning
confined to the Apoc. within the N.T.
40 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [H.-IH. 2.
8. Oupcu dvwyjjieVT)i>. Cf. iv. I.
jjuKpcW . . . Sucojui . Cf. xx. 3, jjiiKpov ^povov, for this order,
and contrast vi. n.
eTr)pT)cras . . . rok \6yov. Cf. xxii. 7, 9 a frequent phrase
in the Gospel.
jxou TOV Xoyoy Kai ... TO ovofid fxou. Cf. x. 9 for the same
remarkable yet intelligible order of the pronouns.
9. TJ^ouaik ica! irpoaKun^o-ouorii ivutriov TOW iroSwr <rou. Cf.
XV. 4, TravTa TO, Wvt] TJovariv /cat TT poo- Kvvrjcr over LV evouTrtW aov :
xxii. 8.
10. eTTJpTjaas TOf Xoyoy. Cf. iii. 8, xxii. 7, 9 ; also i. 3, ii. 26,
xii. 17, xiv. 12.
TTJS uTrop>i>T]s /JLOU, /.. " the endurance practised by Me." Cf.
xiii. 10, xiv. 12, TJ uirofxoi^j T. dyiwK, "the endurance practised
by the saints."
TT]S oiKoufxeVirjs O\T)S. Cf. xii. 9, xvi. 14, where the nature of
the trial is described as demonic in connection with this phrase.
rods KaroiKoui/Tas err! TTJS y^S- Cf. vi. 10, viii. 13, xi. 10 (note).
This phrase has throughout our author a technical sense.
11. epxofxai Taxu. Cf. ii. 16, xxii. 7, 12, 20.
12. 6 yucoik iroirjo-u auToy. See notes on ii. 7, 26.
e \0fl : in later chapters 13 times.
Ypdi|/o> eV aurov TO 6i/o^a. Cf. xvii. 5, 8, xix. 1 6.
r?js Kotlas lpouaaXi]jji, r\ KaTaj3at^ouaa KT\. Cf. xxi. 2.
TO oVojXCl fJLOU TO KttlkOk. Cf. XIX. 12, l6.
15. OUT . . . OUT. Cf. ix. 20, 21, xxi. 4. Our author uses
ovoe . . . ou8e, v. 3, vii. 1 6, ix. 4; also ou . . . ouSe, vii. 16,
xii. 8, xx. 4, xxi. 23 ; ^ . . . /xrJTe, vii. 1,3; even ovSc /xrj . . .
ovSe, vii. i6 b , ix. 4, but never /xr/Se . . . p-qBe.
17. ouSek xp ^ ai/ ^ x 01 *- Cf. xxii. 5.
18. dyopdcrai (metaphorical sense). Cf. v. 9, xiv. 3, 4.
tjjidTia XeuKct. See on iii. 5 above.
20. elo-eXeu o-o/Acu. Cf. [xi. n], xv. 8, xxi. 27, xxii. 14.
21. Kadiaai. Cf. xx. 4 and note on iii. 21.
ws Kdyw. See note on ii. 27 above.
jlCTCl TOU TTttTpOS JULOU Iv TW OpOt O) ttUTOU. Cf. XXH. 3.
(b) Idiom. Here we have idioms and solecisms which,
though they may appear abnormally in other writings, are in our
author a normal means of expressing his thoughts.
II. 2. TOUS Xe yon-as eauTous dirocrToXous Kal OUK i<nr This
resolution of the participle into a finite verb is characteristic of
our author. See note on i. 5 b -6, p. 14 sq.
3. ex 61 * K " e Pdoraaas . . . Kal KeKOTriaices. For similar
combinations of tenses cf. iii. 3, etA^a? /cat r/Kotxras: v. 7 sq.,
vii. 13 sq., viii. 5.
5. epxojjiai = eXeu aojiai. Our author frequently uses the
I1.-II1. 2.] DICTION AND IDIOM 41
present of thie verb as a future : cf. i. 4, 7, 8, ii. 16, iii. n, iv. 8,
ix. 12, xi. 14, xvi. 15, xxii. 7, 12, 20, but never the future itself
except in compounds e^eXtvcrerai, XX. 8 : eureA.ev<ro/xai, iii. 20.
7. TW i/iKwkTt . . . Swcru aurw. See notes on ii. 7, 26.
9. -TUV \eyorrw louScuous el^ai Kal OUK U7ii>. See above on
ii. 2 and note on i. 5 b -6.
10. |3dXXei> e| ufxai^ = " some of you." Cf. iii. 9, St Sw/xi e/c T.
(Tvi/aycuy-^s : V. 9, fjyopaa-as .../< Tracr^s <f>v\7)S : xi. 9, y8A.7rovcrii>
CK TCOV Xawv : xxi. 6, S<ocra> K riys Trr/yJ}?.
13. OTTOU 6 6poVos TOU laram. For this omission of the
copula in relative or dependent clause, cf. v. 13, xx. 10.
tv TCUS Tju.e pais ArrtTras, 6 fidprus JJLOU. On this frequent
solecism in our author, see p. 3 ad fin.
20. TT)y yumiKa I. rj X^youaa. See preceding note.
Xeyouaa Kal 8i8daKi. The frequently recurring idiom already
found in ii. 2, 9 above : see note on i. 5 b -6.
22. jSdXXeii/ auTTjy els icXi^i/. A phrase unintelligible in
Greek unless retranslated into Hebrew. See note on ii. 22.
23. ufxti/ e/cdoTw : cf. vi. ii, avroi s eKao-Tw. Elsewhere only
once in N.T., Acts ii. 8.
26. 6 i/iKwy . . . Swaw aurw. See note on ii. 7.
Swcrw auTw Ifomnar. On the technical sense assigned to this
phrase by our author, see note in loc. It is here rightly used.
Thus chap. ii. is connected by the same diction or idioms or
both with portions of iv.-ix., xi.-xvii., xix.-xxii. We have already
seen in the Introd. to chap. i. that i. and ii.-iii. and most of the
remaining chapters are similarly bound together.
III. 3. iroiaf (Spay. This ace. of a point of time only here in
our author.
7. 6 dyotywy Kal ouSels icXeiaci. A Hebrew idiom. See note
in loc.
8. Se SwKa ei WTrioi aou Oupai/ fyeuynlv^v, r\v ouSels Su^arat
KXeurat auri^y. We have here two Hebrew idioms in these
words :
mna
For other instances of oblique forms of the personal pronoun
added pleonastically to relatives (in reproduction of a Hebrew
idiom), cf. vii. 2, ots c860ij avrots : 9, oi/ apiO ^aai avrov : xii. 6, 14,
xiii. 8, 12, xx. 8.
9. I8ou StSu K T. o-umywyTJs. Most probably a Hebraism.
Jffrn JVD330 |nb ^in, "Behold I will make certain of the
synagogue," etc. Here StSw anticipates TTOU/O-O).
TWI/ XeyoMTWj cauTous Kal OUK eicriy. The same Hebrew
idiom as in ii. 9.
. . iVa TJ^ouaiv . . . Kal yi/waic. Iva. cum. ind. OCCUTS
42 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [lI.-III. 2-3.
9 times in the Apoc., here (iii. 9) and 8 times in the rest of the
Book (see note on iii. 9, p. 88) : only once in the rest of the
Johannine writings, and only 10 times in all in the N.T. outside
the Apocalypse. Again, Iva /xrj cum. ind. occurs twice in the
Apoc. and only twice elsewhere in the N.T. Thus Iva. cum.
ind. is characteristic of our author. Next, Iva cum. subj. occurs
6 times in ii.-iii. and 17 times in the rest of the Book, and
Iva ^ cum. subj. once in ii.-iii. and 7 times in the rest of the
Apoc.
Ivo. TJou<jiv . . . Kal yvGxriv. Cf. xxii. 14 for the same com
bination of moods.
12. 6 VLK&V iroiTJoro) auToy. See notes on ii. 7, 26.
TTJS Kairrjs lepou<ra\i]fJi,, r\ KaTajSaiyouaa. See Introd. to I.
2 (), p. 3 ad fin.
16. /xeXXu . . . ep-eo-cu. Cf. iii. 2, xii. 4. Elsewhere in our
author 10 times with the pres. inf., which is the all but universal
usage in the N.T. Only 4 times outside our author is it
followed by the aor. inf. (in Lucan and Pauline writings) and
twice by fut. inf. in Lucan writing (i.e. Acts).
17. ouSek xP 6 "* 1 *X W Cf. xxii. 5, e^ovo-tv ^peiav . . . </>a>s
f)XiOV.
20. edV TIS aKOucrr] . . . Kal eiaeXeuaojJiai. This Hebraic /cat
introducing the apodosis recurs in x. 7, xiv. 10. It is found
also in Luke ii. 21, vii. 12 ; Acts i. 10; 2 Cor. ii. 2 ; Jas. iv. 15.
21. 6 viK.&\> 8<uaci> aurw. On this Hebraism see note on ii. 7.
From the above evidence of diction and still more of idiom
it is clear that ii.-iii. are from the hand of our author. Certain
words and expressions occur in them which do not recur in the
remaining chapters, but this is due to the nature of the subject
(cf. raSe Xe yci) or to the fact that the Letters in some form were
written by our author long before 95 A.D. the date of the
completed work: cf. ovv (also in i. 19), 7rA?jv, 6/xos. A com
parison of the points of agreement in diction and in idiom shows
that ii.-iii. are connected very closely, and in most cases essen
tially, with iv.-x., parts of xi., xii.-xvii., xix.-xxii.
3. Order of Words and omission of Copula in
relative sentences.
Though the diction and idioms of ii.-iii. are conclusive as to
the authorship of the Seven Letters, it is remarkable that the
order is less Semitic than in the rest of the chapters from the
same hand. Thus excluding ii. 7, ii, 17, 26, iii. 5, 12, 21, where
the same phrase TO) VLKUVTL or 6 VIKWI/ recurs and regularly
precedes the verb for emphasis, and is therefore perfectly justifi
able in Hebrew on this ground, there are more than the average
il.-IH. 3-4.] LETTERS WRITTEN At EARLIER DATE 43
number of passages in ii.-iii. where the object precedes the verb :
ii. i, raSc Xeyec (and at the beginning of each Letter) : 3, VTTO/AOVT/V
eXeis: 4, rrjv aydirrjv . . . a<f>r)K<s: 5, TO. irpwra Zpya irofycrov: 6,
TOVTO e^eis: 23, TO. TCKVO. avTfjs a,7roKTi/u) : 25, o cx T K / 3aT ^ craT:
iii. 10, o-e Trjprja-w. The subject also precedes the verb more
frequently than is usual in the remaining chapters, and yet the
style is profoundly Hebraic and essentially one with the rest of
the Book. These phenomena may be due to the fact that our
author is here using a vigorous epistolary style, which, while
comparable to or even transcending that of the finest passages of
the rest of the N.T., stands in its freer play of thought, feeling
and their expression in marked contrast to the unrivalled
eloquence and sustained sublimity of the rest of the Book.
Turning from the order of the verb to that of the adjective,
the adjective almost always follows its substantive with the
repetition of the article. There are, however, some exceptions,
which have their parallels in the rest of the Book. Thus we
find oAXo prepositive in ii. 24 as always in our author and
generally in the N.T. though it is post positive in Hebrew. In
iii. 4, oA-tya ovofjLara : cf. xii. 12, oXiyov Kaipov : in iii. 8, /u/cpav
. . . Swa/xiv : cf. xx. 3, fUKpov xp vov > an d contrast xpovov /u/c/oov,
vi. ii.
In ii. 13 we have the omission of the copula in a relative
sentence: cf. v. 13, xv. 4, xx. 10; but this omission is frequent
in the N.T.
4. The Letters were written by our Author at an earlier date and
re-edited by him for the present work with certain additions.
Since an examination of the diction and idiom leads to the
conclusion that the Letters are from the hand of our author, it
is not necessary to consider the theories of some critics who
ascribe them to a final reviser, or of others who assign them to
an original apocalypse which was subsequently edited and
enlarged by later writers.
But the question does arise : were these Letters written in the ]
time of Domitian by our author when he edited the entire work,
or were they written at an earlier date ? And this question must
be answered, since conflicting expectations of the end of the
world find expression in them. First, there is the older expecta
tion that the Churches will survive till Christ s last Advent : cf.
ii. 25, o X CT KpaTrja-arc axpi ov av ^a>, and iii. 3, ^o> ws KXeVr^s.
The Second Advent is here referred to as in i Thess. v. 2, 4,
where St. Paul himself expects to survive this event. In the mean
time, however, the individual Churches will undergo persecution
from time to time, and their members in certain cases be faithful
44 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IL-III. 4-5.
unto death l as they have been in the past ; 2 but of a universal
martyrdom there is not the slightest hint, though this expectation
is taught or implied in the rest of the Book (see xiii. 15); nor
is there a single reference to a world-wide persecution save in
hi. 10, though this is one of the chief themes of the Apocalypse.
Again, though this world-wide persecution was to arise in
connection with the imperial cult of the Caesars as the rest of
the Book clearly states, there is not a single reference to this
cult in the Letters : at most there may be an allusion to it in
iii. 10. Moreover, so far as this persecution was conceived as
involving the martyrdom of all the faithful, as in iv.-xxii., this
conception is in direct conflict with ii. 25, iii. n, where the
Churches are represented as witnessing more or less faithfully till
the Advent. In short, the expectation that the Church would
survive till the Second Advent cannot be held simultaneously
with the expectation of a world-wide persecution in which all the
faithful would suffer martyrdom. These two expectations are
mutually exclusive ; and since the first is obviously the original
teaching of our text, it follows that iii. 10 is a subsequent addition.
Accordingly the present writer is of opinion that the dis
cordant elements in the text can best be explained by the
hypothesis that our author wrote these Letters at a much earlier
date than the Book as a whole, before the fundamental antagon-
jism of the Church and the State came to be realized, and
Christians had to choose between the claims of Christ and
Caesarism, of Christianity and the State. When he put together
his visions in the reign of Domitian, he re-edited these Letters by
the insertion of iii. 10 and the addition of new material at the
close of each Letter, which in some degree brought them into
harmony with the rest of the Book.
5. Amongst the additions to the original Letters are the endings
and in part the beginnings of the Letters in their present form.
We have already recognized that iii. 10 is a later addition
made by our author. But we cannot stop here. The endings
1 Special visitations are threatened (fyxofJ-a-i o"ot, ii. 5, 16) unless the
Churches of Ephesus and Pergamum forthwith repent, while to the Church
of Smyrna "a tribulation of ten days," issuing in the martyrdom of
certain of its members, is foretold, ii. II ; in iii. 19 chastisement but not
martyrdom is foretold.
2 The Churches have already suffered persecution in a limited degree.
Thus the Church of Ephesus is praised for its faithfulness therein : cf. ii. 3,
Kal vTrofj,ovi]v %eis /ecu ^Sdarao as 5ta r6 8vofj.a fJLOv /ecu ou KeKOTrlaxes. Like
wise Thyatira: cf. ii. 19, and that of Philadelphia, iii. 8; while that of
Pergamum has already its proto-martyr Antipas, ii. 13. In Smyrna and
Philadelphia the Christians had suffered at the hands of the Jews, ii. 9, iii. 9.
II. -III. 5.] ENDINGS AND BEGINNINGS OF LETTERS 45
of the Letters are indeed from our author s hand, 1 but they (
would in many respects be incomprehensible but for the later
chapters, to which in thought and diction they are most inti-
mately related, and apart from which they would be all but
inscrutable enigmas : cf. ii. 7-xxii. 2, 14 (TO v\ov -nys w>ys)
ii. ii xxi. 8 (where 6 Odvaros 6 Seinrepos is first explained) ; ii. 17
xix. 12 (ovofjiCL KOLIVOV . . . o ovSeis oISci/ KrA.) ; ii. 2629, x ^- 5>
xix. 15 (TTOt/xavet avrovs tv pd/SBio KrA..) ; xxii. 16 (6 da-rrjp ... 6
7rp<oii/os) ; iii. 5~ v i- * I (^06*77 aurots e/cacrra) <rroX.r) A.ei>K?7) ; xiii. 8,
xxi. 27 (TU> /3i/3A.ia> r>7s (077?) ; iii. i2-xxi. 22, which shows that
the term i/aos in iii. 12 is to be taken metaphorically); xxi. 2 (ryv
7ToA.iv . . . lepovcraXrjfj. KCHI/T/V . . . Karafiatvovarav KT/\..) xix. 12
(oi/o/xa o ouSeis olSev : cf. ovofia . . . KCUI/OJ/ in iii. 12) ; iii. 21 xx. 4.
But another characteristic of these Letters is that they all |
use the phrase 6 vt/cwi/. That this expression designates one who
has passed victoriously through the martyr s death to the life
eternal, is clear from xii. ii, avrot bmctftrav . . . KOL OVK rj-ydTryorav
ryv ^^X^ v a ^ T ^ J/ <*XP l QO.VOLTOV : XV. 2, *6W . . . TOV<S vi/coWas e/c
TOV Orjpiov . . . eo~TtoTas CTTI rrjv $aAao~o~av Trjv vaXivrjv : xxi. 7.
Now that 6 vt/coii/ bears the same meaning at the close of the
Letters is to be inferred from iii. 21, 6 VIK&V 6\oo-o> avrw KaOurat
fJLT ffJiOV V TO) QpOVW fJiOV, O)S KCtyO) fVLKTrjCTCL KOL f.KO.6i(Ta. fACTO. TOV
Trarpos /xov iv TW 6p6vu> O.VTOV. As Christ witnessed to the truth
by His death, so should His servants. Now, if 6 I/IKWV is used in
this sense at the close of all the Letters, as it appears to do, we
have here an allusion to the world-embracing persecution (and
martyrdom), which is definitely referred to in iii. 10, though such
an expectation is quite foreign to the body of the Letters, which
belong to an earlier date.
Another later addition of our author common to all the
Letters is, 6 e^wv ov? d/covo-arto rt TO 7rvev/za Aeyei Tats eK/cA^o-iais :
ii. 7% n a , 17% 29, iii. 6, 13, 22. By this addition our author
would teach that the Letters are not merely for their respective
Churches, but for all the Churches. Thus they are adapted so
far as the endings are concerned to their new context.
The later additions at the close of the Letters are accord- J
ingly : ii. 7, n, 17, 26-29, "i- 5~ 6 , 10, 12-13, 21-22.
But the divine titles of Christ at the beginnings of the Letters
can hardly have stood in the original Letters as they now
1 The choice of these endings on the part of our author may in some cases
be determined by the diction or thought of the respective letters of which they
form the close. Thus in the Letter to Smyrna, ov fj.rj ddiK-tjOrj tic TOV 6a.v6.rov
r. Seurtpov, ii. II, declares the reward of him who is TTIO-TOS a%pt 6a.va.rov, ii. 10 ;
in the Letter to Pergamum, dtbaw ai/ry rov fj.dvva, ii. 17, sets forth the true food
in contrast to the elduXddvra, ii. 14; and in the Letter to Sardis, ov /J.TJ ea\et t/ w
T. 6vofj.a avrov ticj. /St/SXov TTJS fwTyj, iii. 5, may refer in the way of cpptragt to
tin ys KCU ver.pbs eZ, iii. I,
46 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II.-III. 5-6.
do. Such a conclusion is suggested by the facts that whereas
they are all, with the exception of those prefacing the Letter to
the Church of Laodicea, drawn verbally from i. 13-18 (see note
p. 25 sq.), they have no organic connection, except in the case of the
Letters to the Churches of Philadelphia and Thyatira, with the
Letters which they respectively introduce, though in several
instances an artificial connection can be discovered (see note
just referred to). What the titles of Christ were in the original
form of the Letters cannot now be. determined. Some of the
existing titles may be original, but it is hard to evade the con
clusion that the original titles were recast by our author, when
he incorporated the Letters into the complete edition of his
visions, and were brought into close conformity with the divine
titles of Christ in i. 13-18. Since they have but slight affinity
with the contents of the Letters at the head of which they stand,
their most natural explanation is to be found in i. 13-18.
6. Were the Letters originally seven distinct Letters addressed
and sent to the Seven Churches ?
On various grounds we have concluded that the Seven
Letters were composed by our author before the time of
Domitian : also that on their incorporation into the Apocalypse
they were re-edited by him in order to adapt them to the impend
ing crisis, by changes made in the beginnings to bring them into
closer conformity with i. 14-18, and by additions such as iii. 10
and others at the close of the Letters, as ii. 7, n, 17, 26-29, m -
5-6, 10, 12-13, 21-22, in order to link them up with the theme
of the Book as a whole the conflict between Christ and Caesar,
Christianity and the World Power, and the universal martyrdom
of the faithful which the Seer apprehended as a result of this
conflict.
Now, if the above conclusions are valid, it would not be un
reasonable to conclude further that these Letters were actual letters
sent separately to the various Churches, and are, notwithstanding
their brevity, comparable in this respect to the Pauline Epp.
In default of independent historical materials we are unable
to test the accuracy of most of the details relating to the moral
and religious life in the Seven Churches. But such materials are
not wholly wanting. Thus we know that the Ignatian Epistles to
Ephesus, Smyrna, and Philadelphia substantiate certain statements
of our author bearing on the inner life of these Churches (see pp.
48, 50, 5 2, etc.). In the case of the Church of Laodicea the external
evidence is fuller. Thus in iii. 17-18 the contrast drawn between
the deplorable spiritual condition of Laodicea and its material
and intellectual riches cannot be accidental, since we know from
II. 1.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN EPHESUS 4/
external authorities that Laodicea was pre-eminent in these
latter respects. But the Letter to the Church in Laodicea shows
that our author is familiar with some of the Christian literature
circulating within it such as St. Paul s Ep. to the Colossians
(see note on p. 94 sq.), which, according to St. Paul s directions,
was to be read in the Church of Laodicea.
My hypothesis, therefore, that the Seven Letters, which
originally dealt with the spiritual conditions of these Churches,
and knew nothing whatever of the impending world conflict
between Christianity and the Imperial Cultus, were actually sent
to their respective Churches, has much to recommend it.
II. 1-7. THE MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN EPHESUS.
1. TW ayyeKw TW iv E^ecrw eKK\T]oruxs. The city of Ephesus }-
lay on the left bank of the Cayster. In many inscriptions it is
designated, ^ irpwrr) KCU /xeyto-Tr? />ir?T/x>7roA,is rfjs Atria?. It was,
according to Strabo, the greatest emporium in Asia (xiv. 24,
e/x-TTOpiov ovcra /xeyicrrov TOJV Kara TTJV Atrtav ryv evros TOV Tavpov).
Ephesus was the centre of Roman administration in Asia. As
the Province of Asia was senatorial the governor was called pro
consul (Acts xix. 38, dvtfuVaroi), and it was at Ephesus that he
was bound to land and to enter on his office. As a free city it -
had a board of magistrates (o-rpar^yot), a senate (ftov\.rj), and a
popular Assembly (eK/cA^o-ta). 1 Under the Empire the power of
the popular Assembly, which in earlier days had really held the
reins of power, had declined until its chief function was to ap
prove of the Bills submitted by the Senate. It had its regular
tirries of meeting, but no extraordinary meeting could be sum
moned except by the Roman officials. The business of the
Assembly was apparently managed by the Town Clerk (ypa/x/xa-
TCVS rfjs TroXews or T. Srj/xov). The Senate, which in pre-Roman
days had been elected annually by the citizens, came gradually,
under the Roman sway, to be composed of a body of distinguished
citizens chosen for life, which tended more and more to become a
mere tool of the Imperial Government. Ephesus was the Western
terminus of the great system of Roman roads the great trade
route from the Euphrates by way of Colossae and Laodicea, a
second from Galatia via Sardis, while a third came up from the
south from the Maeander valley. From its devotion to Artemis,
1 Swete (p. lix) states that there were three assemblies : a council (f3ov\-/i)
elected from the six tribes into which the population was divided ; a senate
(yepovcria) charged with the finance of the city and probably of public wor
ship as well as with the care of the public monuments ; a popular assembly
(&c/cXi7<rta). Each had
48 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 1.
Ephesus appropriated to itself the title Temple Warden
pos, Acts xix. 35). But this word took on an additional meaning,
and came most commonly to be applied to a city as a warden of
a temple of the imperial cultus. The Ephesian Neocorate is
first mentioned on coins of Nero. The first temple was probably
erected to Claudius or Nero, 1 the second to Hadrian, and the
third to Severus. A 2nd century inscription (Wood, App.
Inscr. vi. 6, p. 50) speaks of Ephesus as being warden of two
imperial temples as well as of that of Artemis (Sis veo)/<opos TWV
2e/?acrrwi/ KOL veu>Kopos TT/S Apre/xiSos). Ephesus was also a hot-
I bed of every kind of cult and superstition. Its works on magic
J (*E<eo-ia ypa/z/Aara) were notorious throughout the world. Now
>it was at this city that Paul founded a Christian Church (50-55),
whence proceeded a movement that led to the evangelization of
the province (Acts xix. 10). Though of very secondary import
ance for a couple of decades, it must after the fall of Jerusalem
in 70 A.D. have quickly risen into a position of supreme import
ance and become the chief centre of the Christian Faith in the
f East. Hence it is rightly named first in i. n, ii. i. It was the
home of St. John in the latter part of the century; and tradition
states that not only were Timothy and John, but also the Virgin
, Mary, buried at Ephesus. Judaizing and Gnostic teachers early
showed themselves active, as we may infer from i Tim. i. 7 (0Aov-
T emu yo/Ao8iSao-KaAoi), iv. 1-3, etc., and Ignatius, Ad Ephes.
vii. I, t(o$a,(nv yap rives SoAa> Trovrypw TO ovojjLa Trepi^epciv, aAAa
Tiva 7rpa<r<roi/Tes dvaia 0ov" ovs Sci v/xas ws Oypia e/c/cAiWii/* eicrlv
yap /ewes Avo-o"uWes, Xa.@po$rJKTai, ovs Sci v/xas <vAacrcreo-#ai oWas
Sva-OeparrevTovs. The presence of such elements testified to the
danger of schism. See the articles on Ephesus in Hastings*
D.B., and the Encyc. Bib, with the literature there quoted.
rd8e Xeyei. This clause occurs eight times in the N.T., seven
of these being in ii. and iii. of our Book. o8e occurs only twice
elsewhere in the N.T. This sparing use has been observed
also in the KOIVTJ.
6 Kparcjy TOUS euro, dorepas Iv rfj Seia aurou. This clause
has no organic connection with the letter to the Church in
Ephesus, and, moreover, it is repeated in iii. i in a slightly
different form. The use of Kparwv, which here means to hold
fast, while in i. 16, iii. i we have lyuv^ is strange. In the case
of the Son of Man l\w expresses all that is needed. His
character is a guarantee that the lyv> v contains the /cparwi/. If
it were a man that was in question here, the use of *paTe<V (cf.
1 The temple dedicated to Augustus some time before 5 B.C. did not en
title the city to the Neocorate ; for it was not an independent foundation,
being built within the precincts of the temple of Artemis ; and it was a dedica
tion by the municipality merely, anc} not by the Synod qf Asia (wvbv
II. 1-2.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN EPHESUS 49
ii. 13, vii. i, "to lay hold of," xx. 2, and ii. 14, 15, 25, iii. n
where both words occur) would be intelligible.
6 TrepnraTWK iv jj-ecrw T. curd Xuxyiwy T. \pucrG>v. Christ s
vigilance is not localized but coextensive with the entire Church.
The idea of the Xv^^twv returns in ii. 5, which may have occa
sioned the choice of the above title. That the former of these
two divine titles was added by our author when editing his visions
as a whole, see p. 25 sq., 45 sq.
2-3. These two verses appear to consist of three couplets.
2. ot8a rd epya aou, Kal Toy KOTTOV Kal TT)I> UTrojionik o~ou
Kal on ou 8urj] j3ao-Tao-ai KCIKOU S,
Kal errcipao-as TOUS Xeyorrag eaurous diroo-ToXous Kal OUK eurtv,
Kal eupes aurous ij/euSeis.
3. Kal uirojJiOKT] c tX L< S Kal ejSdoracras Sid TO oyojjiu jxou
Kal ou KCitoirtaiccs*
Here the theme is TO, epya trov. These consist of TOV KOTTOV
KOL rrjv vTro/jiovrji/ crov. These two subordinate themes are then
rehandled, the KOTTOV in 2 bcd and the VTTO/XOJ^I/ in 3 ab . There
are two paronomasias which cannot be accidental : rov K.OTTOV and
ov KfKO7TLa.K<s, B.nd ov Svvr) fia.<TTa.<Tai and J3dcTTa(ra<s.
2. The phrase oloa TO. epya o-ov recurs, but with the pronoun
preceding the noun, in ii. 19, iii. i, 8, 15. Abbott (Johannine
Gram., pp. 414, 422, 601-607) calls the latter the vernacular or
unemphatic possessive. In ii. 19 we have a combination of
both. See note. o?Sa. Christ knows everything (John xxi. 17)
alike the good (2-3, 6) and the bad (4-5) qualities.
TQV Koiroi Kal -rt\v UTTOJULOI/T]!/ aou. The single pronoun links
together the two preceding nouns. These two are the works of
the Church in Ephesus its severe efforts in resisting and over
coming false teachers (2 bcd ), and its steadfast endurance on behalf
of the name of Christ (3 ab ). We might compare i Thess. i. 3,
vfj.a)V rov epyov rs Tmrreco? KOI TOV KOTTOV TT<S
KOI rrjs v-rrofjiovfjs rr)<s C\TTLOO<S, but here KOTTOS and virofjiovrj are co
ordinated with and not subordinated to epyov. /coVos with its
cognate KOTTLOLV is closely associated with Christian work in the
N.T. alike in our text (cf. also xiv. 13) and in the Pauline
Epistles. VTTO/XOI/TJ, as Trench (Synon. 191) points out, is used to
express patience in respect of things, but /xa*po0v/>ua in respect of
persons. But the patience is of a high ethical character. " In
this noble word vTro/xovr/ there always appears (in the N.T.) a
background of di/Speta (cf. Plato, Theaet. 177^, where dvSpiKws
vTro/xetvat is opposed to dvdVSpcos favytiv) : it does not mark merely
the endurance . . . but . . . the brave patience with which the
Christian contends against the various hindrances, persecutions,
and temptations that befall him in his conflict with the inward
VOL. i. 4
50 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 2-4.
and outward world " (Ellicott on i Thess. i. 3, quoted by Trench,
op. cit., p. 190).
ou Su nr] {Saordcrai. ovvrj for Swcurai occurs also in Mark ix. 22,
23 ; Luke xvi. 2. Though not found in Attic prose it is found
in Attic poetry. The intolerance here commended is of evil
doers who claimed to be apostles. Clem. Alex. (Strom, ii. 18)
well defines UTTO/AOV?; as the knowledge of what things are to be
borne and what are not (eTrioTT^iuy eyuyxevcTewy KCU OVK e/x./xei ereoov).
The need of testing the claims of itinerant teachers who claimed
to be prophets and apostles was early felt : cf. i Thess. v. 20 sq.;
i John iv. i. They were not to be acknowledged unless they
brought with them "commendatory letters" (2 Cor. iii. i).
That the Church in Ephesus shunned such false teachers we
learn from Ignatius, Eph. ix. I, eyi/o>v Se TrctpoSeuo-avras rivas
eKei$ev, e^ovras KO,K?)V OLOafflv ovs OVK etacrare o-Tmpat els v/xas,
(3vcrarTs ra OJTO. eis TO /JLTJ 7rapaSeacr$ai TO, cnretpofjieva VTT avTwv.
In the Didache xi. 8, 10, the ultimate test of such teachers was
conformity of their lives with that of Christ. In Hermas, Mand.
xi. 11-15, the two types of teachers are contrasted, and in xi. 16
the excellent advice is given : So/a/xa^c ovv airo rfjs a>r}5 KOU TWV
epywv TOV avOptatrov rov Xeyovra eavroi/ Trveu/xaTO^opov eli/at.
Kal eireipao-as. The verb points to some definite occasion.
7reipaeu/ may be compared with 8oKt/>ta^tv in i John iv. i.
TOUS Xyorras eaurous diroaroXous Kal OUK eivlv. The OVK io"tV
is here a Hebraism for OUK oWas. (See note on i. 5 b -6, p. 14 sq.)
cnrooroXous. These persons have been identified : (i) with the
Judaizers sent from Jerusalem (so Spitta) : cf. 2 Cor. xi. 13 sq. ;
(2) with the disciples of St. Paul or even St. Paul himself
(Volkmar, Volter, Holtzmann 3 (with reservations)) ; (3) with the
Nicolaitans in 6 (Bousset). According to this view, 6 resumes
2. This explanation appears to be the best of the three. It
also rightly differentiates the cpya in 2 (i.e. the vigorous action
against the false teacher and the endurance under affliction) from
the 7rpa>Ta Ipya in 5, which are identical with the dyaTr^i/ . . .
TT/J/ Trpamyv, or brotherly love, in 4. The Church in Ephesus
still hates, 6, the evil members, the false apostles which it had
tried and rejected.
3. This verse returns to the positive element in the praise
given in 2 : it explains rrjv viroiwvrjv o-ov, and refers to TOV KOTTOV
in oil KeKOTriaKes, "thou hast not grown weary." Here we have
KCU e /3ao-Tao-as just as in the preceding verse, ovvy . . . Kal
In both cases an ethical characteristic is brought
forward which had manifested itself in some act of the immediate
past.
4. But, though the Church in Ephesus has preserved its
moral and doctrinal purity and maintained an unwavering loyalty
II. 4-5.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN EPHESUS 51
in trial, it has lost the warm love which it had at the beginning.
The love here referred to is brotherly love : cf. 19; Matt. xxiv.
1 2 (Sia TO 7r\r)6vv6f)vaL rrjv dvo/Aiav \j/vyrjcrTa.i f) a.ya.irr) ran/ TroXXcoi/),
and 2 John 5-6. Some scholars see in our text a reminiscence
of Jer. ii. 2, "the love of thine espousals," and interpret it of
the love to God and Christ. The controversies which had raged
in Ephesus had apparently led to censoriousness, factiousness,
and divisions (cf. Acts xx. 29-30), and the Church had lost the
enthusiastic love it had shown in the days of Paul (cf. Acts xx.
37).
ex<o Kara aou. Cf. 14, 2o. Is this an echo of Matt. v. 23,
Mark xi. 25 ?
adieus. A common usage of this verb in John : cf. iv. 3,
28, 52, x. 12, etc.
5. The Church in Ephesus is bidden to recognize the spiritual
declension that has taken place, to repent and do the works
which characterized its first love. As Swete remarks, " /Avrj/AoVeve,
/AeTai/oTjo-oi/, TTOIT/CTOI/ answer to three stages in the history of
conversion."
jArrjfioVeue ouV. Cf. iii. 3.
el 8e jj,rj, IpxojJicu croi, Kal Kt^orw TT)I> Xuxyiay o-ou CK TOU TOTTOU
auTtjs [&v HT) /ATakOTJaT]s]. Since the ct Se /AT) here declares that
if the Church does not fulfil the triple command given in /Av^/xoVeue
. . . KOL p.trav6r)(Tov . . . KOL . . . THHT/O-OV, judgment will ensue,
it is manifest that the clause cav /AT? /AeTavorja-Tys is really a weaker
repetition of ei Se /A??. This is not in keeping with our author s style.
After et 8e /xrj we must understand /xvr//x,ovei;ets . . . KOL /xeravoTJo-ets
Kai Trotr/cret?. Accordingly et 8e /JL-TJ or lav /AT) /Aravor;cr7;s must be
excised as an intrusion; and clearly it is the latter, as a comparison
of ii. 5 and ii. 16 shows. The necessity for this excision becomes
obvious if we compare 16 and 22 in this chapter, where we have
separately the two constructions occurring in this verse. In the
first case we have a good parallel to our text here ; for the same
sequence of ideas, though less full, recurs /xcravo^o-ov ovv et Se /AT;,
Zpxofjiai o-ot TO-XV , /cat TroXc/Arjcrw. Here there is no otiose repeti
tion of the idea conveyed in ei Se ^. After d Se /AT? here we
have only to supply /AeravoTJcreis. In ii. 22 we have the second
possible Construction, tBov fidXXu avryv eis KXwrjv . . . cav /AT)
When the interpolated gloss is removed we find that 5 con
sists of two couplets, the second of which is
i 8e jrq, e pxojjicu aoi,
Kal K.ivr\<r<t) Ti]v \v\vla,v aou CK TOU TOTTOU auTrjs.
Ipxofxat aoi. Cf. ii. 16. The dative here may be the dativus
incommodi, or an incorrect rendering of ", as in Matt. xxi. 5 (so
Blass, Gram. 113). epx /-"" aOL refers here as in ii. 16 to a special
52 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 5-6.
visitation or coming, though reference to the final judgment is
not excluded. ^px^a-Oai is practically used as equivalent to
eA.euVeo-0a throughout the Apocalypse.
Kin^o-w ri]v \\j^vLa.v aou, i.e. thy Church. That the Ephesian
Church paid heed to this warning for the time being we learn
from the Prologue to Ignatius Epistle to Ephesus, where he calls
it dio/xa/<ap{,<rTos : and in i. i, where he declares, /u/x^rat ovre? $eoi>,
dya^toTruprycravTes ev at^tart Oeov, TO crvyytviKOv Zpyov . . . aTnypricraTe.
Again in xi. 2 he expresses the wish that he "may be found
in the company of those Christians of Ephesus who, moreover,
were ever of one mind with the apostles in the power of Christ."
That the threat in our text implies not degradation nor removal
of the Church to another place, but destruction, seems obvious.
Yet Ramsay (Letters, 243 sqq.) is of opinion that the threat is so
expressed as to mean only a change in local position, and
supports this interpretation by the statement that " Ephesus has
always remained the titular head of the Asian Church, and the
Bishop of Ephesus still bears that dignity, though he no longer
resides at Ephesus but at Magnesia ad Sipylum." Nothing now
remains on the site of Ephesus (i.e. Ayasaluk = aytos 0eoAoyos)
save a railway station and a few huts.
6. The Seer modifies the severe criticism in 4-5 by bringing
forward the redeeming characteristic in the Ephesian Church,
that they hated the deeds which Christ also hated.
TO. epya T&V NiKoXa iTam These Nicolaitans have been identi
fied from the time of Irenaeus (i. 26. 3, iii. n. i) and Hippolytus
(Philos. vii. 36), who was dependent on Irenaeus, with the
followers of Nicolaus the proselyte of Antioch (Acts vi. 5).
Tertullian speaks apparently of a second sect (Praesc. Haer. 33,
Adv. Marc. i. 29, De Pudicitia, 19), but Epiphanius (Haer. xxv.)
deals with the Nicolaitans mentioned in our text. In Clem.
Alex. (ii. 20. 1 1 8, iii. 4. 25), the Constit. Apost. (vi. 8, ot vvv
i/ftvSwi/v/Aoi Ni/coAaiTcu), and Victorinus an attempt was not un
naturally made to show that the derivation of this immoral sect
from one of the seven Deacons was an error. According to
Clement, Nicolaus taught on Trapaxpfja-OaL ry crap/ci Set, and
according to Hippolytus (Philos. viii. 36), Nt/coAaos . . . eSi S-
acr/cev dSiac/>opiav ftiov re /cat /3pwo-w<. A comparison of the text
here with ii. 15-16 leads to an identification of the Nicolaitans
and the Balaamites not only on the ground of our text, but also
from the fact that they are roughly etymological equivalents,
though Heumann (Act. Erudit.^ 1712, p. 179) urged this as a
ground for regarding the names as allegorical and not historical.
That is, Balaam = DJJ y^2-"he hath consumed the people "(a
derivation found in Sanh. 105% where DJJ n^3 is an alternative
reading), while NiKoAaos = VLKO. \a6v. Such a play on the etymo-
II. 6-7.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN EPHESUS 53
logy of words is thoroughly Semitic. There is, it is true, no
exact equivalent to VLKOV in Hebrew. Hence the above can
stand. Furthermore a comparison of ii. 14 and ii. 20, which
shows that the Balaamites and the followers of Jezebel were
guilty of exactly the same vices, makes it highly probable that
the latter were a branch of the Nicolaitans.
The works of the Nicolaitans, then, are those given in
ii. 14, 20. They transgress the chief commands issued by the
Apostolic Council at Jerusalem (Acts xv. 29).
7. 6 lyuv ous dKouo-ciTw KT\. Cf. Matt. xi. 15, xiii. 9, 43;
Mark iv. 9, 23, etc. This formula introduces the promise to
him that overcomes in the first three messages and closes it on
the last four. Here the speaker turns from the individual
Church to the whole Christian community. Since the Book as
a whole was written to be read in public worship, such a larger
reference was conceivable in and for itself.
This clause, which occurs seven times, once in each Letter,
seems to have been added by the Seer when he incorporated
the Seven Letters in an edition of his visions. The seven
eschatological promises, ii. 7 b , n b , i7 b , 26-27, m - 5> I2 > 2I >
appear to have been added at the same time. Such a phrase as
Tratrai at eK/cA^ca ai in ii. 23 is no evidence to the contrary.
TO iri/eujuia. Cf. the closing words of all the Letters ; also
xiv. 13, xix. 10, xxii. 17. The Spirit here is the Holy Spirit
which inspires the prophets, but also the Spirit of Christ, since
in ii. i Christ is the Speaker. The Spirit here has nothing to
do with the seven spirits in Hi. i [i. 4], iv. 5.
TW VLK.&VTI . . . TOU 6eoG. Added probably by our author
when he edited the visions as a whole (see p. 45).
TW KiKwj Ti OWCTCJ auTw. We have here a well-known Hebraism.
Cf. LXX of Josh. ix. 12, ovrot ot aprot . . . e^toSiacr^/zei/ O.VTOV<S. It
is found sporadically in the Kou/rJ, but the Kotvr; usage is wholly
inadequate to explain the frequency and variety of the Hebraisms
in our author. For the occurrence of this idiom elsewhere in
the N.T., see John vi. 39, vii. 38, x. 35 sq., xv. 2-5, xvii. 2 ;
i John ii. 24, 27 : cf. Abbott, Gram. 32 sq., 309. In ii. 26,
6 VIKUV . . . Sue-to avTQ> is more Hebraistic than the expression
in ii. 7. VIKO.V is a word characteristic of our author, and is used
of the faithful Christian warrior in ii. ii, 17, 26, iii. 5, 12, 2i a ,
xii. IT, xv. 2, xxi. 8 ; of Christ Himself in iii. 2i b , v. 5, xvii. 14.
In the remaining passages it is without this moral significance,
vi. 2, xi. 7, xiii. 7. It is found once in the Fourth Gospel and
six times in i John. Elsewhere in the N.T. only four times.
Cf. i Enoch 1. 2. The word VIKO.V implies that the Christian
life is a warfare from which there is no discharge, but it is a
warfare, our author teaches, in which even the feeblest saint can
54 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 7.
prove victorious. But the word VIKO.V is not used in our author
of every Christian, but only of the martyr who, though
apparently overcome in that he had to lay down his life, yet was
in very truth the one who overcame, "as I also have overcome,"
saith Christ, iii. 21 (cf. John xvi. 33). The participle TO> VLKWTI
is here, as elsewhere in our author, influenced by the use of the
Hebrew participle, which can have a perfect sense or imperfect
as the context requires (see p. 202 n.). In our author 6 VIKWV
6 veviK^Koos. This warfare which faithfulness entails may be
illustrated from 4 Ezra vii. 127 sq., "And he answered me and
said : This is the condition of the contest which every man who
is born upon earth must wage, that if he be overcome he shall
suffer as thou hast said ; but, if he be victorious, he shall receive
what I have said."
eic TOU uou TTJS
is a frequent construction in our author, occurring in all eleven
times. In the Fourth Gospel it is found four times, and in the
rest of the N.T. twenty times. Personal victory over evil is the
condition without which none can eat of the tree of life. With
our text we may compare xxii. 14. Test. Levi xviii. u, KCU
Scoo-et rots ctyi ois <ayetv CK TOV v\ov rfjs a>r?s : I Enoch xxiv. 4,
KCU rjv eV auTOis oYi/Spov o ovSeVore oocr<pavp,GU KGU ovSeis ercpos
avTwv ev^pdvOrj, KOLL ovBev Irepov o/xotov aura). ooyxT/v e*X V ^ w ^ e
crrepav Trai/rcav ctpw/taTOJV, KCU TO. <vAAa avrov KCU TO av#os KCU TO
8eV8pOV OV <{>@IVL 15 TOV GUtOVGt I XXV. 4, Kttt TOVTO TO SeVSpOJ/
Kat ov8e/ua crap e^ovcrLav e^et onf/acrOai avrov
Kptcreo)? . . . TOTC StKatot? Kat oo-i ois So^ryo-erat : 5, 6 KapTros avrov
TOt5 CKXeKTOtS CIS ^W^V tS ySopCXV, Kttt /JLeTO.<f>VTv6li](TTaL Iv TOTTO)
clyta) Trapa rov OIKOV TOV Oeov. Thus as early as the 2nd
cent. B.C. it was held that the tree of life would be transferred
to the temple of the Lord in Jerusalem not apparently the
Heavenly Jerusalem, but the earthly Jerusalem cleansed from all
iniquity. That the earthly Jerusalem should give place to the
Heavenly in this connection was inevitable. But the combina
tion of the two ideas is of supreme importance as it prepares the
way for the conception of our Seer, who places the tree of life
in the street of the Heavenly Jerusalem (xxii. 2). That this
Heavenly Jerusalem, to which belongs the tree of life (ii. 7,
xxii. 2), is to be the seat of the Millennial Kingdom on the
present earth before the Final Judgment, and is not to be con
founded with the New Jerusalem, which is to descend from the
new heaven to the new earth after the Final Judgment and
become the everlasting abode of the blessed, I have shown at
some length in the Introd. to xx. 4-xxii.
TOU u\ou TTJS ^coris- Cf. xxii. 2, 14. The tree of life is the
symbol for immortality in our author. None can eat of it save
II. 7-8.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN SMYRNA 55
those who have proved victorious in the strife with sin and evil.
The v\ov TT/S COOT}? is to be carefully distinguished from the $>u>p
T??9 wT7s. The latter is a free gift (xxii. 17, xxi. 6), given without
money and without price to every one that thirsteth for it. It
symbolizes the divine graces of forgiveness and truth and light,
etc. (cf. vii. 17). If a man is faithful to the obligations entailed
by these graces he becomes a victor (vt/ccm/) in the battle of life,
and thus wins the right to eat of the tree of life, that is, he enters
finally on immortality. In the Fourth Gospel (iv. 10, 13, 14),
on the other hand, only the one symbol is used "the water of
life," and this is given a significance that embraces the two
symbols used by our author.
TW irapa&eiorw TOU 0eoG. In our author Paradise has become
equivalent to the Heavenly Jerusalem, which is to descend from
heaven before the Final Judgment to become the seat of the
Millennial Kingdom. In Luke xxiii. 43 it is the abode of the
blessed departed, and in 2 Cor. xii. 4 it is identified with the
third heaven or with part of it. On some of the other meanings
assigned to it and the localities identified with it, see my
Eschatology*> 244, 291 sq., 316-318, 357, 473 sq.
8-11. THE MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN SMYRNA.
8. iv Ijxu pnf]. The ancient city of Smyrna was destroyed
early in the 6th cent. B.C. and refounded on a new site under
the Diadochoi by Lysimachus (301-281 B.C.). It has continued
from that date to the present one of the most prosperous cities
of Asia Minor. Smyrna proved itself a faithful ally of Rome
from the period that Rome began to intervene in Eastern affairs
and before it had established its claim to world supremacy. It
openly supported Rome against Mithridates, Carthage, and the
Seleucid kings. As early as 195 B.C. (Tac. Ann. iv. 56) it
dedicated a temple to the goddess of Rome. Lying at the end
of one of the great roads leading across Lydia from Phrygia and
the east, and forming the maritime outlet for the whole trade of
the Hermus valley, it became wealthy and prosperous. It was
an assize town, and one of the cities bearing the name /x^rpoTroXis.
With Ephesus and Pergamum it strove for the title wpom; Acrtas
a strife which continued till it was settled by the Emperor
Antoninus (Philostr. Op. 231. 24, ed. Kayser); and of all the
Asiatic cities that in A.D. 26 contended for the right of erecting
a temple to Tiberius, Livia and the Senate, it alone secured this
privilege and could henceforth claim the Imperial Neocorate.
A second Neocorate was accorded to it by Hadrian (see, how
ever, Lightfoot, Ignatius, i. 467) and a third by Severus. Of the
56 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 8-9.
power acquired by the Jews in Smyrna notice will be taken. As
regards the origin of the Church in Smyrna the N.T. gives no
information. According to Vita Polycarpi, 2, St. Paul visited
Smyrna on his way to Ephesus. According to Acts xix. 10,
" All they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of God." See
the Bible Dictionaries on " Smyrna," and Ramsay, Letters, in loc.
6 TTpwros Kal 6 lo-xaros. Repeated from i. 1 7.
os eyeVero vtKpos Kal er]o-i>. These words also go back to
i. 17 sq., Kat eyei/o/xT;!/ i/e^pos, Kat I8ov tov CLJJU ets TOVS aiwi/as TOJV
ataman . Compare the demonic caricature in the case of the
Antichrist : xiii. 14, 6s \i TYJV TrA^yr/i/ rr?s /xa^atpr/s Kai l^crev.
The word er/o-ei/ refers to Christ s resurrection : cf. Rom. xiv. 9,
Xpttrros OLTriOavev KOI Zfycrev Iva KOLL ve/cpaii/ Kat a>7 rwv Kvpuvarrj.
This part of the title, os eyeVero veKpos Kat e^o-ev, points forward
to IO d , ytvov TTIOTOS xpt Oavdrov KOL Swtrco <TOL rov <TT<J>avov T^S
{o>^s. The divine title, 6 Trpwros Kat 6 ta^arcs, seems to have
been added by our author when editing his visions as a whole.
See p. 45 sq.
9-10. These two verses constitute three stanzas : the first
verse constituting the first stanza of three lines and the second
verse two stanzas of three lines and two respectively.
9. oT8d orou TTJK OXul/ik . . . dXXa irXoucnos et. The un-
emphatic or vernacular use of the pronoun here throws the
emphasis on the context, " I know the affliction and poverty thou
endurest, but thou art not poor but rich." With this we may
contrast the words addressed to Laodicea, iii. 17, Xeyets on
nAotxrios elf.il) . . . Kat OVK ot6as on crv et 6 . . . TTTW^OS. On the
combination of material poverty and spiritual riches cf. 2 Cor.
Vi. TO, U>S TTTW^Ol, TToXXo^S O 7rXoUTt^OVTS . JaS. ii. 5) ^X OfO^
c^eXe^aro rovs TTTOO^OUS rw KOCT/XW 7rAoi;crtous iv TrtVret : also Luke
xii. 21 ; i Tim. vi. 18. The poverty of the Christians in
Smyrna appears to be due at all events in part to the despoiling
of their goods by the Jewish and pagan mobs : cf. Heb. x. 34,
TYJV apTrayrjv ro>v inrap^ovTitiv V/LHWV /xcro. ^apas TrpocreSe ^ao ^c.
TT)k |3Xao-(f>T]fuai> eic T&V Xeyorrwi louSaious flvai eaurous. Here
K means "proceeding from." Hence John iii. 25 is not a true
parallel. The bitter hostility of the Jews to the Christians at
Smyrna is unmistakable from the context. The Jews were
strong at Smyrna, and had maintained in practice their position
as a distinct people apart from the rest of the citizens till the
reign of Hadrian as an inscription (CIG. 3148, ot TTOTC louSatot)
shows, though they had legally ceased to be so at 70 A.D.
From other sources we know of their hostility to the Christians.
Justin (Dial. xvi. n, xlvii. 15, xcvi. 5, etc.) charges the Jews
generally with cursing in their synagogues those that believed on
Christ; and Tertullian with instigating the persecution of the
II. 9.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN SMYRNA 57
Christians (Scorp. 10, " Synagogas Judaeorum, fontes perse-
cutionum ") : cf. Euseb. H.E. v. 16. And this hostility was no
doubt aggravated by the accession of converts from Judaism to
Christianity, a fact which is attested in Ignatius (Ad Smyrn. i. 2,
i rot s- dycovs /cat TTICTTOUS avrov, etrc ey lovScuois tire ev e$vecrii/).
In the martyrdom of Polycarp this enmity of the Jews was
exhibited in an almost incredible degree; for they joined (xii. 2)
with the pagans in accusing Polycarp of hostility to the State
religion^ crying out " with ungovernable wrath and with a loud
shout : * This is the teacher of Asia, the father of the Christians,
the puller down of our gods, who teacheth numbers not to
sacrifice nor to worship " (6 TWV ^/xere pcoi/ 6tu>v /catfcuper^s, 6
TroAAous SiSao-Kwv fJirj Oveiv /xT/Se Trpoo-Kuveiv).
These Jews, moreover, joined with the pagans in demanding
from the Asiarch and chief priest Philip the death of Polycarp,
and were especially active (although it was the Sabbath day) in
collecting timber and faggots with a view to burning Polycarp
alive (/uaAicrra louSaicov 7rpo0v//,a)s, ws e$os aurois, ets rairra vrrovp-
yovvTw) (pp. tit. xiii. i). Later in the Decian persecution the
Jews took a prominent part in the martyrdom of Pionius, which,
too, took place on the Sabbath (Act. Pion. 3). In our text the
Jews are charged with blaspheming Christ and His followers as
they had done in the earliest days of Paul s preaching in Asia
Minor (Acts xiii. 45, 01 louScuot . . . dj/TcAeyov rots VTTO HavXov
AaAou/xeWs fiXavcfjrj/jiovvTfs). But the Christians are reminded
that these Jews are Jews in name only after the flesh and not
after the spirit : cf. Rom. ii. 28, ou -yap 6 ei/ TOJ <ai/ep<3 lovSatos
ecrriv . . . a AX 6 ei/ r<5 Kpvrrr(a lovSatos, KCU Trfpirofirj KapStas ei/
TTi/cv/xart ov ypaya/xart : Gal. vi. 1 5 sq. The true Jews are those
who have believed in Christ, and thereby won a legitimate claim
to the name and spiritual privileges belonging to the Jews. The
fact that our author attaches a spiritual significance of the
highest character to the name lovSatos shows that he is himself
a Jewish Christian. In such a connection the Fourth Evangelist
would have used the term lo-pa^XtV^s (cf. i. 47), whereas he
represents the louScuot as specifically and essentially the
opponents of Christianity. See Westcott, John, p. ix sq.
KCU OUK daiv. On this Hebraism for /cat OVK ovrwv see note
on i. 5-6.
aui/aywyt) TOU larai/a. Cf. iii. 9. The Jews were, as their
actions showed, a Synagogue of Satan though they claimed to be
a Synagogue of the Lord : 2vi/ayo>yr/ TOV Kvpiov (Num. xvi. 3
(Sip), xx. 4, ^xxvi. 9 (my), xxxi. 16. Cf. Pss. Sol. xvii. 18,
(rwaywyas oonW). The nobler word eK/cA^o-ia was chosen by the
Church as a self-designation, crwaywyrj being used only once in
the N.T. of a Christian assembly (Jas. ii. 2). o-waywy^ was
58 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 10.
gradually abandoned to the Jews, and thus we find such an
expression as crwayajy^ TOV ^arai/a in this Book, which was almost
the latest in the Canon.
10. The persecution with which the Church is here
threatened shows that the Jews are acting in concert with the
heathen authorities. Spitta suggests that the term 8ia/3oA.os (cf.
xii. 10, 6 /carrjywp raiv dSeX^wv fj/jiuv) is here chosen in order to
recall the calumnies of the Jews against the Christians. But in
that case we should, as Diisterdieck observes, expect o-waywy^ TOV
SiafloXov in 9.
e UJAWI/. For the partitive genitive used as an object, cf.
Matt, xxiii. 34; 2 John 4. In Rev. xi. 9; John xvi. 17, we
have it used as the subject.
cis 4>u\aio]i LVO, ireipaaOfJTe. This phrase defines the character
of the trial awaiting the Church in Smyrna, and therefore the
meaning to be attached to Tret/oao-^re. Tretpa^etv and 7retpacr//,os
in iii. 10 refer to the demonic attacks which are to befall all the
unbelievers on the earth, but which cannot affect those who have
been sealed : see vii. 2-4 (notes) ; for the sealing has secured
them against such attacks. But in the present verse ireipdfcfw
is used in the sense of testing by persecution. Against such
TreipGur/Aos Christ does not shield His own : rather they must face
it and be faithful under it even unto death (io d ).
6\i\|/ii> Tjficpwy Se ica. The round number here points to a
short period: cf. Dan. i. 12, 14. The number is used in this
sense also in Gen. xxiv. 55; Num. xi. 19. See in Pirke Aboth,
v. 1-9, on the various things connected with the number 10.
mon-os axpt flamrou. Here the supreme trial of martyrdom
is referred to: cf. xii. II, OVK rjyaTrrjarav rrjv tyvxqv CLVTUV a^pi
Bavdrov : Heb. xii. 4, OVTTCO /xe^pis cu/xaros avTiKareo-r^Te : also
Phil. ii. 8.
rbv arl^oivov TTJS WTJS. The figure appears to be borrowed
from the wreath awarded to the victor in the games. Cf. i Cor.
ix. 25; Phil. iii. 14; 2 Tim. ii. 5; i Pet. v. 4 (rov d/xapaj/rtvoj/
-n}? Sor/s <rr(f>avov). Smyrna was, according to Pausanias (vi.
14. 3, cited by Encyc. Bib. 4662), famous for its games. In the
Test. Benj. iv. i we have the oldest reference to such crowns in
Jewish literature: cf. Jas. i. 12; Asc. Isa. vii. 22, viii. 26, ix.
10-13, e * c< > Herm. Sim. viii. 2, 3; Polycarp, Ad Phil. i. i;
Martyr. Polyc. xvii. i. But it is possible, as has been suggested
by Dieterich, Nekyia, 41-45; Volz, 344; Gressmann, Ursprung d.
israeL jud. Eschat. no, that these symbols are derived from
heavenly beings. Thus in 2 Enoch xiv. 2 the sun is represented
as adorned with a crown of glory ; similarly in 3 Bar. vi. i with
a crown of fire. Dieterich (op. cit.> p. 41) states that in works of
art the Greek deities were very frequently represented with
II. 10-11.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN SMYRNA 59
crowns of light or nimbuses from the time of Alexander the
Great, and that the nimbuses in works of ancient Christian art
were derived from this source. These crowns are naturally
associated with the blessed when once these are conceived as
clothed in light : cf. p. 183 sqq. The genitive Trjs fafjs is there
fore, as Bousset suggests, probably to be taken not epexegeti-
cally as "the crown which consists in life," but as "the crown
which belongs to the eternal life." As the tree of life (cf. ii.
7 note, xxii. 2, 14) is a symbol of the blessed immortality
in Christ, so the crown of life appears to symbolize its full
consummation.
11. 6 Zxwv . . . eKK\T)oriai9. Cf. 7*.
ll b . Like 7 b , i7 bcd , 26-28, iii. 5, 12, 21, this, too, is probably
an editorial addition of our author. Here the addition is
unhappy, for it comes in the form of an anti-climax after the
great promise in io e .
6 VIK>\> ou [AT] d8iKT]0fj. ov fjLrj with the future or aorist con
stitutes "the most definite form of a negative assertion about
the future" (Blass, Gram. 209). ov py is always (15 times)
followed by the aorist subjunctive in our author except in
xviii. 14, which is not from his hand: in the rest of the N.T. it
is followed by the indicative once out of every seven or eight
times ; in classical Greek the present subjunctive is also found.
This construction is frequent in the N.T. in all about 96 times,
but rare in non-literary papyri. Moulton (Prol. 190 sqq.) tries
to show, notwithstanding, that the N.T. and the papyri are here
in harmony.
dSiK-nOfj eK. d&Keti/ is always used in the sense of " to hurt "
in our author: see xxii. n, note. The agent or instrument is
expressed by e/c after a passive verb. Cf. iii. 18, ix. 2, 18, xviii. i.
In this promise there may be a reference to 10, ytVov TTIO-TOS a^pt
<9avarov. He that is ready to submit to physical death for his
faith will not be affected by the second death.
TOU Qa.va.-rov TOU Seurepou. Cf. xx. 6 [14], xxi. 8, where this
expression is explained. This is a Rabbinic expression. Thus,
in the Jerus. Targum on Deut. xxxiii. 6 we have, " Let Reuben
live in this age and not die the second death (w:n wmoa)
whereof the wicked die in the next world." Targ. on Jer.
li. 39, 57, "Let them die the second death and not live in the
next world"; on Isa. xxii. 14, "This sin shall not be forgiven
you till ye die the second death"; also on Isa. Ixv. 6, 15 ; Sota,
35 a (on Num. xiv. 37), "they died the second (?) death" (nn tt
rov^ ft). See Wetstein for further examples. The idea is found
also in Philo, De Praem. et Poen. ii. 419, 6a.va.Tov yap SITTOV eTSos,
TO /xev /CO/TO, TO TtOvdvai . . . TO Se KO.TO, TO airoOnfjo-KCLr, o 8r) KO.KOV
Though the expression is not found in i Enoch the
60 THE REVELATION OE ST. JOHN [II. 11-12.
idea probably is in xcix. n, cviii. 3, where the spirits of the
wicked are said to be slain in Sheol, though their annihilation is
not implied thereby.
12-17. THE MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN
PERGAMUM.
12. TTJS iv rkpYctfAw. This city appears as ^ n<f/>ya//,os in
Xenophon and Pausanias, but as Tlepya/Aoi/ in Strabo, Polybius,
Appian, and most other writers. The latter is the usual form
also in the inscriptions. Pergamum was a Mysian city, about 15
miles from the sea. It commanded the valley of the Caicus,
and lay between two streams which fell into the Caicus about
4 miles distant. The earliest city was built on a hill, 1000 feet
high, which became the site of the Acropolis and many of the
chief buildings of the later city. Though a city of some import
ance in the 5th cent. B.C. its greatness dates from the 3rd, when
it was made the capital of the Attalids, the first of whom to
assume the title of king was Attalus i. in 241 B.C. The last of
this dynasty Attalus in. bequeathed his kingdom, with the
exception of Phrygia Magna, to the Romans. At this date this
kingdom embraced " all the land on this side the Taurus," and
was constituted, with the above exception, as the Province of
Asia by the Romans, with Pergamum as its official capital.
Pergamum was famed for its great religious foundations in
honour of Zeus Soter, 1 Athena Nikephoros, whose temple
crowned the Acropolis, Dionysos Kathegemon, and Asklepios
Soter. 2 Of these the cult of Asklepios was the most distinctive
and celebrated. It was the Lourdes of the Province of Asia,
and the seat of a famous school of medicine. Thus Galen (De
Compos. Med. ix.) writes : elwOacriv TroAAot . . . / TO> flito Xf.yc.iv
fjio. TOV ev Depya/xo) Ao-KA^TrioV, /xa TTJV iv E<e<ra> "Apre/xtv, /xa TOV
fv AcA^oT? ATroXXcova, and Philostratus ( Vita Apollonii, iv. 34),
o>(T7r/3 fj Acrta et<j TO Ilepya/xoi/, ourca? ets TO itpov TOVTO we<oira
f) Kprjrr) (both passages quoted by Wetstein) : Mart. ix. 17,
" Pergameo . . . deo."
But from the standpoint of our author the most important
cult was that of the Roman Emperors, which was established in
Pergamum as the chief city of the province in 29 B.C., where
a temple was dedicated to Augustus and Rome by the Provincial
1 Many scholars have sought to explain 6 6p6vos TOV Zarava by the gigantic
altar erected on a huge platform 800 feet above the city to Zeus Soter in
commemoration, it is believed, of the victory of Attalus over the Galatai.
2 Other scholars have found in the phrase in the preceding note a reference
to the worship of Asklepios, because the serpent (i.e. Satan : cf. xii. 9) was
universally associated with him.
11.12-13.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN PERGAMUM 6l
Synod (Ko/ov Ao-i as); 1 cf. Tac. Ann. iv. 37, where Tiberius
refers to the founding of this temple to Augustus and Rome by
Pergamum. No such foundation was officially recognized in
Asia unless it was made by the Synod with the concurrence of
the Roman Senate. Thus Pergamum won the honour of the
Neocorate before Smyrna, which did not obtain it till 26 B.C., and
Ephesus, which was not so honoured till the reign of Claudius or
Nero. A second temple was built in Pergamum in honour of
Trajan, and a third in honour of Severus. The imperial cult had
thus its centre at Pergamum ; and as the imperial cult was the
keystone of the imperial policy, Pergamum summed up in itself
the intolerable offence and horror that such a cult, the observ
ance of which was synonymous with loyalty to Empire, provoked
in the mind of our author. It is here and nowhere else that we
are to find the explanation of the startling phrase, 6 0poVos rov
^arava, in 13. Behind the city in the ist cent. A.D. arose a huge
conical hill, 1000 feet high, covered with heathen temples and
altars, which in contrast to " the mountain of God," referred to
in Isa. xiv. 13; Ezek. xxviii. 14, 16, and called "the throne of
God " in i Enoch xxv. 3, appeared to the Seer as the throne of
Satan, since it was the home of many idolatrous cults, but above
all of the imperial cult, which menaced with annihilation the
very existence of the Church. For refusal to take part in this
cult constituted high treason to the State. See Ramsay, Letters
to the Seven Churches \ 281 sqq.
6 eypv *V popJHxwxK KT\. Cf. i. 1 6. This title is connected
with 1 6 that follows. See p. 26.
13. OTTOU 6 0p6k09 TOU larai/a. The reference in these words,
as has been shown in the preceding verse, is to the primacy of
Pergamum as the centre of the imperial cult, and as such the
centre of Satan s kingdom in the East in the West it was
Rome itself: cf. xiii. 2, xvi. 10. Here stood the first temple
erected to Augustus and Rome; and here dwelt the powerful
priesthood devoted to the imperial cult ;^and from Pergamum it
spread all over Asia Minor. The Asiarch or chief civil authority
is, as we see from the Martyrdom of Poly carp, likewise the chief
priest of this cult.
Kpcn-eis TO oVojxd jAou. Notwithstanding all these difficulties
thou "holdest fast My name."
OUK ripsaw Tf)k iriorTtf JJLOU KT\. These words refer to some
definite persecution of which nothing is at present known. In
Trio-Tts /xou the /xou is the objective genitive, i.e. " faith in Me " :
cf. xiv. 12. In ii. 19, xiii. 10, 7rurrts= "faithfulness."
1 That the temple was actually the seat of the imperial cult in the province
is proved by an inscription from Mytilene : v <T ry vou$ ry KOLTO, > cr/ceuafo-
fjL^vtf aura? virb TTJS Acrias eV llepyd/ui.^ (quoted by Bousset).
62 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 13-14.
v TCUS Tjfxepcus t An-tirast. If with the best MSS we accept
Aj/r/Tras, we must treat it as indeclinable. But it is perhaps best
to follow Lachmann (Studien und Kritiken, 1830, p. 839), WH
(ii. App. 137), Nestle, Swete, and Zahn in regarding ANTIIIA as
the original reading, and the final C either as an accidental
doubling of the following O (Lachmann), or a deliberate change
of AvriVa into the nom. Avrwras owing to the nominative 6
/x,aprvs (Zahn). The former explanation is to be preferred. For
early attempts to emend the text see critical notes in loc. AvrtVas
is an abbreviated form of ArriTrar/oos, as KAeoTras for KXeoTrarpo?.
Cf. Hermas for Hermodorus, Lucas for Lucanus. Nothing is
really known beyond this reference of the martyr Antipas.
Later martyrs in Pergamum are known, as Carpus, Papylus and
Agathonike (cf. Euseb. H.E. iv. 15).
6 jjidpTus JJLOU. On this solecism, which is really a Hebraism,
see note on i. 5. The R.V. is right essentially in xvii. 6 in
rendering //.aprvpon/ I^o-ou by " martyrs of Jesus." The word
should be similarly translated here. For, since the Seer expects
all the faithful to seal their witness with their blood (xiii. 15),
the word /zaprus in our text is a witness faithful unto death, and
therefore a martyr. But outside our author this use was not
established till later, though the way was prepared for this use
by Acts xxii. 20, 2re<ai/oi; rov /xaprupos (row, and i Tim. vi. 13;
Clem. Cor. 5. Though the technical distinction between /x-aprvs
and ofjLo\oyrjrr]<s ("martyr" and "confessor") was not absolutely
fixed till the Decian persecution, yet, as Lightfoot (on Clem.
Cor. 5) observes, " after the middle of the second century at all
events /zaprvs, /zaprv/oetv, were used absolutely to signify martyr
dom ; Martyr. Polyc. 19 sq. ; Melito in Euseb. H.E. iv. 26;
Dionys. Corinth, ib. ii. 25. . . . Still even at this late date they
continued to be used simultaneously of other testimony to be
borne to the Gospel, short of death : e.g. by Hegesippus, Euseb.
H.E. iii. 20, 32."
cVrreKTcti OT). The passive form of dTroKraVco, which occurs very
rarely in the LXX and only once outside the Apocalypse in the
N.T. (i.e. Mark viii. 31 = Matt. xvi. 21 = Luke ix. 22), is fre
quently used in this Book: cf. ii. 13, vi. ii, ix. 18, 20 [xi. 5, 13,
xiii. 10, 15], xix. 21 ; whereas a-rroOv^a-Kw is only used strictly as a
passive in viii. ii, xiv. 13. In the Fourth Gospel, on the other
hand, whereas the passive of o-Tro/cTctVetv does not occur, we find
a-n-oOvrjo-Keiv used as its passive, xi. 16, 50, 51, xviii. 14, 32, xix. 7.
14. ex&&gt; Kara aoG oXiya. Though this Church has withstood
the dangers besetting it from the imperial cult, it has suffered
teachers of false doctrine to arise and win a following amongst
its members. In oAiya only one thing is meant, though the
writer speaks of that one thing generically : cf. WM 219.
II. 14-15.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN PERGAMUM 63
eKi = Trap up^ in the preceding verse.
eX l S e*ei KpaToGi/Tag TTJI SiSa^y BaXadjJi, os eSiBaaicei TW
BaXaK KT\. On the relation of this verse to the next see 15.
The reference is to Num. xxxi. 16 (cf. xxv. i, 2). Balaam is
here represented as the prototype of all corrupt teachers. In
our text these early Gnostics by their false teaching, that as they
were not under the law but under grace (Rom. vi. 15) and were
therefore not bound by the law, tempted men to licentiousness,
even as Balak corrupted Israel in accordance with the advice
of Balaam. In Num. xxxi. 16 it is not expressly stated that
Balaam counselled Balak to act so against Israel, but the state
ment in our text is a not unnatural inference an inference
already made in Philo, Vita Mays. i. 53-55 ; cf. Joseph. Ant. iv.
6. 6 ; Origen, In Num. Horn. xx. i.
The construction eSi Sao-Kei/ TO> BaXa/c is, according to WM,
p. 279 (note 4 ), found in some late writers. It is unjustifiable to
explain it as a Hebraism, since this construction in the case of nT
and *fth is exceptional in the O.T. In ii. 20 SiSao-Keu/ takes
the ace.
<J>ayeiy etSwXoOura ica! Tropycuom. Here the order is against
Num. xxv. 1-2 and ii. 20 (see note) of our text. It is doubtful
whether the first phrase refers to the eating of food which had
been bought in the open market and already been consecrated
to an idol, or to participation in pagan feasts. Probably it refers
to both. This problem had, as we know, arisen in Corinth many
years earlier in an acute form : cf. i Cor. viii. 7-13, x. 20-30.
From this letter we learn that, though St. Paul did not censure
the conduct of the Corinthians who regarded the eating of dBuX.6-
Ovra as a matter of moral indifference, because of the decree
issued by the Apostolic Council at Jerusalem (cf. Acts xv. 29,
a.7r^(r6a.L eiSwAotfuTon/ : cf. XV. 20, aTre^ecr^at TCOV dA.i(ry?7/x,aTcoi> TO>J/
iS<oAwi/), yet he condemned their action on the principle that it put
a stumbling-block in the way of their weaker brethren, and tended
to bring about their moral downfall ; and that by sharing in the
heathen feasts which were made in honour of gods, who though
they were not indeed gods as the heathen conceived them (i Cor.
viii. 4), were nevertheless demons (x. 20), they made themselves
spiritually unfit to take part in the Eucharist (x. 21).
15. This verse and the preceding are difficult, but their ex
planation does not call for the supposition of mixed constructions.
The thought and connection of th e verses are as follows : in 14
our author states that the Pergamene Church has certain corrupt
teachers, belonging to the following of Balaam, who seduced
Israel into sin. But since this statement only defines the affinities
of these corrupt teachers with thepast^ we expect a further defini
tion of their affinities with the present. This we find in 15, where
64 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 15-16.
we should render : " Thus in like manner them too (i.e. as well as
the Ephesian Church : cf. 6) hast some who hold the teaching
of the Nicolaitans." OUTWS and 6/xoiws are not to be taken as
referring to one and the same thing. OVTOJ? justifies the state
ment made in 14, whereas the o/xotco? refers to the Ephesian
Church. Thus the /cat a-v and the o/xot ws belong together :
" Thou too (as well as the Ephesian Church) in like manner "
(with the Ephesian Church). The ex ls m *5 resumes that in 14.
This explanation does no violence to any part of the text, while
it explains each member of it in a natural sense from the
context. The right interpretation of /cat a-v leads to the right
interpretation of the whole. By failing to recognize this fact
expositors have erred in the past. Thus Johannes Weiss is
driven to mistranslate 15 as follows: "So hast du dort auch (?)
solche, welche die Lehre der Nikolaiten halten gleicherweise."
The /cat beyond question belongs to the a-v. Bousset represents
the meaning of 14-15 to be: "So wie Bileam durch Balak die
Israeliten verfiihrte, so haben die Pergamener die Nicolaiten als
Verfiihrer." But if any such comparison was intended, we should
have had something like wo-Trep BaAaa//, eSt Saavcev ra> BaAa/c j3a\elv
/CpaTOWT9 TT/J StSa^V NlKoAeHTWV j3d\\OV(Tl OTKCtvSaXov
0-ov. But this interpretation fails, as it leaves wholly out
of sight the definitive phrase /cat a-v. Besides, if, as some scholars
suppose, the construction is irregular and the ourus presupposes
a preceding wo-Trep in this context, then not BoAaa/x, but ot viol
lo-parjA would be the subject with which /cat a-v would be com
pared : Gjo-7rep ot wot Io-paT)X ei^oi/ Kparowas TT)V SiSa^i/ BaAaa//,
/crA., OVTWS x ts KC " ~^ K P a TwTas KrA. This would in itself
give an excellent sense. As the ancient Israel had corrupt
teachers, so too now has the Pergamene Church. But then the
present form of the text does not admit of this interpretation,
and, moreover, the context is against it. The /cat a-v recalls the
fact that not only is the Pergamene but also the Ephesian Church
troubled by corrupt teachers.
The grammatical study of the text having thus established
the fact, that in 15 we have at once both an explanation of 14
and a comparison with ii. 6, serves further to settle the relation
of the Balaamites and the Nicolaitans. The term Balaamites is
simply a name given for the nonce by our author to the Nicolai
tans. The assignment of this name rests on two grounds : the
first is the identity of results as regards their teaching ; the
second is the identity in respect of meaning in the view of our
author as well as of certain Jewish writers of BaAaa/A and Ni/coAaos
(see note in ii. 16).
16. fAeTayoTjaoi ou^. The whole Church of Pergamum is called
upon to repent and purge itself from these Nicolaitans, in the
11.16-17.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN PERGAMUM 65
hope that they will ultimately come to a better mind and return
to her (cf. i Cor. v. 4-5), else Christ will visit the Church (^p^o^ai
o-ot) and deal drastically with these corrupt teachers (/XCT* avrwv).
The Seer requires the Church of Pergamum to expel them, as the
Church of Ephesus had already done. It has not identified
itself with them.
el 8e JATJ. Here equivalent to d B py //,Tai/o>jo-eis as in ii. 5 b ,
where see note, et Se prf is always elliptical in our author.
iroXefirjaw per O.UT&V. This construction, which is frequent in
the LXX, is confined to the Apocalypse (cf. xii. 7, xiii. 4, xvii. 14)
in the N.T. The verb itself occurs outside the Apocalypse only
in Jas. iv. 2. In our text it cannot be treated as other than a
Hebraism, if we take into account the Hebraistic character of
the text in general. The fact that it occurs sporadically (see
Moulton, Proleg? 106) twice or more in the Papyri is no
evidence to the contrary. See Abbott, Gram., p. 267.
V TT| pO[A<f>(lia TOU OTOfAdTOS fXOU. Cf. 1. 1 6, U. 12, XJX. 15.
The phrase suggests a forensic condemnation, but in xix. 15 this
word is conceived as an actual instrument of war.
17. TU ClKWI Tl S(0<TO> dUTU> TOG |J,cWa. On TO) VlKOJVTl . . .
CLVTW see 7. TOV (jidvva is the only instance in the N.T. of
Sowai with the partitive genitive (see iii. 9). According to 2 Bar.
xxix. 8 the treasury of manna was to descend from heaven
during the Messianic Kingdom, and the blessed were to eat of it.
This manna is referred to in Chag. i2 b (Tanchuma; Piqqudi, 6;
Beresh. rab. 19; Bammid. rab. 13), where it is said that in the
third heaven (D pn J ) are the mills which grind manna for the
righteous. This manna was called "bread from heaven," Ex.
xvi. 4 ; " corn of heaven," Ps. Ixxviii. 24, and likewise " bread of
the mighty" (i.e. angels, cf. Ps. Ixxviii. 25). It is to this heavenly
manna, and not to the golden pot of manna which was preserved
(Ex. xvi. 32-34) in remembrance of the food in the wilderness
and which was in the ark (Heb. ix. 4), that our text appears to
refer (cf. Or. Sibyl vii. 148 f. :
8 OVK ecrrat ouSe a-ra^v?, aAA. a^aa 7rai/TS
It is quite true that there are several Rabbinic passages
which speak of the restoration of the pot of manna on the advent
of the Messiah : cf. Tanchuma, p. 83 b , and other passages cited
by Wetstein in loc.
The idea of the manna in this connection was probably
suggested to our author by the association of ideas evoked by
14-16. There he was thinking of Israel in the wilderness
tempted by Balaam, just as the Pergamene Christians are tempted
by his spiritual successors. As the ancient Israel was fed by
VOL. i. 5
66 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 1?.
a material manna, the true Israelites would in the future life be
fed by a spiritual manna. Since the material manna could not
avert death under the old Dispensation, John vi. 49 argues that
it was not bread of life even in the very sphere to which it
belonged..
As the context shows, as well as a comparison of the other six
promises, the promise here refers to the future. 1 The manna
that is now hidden will then be given to those who have fought
the good fight and conquered. Part of this victory on the part
of the Pergamene Church will consist in their abstinence from
forbidden meats : contrast the gift of the manna here with the
eiSwA.o fluTo, eaten by the unfaithful, ii. 14. The " hidden manna "
probably signifies the direct spiritual gifts that the Church
triumphant will receive in transcendent measure from intimate
communion with Christ. This " hidden manna " is practically
equivalent in some degree to the water of life (see p. 54 sq.), but
not to the tree of life.
tl/rj^or \euK-f\v. Stones or pebbles were variously used by the
ancients, and each usage has been applied to the interpretation
of the present passage, i. The white stone used by jurors to
signify acquittal; cf. Ovid, Met. xv. 41 :
" Mos erat antiquis niveis atrisque lapillis,
His damnare reos illis absolvere culpa."
2. The //?7<os which entitled him that received it to free enter
tainment to royal assemblies. Cf. Xiphilin, Epit. Dion., p. 228,
where it is said of Titus : ot^cUpia yap v\wa [j,LKpa aj/wflev ets TO
Biarpov epptVret (rv/JiftoXov e^owa TO IL\V eSw8t)u,ov TIVOS ... a d/07ra-
Tivag e Sei Trpos TOV<S Sutryjpas avTwv tTreveyKeiv KCU Xafielv TO
Hence here a ticket of admission to the
heavenly feast. 3. The precious stones which according to
Rabbinical tradition fell along with the manna (Joma, 8). 4. The
precious stones on the breastplate of the high priest bearing
the names of the Twelve Tribes. 5. The white stone was re
garded as a mark of felicity: cf. Pliny, Ep. vi. u. 3, "O diem
laetum notandumque mihi candidissimo calculo."
But each of these explanations is unsatisfactory ; either the
/o7<os is not white or it has no inscription upon it. The true
source of the ideas underlying the expressions in our text is most
probably to be found in the sphere of popular superstition, which
attached mysterious powers to the use of secret names (see
Heitmiiller, 7m Namen Jcsu, 128-265). The new name in such
a connection would naturally be not that of the person who
received the t/^<o5, but of some supernatural being. The white
1 Philo (Quts rerum divin. 39, Leg. allcgor. iii. 59, 61), on the other hand,
uses manna as signifying " the spiritual food of the soul " in the present life.
II. 17-18.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN THYATIRA 67
stone was simply an amulet engraved with some magical formula
or name, such as we find in Makk. n a (cf. Sukka, 53*) : " When
David dug the cistern (at the south-west corner of the altar) the
deep surged up and sought to overwhelm the world. Then he
asked if he might inscribe the divine name on a potsherd and
cast it into the deep to cause it to sink back into its place,"
The value of such an amulet was enhanced if the holder of it was
assured that the name was new, and so known only to him ; for
should any one succeed in learning this name he too would enjoy
the same powers as its possessor. We have now to ask if our
author has taken over in their entirety these ideas. Even if
this is so, we may be certain that they have become spiritually
transformed. The new name can only be that of Christ or God
inscribed on a if/rj^os. The man himself may be regarded
as the i/^<os; and since he is ACUKO S, as his victory in the final
strife has proved, he is inscribed with the divine name, 1 which
has a different meaning in character with the soul that receives it,
and therefore a new meaning to every faithful soul, and which
none but it knows (cf. Matt. xi. 27). This interpretation brings
this passage somewhat into line with iij 12, 6 WKOJV . . . ypdif/M
N \ * n /\ ~ \ \ V / \ /
7T dVTOV TO OVOfJid TOV UOV fJLOV . . . KCU TO OVOfJLO. [JLOV TO KCUVOF.
This inscription designates him as God s own possession, as the
o-<f>payi<s in vii. 2 sqq. (see note in loc. and parallels). But the
1/07^05 with the divine, name inscribed on it maybe differently
interpreted, and taken to be a symbol of the transcendent
powers now placed in the hand of him that has been faithful
unto death. Through such faithfulness the blessed are fitted to
receive from their divine Master fresh graces (i.e. the hidden
manna) and powers (the stone inscribed with the divine name)
of a transcendent character.
o^ofjia K.O.IVOV. See preceding notes.
o ou&eis o!8ey et p) 6 Xa|x|3ai><oi/. As we have observed above,
the knowledge that a faithful heart possesses of God is a thing
incommunicable, known only to itself. Cf. xix. 12, ZX<M ovo/xa
ycypa/x/xevov 6 ouSeis oI6W et /AT) auros, where, however, the general
meaning is different, and the clause is probably an interpolation.
18-29. THE MESSAGE TO THE ANGEL OF THE
CHURCH IN THYATIRA.
18. TW ev uareipois- The longest letter is addressed to the
least important of the Seven Cities. Thyatira lay about 40
1 Some scholars think that the new name given to the victor means a
new character (cf. Gen. xxxii. 28; Matt. xvi. 17, 18). But the 6 VIKUV has
already shown by his faithfulness that he possesses this new character ; he is
already a Kaivrj
68 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ll. 18-ld.
miles to the S.E. of Pergamum almost midway between the
Caicus in the north and the Hermus in the south. It was a
Lydian city on the confines of Mysia, to which it was sometimes
said to belong (Strabo, 625, uareipa . . . fjv Mwwv lo-xdrrjv
rives </>ao-iV). It was founded by the Seleucidae, its first settlers
being for the most part old soldiers of Alexander the Great and
their children. Hence it was called Karot/cta MaKeSoVwv by
Strabo, 625. About 190 B.C. it fell under the sway of the
Romans and formed part of the Province of Asia. Thyatira was
notable for its extensive trading and the number of its guilds of
craftsmen, and it is with the question, whether Christians were
justified or not in sharing in the common meals of a sacrificial
character, that this Letter to the Church in Thyatira is mainly
concerned: see notes. But Thyatira was undistinguished in
other respects in later times; for Pliny, H.N. v. 33, writes
slightingly of this community: "Thyatireni aliaeque inhonorae
civitates." An important road ran from Pergamum to Thyatira,
thence to Sardis and through Philadelphia to Laodicea. Thus
the Seven Churches were naturally linked together from a
geographical point of view, starting with Ephesus and ending
with Laodicea. Thyatira had temples dedicated to Apollo
Tyrimnaios, Artemis, and a shrine of Sambathe (TO Sa/^afleioi/),
an Oriental Sibyl in the neighbourhood ; but it had no temple
founded in honour of the Emperors. The Christian Church at
Thyatira ceased to exist towards the close of the 2nd cent. A.D.,
according to a statement of the Alogi. It early became a centre
of Montanism (Epiphanius, Haer. li. 33). See Ramsay, Letters^
and the Bible Dictionaries in loc.
b utos TOU OcoG. This title may have been suggested to our
author by Ps. ii. 7, seeing that later in this letter he quotes Ps.
ii. 9 in its entirety and a phrase from ii. 8. But the title is
presupposed in i. 6, ii. 27, iii. 5, 21, xiv. i, where God is
definitely spoken of as the Father of Christ. Nowhere in our
author is God described as " Father" in relation to men save in
xxi. 7 : contrast John xx. 17, etc. This title was claimed by
Christ (Matt. xi. 27 ; Luke x. 22), ascribed to Him by Peter
(Matt. xvi. 1 6), and formed the ground for the indictment brought
against Him before the Sanhedrin (Matt. xxvi. 63 ; John xix. 7).
6 exwy . . . x 01 ^ ^ 1 ^^- From i. 14 sq. The presence of
the first clause, 6 e^wv TOVS 6fj>@a.Xfjiov<s d>s <A.oya Trupos, appears to
be explained by 23, 6 cpawwv i>e<povs /cat xapStas KrX., and ot
iro Scs avrov ofioioL x a ^ KO ^ l P<*-vtt> possibly by 27 b . Here the
divine title seems to have been added by our author when
editing his visions as a whole : see p. 45 sq.
19. oI8d aou TCI epya. Here as in x. 9 the vernacular
possessive genitive introducing a group of nouns is followed by
II. 19-23.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN THYATIRA 69
the ordinary possessive, /cat rty dydV^v . . . /cat ryv inro/jLovyv o-ov
Kal TO. tp-ya <rov. Here Abbott, Gram., p. 606, remarks: "(i)
The writer could not well have said /cat o-ov, and (2) the twofold
repetition . . . shows that emphasis is intended the patience
that you shew and the deeds that you do" For a similar case cf.
x. 9. " The two passages show that the unemphatic o-ov is not
likely to be used after an unemphatic word."
KCU iV dydiTTji KT\. The /cat here introduces an explanatory
description of the pya. On aydiryv cf. ii. 4, and on VTTO/XOI/^V cf.
ii. 2. Further, the Seer states that in the fulfilment of such
works the Church in Thyatira has steadily advanced, whereas
Ephesus has gone backward (ii. 4). -n-XeiW seems here to be
used as meaning greater in quality, better : cf. Matt. vi. 25, xii.
41, 42; Heb. iii. 3, xi. 4, etc. As Swete remarks, "in these
addresses praise is more liberally given, if it can be given with
justice, when blame is to follow ; more is said of the good
deeds of the Ephesians and Thyatirians than of those of the
Smyrnaeans and Philadelphians, with whom no fault is found."
In rrjv dyaVtyv /cat TTJV TTI<TTIV we have the two dynamic Christian
forces which issue in the two Christian activities that follow r^v
8ta/coviav /cat rrjv vTro/aovi/jv.
20-23 a . The dangers which threatened Thyatira were in-^j
ternal rather than external. It was not the cult of the Emperor
nor the cults of the pagan deities, the condition of membership
in which was confessedly willingness to take part in the worship v
prescribed in each case, but the trade guilds that formed the /
problem in Thyatira. In the former case there could be nori
doubt as to the wrongness of participation in such cults, but in
the case of the latter the evidence seemed to the more intel
lectual class less conclusive. To the morally sound amongst this
class there could be no divergence of opinion as to the wrong-
ness of fornication, but different views were honestly maintained
as to the legitimacy of eating food sacrificed to idols, seeing that
in the eyes of the enlightened an idol was nothing. Now, since
membership in trade guilds (e/oyao-u, o-v/A^tworei?, o-we/oyao-iat)
did not essentially involve anything beyond joining in the
common meal, which was dedicated no doubt to some pagan
deity but was exactly in this respect meaningless for the en
lightened Christian, to avail oneself of such membership was
held in certain latitudinarian circles to be quite justifiable. And
this was particularly the case in Thyatira, which, owing to the
fact that it was .above all things a city of commerce, abounded
in business guilds, to one or other of which every citizen all but
necessarily belonged: otherwise he could hardly maintain his
business or enjoy the social advantages natural to his position.
Thus it was these trade guilds in Thyatira that made the
70 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 20.
Nicolaitan doctrine so acceptable to the Church in this city,
and that though the common meals of such guilds too often
ended in unbridled licentiousness. Against the principles and
conduct of the Nicolaitans the Church in Ephesus bad openly
declared itself (ii. 6) ; but no such declaration had as yet
emanated from the Church in Thyatira. Owing to the business
and social interests of its members it was too ready to accept
any principle that would justify their membership in the city
guilds. Hence it withheld its testimony against an influential
woman who had long (21) and notoriously (23) advocated the
principles of the Nicolaitans and yet enjoyed the membership of
the Church.
However this person might cloak her activities under the
noble name of prophetess, or advance her teaching as a more
enlightened (Gnostic?) Christianity, they were, the Seer de
clares, simply sheer licentiousness and the negation of the laws
laid down by the Apostolic Council. She was a modern Jezebel,
and the Church of Thyatira in tolerating her presence in the
Church was no better than a modern Ahab.
20. d(j>ts. Cf. John xii. 7 for this use of a<j>ievai. On the
form see Blass, Gram. 51 ; Robertson, Gram. 315.
TTjy yuj/aiKa Med|3eX. Jezebel is here used symbolically of
some influential woman in the Church in Thyatira, and chosen
in reference to the wife of Ahab, who was guilty of whoredom
and witchcraft (i Kings xvi. 3152 Kings ix. 22), and sought to
displace the worship of the God of Israel by idolatrous cults
introduced from other lands. There is no question here of the
Chaldaean Sibyl at Thyatira with whom Schurer (Theol. Abhandl.
Weizsacker gewidmet, p. 39 sq., 1892) sought to identify her.
Such a personage could not have been admitted to membership
of the Church in Thyatira, whereas the Jezebel in our text stands
admittedly within the jurisdiction of the Church. Zahn (see
Bousset, 1906, p 217 sq.) accepts the reading TT?V ywou/ca arov and
takes her to be the wife of the bishop of the Church, while Selwyn
(p. 123) identifies her with the wife of the Asiarch.
TJ Xeyoucra eaimjj irpocJnJTiy. On this Hebraism see note on
i. 5. We might compare Zeph. i. 12, e/cSi/o^rco en-i TOVS avSpas
rovs /cara^poj/owras . . . ot Xeyovrcs (D s "lEKn). This construc
tion is found in Mark xii. 38-40 (contrast Luke xx. 46), where it
is to be explained as due to the Semitic background. But a still
more pronounced Hebraism follows : see next note.
Kal 8i8d<7Ki Kal irXam. Here we have, as we have already
pointed out in i. 5-6 (note), a resolution of the participle into
a finite verb. Thus our text is a literal rendering of the Hebrew
idiom : "iD L ni nN" 1 ^ KTT^ JKn.
l <f>ayeli/. Our author appears here to emphasize
11.20-22.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN THYATIRA 71
the fact that, when the Church in Thyatira tolerated this
Nicolaitan teaching because it justified their membership in the
city guilds and their sharing in the common meals, it was in
reality tolerating fornication. See, however, note on ii. 14. It
will be observed that the order of the words here differs from that
in ii. 14. Here it is probably intended to mean that the primary
object of the prophetess was sexual immorality.
21. This verse implies that a definite warning had been
addressed to this self-styled prophetess, and that this warning
had been given sufficiently far back in the past to allow of a full
reformation of the evil. The warning may have come from the
Seer himself. But its source cannot be determined.
Iva |ui6TavoiiiorTj. The tva here has its final force: in ix. 20
a consecutive.
fATa>oT]<rai CK. Always so with the noun in our author:
cf. ii. 22, ix. 20, 21, xvi. ii ; probably a reflection of |Jp 31>;
for in Symmachus (though only occasionally in the LXX) /xcra-
voeu> is a more frequent rendering of the Hebrew phrase : cf. Job
xxxvi. 10; Isa. xxxi. 6, Iv. 7 ; Jer. xviii. 8; Ezek. xxxiii. 12.
22. I8ou jSttXXu auTTjk eis K\ivr\v.
Kal TOUS [xoixeuorras juter aurijs cts OXixj/ic fjLeydXTjK. We have
here a clear instance of Hebrew parallelism, and likewise of
Hebrew idiom, though, so far as I am aware, not hitherto
recognized by any scholar. While some scholars have quite
wrongly taken K\tvrj here to denote a banqueting couch, most
others have rightly recognized it to be a bed of illness or
suffering, but have not explained how this interpretation can be
justified. Now, if we retranslate it literally into Hebrew, we
discover that we have here a Hebrew idiom, i.e. 33^bi> ^23 = " to
take to one s bed," "to become ill "(Ex. xxi. 18): hence "to
cast upon a bed " means " to cast upon a bed of illness." This
idiom is found in i Mace. i. 5, eTrecre CTTI TTJV KXtvijv, and Jud.
viii. 3, tTrco-c ori rr)v K\i.vf]v y which books are translated from the
Hebrew. Thus we should render :
" Behold I cast her on a bed of suffering,
And those who commit adultery with her into great
tribulation "
Furthermore, it is to be observed that in iSov yScxAXw (late
MSS PQ /SaXtu) the /SaAXw represents a participle in the
Hebrew which can refer to the future, the present, or the past,
according to the context. Since it is parallel here with aTroKrevco
(23*), it refers, of course, to the future. This idiomatic refer-
7 2 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 22-23.
ence to the future in a present verb is to be found also in i. 7
(1801; IpxeTcu), ii. 10, iii. 9 (where our author has both i8ov 8i8o>
and tSoi) 7roo}o-w referring to one and the same thing), ix. 12,
xvi. 15, etc.
22 b -23. TOUS fJioixeuorras |UIT CXUTTJS . . . 23. K.a.1 rd TZKVO.
auTTJs- The text (/^oixetWras . . . TCKVOL) suggests that we have
here the actual paramours of this woman and her children.
Further, the children may be her legitimate children. Hence
the punishment is a severe one. There may be also a reference
to the fate that befell the sons of Ahab (2 Kings x. 7). But the
punishments are wholly disproportionate to the guilt on this
interpretation. Moreover, this interpretation, even if it is right,
is too narrow, and must not be regarded as excluding the possi
bility of finding a spiritual reference in the text. The entire
Church in Thyatira, owing to its special circumstances, is en
dangered by the Nicolaitan doctrine. Hence the poixtvovra.**
appear to be all those who, owing to the teaching of this woman,
thought they could combine faithfulness to Christ with the
concessions to the pagan spirit that their membership of the
business guilds involved ; and the rcWa to be those who have
absolutely embraced this woman s teaching even to its fullest
issues. For the former there is still hope : they are striving to
reconcile the claims of Christ on the one hand and the claims
of their business life on the other. Therein they have been
guilty as idolatrous Israel of old : cf. Hos. ii. 2, 4, where there is
a similar reference to mother and children. But they may yet
come to see that they cannot serve two masters : hence for them
the door of repentance is still open (22). But as regards the
reVva, the case is different. They have embraced the Nicolaitan
teaching unreservedly and unconditionally. They are one with
their spiritual mother in aim and character. P or them, therefore,
there is nothing but the doom of destruction (23*). In this
interpretation the difference in the dooms threatened is wholly
natural.
w iv Oai/arw. Cf. Ezek. xxxiii. 27, 6a.va.Tv a
where #araros = "i:n> "pestilence," as here and in vi. 8 (note).
miaou at KK\t]criai KT\. The doom of the offenders
was to be known as widely as the scandal had been. The
yvuvovrai on is an O.T. form of expression : i.e. know by reason
of experience, as in the case of the Egyptians, etc. Cf. Ex.
vii. 5, xvi. 12, xxix. 46, etc.
6 epauv&v ye<J>pous KCU KapSias. This phrase is from the O.T.,
but it is an independent rendering of Jer. xi. 20, Jy\ rri^D jn 3
where the LXX has 8o/a/xa(ov ve<f>pov<> KOL KapSias. The LXX
does not use Ipawav at all as a rendering of jrQ, nor apparently
does any other Jewish version save Aquila in one instance
II. 23-24.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN THYATIRA 73
(Ezek. xxi. 18). The same phrase, though the order of the
words is different, is found in Ps. vii. 10. Cf. other variations in
Jer. xvii. 10, xx. 12. St. Paul uses the phrase $w T<3 SOKL/JLOLJ^OVTI
TO,? KapSuxs fj/ji&v (i Thess. ii. 4) and 6 epawon/ ras KapSias in
Rom. viii. 27. ve<po? is not found elsewhere in the N.T. Cf.
Wisd. i. 6, where a free rendering is given of the entire phrase.
The kidneys were regarded by the Hebrews as the seat of the
emotions and affections (Jer. xii. 2), and the heart of the thoughts.
Zpawav is, according to Blass (Gr. 21), an Alexandrian form.
Swcrcu up!/ KaoTU> Kara TO, epya UJULWK. This phrase recurs in
xxii. 12. Cf. Matt. xvi. 27, 6 wos TOV av&pw-n-ov . . . a/7roS<ocre<
e/cacrra) Kara rr]v 7rpatv OLVTOV.
24. OUK Ixouaii . This may mean " are free from " in contrast
to those who "hold fast" Kparovaw, but a comparison of i. 16
and ii. i is not in favour of this view, if text of ii. i is right.
oirii cs is here generic; indicates a class. Its use is therefore
classical, as in i. 7, ix. 4, xx. 4. Elsewhere our author uses
OO-TIS as practically the equivalent of os: cf. i. 12, xi. 8, xii. 13,
xvii. 12, xix. 2. See note on xi. 8.
oiTiyeg . . . Ta J3a0e a TOU Zaram. Two interpretations are
here possible, and both are forcible, (i) Since the persons
referred to in u>s Aeyouo-iv are the libertine section in the Church
of Thyatira, the above words, omves . . . ^arai/a, are an indignant
retort on the part of our author, in which he declares that,
whereas they claim to "know the deep things of God" (cf.
Iren. Haer. ii. 22. 3) even as St. Paul (cf. i Cor. ii. 10, TO yap
Tri/cv/xa Travra epavva, KCU TO. /3dOrj TOV Qcov : Rom. xi. 33; Eph.
iii. 18), it is not the deep things of God but of Satan that they
have sought after. The later Gnostics, we know, professed alone
to know TO, fidOy: cf. Iren. Adv. Haer. ii. 22. i, "qui profunda
Bythi adinvenisse se dicunt"; 22. 3, profunda Dei adinvenisse
Se dicentes " ; Hippol. Phllos. V. 6, eTre/caAecrav lavrovs yvoooTtKOv?,
<ao-/covTes fjiovoL TO, /3d6r) yivcoo-Keiv : Tertull. Adv. Valefit, i,
" Eleusinia Valentiniani fecerunt lenocinia, sancta silentio magno,
sola taciturnitate caelestia. Si bona fide quaeras, concrete
vultu, suspense supercilio, Altum esf, aiunt." This phrase (ra
/?a#ea) was a natural one on the part of men who laid claim to
an esoteric knowledge a knowledge that in the case of the
Cainites, Naasenes, Carpocratians, and Ophites was held to
emancipate its possessors from the claims of morality. This
last fact leads naturally to the second interpretation. (2) Ac
cording to this second interpretation the words represent the
actual claim of this Gnostic element in the Church of Thyatira,
as Wieseler, Spitta, Zahn, Volter (Offenb. iv. 166), Bousset
assume. These false teachers held that the spiritual man should
know the deep things of Satan, that he should take part in the
74 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 24-26.
heathen life of the community, two of the most prominent
characteristics of which were its sacrificial feasts and immoral
practices. Though he outwardly shared in this heathen life,
nevertheless as a spiritual man (i.e. the Gnostic of later times)
he remained inwardly unaffected by it and so asserted his
superiority over it.
The insistence on the knowledge of intellectual mysteries,
either as an indispensable addition to or as a substitute for
simple obedience to the claims of the Christian life, has always
been a weakness of the Church.
ou flciXXw l<f> ufids aXXo |3dpos. In themselves these words
could refer either to burdens of suffering or of the law. But the
context declares clearly for the latter ; for the term Kparrja-ai in
the following verse can only refer to the obligations of the moral
law, and these obligations in particular related to fornication and
the eating of meat offered to idols. Now these were the two chief
enactments of the Apostolic decree in Acts xv. 28, e8oev . . .
^o/Sei TrAeof e7rm $eo-0ai V/MV ySapos TrXrjv rourcov TCOV eTraj/ay/ces,
a.7r)(6or@ai eiSa)Ao$vT<ov . . . /cat Tropretas. Only these two pro
hibitions are declared to be obligatory on the members of the
Church in Thyatira, which were entangled in the libertinism of
the Nicolaitans. The other two aTre xeo-flat . . . afyiaros /ecu
TZTIKTCOV are not re-enacted. But this is not all. The use of
the word aAAo in itself points to the exclusion of the two latter.
Thus our author had clearly the Apostolic decree in his mind.
25. Once and for all take a firm hold (Kparrfo-are) on these
duties incumbent on you, and shun absolutely the sacrificial
feasts of the heathen and the moral evils that attend on them.
o X T KpaTY)oraT. Cf. iii. II, K/odret o ex eis - 5 <0 ls to De
taken as a subjunctive of the aorist I/G> since a^pi in our author
elsewhere is followed by the subjunctive : cf. vii. 3, xv. 8, xx.
3, 5. In xvii. 17 it is followed by the indicative; but our
author is here using a source.
26. 6 laKuy KOI 6 rqpStv KrX. The victory is to him that keeps
Christ s works unto the end ; in the present instance the special
works required from the Church of Thyatira. But the repetition
of the article equates the two phrases. Hence we might trans
late : "he that overcometh even he that keepeth." The
victor is he that keeps Christ s works : he that keeps Christ s
works is the victor.
6 iaKUK . . . 8<uau> aurw, the nominative resumed in a subse
quent pronoun in the dative.
To this nominativus pendens or accusative we have an exact
parallel in iii. 12, 21. A more normal construction occurs in
ii. 7, 17, and the normal in vi. 4, xxi. 6.
aurw eouaiay eirl Twy IQv&v. A free rendering of Ps,
II. 26-27.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN THYATIRA 75
ii. 8, ^r6rp D^H H^riSI j LXX, Swo-w 0*01 Wvr) r^v /cATypovo/u av crov.
The thought of these words as well as the diction of what
follows are drawn from Ps. ii. 8-9. This Psalm was interpreted
Messianically as early as the ist cent. B.C. in the Pss. Solomon
(see note on xix. 15). The nature of the power conferred is
described in the next verse.
Our author appears to distinguish carefully the use of eoim a
with the article and without it. In the Fourth Gospel the
article is not used at all. With the article full authority in the
circumstances denned in the context is implied : cf. ix. 19, xiii.
4, 12, xvi. 9, xvii. 13. When a limited authority is implied,
eovo-ta stands without the article : cf. ii. 26, vi. 8, ix. 3, xiii. 2,
5, 7, xiv. 18, xvii. 12, xviii. i, xx. 6. There are three cases
which do not come under this rule, i.e. in ix. 10, xi. 6, and xxii.
14. In xi. 6 our author is using a source : hence we have
here no exception. But ix. 10 and xxii. 14 are abnormal, since
-fj e ^ovcrta avrwv in these passages appear to be equal simply to
eXpv&w e^ovcriav.
27. 27 ab imply the actual destruction of the heathen nations
as in xix. 15, and apparently in their destruction the triumphant
martyrs (cf. ii. 26, xvii. 14) are to be active agents as members
of the heavenly hosts which should follow the word of God, xix.
13-14. At this moment that I am writing we can witness at
least a partial fulfilment of this dread forecast, in which England
and her allies are engaged in mortal strife with the powers of
godless force and materialism. As Swete aptly writes: "The
new order must be preceded by the breaking up of the old
(<rwTpi)8eTai), but the purpose of the Potter is to reconstruct ;
out of the fragments of the old life there will rise under the hand
of Christ and of the Church, new and better types of social and
national organisation." To this we might add: the present
heathen system of international relations will sooner or later be
destroyed and replaced by international relations of a Christian
character.
Kttl iroip.ai ei aurous iv pd/88w aiSrjpa
a>S TO, 0-K6UT] TO,
From Ps. ii. 9. Our author here agrees partly with the LXX :
avrovs ev pa/3Su> crtS?/pa
Instead of Troi/xavets Symmachus renders crwrpiif/tis (s. cruv-
#/\ao-ets), and instead of crvvrpfyeis Aquila renders Trpocrp^et?.
Two important questions arise here. r. Has our author simply
borrowed his rendering Trot/xavet from the LXX? 2. What
meaning does our author attach to Trot/Mam? Now as to i,
76 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [II. 27.
since it is our author s usage elsewhere to translate the Hebrew
text independently, there is no reason to infer that he is here
simply borrowing from the LXX. The LXX was no doubt
familiar to him and provided him with a vocabulary. But he
was in no sense dependent upon it. But it has been urged, and
no doubt rightly, that the LXX here derived Djnn from njn and
so vocalized it Djnn and rendered it Trot/xavets, whereas they
ought to have derived it from yjn and vocalized it DJHfi, "thou
shalt break " (as Symmachus). We have now to deal with 2
what meaning did our author attach to Troi/xai/ct ? A comparison
of xix. 15, where Troi^avfl is parallel to -n-ard^y, and of the present
text, ii. 27, where it is parallel with o-wr/otySerat (cf. also xii. 5),
is strong evidence that our author attached two distinct meanings
to TToi/AatVeti/. 1 The ordinary meaning is found in vii. 17 (7rot//,aj/t
= " will pasture "), the other and unusual meaning " will de
vastate, lay waste," in ii. 27, xii. 5, xix. 15. Now, since this
sense is so far as I am aware not found outside our author and
the LXX (if indeed it is found in the latter), it is incumbent on
us to explain how our author came to attach this meaning to the
Greek verb. The explanation is apparently to be found in the
fact that TTot/xatVeti/ is the ordinary translation of njn. But
whereas njn generally means "to shepherd/ it means sometimes
"to devastate," " destroy," as in Mic. v. 5 ; Jer. vi. 3, ii. 16 (where
the R.V. renders "break"), xxii. 22; Ps. Ixxx. 14 (see Oxford
Hebrew Lex., p. 945). Now in the first two passages the LXX
renders njn by Trot/xatVetv. Hence Troi/xatVav should here mean
" to lay waste " or " to destroy." But, even if the LXX failed to
grasp the right rendering of njn in these passages and rendered
it according to its ordinary sense, it does not follow that our
author does so also. As clearly as language can indicate,
TroifjLaiveiv and Trarao-cretv in xix. 15 are parallels, just as potato.
oeta and /m/2Sw orL$r)pa. in the same clauses are likewise parallels.
It is noteworthy that in Latin pasco developed this secondary
meaning also.
Hence it is highly probable that our author assigned to
Trot/LuuVeiv a secondary sense that attaches to njn (as he does
to other words : cf. iroSts, x. i n.), and that we should render here :
" He shall destroy them with an iron rod,
As the vessels of the potter shall they be dashed to pieces."
1 That our author did attach two meanings to IT 01 na.lv eiv is the view
universally adopted by ancient and modern versions. Thus the Vulgate and
Syriac versions and the A.V. and R.V., etc., render this verb by "rule" in
ii. 27, xix. 15. This is, of course, a possible meaning and it is also an
ancient one, but in our author the parallelism and the context are against it.
The object with which authority is given to them over the apostate nations is
not that they may " rule " them, but may utterly destroy them.
. 27-111. 1.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN SARDIS 77
us rot o-KeuT] TO, KcpafUKo, ffuiTpi|3eTai. Here we have a free
rendering of Ps. ii. 9**: cf. also Isa. xxx. 14; Jer. xix. 11. It is
best to regard o-wrpi/Serai as = 1VBJ1 in the mind of our author,
and hence take it as a Hebraism and equivalent to a future.
Later MSS saw, in fact, that a future was required here and read
o-wTpi/^o-erai. We should not here, with the R.V., take the
words as follows : " as the vessels of the potter are broken to
shivers." Such a thought is weak : there is no point in such a
statement. The writer means to say that the righteous will
"dash to pieces" the strong and the mighty among the heathen
as easily as one dashes to pieces a potter s vessels. Primasius
supports this view: "sicut vas figuli confringentur": also Ticonius:
"ut vas figuli comminuentur." Besides, the parallelism requires
o-vvTpCfaTai 1 to be taken as a principal verb, as it is in Ps. ii. 9.
Even Isa. xxx. 14, Jer. xix. n support this view.
o>S Kayw eiXY]<f>a irapa TOU Trarpos jxou. These words recall, of
course, Ps. ii. 7, Kvpios eiTrei/ Trpos ^.e Yto s fjiov e? (TV. Cf. Acts ii. 33,
rrjv re 7rayyeAiav TOV Tn/eu/Aaros . . . Aa/2<W Trapa. TOU Trarpos, for
the phraseology.
28. In this letter to Thyatira only do we find a double
promise here and in 2y ab . On this and other grounds Selwyn,
Wellhausen, and others would omit 2y ab as an intrusion.
No satisfactory explanation has as yet been discovered of
these words. But in the meantime the best interpretation seems
to be that of Beatus (quoted by Swete) : " id est, Dominum Jesum
Christum quern numquam suscepit vesper, sed lux sempiterna
est, et ipse super in luce est," and of Bede : " Christus est Stella
matutina qui nocte saeculi transacta lucem vitae sanctis promittit
et pandet aeternam." In xxii. 16 Christ describes Himself as
6 do-TT/p 6 Aa/A7rpos 6 TrpoKVos. Hence the words combined with
27 mean simply: "when thou hast won through the strife I will
be thine."
III. 1-6. THE MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN SAUDIS.
1. iv IdpSeo-ii/. Sardis (see the Bible Dictionaries in loc. :
also Ramsay, Letters^ 375-382) was situated about 30 miles
S.E.S. of Thyatira. In Ionic its form was ^apSus, in Attic
SapSets, while in later Greek it was written ^apSis. Sardis was
built on the northern confines of Mt. Tmolus, and its acropolis
on a spur of this mountain. It dominated the rich Hermus
1 A neuter plural has the verb oftener in the plural in our author. But
lperai here must agree either with ra aKeirq or, as I take it, with T&
supplied from 26 b . For other instances of the sing, verb and plural
noun cf. i. 19, A /uAXet, viii. 3, xiii. 14, xiv. 13, xix. 14, xx. 3, 5, xxi. 12.
78 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [III. 1.
valley, and was the capital of the ancient Lydian kingdom. It
reached the height of its prosperity under Croesus (circ. 560
B.C.). On its conquest by Cyrus it became the seat of a Persian
Satrapy, and its history for the next three centuries is buried in
obscurity. Under Roman rule it recovered some of its ancient
importance, and became the centre of a conventus juridicus ; but,
notwithstanding, no city in Asia presented a more deplorable
contrast of past splendour and present unresting decline. In
17 A.D. it was overthrown by a severe earthquake, but through
the generosity of Tiberius (Tac. Ann. ii. 47), who remitted all its
taxes for five years and contributed 10,000,000 sesterces towards
its rebuilding, it rose so rapidly from its ruins that in 26 A.D. it
was called a TroAts /xeyaXr; by Strabo (625), and it contended,
though unsuccessfully, with Smyrna for the privilege of raising a
temple to Tiberius (Tac. Ann. iv. 55). Its chief cult was that
of Cybele, while its staple industries were connected with woollen
goods, and it claimed to have been the first community which
discovered the art of dyeing wool. To these industries there is
possibly a reference in iii. 4, 5*. Its inhabitants had long been
notorious for luxury and licentiousness (Herod, i. 55 ; Aesch.
Pers. 45), and the Christian Church had manifestly a hard task
in resisting the evil atmosphere that environed it. Like the city
itself, the Church had belied its early promise. Its religious
history, like its civil, belonged to the past. And yet, despite its
moral and spiritual declension, it still possessed a nucleus of
faithful members: it had "a few names which had not defiled
their garments." It was not apparently troubled by persecution
from without, or by intellectual error from within, and yet it
and the Church of Laodicea were the most blameworthy of the
seven.
6 zytov TO, cirra -nreujJiaTa TOU 0eou KCU TOUS eirrd dorepas. This
clause is (see p. 26), as the corresponding divine titles of Christ in
the other six Letters, to be regarded as a redactional addition of
our Seer when he edited his visions as a whole. The phrase TO. eTrra
Trt/ev/xara has already occurred in i. 4, but there it is a manifest
interpolation. Hence it really occurs here for the first time.
On its probable meaning see i. 4, note.
otSd o-ou Ta epya. On this vernacular genitive (contrast
ii. 2) see notes on ii. 9, 19; Abbott, Gram., pp. 605, 607 ; also
414-25, 60 1. Here as in iii. 8, 15 the emphasis is laid on the
Ipya "the works thou hast wrought are known tome" they
give thee a semblance of life, but in reality thou art dead. This
vernacular genitive recurs at the close of this verse : cf. also x. 9,
xviii. 4-5, xxi. 3 (A).
on oi/o/jui exeis on fjs KCU yeitpos ei. For the construction cf.
Herod, vii. 138, owo/m cl^e, a>s r *A^i/as eAawei, KO.TICTO Se es
lit. 1-2.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN SARD1S 79
Tracrav r. EAAaSa. Contrast 2 Cor. vi. 9, u>s aTroOvrjo-KovTts, Kal
I Sov u)/xev, and cf. Jas. ii. 17, fj Trams, lav JJLT) txtl epya, ve/cpa ecrri
/ca# eavrr/i , and 2 Tim. iii. 5, e^oi/res /zop<jE>u)(riv evcre^etas r^v 8e
SiW/xiv CUJTI/S rjpvyfjievoi. The condemnation of the Church of
Sardis is more severe than that of the other six Churches. And
yet it, too, has a nucleus of faithful members.
2. yivou ypi]yopG>v. For this construction cf. xvi. 10, cyci/ero . . .
e o-Korw/xeVry. yp^yopeii/ is a word of our Seer s (cf. xvi. 15), and,
though found in the three Synoptic Gospels, is not used in the
Fourth. Our text recalls Matt. xxiv. 42 (Mark xiii. 33), yp^yo-
pen-e ovv, ort OVK ot Sare TTOLO. ^epa 6 Kvpios V/AO>V ep^erat. There
are very close affinities in diction between 2-4 here and xvi. 15,
which show indubitably our author s hand. With yivov
... 3, KO.I T^pet Kat jaeravoryow ear ovV /AT/ yp^yop^cn/
. ... 4, a OVK e/xdAwav ra t/xarta avrajv, /cai
. . ev AeuKots, cf. xvi. 15, iSov cp^o/xat ws
6 ypryyoptov Kai rr;pav TO. t/xarta avrov, u/a /XT) yv/jLi>o<s
. But on the high probability that xvi. 15 originally
stood between 3 b and 3, see note on this verse and also on
xvi. 15.
Ramsay (Letters, 376 sqq.) is of opinion that this admonition
to be watchful was suggested by two incidents in the past history
of Sardis, when the acropolis fell into the hands of the enemy
through the lack of vigilance on the part of its defenders first
in the time of Croesus in 549 B.C., and next in 218 B.C. when
Antiochus the Great captured the city, a Cretan mercenary
having led the way, "climbing up the hill and stealing
unobserved within the fortifications."
TCI Xourdt. This word is found eight times in our author, but
not in the other N.T. Johannine writings. As Swete points out,
ra AotTra means not merely persons, but "whatever remained at
Sardis out of the wreck of Christian life, whether persons or
institutions." The entire community needs to be reconstructed
on a sound foundation.
& ejj.e\\oi> airoQavelv. We have here the epistolary imperfect.
In the plural verb (contrast i. 19) we have a construct ad sensum.
The idea recalls Ezek. xxxiv. 4, 16. Blass (Gram. 197) seems
right in maintaining that the aorist is correctly employed here
and in iii. 16, xii. 4, after /xeXWiv. /Ae AAew is seldom followed by
the aorist in the N.T. : it is generally followed by the present, as
also in our author: cf. i. 19, ii. 10, iii. 10, vi. n, viii. 13, x. 4, 7,
xii. 5, xvii. 8. In classical Greek /xe AAetv is followed most
frequently by the future inf., but in vulgar Greek this was dis
placed by the present.
aou TO, (< AC) epya- Here as at the beginning of the verse
we have the vernacular possessive. The emphasis is thrown
80 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ill. -3.
strongly on the noun : " The works wrought by thee I have found
wanting before my God." Cf. Dan. v. 27. Here the o-ov refers
to the community as a whole. As a centre of spiritual and
moral power it has failed, though it contains a few that have
been faithful (4). Hence we read ra Ipya against AC. ov o-ov
epya = " no works of thine," cannot be maintained in the face
of 4.
TrXTjpwjxeVa. Only found once again in our author in vi. u.
It is a favourite Johannine word in the Fourth Gospel, occurring
13 times (cf. especially xvi. 24, xvii. 13), and twice in i and 2
John. Cf. also Col. ii. 10, e(rre ei/ avro) TreTrA^poo/xeVoi.
fvutriov TOU OeoG fxou. The community has a name before the
Christian world for its works, but not before God ; for the faith
fulness of the few (4) cannot redress the balance against the
Church as a whole. It is a dying Church. On TOV Oeov /JLOV cf.
iii. 12 ; Rom. xv. 6, TOV Btov /cat Trarepa TOV Kvpiov T^/XOJV I7yo-ov
XpLo-rov : also Mark xv. 34 ; John xx. 1 7.
3. |Ai/Y]jj,6i>ue oui> (cf. ii. 5, the advice to the Church of
Ephesus) irws ei\Y|<J>as KCU TjKouaas. The change of tenses is here
significant. rj/couo-as points to the time when they heard the
Gospel: cf. i Thess. i. 5, 6, ii. 13. eiAr/^as concedes that they
still possess this gift of God.
TTJpei Kal fAT<xv6T]ow. The Church is to keep fast hold of
what it has received and heard, and, repenting forthwith, recover
its former spiritual attitude (aor.).
cay ouv JULY] YpT)yopY)o-T]s. As a host of critics have pointed out,
xvi. 15 (see note) undoubtedly breaks up the context in which it
occurs. Konnecke (followed by Moffatt) would restore it before
the above words, while Beza transferred it before iii. 18. The
first suggestion is probably to be preferred. It might, of course,
be objected that the repetition after ISov epxo/xcu us /cAeW^s of
5^0) o)< K\7rrr}<; would be jejune. But the latter seems more
definite. And yet in ii. 5, 16, d Se /XTJ, ep^o/xat. the present
epxoyuat appears to be used under exactly the same conditions as
ijci) ws /cXeVT^s here. But it is probable that in the clause tSov
epxo/xat d)5 KXeTTTr/5 we have a general description of the nature of
Christ s Advent. It is to be unexpected, whereas in the clause
ij&o d>s KAcTrrTys there is a definite menace, in which it is implied
that the Church of Sardis will be caught off their guard by the
suddenness of Christ s Advent. Hence, though with some
hesitation, I have restored xvi. 15 before iii. 3.
XVI. 15. I8ou epxofxai a>s
jMicdptOf 6 YpTjyopwy Kal rrjpojy rot tfxcma aurou,
u/a JAY] yujxyos irepnraTT),
Kal pXeTrwai^ TT]\> aax T ]J JI<o< i Y)i CIUTOU.
III. 3-5.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN SARDIS 8 1
III. 3 C . lav ouv A
T]w US K\TTTt)S,
KCU OU JUIT) yfWS
iroiai wpay T]<U em ere.
edy ouV fXT) YP^YOP 1 ! "!)* *) w "S K\eVn]s KT\. An obvious echo
of Matt. xxiv. 43 sq. ( = Luke xii. 39 sq., cf. Mark xiii. 35). d pSet
6 O6Ko8eo-7roTi/s Troia (frvXaKrj 6 KAeTrr^s ep^crat eypryyopr/crev av . . .
yiV<r@ CTOi/xoi, on ^ ou So/ceiTC (Spa, o utos rot) avOpuTrov ep^tTttt.
The Second Advent is referred to in our text : it will come as a
thief in the night, because they are not on the watch ; cf. i Thess.
v. 2, 4.
ou JXTJ Y"$S- T ne subjunctive follows ov 7x17 without excep
tion in our author, and all but universally in the rest of the N.T.
In WH text ov prj occurs 96 times, according to Moulton
(Gram. 190). Of these examples 71 are with the aor. subj. and
8 with the fut. ind. The rest are ambiguous.
iroi ai &pav. For <Spav in the ace. when apparently referring
not to the duration but to a point of time, cf. Moulton, Gram. 2 ,
p. 63. Blass, Gram. 94 sq., points out that this usage began in
classical times where wpav = ei? <Spav ; cf. Robertson, Gram.
470 sq. Acts xx. 1 6, John iv. 52 are generally cited as parallel
usages to that in our text. See, however, Abbott, Gram., p. 75.
4. The case of Sardis is critical, but there is still room for
hope ; for there is a faithful nucleus that has escaped the general
corruption.
ovofxara. Cf xi. 13; Acts i. 15. Deissmann (Bible Studies,
196 sq) has proved that in the 2nd cent. A.D. 6Vo/>ux was used
in the sense of "person." Hence it is probable that in our
author we have the same usage. It is, however, to be re
membered that oi/o /xara is used in Num. i. 2, 20, iii. 40, 43, as a
rendering of rriDl^ where this word means " persons " reckoned
by name.
d OUK ejAoXway TOL tfJicxTia auTWK. See note on 18. The
moral stains here referred to especially include Tropvei a (cf. xiv. 4).
"The language reflects that of the votive inscriptions in Asia
Minor, where soiled clothes disqualified the worshipper and dis
honoured the god. Moral purity qualifies for spiritual com
munion " (Moffatt in loc.).
Trepnrari^aouo n JACT ejxou iv Xeuicotg. We have here the first
eschatological promise, which is not preceded by the words
6 viKoii/. The raiment here spoken of is the heavenly raiment or
the spiritual bodies awaiting the faithful in the next life. See
note on next verse.
<xiot euru>. Contrast the use of this phrase in xvi. 6.
5. See note on ii. 1 1 b .
VOL. i. 6
82 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ill. 5.
ev. 7re/oi/:?aAA.e<r#ai takes two constructions in
our author. It is followed either by ev with the dat. as here and
in iv. 4, or by the ace. in the remaining passages.
iv Ifiariois XeuKois. These garments l are the spiritual bodies
in which the faithful are to be clothed in the resurrection life.
This thought is clearly expressed in 2 Cor. v. i, 4, " If the earthly
house of our tabernacle be dissolved, we have a building from
God, a house not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens. . . . For
indeed we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened ;
not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be clothed
upon." But this idea recurs elsewhere in the N.T., though it is
not so definitely expressed as here : cf. Matt. xiii. 43, rore ot oY/ccuoi
e/cAa/Ai/fovarv us 6 ^/Vios, that is, they shall have a body of light
(cf. Ps. civ. 2, " who coverest thyself with light as with a garment "),
i Cor. xv. 43, 49, 54, Phil. iii. 21, where it is promised that the
body of our humiliation will be conformed to the body of His
glory (TU> trw/mri TT}S SOT;S avrov). We shall find later that
" body of light " and " body of glory " are used interchangeably.
But returning again to Phil. iii. 21 we see that the connection
between the earthly body and the heavenly though they are
different in essence is of the closest, and that the character of
the heavenly body is conditioned by that of the earthly body
(cf. i Cor. vi. 1 8). In the Asc. Isa. iv. 16 (circ. 88-100 A.D.) we
find further references to these garments or spiritual bodies :
" But the saints will come with the Lord with their garments
which are (now) stored up on high in the seventh heaven : with
the Lord they will come, whose spirits are clothed . . . and be
present in the world." Cf. vii. 22, viii. 14, "when from the body
by the will of God thou hast ascended hither, then thou wilt
receive the garment which thou seest" : also viii. 26, ix. 9, "And
there I saw Enoch and all who were with him stript of the
garments of the flesh, and I saw them in their garments of the
upper world, and they were like angels, standing there in great
glory"; ix. 17, "And then many of the righteous will ascend
with Him, whose spirits do not receive their garments till the
Lord Christ ascend"; also ix. 24-26, xi. 40. In the Apoc. of
Peter 3 (circ. 110-125 A.D.) the raiment of the blessed is said
to be light, and 5, all the dwellers in Paradise to be " clad in the
raiment of angels of light" (ei/SeSu/xe voi ^<rav IvSv/za dyyeAcuv
<umi/<m>). Next, in Hermas, Sim. viii. 2. 3, the faithful are
rewarded with white garments : i/xaTto-/x.oi/ 8c TOV avrov iravrts
\VKOV axret \tovd 01 Tropevo/zevoi eis TOV irvpyov Again,
1 The idea is not a hard and fixed one in Jewish and Christian literature.
While generally the garments are symbols of the heavenly bodies of the faithful,
at times they seem to denote only a sort of heavenly vesture distinct from the
faithful themselves.
III. 5.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN SARDIS 83
in the Odes of Solomon we have three references to these
heavenly bodies: xi. 10, "And the Lord renewed me in His
raiment (cf. Ps. civ. 2) and possessed (? formed, i.e. eKT^o-aro,
corrupt for eK-nWro) ... 14, And He carried me to His
Paradise " ; xxi. 2, " And I put off darkness and clothed myself
with light. 3, And my soul acquired a body free from sorrow or
affliction or pains " \ xxv. 8, " And I was clothed with the cover
ing of Thy Spirit, and Thou didst remove from me my raiment
of skin." See also Burkitt, Early Eastern Christianity p , p. 215;
Moulton, Journal of TheoL Stud. iii. 514-527. In its present
form 4 Ezra i.-ii. is Christian, but it is not improbably
based on Jewish sources. However this may be, we have,
as in the Asc. Isa., references to this heavenly body of light.
Cf. ii. 39, "Qui se de umbra saeculi transtulerunt splendidas
tunicas a domino acceperunt." The nature of these heavenly
garments is clear from ii. 45, " Hi sunt qui mortalem tunicam
deposuerunt et immortalem sumpserunt."
We have now shown that the resurrection body was clearly
conceived in the first and second centuries A.D. in Christian
circles as a "body of light." But this conception was also
pre-Christian. Thus in i Enoch Ixii. 16, where the risen righteous
are described :
" And they shall have been clothed with garments of glory,
And these shall be the garments of life from the Lord of
Spirits " ;
cviii. 12, "And I will bring forth in shining light those who have
loved My holy name." See also 2 Enoch xxii. 8, " And the Lord
said unto Michael : Go and take Enoch from out his earthly
garments . . . and put him into the garments of My glory." For
interesting though only partial parallels in Judaism and Zoroas-
trianism, see Lueken, Michael, 122 sq. ; Boklen, Verwandschaft
d. jiidisch-christlichen mit d. Parsischcn Eschatologie, 61-65.
To return now to our author, it is clear that the white garments
represent the resurrection or heavenly bodies of the faithful in
iii. 4 C , 5 a , vi. n (see note), vii. 9, 13, 14, xix. 8 a (where 8 b is a
gloss). In iii. 4 b (note), 18 (note), xvi. 15, the i/xarta are used as
a symbol of the spiritual life as manifested in righteous character,
which forms the heavenly vesture of the redeemed.
The idea may go back to Ps. civ. 2 where God is said to
clothe Himself with light as with a garment. The garments of the
angels are white : Mark ix. 3 = Luke ix. 29 ; Mark xvi. 5 = Matt,
xxviii. 3 ; Acts i. 10. The very bodies of the angels are white,
composed of light ; cf. 2 Enoch i. 5. This is the older idea, and
it is preserved in our author. Later these garments came to
signify heavenly vestures of an accessory nature.
84 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ill. 5-7.
ea\uJ/<> . . . CK. Cf. vii. 17, xxi. 4. The Sardians had
a name to live and yet were dead (iii. i); if they awake
(iii. 2) to righteousness and show themselves victors, then their
name will be preserved in the book of life. TT)S ftiftXov T??S 00779.
Cf. xiii. 8, xvii. 8, xx. 12, 15, xxi. 27.
" The idea underlying this phrase can be traced to the O.T.
There the book of life (or its equivalents, Ex. xxxii. 32 sq., God s
book ; Ps. Ixix. 28, book of the living ) was a register of the
citizens of the Theocratic community of Israel. To have one s
name written in the book of life implied the privilege of partici
pating in the temporal blessings of the Theocracy, Isa. iv. 3, while
to be blotted out of this book, Ex. xxxii. 32, Ps. Ixix. 28, meant
exclusion therefrom." He whose name was written in this book
remained in life but he whose name was not, must die. " In the
O.T. this expression was originally confined to temporal blessings
only, save in Dan. xii. i, where it is transformed through the
influence of the new conception of the kingdom, and distinctly
refers to an immortality of blessedness. It has the same mean
ing in i Enoch xlvii. 3. A further reference to it is to be found
in i Enoch civ. i, cviii. 7. The phrase again appears in the
Book of Jubilees xxx. 20 sqq. in contrast with the book of those
that shall be destroyed, but in the O.T. sense. ... In the N.T.
the phrase is of frequent occurrence, Phil. iv. 3 ; Rev. (see above
list) ; and the idea in Luke x. 20, Heb. xii. 23, written hi
heaven, is its practical equivalent." The above is quoted with
a few changes from my note on i Enoch xlvii. 3. In the same
note kindred expressions are dealt with at some length such as
the books of remembrance of good and evil deeds the good in
Ps. Ivi. 8; Mai. iii. 16; Neh. xiii. 14; Jub. xxx. 22; the evil
in Isa. Ixv. 6; i Enoch Ixxxi. 4, Ixxxix. 61-64, 68, 70, 71, etc. ;
2 Bar. xxiv. i ; both the good and the evil in Dan. vii. 10 ;
2 Enoch Iii. 15, liii. 2 ; Rev. xx. 12 ; Asc. Isa. ix. 22. See Weber,
Jud. Theol? 242, 282 sqq. ; Dalman, Wortejesu, i. 171 ; K.A.T*
ii. 405; Bousset, ReL d. Judenthums, 247.
xal ofioXoyiqo-w TO oVofia aurou KT\ We have a clear reminis
cence of our Lord s words in Matt. x. 32 (Luke xii. 8), Tras ovv
OOTIS oytxoXoyrycret ev cfj,oi H/jiTrpocrOei TOJV dv^/atoTrwi/, oynoAoy^crco
Kayw tv avr<3 /z7rpoo-$ei/ rov Trar/oo? JLOV TOV iv rots ovpavols (TOJV
d-yye Xwv TOV 0cov, Luke xii. 8).
7-13. THE MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN
PHILADELPHIA.
7. Tt]s iv <t>iXa8eX<J>ia. This city (see Bible Dictionaries in loc.)
lies some 28 miles south-east of Sardis. From the words of our
author it is clear that its Christianity was of a high character,
III. 7.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN PHILADELPHIA 85
standing in point of merit second only to Smyrna among the
seven Churches. In the time of Ignatius (Ad Phil. 3, 5, 10)
it enjoyed the same high reputation. Philadelphia was founded
on the southern side of the valley of the Cogamis a tributary
of the Hermus by Attalus n. Philadelphus, and named after
its founder (159-138 B.C.). Under Caracalla it received the title
of Neocoros or Temple Warden, and thenceforward the Kou/oV
of Asia met there from time to time to celebrate certain state
festivals. Like other cities of Asia Minor it too suffered from the
great earthquake in 17 A.D., and was assisted to rebuild by a
donation from the imperial purse.
The chief pagan cult was that of Dionysus, but its main
difficulties arose from Jewish rather than from pagan opponents
(iii. 9), as was the case with Smyrna (ii. 9). These Judaizers
were still a source of trouble in the time of Ignatius (Ad
Phil. 6).
In later times Philadelphia was notable for the heroism with
which it resisted the growing power of the Turks. " It displayed
all the noble qualities of endurance, truth and steadfastness which
are attributed to it in the letter of St. John, amid the ever threaten
ing danger of Turkish attack ; and its story rouses even Gibbon to
admiration" (Ramsay, Letters, 400). It was not until 1379-90,
when jealousy divided the Christian powers, that it fell before the
attack of the united forces of the Byzantine Emperor Manuel n.
and the Turkish Sultan Bayezid I. Since that time it has been
known as Ala-Sheher, the reddish city, a designation due to
the red hills in its rear.
6 &Y>S o aX^i^s. "The Holy, the True." This asyndetic
use of two divine designations is to be found in i Enoch
i. 3, xiv. i (cf. also x. I, xxv. 3, Ixxxiv. i), 6 ayios 6 /xeyas.
6 ayios was familiar to the Jews as a title of God ; cf. Hab.
iii. 3; Isa. xl. 25; i Enoch i. 2, xxxvii. 2, xciii. n, etc.;
Acts iii. 14. The two words ayios and dA^u/ds, which are com
bined as epithets of God in vi. 10, are in our text applied
to Christ: cf. iii. 14, 6 THO-TOS KOL dA/^ivds : xix. n, TTICTTOS
[KaXov/uevos] /cat aX.r)Oiv6s. As regards the meaning of aXyOivos,
Hort has rightly urged that " it is misleading to think (here) only
of the classical sense, true as genuine. ..." Not only vi. 10, but
iii. 14, 6 /xdprvs 6 TTIO-TOS KOL aXyOivos (cf. xix. n), and what is said
of His ways or judgments (xv. 3, xvi. 7, xix. 2), dA^u/ds
coupled with Si/caios, show that the Apocalypse retains the O.T.
conception of truth, expressed, e.g. in cxlvi. 6, which keepeth
truth for ever, i.e. constancy to a plighted word or purpose, the
opposite of caprice." Cf. also Isa. xlix. 7, "because of the
Lord that is faithful, the Holy One of Israel." In the LXX
is never used of God, but dA^ii/ds is used a few times ;
86 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ill. 7-8.
cf. Ex. xxxiv. 6; Isa. Ixv. 16; Ps. Ixxxvi. 15, where the Hebrew
is either nps or }2K. Hence aX-rjOwos implies that God or
Christ, as true, will fulfil His word. The thoroughly Hebraic
character of the Apocalypse confirms this view. In the Fourth
Gospel, on the other hand, aXr)6ivos = "genuine" as opposed to
unreal rather than to untruthful. Hence in our author Trench s
( N. T. Synonyms, 29) admirable differentiation of the words aXrjOijs
(not used in our author, but 14 times in the Fourth Gospel) and
dA?7#u os does not hold : " We may affirm of the a\r)9r)<s, that he
fulfils the promise of his lips, but the dA^ivos, the wider promise
of his name. Whatever that name imports, taken in its highest,
deepest, widest sense, whatever according to that he ought to be,
that he is to the full." This distinction is true of the Fourth
Gospel, where both words occur.
6 )(<oj/ TT]V K\elv AaueiS, 6 ayoiywy ical ouSels icXeiaci KT\. The
passage points back to i. 18, but it is based on Isa. xxii. 22,
where QF with the Mass, read, with reference to Eliakim, 8wcra>
rrjv /cAetSa ot/cov AaveiS CTTI TOV oo/xov avrov, /cat dvotet /cat ov/c
carat 6 d7ro/cA.ta>v /cat /cAeiVei /cat OVK etrrai 6 dj/otywv. Since both
B and A read differently, our author is apparently not using the
LXX here. In any case, while the LXX reproduces the Mass.,
which here consists of parallel clauses, it is clear that our author
deals independently with the text. The Hebrew is familiar to
him, and what appears in Isa. xxii. 22 in the form of direct
statements and finite verbs is cast by our author into a series of
dependent clauses, which are introduced by participles that are
subsequently resolved into finite verbs, i.e. 6 dvoiywi/ Kat ovScis
/cAeiVet /cat /cAeuov /cat ovSets dvoi yet. This is not Greek, but
a Hebrew idiom often used by our author, ~UD!Tt "UD fW nnsn
nna r*a
The expression T^V /cAetv Aauet S has apparently a Messianic
significance. Cf. v. 5, xxii. 16, pt a Aavet 8. The words teach
that to Christ belongs complete authority in respect to admission
to or exclusion from the city of David, the New Jerusalem.
The admission referred to may primarily have to do with the
Gentiles and the exclusion with the unbelieving Jews (see 9). But
their scope is universal.
As Eliakim carried the keys of the house of David in
the court of Hezekiah, so does Christ in the kingdom of
God: cf. Eph. i. 22. He has the same authority in regard
to Hades, i. 18, and supreme authority in heaven and earth,
Matt, xxviii. 18, and is "as a son over his own house," Heb.
iii. 6.
8. Ot&ci <TOU TCI Ipya. This clause has by some scholars been
rejected on the ground that it breaks the connection and is
harmonistic. But it is better with WH to take the words that
III. 8.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN PHILADELPHIA 87
follow, iSou Sc ScoKo, . . . avTTJv, as a parenthesis, and connect
oTSa . . . epya directly with on /u/cpav ex l? KT ^- "^ a * s followed
by cm in iii. i, 15.
i8ou Se SwKa evwiriov crou dupac dca>Y|xenr]i>. SeScoKa apparently
is used Hebraistically here, " I have set." In Ovp. dvewy/xeV^v we
have a Pauline metaphor: cf. i Cor. xvi. 9, 6vpa yap JJLOI aveyytv
fjLyd\.rj /ecu cvepyrjs : 2 Cor. ii. 12, Ovpas /xot dvewy/xevrys ei/ Kupiu) :
Col. iv. 3, iva 6 #eo? avoi^y fjfjuv Ovpav rov Aoyou (i.e. an oppor
tunity for preaching the word). Here the " open door " means
that a good opportunity is being given for missionary effort, and
in our text and in the above Pauline passages the door stands
for the privilege accorded to the Christian teachers; in Acts
xiv. 27, r^voi^ev rots e#i/ecriv Ovpav TUOTCWS, the metaphor is applied
conversely, where the door is opened not to the Christian
teacher, but to the converts to the Christian Church. A
different explanation has been advanced by Moffatt, who in view
of a passage written by Ignatius to this same Church of
Philadelphia (Ad Philad. ix. i, O/UTOS <ov Ovpa TOU Trar/ao?, Si rjs
etVep^ovrat A/3paa/>i KCU IcraaK KrA.) connects the phrase with
Christ and compares John x. 7, 9, where Christ describes
Himself as 17 Ovpa rtov Trpo/Jarwi/. But it would be strange for
the speaker Christ to say, " Behold I have set before you
a door opened," and to imply thereby that He Himself was this
door. The direct form of statement in John x. 7, 9 does not
support this view. Bousset propounds a third explanation,
i.e. that the open door is for the entrance 9f the community
into the Messianic glory.
r\v ou&els SuVarat icXeurai au-rrjy. On this Hebraism cf. vii.
2, 9, xiii. 8, r2, xx. 8 : cf. xii. 6, 14, xvii. 9; also ii. 7, 17.
on fuKpay exeis SuWfui . This clause, as pointed out above,
depends directly on olSd crou TO, epya, the intervening clause
being a parenthesis. The Church had little weight in Phila
delphia so far as concerned its external circumstances.
KCU TrjpT]crds JULOU joy Xoyok. The KCU has here an adversative
force ( = " and yet "), as frequently in the Fourth Gospel (Abbott,
Gram. 135 sqq.), i. 5, iii. 13, 19, iv. 20, vi. 70, ix. 34, etc. The
usage is Hebraic in character. Cf. also Matt. vi. 26; Jer. xxiii.
21 (Robertson, Gram. 1183). On er^p^cras . . . Xoyov see note
on xiv. 12. /cat OVK T7pi/^cra>. Cf. ii. 13. These clauses point to
some period of faithfulness under trial in the past.
fiou TOV Xoyok ... TO oi/ofxd JJLOU. With the position of the
pronoun here cf. x. 9, Tri/cpava crou rr/v KoiAiav aAA. Iv TO) crro/xart
o-ou ecrrai yXvKv. The first unemphatic (or vernacular possessive)
IJLOV throws the emphasis on enjpr/cra? and TOV Xoyov : "And yet
the word I gave you thou didst keep, and didst not deny My
name,"
88 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ill. 9,
9. The conversion of the Jewish element in Thyatira
promised.
iSou 8i8w eic TTJS owaywyns TOU laram. In SiSoi (for
the earlier St Soyu see Robertson, Gram. 311 sq.) we have
a transition from -/u to -<o forms. Cf. xvii. 13 (8i8ocunv). As
regards SiSw two interpretations are possible. First, it may be
rendered literally : " I give men of the synagogue ... as thy
converts." Otherwise Si&5 is to be taken Hebraically, " I make
(i.e. I will make) men of the synagogue . . . behold I will make "
(71-01770-0)). This latter use is frequent in the LXX. It is to be
found also in Acts x. 40, xiv. 3 (ii. 27, in a quotation from the
LXX). The combination iSov Si&o is decidedly in favour of the
latter view; for it is a pure Hebraism, fro "03H, with a future
sense. With the construction SiSw e*c TT?S o-waywy?}? compare
ii. 17, 8wo-<o . . . TOV (Jidvva.
njs cruytiywYTJs TOU laram. In the LXX pn?V ?np is rendered
17 a-vvaywyrf TOV Kvpiov (Num. xvi. 3, xx. 4 : cf. also xxvi. 9,
xxvii. 3, where a different Hebrew word is used). Not a
Synagogue of the Lord, but a Synagogue of Satan, does the
Seer pronounce these Jews to be. Some twenty years later the
Church of Philadelphia had greater dangers to encounter from
the Judaizers than from the Jews, both of whom were active :
cf. Ignat. Ad Philad. vi. I, eai/ Sc TIS lovSaur/xov kp^vevy vfjuv, /XT)
a.KOVT avTOv a/xetvov yap eoriv Trapa dvSpos Treptro/x^i/ C^OVTOS
Xpio"Tiavio-//,6i/ O.KOVCLV 77 Trapa a.Kpo/3v<TTOv iov8ato-yaov.
r&v Xcyorrwy eaurous louSaious ei^au The raV Aeyovrcov is in
apposition to -n/s o-waywy^s. On the whole clause cf. ii. 9. In
classical Greek the usual construction would be TWV Xcyovrwv
(avrtov) lovSaiW eti/at. But even in classical Greek the ace. with
inf. is found where the nom. would have been usual. In the
Koivr) Moulton (Gram. 212 sq.) shows the same usage active. In
fact, as Robertson writes (Gram. 1039), "the ace. with the inf.
was normal when the substantive with the inf. was different from
the subject of the principal verb." Our author claims that the
Christians alone had the right to the name "Jew." " Faith in
Christ, not mere nationality, constituted true Judaism. The
succession had passed to Christianity" (Moffatt in loc.} : cf. Rom.
ix. 6-9, ii. 28, 29, " He is not a Jew which is one outwardly
. . . but he is a Jew which is one inwardly." Herein our
author differs from the Fourth Evangelist, with whom lovSauu is
by no means an honourable designation.
ruv \ty6vTw . . . KCU OUK taiV. An unmistakable Hebraism.
Cf. ii. 9 and i. 5-6, note.
iroi^aw Ivo. cum fut. or subj. Cf. xiii. 12 (fut.), 16 (subj. ?) ;
John xi. 37 (subj.); Col. iv. 16 (subj.). The u/a clause is
one of consequence ; cf. ix, 20, xiii. 13. The fut, ind. after
III. 10] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN PHILADELPHIA 89
Iva is frequent in our author: see Introd. to ii.-iii. 2 (b\
p. 41 sq.
Iva T]ou<ni> KCI! irpOCTKu^aouo-ii eywmoc TU>I> iroSwi/ aou. Cf.
xv. 4, xxii. 8. The language is based on Isa. Ix. 14, where the
Gentiles are described as submitting to the Jews : TropeuVovrai
Trpos <re SeSo6Kores viol TaTreivaxravTtov <re : xlv. 1 4, Sia/^o-ovrai Trpos
o- KCU Trpoo-Kwrjo-ova-iv o-ot. It will be observed that our author s
diction is not dependent on the LXX. Moreover, our text more
nearly renders the Mass, of Isa. Ix. 14 than the LXX, for KCU
TrpocrKWijorovcriv e-rrl ra ix vr i v TroSwv <rov IS found only in Q mg
and not in the LXX. The homage that the Jews expected from
the Gentiles, they were themselves to render to the Christians.
They should play the role of the heathen and acknowledge the
Christians to be the true Israel.
lyw Yiyd-irTjo-d ae. From Isa. xliii. 4.
irpocrKui T]o-ou<Tii> . . . Kttl yvGxTiv. Cf. xxii. 14, tva corral . . .
10. This verse is a redactional addition on the part of our
Seer when he was editing his visions. Its meaning is only
explicable from a right understanding of vii., where the 144,000
are sealed. There the faithful are sealed with a view to their
preservation from the assaults of demons, but are not thereby
secured against physical death. This persecution is not to be
a merely local one (cf. ii. 10) : it is to embrace the entire world.
Elsewhere throughout the original Letters to the Seven Churches
there is not even an apprehension of a world-wide persecution (see
5, p. 44 sq.). The continued existence of two of the Churches
is presupposed till the Second Advent: cf. ii. 25, iii. 3 (?), n. It
will be observed that the demonic trial spoken of, while world
wide, was to affect only " those that dwell upon the earth," i.e.
the non-Christians.
on er^pTjaas Toy XoyoK . . . Kclyaj ore TTjp^aw. Cf. John xvii.
6, II, 12, rov Aoyov (rov rerrjprjKav . . . Trarep aytc, T7ypr?<rov
avroi;? . . . ore fjfjirjv /x-er avrcov eya> er^pow avrovs. As they
have kept Christ s word, so He will keep them safe from the
demonic assaults which will affect all who are not His.
rov \6yov rfjs UTTOJAOIOJS JJLOU, i.e. " the word of my endurance."
The phrase VTTO/X,OV^ TWV aytW (xiii. 10, xiv. 12), i.e. "the endur
ance practised by the saints," requires a like interpretation here.
Hence "the word of my endurance" is "the Gospel of the
endurance practised by Christ." This is to be, as Hort writes,
at once as an example and as a power." Cf. 2 Thess. iii. 5,
TTJV vTTopovrjv TOT) XpioTou : Ignat. Ad Rom. x. 3, eppoxrfle cts reA.09
zv VTTO/JLOvf} I^rrou Xpifrroi).
TTjpTJau CK. Only found elsewhere in the N.T. in John
xvii. 15 (cf. Jas. i. 27, r^petv ciTrd), where the thougl t is quite in
90 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ill. 10-12.
keeping with that of our Seer : OVK epwrw Iva apys e/< TOV
dAA Iva Tr)pr}o~r)<$ OLVTOVS ZK TOV Trovrjpov. Here TOV Trovrjpov is the
Evil One, or Satan. Hence our Lord s prayer is that His
disciples may be delivered from the evil sway of Satan, not that
they may be saved from the physical evils (including death)
which are inevitably incident to this life. This gives exactly the
object of the sealing in vii. The sealing provides the spiritual
help needed against the coming manifestation of Satanic wicked
ness linked with seemingly supreme power. See III. c. in the
Introd. to vii., 5, p. 194 sqq. Unreserved loyalty to Christ carries
with it immunity from spiritual anguish and mental trouble.
TTJS <Spas TOU -n-eipao-jxou. This tribulation is to affect only the
faithless and the heathen ; for, as the note on xi. 10 shows, the
phrase " those that dwell upon the earth " denotes the world of
unbelievers as distinguished from that of the faithful. Hence
whilst the word Tmpaoyx-os (cf. 7mpaeiv later) may in some
degree retain the sense of " trial," since some of the faithless
might thereby be brought to repent, yet its prevailing sense in
this passage is affliction and temptation the fitting functions
of the demons (ix. 1-21). 7reipae.v in ii. 10 means "to afflict,"
but the affliction is limited to "ten days." On 7mpaav as
meaning to inflict evils upon one in order to test his character,
cf. i Cor. x. 13 ; Heb. ii. 18, iv. 15.
TOUS KdToiKoGrras em TT)S y^s- These are the heathens or
non-Christians. See note on xi. 10 and 4 of the Introd.
to xiii. Thus the coming Tretpacr/xo?, which is to be world-wide,
is to afflict only those who have not the seal of God on their
forehead (ix. 4). See note on vii. 3.
11. epxojuipit raxu. This refers to the Second Advent and
presupposes the continuance of the community till that event,
as in ii. 25, iii. 3. But the main presupposition of the later
chapters, which represent our author s final view, is that in the
final persecution all the faithful will suffer martyrdom : cf. xiii. 15,
xviii. 4 (note), 20, and i of the Introd. to xv., and i of the
Introd. to xvi.
Kpdrei o e xeis. Each Church is to preserve its own inherit
ance. Cf. ii. 25. See note on ii. i on Kpareu/.
Iva. pi&els Xd|3T] TOV <TTe<J>av6y crou The promise of the crown
is parallel to that made to the Church of Smyrna, ii. 10 (see
note). Cf. Col. ii. 18 ; 2 Tit. ii. 5.
12. See note on ii. i i b .
6 VLK.WV Troirjorw auToV A Hebraism. Cf. ii. 7, 17, 26, iii. 21.
oTuXoy iv TW mw TOU 0eou jjiou. With Otov fjiov cf. iii. 2, 5
Here the phrase occurs four times. The expression errv Aos is
used metaphorically as elsewhere in the N.T. and in Judaism.
Cf. I Tim. iii. 15, eK/cAr/crta . . . crruAos KCU e^pat o^a r^s aXrj-
III. 12.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN PHILADELPHIA 91
0eias: also Gal. ii. 9. In Clem. Rom. v. 2, Peter and Paul are
called 01 /AeyioToi Ko.1 SLKOLLOTCLTOL CTTV\OL. In Judaism, R. Johanan
ben Sakkai was called wr\ Tiy, " the right pillar," with refer
ence to i Kings vii. 21 (Ber. 28 b ), and Abraham the pillar of the
world in Exod. rab. 2 (see Levy s Neuhebraishes Worterbuch,
iii. 660; also Schoettgen, Hor. i. 728 sq.). The metaphor is
current in most languages : cf. Pind. Ol. ii. 146 ; Eur. Iph. I.
57, (TTvAot yap ouctDv etcrc TrcuSes apo~eves : Aesch. Agam. 897 ; Hor.
Od. i. 35. 13. Since O-TT^OS is thus used metaphorically, it
follows that vaos has also a metaphorical sense here. Hence the
text is not inconsistent with xxi. 22, where it is said that there is
no temple in the heavenly Jerusalem, xxi. lo-xxii. 2, which
descended from God to be the seat of the Millennial Kingdom.
In the more spiritual and New Jerusalem, xxi. 2-4, xxii. 3-5,
which was to descend after the first judgment, there could, of
course, be no temple. The local heavenly sanctuary existing in
heaven (see notes on vii. 15, iv. 2) was ultimately to disappear,
and God Himself to be the temple.
eo> ou pj e^eXOt) I. The subject is 6 VIKWV. Fixity of
character is at last achieved. Since God is the temple, and
the faithful have become pillars in this temple, they have become
one with Him, and therefore can never be separated from
Him. Cf. John xvii. 2l a , iva Trai/res ei/ wtrtv : 22, a/a axriv ei/
Ka$a)s T^/xets v : 2l b , tva at avrot ei/ ^/uv wtrtv. Isa. xxii. 25,
which speaks of the removal of "the nail fastened in a sure
place " (i.e. Eliakim), may have been in the mind of our author,
inasmuch as in iii. 7 he has quoted Isa. xxii. 22. The nail can
be removed, but not the pillar.
ou (or JXTJ) . . . In, frequent in our author but not in Fourth
Gospel.
KCU ypavj/co eir aur6i> TO 6Vojj,a KT\. So far as the Greek goes
the words CTT avrov could refer to (i) o-rvAov, or (2) to 6 VLKWV.
i. In favour of the first it has been urged that inscriptions on
pillars were not infrequent in Oriental architecture. In order to
worship a god it was necessary to know his name. Thus in the
magical prayer of Astrampsychus, quoted by Reitzenstein,
Poimandres, 20 (see Kenyon, Greek Papyri, i. 116), we find:
OtSa <re, Epyu/J) . . . oTSa crov KOL TO, /3ap/3aptKa ovo/jLara /cat TO
a\f)6ivov ovofj.a o~ou TO eyypayu,^aevov rrj tepa (TTijXrj iv TO) dSuTco ev
Ep/x-ouTroAei. But there is a nearer parallel, as Bousset points out
(referring to Hirschfeld, 860) ; for it was customary for the
provincial priest of the imperial cultus at the close of his year of
office to erect his statue in the confines of the temple, inscribing
on it his own name and his father s, his place of birth and year of
office. Possibly the foregoing figure was chosen with reference
to this custom in order to set forth the dignity of the faithful as
92 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [III. 12.
priests of God in the next world. Ignatius, Ad Philad. vi. i, has
been thought to refer to the present text when he writes in
reference to those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ, OVTOL
o~Tr)\a.L eicrii/ KO.L TOLUOL veKptov, i<f> ots y^ypcnrrai JJLOVOV ovo/Aara
TiDv. But there is really no idea in common. Ignatius is
comparing false teachers to sepulchres, whereas our text declares
that the victors shall be upholders of the spiritual temple of
God, with the name of their God blazoned on their brows.
Some think that the idea in our text is a development of Isa,
Ivi. 5, " Unto them will I give in mine house and within my
walls a memorial (lit. * hand ) and a name better than of sons
and daughters," to which there are parallels in the Phoenician
and Punic stones, which served as memorials within the heathen
temples. But, as we have already presupposed, the other inter
pretation is decidedly to be preferred. 2. The victor receives
the name on his forehead, as in xiv. i, xxii. 4 (cf. vii. 3, note,
xvii. 5). See also ii. 17, note.
TO oVojjia TOU 6eoG JJLOU. See note on iii. 2. The name of God
impressed on the forehead of the victors shows that they are
God s own possession : see vii. 3, note.
TO oVofxa TTJS iroXews TOU 0eoG jiou. These words denote that
to the victor God will give the right of citizenship in the New
Jerusalem: cf. Gal. iv. 26 ; Phil. iii. 20 ; Heb. xi. 10, xii. 22, xiii. 14.
TTJS Kaii fjg lepouo-aXi^fx. Cf. xxi. 2. The New Jerusalem is
the Jerusalem that descends from God after the final judgment
and the creation of the new heaven and the new earth. It is to
be distinguished from the heavenly Jerusalem which descends
from heaven before the final judgment to be the seat of the
Millennial Kingdom. See 5 in the Introd. to xx. 4-xxii., vol. ii.
p. 150. Our author uses the form lepovo-aAi?/*, but the Fourth
Gospel l/jo<roAt)/xa.
TJ KaTaf3cuyou<ra KT\. Cf. xxi. 2, 10. On this Hebraism see
note on i. 5.
TO 6vop& p>u TO K<ui>6V. Cf. xix. 12, 1 6. But the new name
more probably is one to be revealed at His Second Advent. And
as Christ was to bear a new name at this Advent, so should also
His faithful servants, ii. 17. Gressmann (Urspr. d. Israel, jud.
Eschat. 281) has aptly remarked that "as in the beginning of the
present world all things received their definite names, so will
they also be named anew in the future world."
A partial parallel to the whole verse is to be found in the
Baba Bathra, 75 b , " Rabbi Samuel the son of Nachmani said in
the name of Rabbi Johanan that three are named after the name
of the Holy One blessed be He the righteous (Isa. xliii. 7),
the Messiah (Jer. xxiii. 6), and Jerusalem (Ezek. xlviii. 35).
III. 14-22.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN LAODICEA 93
14-22. MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN LAODICEA.
As there were at least six cities, bearing the name Laodicea,
founded or restored during the later Hellenic period, the
Laodicea in our text was called AaoSt /ceia fj TT/OOS (or CTTI) TU>
Av/cw (Strabo, 578). In the N.T. it was written AaoSt/aa, but in
inscriptions and literature AaoSt/ceia. It was founded on the
south bank of the Lycus, 6 m. south of Hierapolis and 10
west of Colossae, by Antiochus n. (261-246 B.C.), and named in
honour of his wife Laodice. Laodicea was most favourably
situated as regards the imperial road-system. It formed the
point on the great eastern highway where three roads converged
and met: the first from the S.E. from Attaleia and Perga; the
second from the N.W. from Sardis and Philadelphia (about 40
miles distant); and the third from the N.E. from Dorylaeum
and northern Phrygia. Its situation thus fitted it to become a
great commercial and administrative city. Besides being a seat
of the Cibyratic conventus^ it was (i) a banking centre (thus
Cicero proposes to cash there his treasury bills of exchange
Ad Fam. iii. 5, Ad Att. v. 15), and very opulent; for when it
was overthrown by the great earthquakes of 60-6 1 A.D. (Tac.
Ann. xiv. 27) it was not obliged to apply for an imperial subsidy,
as was usual in the case of other cities of Asia Minor: cf. iii. 17,
TrAovcrios et/u . . . /cat ouSei/ ^petai e^co : it was also (2) a large
manufacturer of clothing and carpets of the native black wool,
and it was likewise (3) the seat of a flourishing medical school,
amongst its teachers having been Zeuxis and Alexander Phila-
lethes. Now it can hardly be an accident that in iii. 17 of our
text there are three epithets which refer to these commercial
and intellectual activities, TTTW^O? /cat rv^Xos /cat yv/xvos, but in
the way of total disparagement. And that this is so is still
clearer from iii. 18, where, in contrast to their material wealth,
their successful woollen factories and their famous medical
specifics, the Laodiceans are bidden to buy from Christ the true
riches, the white garments and the eye salve for their purblind
vision. The Church of Laodicea was probably founded by
Epaphras of Colossae, Col. i. 7, iv. 12 sq. The Lycus valley
had not been visited by St. Paul down to the time of his first
imprisonment in Rome, Col. ii. i. That he wrote a letter to
Laodicea is to be inferred from Col. iv. 16 ; but this letter is lost,
unless it is to be identified with that to the Ephesians (see Ency.
Bib. i. 866 sq.). The Latin Epistle to the Laodiceans is entirely
apocryphal (see Lightfoot, Colossians, 279-298). Our author
appears to have been acquainted with St. Paul s Epistle to the
Colossians. See note on 14. On this letter cf. Ramsay, Letters^
94 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ill. 14.
413 sqq., and the articles on Laodicea in Hastings D.B. and
the Ency. Bib. especially in the latter.
14. 6 Ap^. The explanation of this phrase is uncertain,
but it may possibly be found in Isa. Ixv. 16, JDN rftf* = "the God
of Amen." But, as modern scholars recognize, the LXX (TOV
6tov TOV aX-YjOivov} implies JK \ji?K = "the God of truth," instead
of JDK vfes, "the God of "Amen." The idea is thus "the True
One," "the One who keepeth covenant." Hence the words that
follow are in part a repetition and in part an expansion of the
phrase that follows. Symmachus renders r<5 06o>, a^v, and
Aquila (TU> 0<3) TreTrio-Tw/AeVws. In any case our author, as
Symmachus, found fK in Isa. Ixv. 16.
6 jjidpTus mores K<U dXTjOiyos. For the first three words cf. i. 5,
and for the meaning our author attaches to aXyOivos, see note on
iii. 7.
Y) dpx^j TTJS imorews TOU 0eou, i.e. "the origin (or primary
source ) of the creation of God." It is remarkable that in St.
Paul s Epistle to the Colossians we have several phrases which
can hardly be regarded as other than the prototypes of certain
expressions in our author. Now we know (Col. iv. 16) that St.
Paul wrote about the same time to the Churches of Colossae
and Laodicea, and gave directions that the Epistle to the
Colossians was to be read in the Church of Laodicea and the
Epistle to the Laodiceans to be read in the Church of Colossae.
Now it is possible that like phrases to those in the Epistle to the
Colossians occurred in that to the Laodiceans ; but even pre
supposing that this was not the case, we know at all events that
St. Paul s original Epistle to the Colossians was read in the
Church of Laodicea and that probably copies of it were current
there. Since, therefore, there are, as we shall show, several
points in common between our author and the Colossian Epistle,
it is highly probable that our author was acquainted with it.
See Lightfoot, Colossians^ 41 sqq.
1. First of all, with 17 PX^ T ^ s KTMTCCOS TOV Oeov we should
compare Col. i. 18, os eon-iv dpx 7 ? (where apxn the active
principle in creation = ama, cause has the same meaning as in
our text), and i. 15, TT/OCOTOTOKOS Trao-T/s KTUTCOOS ( = " sovereign
Lord over all creation by virtue of primogeniture" Lightfoot).
It is to be observed that TrpwroroKos bears the same meaning
in our author in i. 5, TTPWTOTO/COS TCOV vtKpw = " sovereign Lord
of the dead " (i.e. the secondary meaning of 7rpom>TOKos). In
Col. i. 1 8, TT/awTOTOKos IK Toiv vtKpfov is not quite parallel owing to
the presence of the e/c, which brings out the primary meaning of
TTpwToroKos, i.e. priority in time.
2. With iii. 21, Swcrco avrw Ka$iirrai /ACT e/xov Iv r<3 Opovw /AOV, ws
III. 14-15.") MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN LAODICEA 95
Kaycb VLKrj(ra KCU eKa$i<ra /xera rov Trarpos jaov cv TU> Opovta avrov,
compare Col. iii. I, et ovv o-w^ye p^re rw X., TO, ai/w ^reire, ou 6
X. eo-riy ev Seia TOV 0eoi; Ka0>7/xevos. (Cf. Eph. ii. 6, cruv^yeipei/
KCU crvveK(i6icrV ev rots eTrovpavtois e^ Xptcrra) I^crou.) In our text
the victors are to be seated on Christ s throne as He is seated
on God s throne. In Col. iii. i, Christ is seated at the right
hand of God, and the faithful are to sit with Him in heavenly
places (Eph. ii. 6).
3. In iii. 17-19 the self-complacency and self-satisfaction of
the Laodiceans, arising in part, no doubt, from their great
material wealth and prosperity as well as their intellectual
advancement, are denounced, and they are exhorted to seek the
true riches and the true wisdom which comes from a vision
purged by the Great Physician. Cf. Col. i. 27, where the apostle
emphasizes in contrast to their proud but baseless knowledge
(ii. , 1 8, 23), "the riches of the glory of this mystery which is
Christ in you," and ii. 2, 3, where he declares that he strives for
the Colossians and also for the Laodiceans that they may be
brought unto "all riches of the full assurance of understanding,"
even "all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden "in
Christ.
It is not unreasonable to conclude from the above evidence
that our author was acquainted directly or indirectly with St.
Paul s Epistle to the Colossians. Possibly he was acquainted
with St. Paul s lost Epistle to the Laodiceans, and was thereby
influenced in his diction and thought. There are no resem
blances between the diction and thought of the other six Letters
and the Pauline Epistles a matter worthy of consideration.
15. While the Churches of Ephesus, Pergamum, Thyatira,
and Sardis were guilty of manifest evils, no such evil is laid to
the charge of the Church of Laodicea. But the evil, if not
manifest, was still more perilous. The Laodiceans professed
Christianity and were self-complacent and self-satisfied. They
were unconscious that they were wholly, or all but wholly, out
of communion with Christ (iii. 20), at all events they felt no
need of repentance. Hence the startling declaration that the
absolute rejection of religion (iii. 15) were preferable to the
Laodicean profession of it. As a Church and as individuals
they dwelt with complacency on what they had achieved (17*),
whilst they were serenely unconscious of what they had left
undone.
o(|>eXoi/ xj/uxpos TJS- o<eA.ov is used with the past ind. in late
Greek to introduce an impracticable wish, and with the fut. ind.
(Gal. v. 12) to express a practicable wish. But here as in
2 Cor. xi. i we have o^eXov with the past ind. to express a
possibility though in the present still unrealized. Moulton
96 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ill. 15-17.
defines these as instances of the " unreal " indicative. See Blass,
Gram. 206 sq., 220 ; Moulton, Gram. i. 200.
eor6s. Here only in the LXX or the N.T. Enthusiasm is
required in the faithful, they were to be "hot to the boiling
point," fervent in spirit (TU> Tn/cu/xari eovres, Rom. xii. n).
16. x^ a PSj i- e - " lukewarm " here only in Biblical Greek.
jiAXw . . . ejAeacu. Our author as a rule uses the pres. inf.
after /xe AAeu/ : see note on iii. 2. e/xeo-at. This verb is not used
elsewhere in the N.T. and only once in the LXX. The rejection
of the Laodicean Church is not announced as final here, and
the possibility of repentance is admitted in 18-20. The lan
guage is very forcible though homely. The Laodiceans are not
only denounced, but denounced with the utmost abhorrence.
Such a denunciation is without parallel in the other Epistles.
An immediate and special judgment is not here held in view,
but the final judgment.
17. This verse forms the protasis of the sentence; the
apodosis follows in 18. See note on 14-22 above. There it is
pointed out that in 17-18 we have references to the material
and intellectual wealth of Laodicea. On the other hand it is
urged that the language is metaphorical, and states that the
Church of Laodicea is rich in spiritual possessions and has need
of nothing (cf. i Cor. iv. 7-8). This, no doubt, is true, but the
allusion to the material conditions of the city cannot be ignored.
irXo<5<n6s etfxi KCU TrcirXouTT) ica, "I am rich, and have gotten
riches." Our text here is a free and direct rendering of Hos.
xii. 9, *h JiK TINVD Tnt^y. The LXX renders pN under the
influence of the kindred Arabic root, TreTrAovrr/Ka, tvprjKa di/a-
ij/vxyv (di/axA.s, Aquila) e/xavrw, but our author s rendering is
more correct. Laodicea not only declares that she is rich, but
maintains that her wealth, material and spiritual, is the result of
her own exertions. But, as has already been suggested in ii. 9,
the Church that is rich in spiritual and moral achievements is
the most conscious of its own spiritual and moral poverty.
In ovSev xpeuxv *X W tne v$tv is an ace. of limitation or refer
ence. Blass (Gram. 91, note) thinks it cannot be right. But it
recurs in xxii. 5 (note). Our author uses \peiav e^av either with
the gen. (xxi. 23, xxii. 5) or with the ace. (iii. 17, xxii. 5). As
Swete points out, there is a parallel expression and construction
in Petr. Ev. 5, u>s ///^So/ TTOVOV t\w. But our author does not
always keep to the same construction. Thus yc/xw has a gen. in
iv. 6, 8, v. 8, xv. 7, xvii. 4, xxi. 9, but an ace. in xvii. 3, 4.
Kal OUK olSas. Contrast this with oTSa o-ov ra Zpya in iii. 15.
au el 6 TaXaiirwpos KT\. The <rv is emphatic : it is thou who
art self-satisfied and boastful that art the wretched one par
excellence. With the emphatic use of the art. before the pre-
HI. 17-18.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN LAODICEA 97
dicate cf. Luke xviii. 13 ; Matt. v. 13, v/xets core TO a\a$ T^S yr)s,
i.e. the only salt that deserves the name (cf. Blass, Gram. 157).
TaAcuVwpos occurs only here and in Rom. vii. 24, where it is used
respectively of the extremes of unconscious and conscious
wretchedness. eAecivo?, "pitiable," as in Dan. ix. 23; i Cor.
xv. 19.
TTTWXOS Kal Tu<f>X6s KOI yupvfa. In these three terms we have
most probably allusions to local subjects of self-complacency in
Laodicea and its Church; see note on 14-22, p. 93. On the
spiritual significance of TTT(DXS see note on ii. 9.
18. Here at the close of the subordinate clauses comes the
chief sentence. This sentence is an admonition dealing with the
spiritual condition of the Laodiceans as set forth in the closing
words of the preceding verse TTTW^OS Kal TV</>AO? KCU yv/xvo?.
Since the Laodiceans are all but spiritually destitute (TTTW^OS),
they are exhorted to buy for themselves a new and disciplined
spirit (xpvcriov TreTrupw/xcvov CK Trupos). This spirit constitutes the
true riches, and since it cannot remain fruitless or inoperative, it
manifests itself in a righteous character. Now this righteous
character as it advances towards perfectionment weaves a gar
ment for the spirit the spiritual body the white raiment of the
blessed in the heavenly world. The Christian character (or its
derivative the spiritual body) may be regarded from two stand
points. From the human standpoint such character is a
personal acquisition of the faithful, and, therefore, so far always
imperfect: hence it can be soiled by unfaithfulness (iii. 4 b ), or
cleansed and made white in the blood of the Lamb (vii. 14).
On the other hand, from the divine standpoint the Christian
character is a gift of God. Its derivative, the spiritual body, is
not bestowed till the faithful have attained their perfectionment.
Since the martyrs were regarded as having already reached this
stage, they were clothed in heavenly bodies (vi. n), whereas
from the rest of the faithful this gift was withheld till the end of
the world, as they were still in a state of imperfection, even
though redeemed.
o-ujjLJBouXeuw o-ot. This construction here and in John xviii. 14
only in N.T. Occasionally in the LXX.
dyopdaai Trap CJAOU \puaiov. Cf. Isa. lv. I, " Ho, every one
that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money ;
come ye ... buy (dyopao-are) wine and milk without money
and without price." For the metaphorical use of this verb cf.
v. 9, xiv. 3, 4; Matt. xxv. 9, 10.
The words Trap* e/xov are emphatic. Cf. Matt. vi. 19, 20 for
the thought. As regards the construction dyopao-at Trapa, cf.
2 Esdr. xx. 31. In v. 9 of our author this verb is followed by e*,
and in xiv. 3, 4 by airo : but the sense is different. On the
VOL. i. 7
98 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [III. 18.
symbolic meaning of ^pwiov here see note at beginning of
verse.
7TirUpa>JJ,l OK K TTUpOS. Cf. I Pet. 1. 7, TO SoKLfJLlOV V^U-OJV TY)<S
Trio-Tews Tro/VuTi/AoVepov xP vcr ^ ov ^ ta ^upos Se So/a/xa^o/xe vou.
Other parallels may be found in Ps. xviii. 31, Prov. xxx. 5,
where the word of the Lord is said to be " tried " (nsilV, in the
LXX 7T7j-vp(o/x,vot), or in Pss. Sol. xvii. 47, TreTrvpoo/xei/a vrrep
Xpvcriov. See also Ps. Ixvi. 10. From these parallels it is clear
that the meaning of TreTrvpwjaeVov e* Trupo s is that this gold has
been tested and is to be trusted. Further, since in the present
passage this gold is not a material but a spiritual thing, the idea
of the text is that Christ gives to the true seeker a spiritual gift,
which constitutes the only true riches (Col. i. 27). This spiritual
gift, consisting as it does in a new heart or spirit, becomes in
fellowship with Christ the fans et origo of the Christian character,
and this in turn the source and artificer of the spiritual body.
Another function of this new spirit in man is that it endows him
with spiritual vision (iii. i8 c ). Interpreted thus, the t/xarta XevKa
and the xoAAoupiov are not separate and independent gifts, but
gifts that are subsidiary to or rather springing out of the chief
gift the ~xpv<riov TreTTvpw/xevov e/c Trupo? i.e. the new heart.
t/jLctTia XUK<{. See the preceding note; also the note at
beginning of verse, and on iii. 5.
jxr) <f>acpo>6rj T) aur)(unr] rfjs Y U I UL>/ T1 1 T S <rou> See xvi. 15, note.
For the diction, cf. Ezek. xvi. 36, a.7roKaXv<j>0rj(rTai rj alo-xyvi}
erov ("irvny n^in): also xxiii. 29; Ex. xx. 26. The soul of the
faithless will appear naked in the next world. Cf. 2 Cor.
V. 2, 3, TO oiKrjrripiov fj/Jiwv TO e ovpavov lirevSvcracrOaL e7ri7ro#owT9,
t ye /cat, evSuo-a^iei/oi ov yvfjivol evpe$>7o-o/x$a. According to XX.
11-13, the dead (the righteous, excluding the martyrs, and the
wicked) are raised disembodied: see note on xx. 13. The
righteous then receive their spiritual bodies, but the wicked
remain disembodied souls and are cast into the lake of fire.
This is also the teaching of St. Paul, as 2 Cor. v. 2, 3 proves.
KoXXoupioy eyxpLCTCu TOUS 6<j>0a\fjious icrX. The KoAAovpiov was
shaped like a KoXXvpa (of which it is a diminutive). It was
prepared from various ingredients, and was used as an eye salve.
In our text it is the famous Phrygian powder used by the
medical school at Laodicea. It appears in the Jerusalem
Talmud (Shabb. i. 3 d , vii. io b , viii. n b ) (see Levy s Neuhebraishes
Worterbuch, iv. 293) as JYn^jp and P"v6 N p in the general sense
of an eye salve, and in Latin as Colly rium : cf. Hor. Sat. i. 5. 30,
"nigra . . . collyria" : Juv. vi. 579. Celsus, vi. 7, speaks of many
collyria of every kind: "Ex frequentissimis collyriis": vii. 7. 4.
See Wetstein for further references, from which may be quoted
the following : Wajikra R, ?56 a : " Verba legis corona sunt capitis,
III. 18-19.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN LAODICEA 99
torques collo, collyrium oculis." eyx/aicrat. Here only in the N.T.
and only four times in the LXX.
The application of the eye salve in our text results in
spiritual vision. Thereby the Laodiceans can get rid of then
self-deception, and so gain true self-knowledge, and therewith a
knowledge of " the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is
Christ in you, the hope of glory" (Col. i. 27), "in whom are all
the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden " (Col. ii. 3).
In the note on TreTrupoo/zevov e/c Trvpos above I have taken the
spiritual gift symbolized by KoX.\ovpiov as a gift springing out of
the chief gift symbolized by XP V(T ^ OV ntTrvp. IK Trvpos, and not as a
separate and independent gift. On the other hand, the KO\\OV-
PLOV in our text has been taken by some interpreters to mean
the word of God (or of prophecy as opposed to the Law), or
enlightening power or eAey/xos (John xvi. 8 sqq.) of the Holy
Spirit (so Diisterdieck and Swete).
19-20. The severity of the rebuke just administered is a sign
of Christ s love which summons to repentance and abiding ear
nestness first the Church as a whole (19) and next the individual
members of it, and promises that if they will open their hearts
He will enter into the closest communion with them for ever.
19. eyw Serous lav <{>i\w e\ey)(cu KCU iraiSeuw. Cf. Pss. Sol. X. 2,
xiv. i ; Heb. xii. 6. The text is remarkable here. It is drawn
from Prov. iii. 12, ITpV "" 3rw"iE>K DK ^j, which the LXX
renders, ov yap aya-jra Kvptos eXey^ei, (B ; TrcuSevet, XA). Here
first of all we observe that our author uses <^iXetv and not aya-n-av
as in the LXX. This is further remarkable, since in i. 5, iii. 9,
ayairav and not <J>L\LV is used of Christ s love for man. <<Aeu/
is not used in the LXX or the N.T. (except in John xvi. 27) of
God s love for man, but dyaTrav. Moreover, men are bidden
dyaTrav rov 0eov but never <iAeiv rov 0eov save in Prov. viii. 17.
This last passage is instructive ; for here the LXX renders 3HK
which is twice used by the two words : eyw TOVS //, <iA.ovvras
dyaTru>. The two Greek words differ in that dyaTrav " expresses
a more reasoning attachment, . . . while the second ... is
more of the feelings or natural affections, implies more passion "
(Trench, Synonyms of the N.T *\ See, however, M. & M. s
Voc. of Gk. T.j p. 2. In John xi. 3, 36, xx. 2, qfuAetv is used
of Christ s love for Lazarus and John, but elsewhere in the
Gospel dyaTrav is universally employed in this connection.
Hence there is no perfect parallel in the N.T. to the use of
<f>L\fLiv here. The exceptional use of the emotional word (con
trast iii. 9) here can only be deliberate. It is a touching and
unexpected manifestation of love to those who deserve it least
among the Seven Churches.
Next, eXey^o) and TraiSevw gall for attention, Herg Swete
100 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ill. 19-20.
observes that these two words may be duplicate renderings of
iTDr, or that TratSev w may have been suggested by the preceding
verse in Prov. iii. n, /x^ oAtycopet TratSeias Kvptov. The latter
view is to be preferred, since TmiSevW never appears in the LXX
as a rendering of ro* except in Prov. iii. 12 (in KA, etc.), but is
a normal rendering of ID* 1 , whereas the stock translation of ro* is
Reproof and chastisement are evidence not of Christ s
rejection of the Laodiceans, but of His love (<tAo>) for them.
Love is never cruel, but it can be severe. There has hitherto
been no hint of any persecution of the Laodicean Church.
Even here the mention of it carries with it not even the faintest
allusion to the great persecution which was expected by the Seer
in 95 A.D. and to which there is a definite reference in 21.
^TJXeue oSk K<U ^Ta.v6r](rov. Here zeal is enjoined as a per
manent element in the Christian character hence >jAeve and
not tyXevcrov, while repentance is required as a definite change
once and for all from their present condition hence peravorjorov.
They are to begin by one decisive act, the life of Christian
enthusiasm as opposed to their former life of lukewarmness and
indifference.
20. The deep note of affection in the preceding verse
pervades this also. As a friend He admonishes the Laodicean
Church to repent in 19 ; as a friend in this verse He does more :
He comes to each individual and seeks an entrance into his
heart. Here the words (ecu/ rts aKovay rys <^o>v^s ftov) have a
personal and individual character not applicable to the Church
of Laodicea as a whole. If 20 were addressed to the Church we
should expect eai> cri> aKOvvys r. <j>. p.ov. Cf. ^Aeve Kat /xcravoiycrov
in 19. Hence with De Wette, Alford, Weiss, and others this
verse is to be interpreted as referring to repentance in the
present.
But many scholars Diisterdieck, Bousset, Swete, Holtz-
mann and Moffatt interpret this verse in conjunction with 21
eschatologically, and adduce as parallels such unmistakable
eschatological passages as Mark xiii. 29 ( = Matt. xxiv. 33),
ytveo(TKeT on cyyus eo-nv lirl 6vpa.L<s : Luke xii. 36, v/xets o/xotot
dv0po>7rois TrpocrSexo/x.ei ots TOV Kvpiov . . . Iva eX^oi/ros /cat Kpov-
crai/Tos e$eos di/oi^oocriv avrw : Jas. V. 9, iSov o KPLTTJS Trpo rwv
Ovpw co-TT/Kev. It is shown further that in Luke xxii. 29 sq.,
Kayo) 8iart^e/xat v/>uv, /<a0a>9 Sie^cro /xot 6 Trarrfp JJLOV /3acriAeiav, Iva
2(r@r)T KCU Trivrjrf eVi TT}S rpaTre^iy? JJLOV cv rfj /3acrtXeia /xov, Kat
KaOrjcrOc CTTI Bpovuv ras 8co8eKa (f>vXa<s Kpti/ovre? TOV Icrpa^A., we
have a combination of the metaphors eating and drinking with
those of thrones and judging, just as we have a combination of
the metaphors of eating and sitting on thrones in 20-21 in our
111.20-21.] MESSAGE TO THE CHURCH IN LAODICEA IOI
text. But though the parallels in diction are indisputable, the
thought differs. For whereas in Mark xiii. 29 ( = Matt. xxiv. 33)
and Jas. v. 9 we have the final advent of Christ as Judge, in 20
of our text He comes as a Preacher of repentance an office
incompatible with that of Judge. Also in Luke xii. 36 the
reference to the last coming and the giving of an account is
manifest : He comes there to reward the faithful, not to call the
careless and indifferent to repentance. Hence the eschatological
interpretation is to be rejected. As usual our Seer takes his own
line with tradition, even when the tradition is concerned with our
Lord s own words; for iii. 20-21 shows, as Bousset recognizes,
that he was familiar with Luke xxii. 29 sq.
The diction recalls Cant. v. 2, where the LXX reads <(OI/T)
<iSeA.<j!>iSov /xov, Kpova rt rrjv Ovpav avoi6v /xot dSeX^r; fjiov. Since
in 4 Ezra v. 23-26 there is contemporary evidence of the
allegorical use of Canticles (see Box s ed., p. 52 sq., notes), it is
more than probable that our author has here come under its
influence. See also Bacher s Agada der Tannaiten^, i. 94, 186,
229 sq., 310 sqq., 338, ii. (ist ed.) 47 sq. etc.^
i&v TIS dicouo-T] TTJS 4>(u^s fxou . . . Kttl eto-eXeu aofiai. I have
with some hesitation followed NQ, a considerable body of
cursives, s 1 and Prim, in retaining the /cat before the apodosis.
dKOuaT) TTJS 4>wrrjs fAOU. Cf. John X. 3, TO, TrpofidTa </>(ov^5 avrov
a/covet : xviii. 37, Tras 6 a>v /c TT/S dA^eias OLKOVCI fjiov TT)<S <jm>vfj<s.
Obedience to Christ leads to fellowship with Him.
Kal eXeu crojicu irpos aurov ica! Seiirm^ox* jier* aurou. Cf. John
xiv. 23, ?rpos avrov eA.ev<n>/A$a Kat /xovrjv irap a^rw 7rot7ycrd/xe^a.
For ciore/a^eo-d at Trpds rtva of entering into a man s house, cf. Mark
xv. 43.
Participation in the common meal was for the Oriental a proof
of confidence and affection. The intimate fellowship of the
faithful with God and the Messiah in the Coming Age was
frequently symbolized by such a metaphor. Cf. i Enoch Ixii. 14,
"And the Lord of Spirits will abide over them, And with
that Son of Man shall they eat, And lie down and rise up for
ever and ever." Cf. Shabbath, 153*. That this language is
metaphorical always in the N.T. and generally in Jewish writings
is shown by such statements as i Cor. vi. 13* and Ber 17% "In
the world to come there is neither eating nor drinking . . . but
the righteous . . . find their delight (D^ro) in the glory of the
Shechina."
21. This verse is wholly eschatological. Christ promises to
the martyrs to those who shall be victors by being faithful unto
death that they shall sit on His throne even as He had been
victorious through being faithful unto death and had sat down
on His Father s throne. The fulfilment of this promise is seen
102 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [ill. 21-1 V. 1.
by the Seer in his vision in xx. 4, where the martyrs sit on
thrones and reign with Christ for 1000 years.
Like ii. 7, n b , i7 b , 26-27, iii. 5, 12, this verse is a later
addition of our author when he edited his visions as a whole.
o VIK.&V . . . aura). See note on this Hebraism on ii. 7 ; also
on SiSoi/at followed by the inf.
SGJCTCO . . . icaOurai JJ.6T 1 ejmou Iv r. 6p6i/cp JAOU. The Seer
witnesses in a vision the fulfilment of this promise in xx. 4, et<W
upovovs KOLL Ka0tcrav CTT* avrovs /cat Kptua e8o$/7 avroTs . . . Kat
efycrav KCU e/3acriAev(rai/ /tera TOV Xpto-roC ^tAta ITT;. The promise
relates to the Millennial Kingdom. To the same period should
probably be referred Luke xxii. 30, /cdyo> Startfle/xat v/ati/ /<a0w<j
oieaero fjiot 6 Trarrfp /u,ou y8a.o~6A.etai/ tVa. . . . Ka6rjcrOe evrt Opovw
r. SwSe/ca (f>v\a<s Kpti/ovres rou Io-pa?jX (cf. Matt. xix. 28), and like
wise 2 Tim. ii. 1112, etyap crwaTre^dVo/xev, Kat o"Di/^cro/jtev. ct VTTO-
/xeVo/u,i/, Kat crv/x/Sao-tAe^o-o/xej/, where the thought is certainly akin
to that in our text. Cf. Mark x. 40. Yet the reign of the saints
is not limited to the Millennial Kingdom : it will enter at last
into the fulness of its potentialities in the everlasting kingdom of
God, when " they shall reign for ever and ever," xxii. 5.
u>S Kayo) eyiKTjaa. Cf. John xvi. 33, ^apcretre, eyw veviKYjKa TOV
Kat K<x0ura fierd, TOU irarpos p.ou iv T. 0poi/w aurou. Cf. xxi. 2,
xxii. 3, notes, and Col. iii. i, ov 6 Xpto-ros eVrtv i/ Se^ta TOV Oeov.
Our author appears to use KaOi&iv in the finite tenses (cf. xx. 4)
and the infinitive, but never the participle Ka#t wv, in place of
which he uses Ka&j/^ei/os. Finite tenses of KaOfja-Oai are found
in sources used by our author (xvil 9, 15, xviii. 7).
CHAPTER IV.
i. The Contents and Authorship of this Chapter.
With chap. iv. there is an entire change of scene and subject.
The dramatic contrast could not be greater. Hitherto the scene
of the Seer s visions had been earth : now it is heaven. On the
one hand, in ii.-iii. we have had a vivid description of the
Christian Churches of Asia Minor, which is to be taken as
typical of the Church at large, the ideals they cherished,
their faulty achievements and not infrequent disloyalties, and
their outlook darkened in every instance with the apprehen
sion of universal persecution and martyrdom. But the moment
we leave the restlessness, the troubles, the imperfectness, and
apprehensions pervading ii.-iii., we pass at once in iv. into an
IV. 1-2.] CONTENTS AND AUTHORSHIP OF CHAPTER IO3
atmosphere of perfect assurance and peace. Not even the
faintest echo is heard here of the alarms and fears of the faithful,
nor do the unmeasured claims and wrongdoings of the supreme
and imperial power on earth wake even a moment s misgiving in
the trust and adoration of the heavenly hosts. An infinite
harmony of righteousness and power prevails, while the greatest
angelic orders proclaim before the throne the holiness of Him
who sits thereon, who is Almighty and from everlasting to ever
lasting, and to whose sovereign will the world and all that is
therein owes and has owed its being.
Such is the general import of this chapter. As regards its
source, there can be no doubt. It comes wholly from the hand
of our author (see 2), but it was most probably not written all
at the same time. Our author appears here to have incorporated
one of his earlier visions, consisting of four stanzas of four lines
each, 2 b ~3, 5*, 6-8. In this vision the Seer beheld (as in Isa. vi.)
a throne in heaven and Him that sat thereon, and the four
Cherubim that stood round about the throne, who sang unceas
ingly :
" Holy, holy, holy is the Lord Almighty,
Which was and which is and which is to come."
In the notes on iv. 4 a variety of reasons are given for regarding
this verse as not originally belonging to this vision; but, as
inserted by our author when he edited his work as a whole, to
serve as an introduction iv. 9-11 (see also 3). iv. i, 2 a (in
prose) was at the same time prefixed to link up the preceding
visions on earth with the visions that follow in heaven in iv.-ix.
2. This entire Chapter is indisputably from our Authors
hand, as the diction and idioms testify.
(a) Diction.
1. /Aero, raura etSoy ica! I8ou. See note in loc. Iv TW oupaku.
So always in the sing, in our author except in xii. 12. 8eiu : cf.
i. i, xvii. i, xxi. 9, 10, xxii. i, 6, 8. & 8el yei/eadat. Cf. i. i,
xxii. 6.
2. eye^ojULY]^ Iv weufxari. Cf. i. TO.
4. TrepijiJepXTjjaeyous IjJiaTiois Xeuicois. Cf. iii. 5. In vii. 9, 13,
x. i, xix. 8, 13, the noun follows in the ace. instead of in the
dat.
5. doTpaTral ical <|>a>ml ical fipovrai Cf. xi. 19, xvi. 18, but
in viii. 5 in a different order.
6. o>s OdXaaaa uaXinr]. Cf. XV. 2 (bis}, ojjioia KpuordXXw : cf.
xxii. I, TTora/xov . . . COT}S . . . <us /cpvcrraAA.oi .
8. aKurauau OUK exouaty icrX. recurs in xiv. II. Kupios o 0eos.
IO4 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 2-3.
This divine title occurs 10 times elsewhere in our author (cf. i.
8, iv. n, xi. 17, xv. 3, xvi. 7, etc.), and only twice in the rest
of the N.T. (i.e. in St. Luke) except in passages quoted from the
O.T. Kuptos 6 0e6s, 6 irarroKpctTwp. Cf. i. 8, xi. 17, xv. 3, xvi. 7,
xix. 6, xxi. 22. 6 irarroicpaTtop 6 r\v KCU 6 &v KCU, 6 epxoji.ei>os. Cf.
i. 8, xi. 17, xvi. 5.
9. Swaouaii . . . 86ai>. Cf. xiv. 7, xvi. 9, xix 7 (xi. 13).
Cf. 4th Gospel ix. 24, xvii. 22. TW ^WVTI els T. aiwyas T. aiwywi/ :
cf. 10, i. 1 8, x. 6, xv. 7 (cf. vii. 2).
11. \aj3eik . . . TT]V SuVajuk. Cf. V. 12, xi. 17.
(ft) Idiom.
1. f\ 4>UkT) . . . adXTriyyos XaXouarjs . . . \tyuv. See note in
loc. on this Hebraism, and cf. xvii. i, xxi. 9.
2. em T. Qpovov icaOrjjxei os. On the three definite yet peculiar
forms of this phrase in our author see note on iv. 2 ; it
recurs in 4, 9, 10 in exact harmony with our author s peculiar
use.
7. ex&H^eTx 61 cf. 8, xii. 2, xix. 12, xxi. 12, 14.
8. TO, Te oxrapa a>a . . . Xe yoires. A frequent construction
in our author.
9. OTO.V cumfut. ind.\ cf. viii. i, where orai/ is followed by aor.
ind., though elsewhere in our author by the subj. For orav with
ihefuf. ind. see Robertson, Gram. 972.
10. n-poo-Kuyrjcrouo-ii TW WJTI. On the technical sense attached
by our author to this construction see note on vii. n.
3. One part of this Chapter appears to have been written at an
earlier date and incorporated subsequently when our author
edited the complete work.
2b ~~3 5 6-8 acde appear to have been written by our author
as an independent vision. The grounds for this conclusion are
given in the notes in loc., some of which may be stated here.
\ First of all, iv. i, 2 a is a prose introduction to the chapter,
which serves to connect the preceding visions on earth with those
that follow in heaven, iv. 2 a -ix. The rest of 2 b -8 is in verse.
But iv. 4, according to our author s usage elsewhere, cannot have
^. stood here originally. The grammar is against it: we should
have nominatives and not accusatives (Qpovoi not Opovows, etc.).
Again the functions of the Cherubim are conceived somewhat
differently in iv. 8 and in iv. 9 (see note). Next, since the
description proceeds from the throne outwards, the Living
Creatures ought to have been mentioned before the Elders,
since they stand nearest to the throne. For the observance of
this order elsewhere in our author see note on iv. 4. When
the description begins from without, we naturally find the
IV. 3.] RECAST OF AN EARLIER VISION 10$
reverse order angels, Elders, Living Creatures, as in vii. n,
xix. 1-4.
How then are we to explain iv. 4 ? Two explanations are
possible, i. Our author has here used one of his earlier visions,
but in order to adapt it to his present purposes has prefixed to it
an introduction, iv. i, 2 a , and next, in order to prepare the way
for iv. 9-11, has inserted iv. 4 possibly in the margin of his
MS. By an oversight the nouns " thrones . . . elders " were
put in the ace., owing not improbably to eI8ov in iv. i. * Since,
according to the present writer s theory, our author had not the
opportunity of revising his work, this grammatical error was not
removed. In such a revision the next great objection to iv. 4
could have been removed by transposing it after iv. 8 b . Thus
we should have had a description of the throne and of Him that
sat thereon (2 b ~3), next of the Living Creatures (6-8), and
finally of the Elders (4). In that case 8 C would have read /ecu ra
a>a avoLTravo-w OVK ex ovo ~ KT ^ 2 - Our author wrote the entire
chapter at the same time, but forgot to mention and describe the
Elders, which omission he forthwith repaired by an insertion on
the margin of his MS, since some account of these was rendered
indispensable by iv. 9-11. The former explanation seems prefer
able. I add here what I take to be the original form of the
vision in 1-8. The poem consists of four stanzas of four lines
each, the first beginning with the words KCU t
IV. 1. Mercl raura
2. Kal i8ou dpoVos IKCITO Iv TW oupayu),
Kal em TOP Bpovov caOrjju.ei os,
3. Kal 6 Ka0Ti|xep 05 ofioios opdaei XiOcu idamSi KCU crapSto),
Kal tpis KUKXoOey TOU OpoVou OJJLOLOS opdaei ajjiapay-
Sicu.
II.
5. Kal CK TOO OpoVou eKiropeuocTat dorpa-ira! Kal <J)wml
Kal J3poi/rat,
Kal ITTTCI XajjnraSes irupos Kaiojj,pai ev&iriov TOU OpoVou,
6. Kal e^wTTiov TOU Opoi ou 6? OciXaao-a uaXi^T) ojmoia
KpuoTaXXw,
Kal KUKXw TOU Opovou TeWapa
Kal
III.
7. Kal TO ^WOP TO TTpWTOl OU.OIOP Xe oi/Tl,
Kal TO Seurepov ^wop OJJLOLOV jmoaxw,
1 If 5 b is a later addition, as it may be, then 6 b would form lines 3 and
4 of the stanza.
106 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 1.
Kttl TO TplTOK woy ^V TO Trp6aa>TTOJ> O>9
Kttl TO TCTapTOy ^WOk OjJLOtOJ aTU> TTTOJJiei/(}).
IV.
Ta T&T<rapa wa ev Ka0* IK auTu^ IXCOK &va irrepu-
YS *>
OUK c^ouo-iy rjuepas Kal KUKTOS
ayios ayios ayios Kupios o 6eds 6 irarroKpdiTwp,
6 r\v Kal 6 UK Kal 6
1. jxTa TauTa i8oi> Kal LSou. The clause with or without the /cat
l&ov always introduces a new and important vision in our
Apocalypse. 1 Compare vii. i (/xeTo, rovro), 9, xv. 5, xviii. i, xix. i
(fjLCTa Tavra r}/<ovo-a). Sometimes the same note of emphasis and
unexpectedness is conveyed by the clause /cat elSov KOL iBov : cf.
vi. 2, 5, 8, xiv. i, 14, or by /cat ctSoi^ /cat r//couora, viii. 13. Gener
ally similar and closely related sections, paragraphs, and clauses
are introduced by /cat dSov, as in v. i, 2, 6, n, vi. i, 2, 12, etc.,
and in fact in all the subsequent chapters except xi. and xxii.
These formulae are characteristic of apocalyptic literature, and
imply an ecstatic condition. They are not, however, so carefully
distinguished in other authors as in our Apocalypse.
Thus jaeTa Tavra et<W, or its linguistic equivalent, is found in
1 Enoch Ixxxv. i, Ixxxix. 19, 30, 54, 72, xc. 2 ; T. Joseph xix. 5 ;
2 Bar. xxxvii. i, liii. 8, n.
Kal et8oi>, or its equivalent in Hebrew, Aramaic, or
Ethiopic is found in Dan. vii. 4, 9, n, 21, viii. 2, 4, 7;
1 Enoch xvii. 3, 6, 7, 8, xviii. i, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 12, 13, xix. 3,
xxi. 2, Ixxxv. 7, Ixxxix. 47, 70, xc. i, 4, 5, 9, etc. ; T. Levi viii. i ;
T. Joseph xix. i, 3, 7, 8. We find frequently with the same
connotation the clause, " And again I saw," in i Enoch Ixxxvi.
i, 3, Ixxxvii. i, Ixxxix. 3, 7, 51.
But the fuller form in our text frequently appears in this
literature, pera ravra etSov /cat tSov. See vii. 9, or its linguistic
equivalent, Dan. vii. 6, 7 (TIKI mn Jim nn "insa) ; i Enoch
Ixxxvi. 2 ; T. Joseph xix. 5 ; 4 Ezra xi. 22, 33, xiii. 5 (" vidi post
haec et ecce "), 8, and the somewhat shorter form nani mxi (or
the like) in Ezek. i. 4, ii. 9, viii. 2, 7, 10, x. i, 9, xliv. 4; Zech. i.
8, vi. i ; Dan. iv. 10, vii. 2, 13, viii. 3, x. 5 ; i Enoch xiv. 14-15;
2 Bar. xxxvi. 1-2, 7, liii. i ; 4 Ezra xi. i, 3, 5, 7, 10, 12,
xx. 9, etc.
In all the above passages in Ezekiel, Zechariah, Daniel,
1 The occurrence of this clause in xv. 5 shows that a new vision is being
introduced : hence xv. I, which deals with the same vision, is an interpola
tion.
iv. i.] SEER S VISION OF GOD 107
i Enoch, Testaments XII Patriarchs, 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, the
ecstatic condition is designed by the expressions just enumerated.
It is important to note this fact, owing to the presence of the
clause eycvo^v ev irvevfiart in the next verse. If the Seer is
already in a spiritual trance, what is to be made of the words
eycvofjuyv ev TTvev/xart in 2 ?
Rat i&ou 0upa ^ewyfJieVY] iv TW oupa^w. As we shall see later,
/ecu tSov Ovpa . . . Iv TrVev/xari is an addition of our author whereby
he connects the preceding visions on earth, i. io-iii., with those
that follow in iv.-v., which are in heaven. The phraseology is
apocalyptic. Cf. I Enoch xiv. 15, KCU I8ov aXXrjv Ovpav dvewy/AcV^v.
It is possible to explain this expression in two ways. i. The
Seer may be conceived as being already in heaven. In that case
the door here mentioned would lead to a holier part of the
heaven than that in which the Seer had hitherto been. This is
the view underlying i Enoch xiv. There Enoch is translated into
heaven, xiv. 8. When Enoch had once entered, he saw a great
wall built of crystal, and tongues of fire which encircled a great
house (xiv. 9). Into this house he entered, quaking and tremb
ling, and then beheld aXXrjv 6vpav dvewy/xeV^v over against him
leading to a still greater house in which God manifested His
presence. The idea here would be practically the same as that
of different divisions of the Temple differing in degrees of
holiness. 2. The Seer may be conceived as not yet in heaven,
but as entering by this door. 1 This is the view underlying
T. Levi V. I, rpoie /x,ot 6 ayyeAos ras TrvXas TOV ovpavov. These
gates admit Levi from the second to the third heaven. Since,
however, there is no reason to believe that our Apocalypse
teaches of more than one heaven (see later), the door referred to
in the text admits the Seer from earth to heaven. Cf. 3 Mace,
vi. 1 8, Tore 6 /*eyaAoSoos 0eos . . . rjv^cv ra9 ovpavtovs TrvAas,
e <oi> SeSo^aoyxei/oi Svo <o/?epoetSets ayyeXot Ka.Te(3r](rav. This
seems to be the right explanation. That the door, moreover, is
not on a level with the Seer, as in i Enoch xiv., is clear from
the words that follow dva/?a wSe.
With the expression "a door opened in heaven" for the
admission of the single Seer, we might contrast the words in
xix. n, "I saw the heaven opened," where the whole heaven is
opened, as it were, that the armies of heaven might go forth in
the train of the Son of God. Yet in T. Levi ii. 6 the heavens
open to admit Levi.
1 Compare in this sense Gen. xxviii. 17; Ps. Ixxviii. 23; 3 Bar. ii. 2,
iii. 2; Dieterich, Mithras liturgie, II sqq.
On the ideas of doors in heaven through which the sun, moon, planets,
and winds pass, see I Enoch xxxiii.-xxxvi., Ixxii. sqq. See also Schrader 3 ,
A". A. T. 619, for the occurrence of such ideas in Babylonian writings.
168 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 1.
iv TW oupai>w. Throughout the entire Apocalypse
occurs in the singular except in xii. 12, which is derived from
an independent Semitic source (see xii., Introd. 7). This fact
in itself would not suffice to prove that our Seer believed in only
one heaven; for in the Test. XII Patriarchs, where the doctrine
of a plurality of the heavens is distinctly enforced, we find some
times ovpavds, T. Reub. i. 6, v. 7, vi. 9 ; T. Levi xiv. 3 (j3), xviii.
3, 4 ; T. Jud. xxi. 4 ((3), etc. ; sometimes ovpavoi, T. Levi ii. 6,
iii. i (a), 9 (/?), v. 4 (/3), xiii. 5 ; T. Jud. xxi. 3, etc.
Notwithstanding, the entire outlook of our book favours the
conception of a single heaven.
On the impossibility of getting a consistent view of the
scenes portrayed in heaven by our book see note on Opovos . . .
ev TW ovpavw in 2.
But the passage, /cat tSov Ovpa ... 17 <f><*)vr) . . . ev Tn/cv/jum, is,
as we shall see presently, an addition inserted by the writer with
a view to linking together this vision with that which precedes :
Kat ff (fxtivrj fj irpwr-q r)V fjKOvcra. cos (raATTiyyos XaXova-rjs yw,er ffJLOV,
Xeywv. Render, "and the former voice." 17 <CDJ/T} depends on
I8ov. This voice appears to be that referred to in i. 10, ^Kovcra
(frwvrjv fMyaX.r)v . . . ws <raA.7riyyos Acyoucnys. Christ, therefore,
seems to be the speaker. But, as it has been observed by
Vischer, 77, and Bousset, 243, it is strange that the Being who
later in the vision is recognized as the Lamb (v. 6), and the object
of the vision, should here appear as the speaker and guide, the
angelus interpres, as it were. If we have in iv. 1-8 and in v.
two visions which the Seer had experienced on different
occasions and under different circumstances, and in which no
mention was made of the agent through whom these visions
were given, then we shall have no difficulty in recognizing the
phrase % <j><wr] . . . Aeycui/ as an addition on the Seer s part,
when editing his work as a whole, since this addition represents
Christ as the revealing subject of iv.-v. as He is of i.-iii. In
this first edition of his visions the above inconsistency escaped
him. If, however, we could, with some scholars, take the voice
in i. 10 to be that of an unknown angel, there would be no such
inconsistency.
f] $uvr] . . . <&s (rdXiriYyos Xa\oucrr]s |AT ejJtou \lyvv. Here ^
<a>vrj is dependent on iSov no less than 17 Ovpa. There are two
explanations possible of Acywv. Either Xey<ov is to be construed
Kara <rvv<riv with <wvrj and hence to be taken as = A-e youcra,
for similar constructions cf. xi. 15, xix. 14. Cf. Gen. (LXX)
xv. i, or the phrase XaXovo-rjs pir ejuov Aeytuv is to be taken as a
Hebraism ("ib&6 s riK "?"!P), as in xvii. i, xxi. 9. Cf. x. 8.
dfdpa ( = avd/3r)di : cf. /xcraySa, Matt. xvii. 2O. See Robertson,
Gram. 328).
IV. 1-2.] SEER S VISION OF GOD 1 09
<58e ( = "hither": cf. John vi. 25, x. 27. See Blass, Gram.
p. 58). Cf. i Enoch xiv. 24.
In the preceding visions, i. 10 sqq., the Seer was on earth.
In this verse he is spiritually translated to heaven, and remains
in heaven till the close of ix. This translation is implied in
the words, "Come up hither, and I will show thee the things
which must come to pass hereafter." His continued presence
in heaven is attested by v. 4, 5, vi. 9, vii. 13, 14, viii. i.
From heaven he can behold what takes place on earth : cf. vi.
12, 15 sqq., vii. i, 2. Thence onwards there is a frequent
shifting of the scene of the Seer s visions. In x. he has again
returned to earth : cf. x. 4, 8, and remains on earth till the close
of xi. 13; but in xi. 15-19 the scene of his vision is again in
heaven. In xii. the scene seems to be again on earth ; for xii.
14-16 imply it, and the birth of the Messiah is on earth, xii. 5 ;
for He is thence rapt to heaven. Yet there are difficulties as
regards the various sections of xii. In xiii.-xiv. 13 the scene of
his visions is still on the earth, but xiv. 14, 18-20 imply his
presence in heaven, as well as xv. 2, 5 sqq., xvi. i. Hence
xv. i (see note in loc.) is an interpolation. In xvii.-xviii. the
scene is again changed, and the Seer is on earth again : cf.
xvii. 3, xviii. i, 4, 21. In xix. i-io the Seer is again in heaven.
From xix. n to the close of the description of the heavenly
Jerusalem he is again on earth. At the advent of the final
judgment the former heaven and earth flee away.
Some of these changes of scene may be explained by the use
of sources on the part of the writer : others by his incorporation
into his text of earlier visions of his own, some of which pre
suppose heaven, others earth, as the scene of their reception. .
8eiw. This verb has already occurred in the same con
nection on i. i, where the Hierophant is Christ.
Here also, in this editorial addition to the original vision,
Christ is similarly represented, though a certain inconsistency is
thereby introduced. See note above (p. 108). The word Seio>
recurs in xvii. i, xxi. 9, 10, xxii. i, 6, 8, where the guide is an
angel of the vision of the Bowls.
Setfw o-ot d Set yepcaOai fxera raura. As in i.-iii. the present
(a i<rtV, i. 19) has been dealt with, in the chapters that follow the
future destinies of the Church and the world are to be mani
fested to the Seer. This was promised in i. i, 19. The phrase
a Set yeveV&u (already in i. i) is found in the LXX and Theo-
dotion of Dan. ii. 28, 29, while in ii. 29, 45 the entire clause,
a Set yeveV0ai /tera ravra, occurs in Theodotion s rendering of
2. euOe ws iyv6[ii]v iv ir^eujAari. These words create a great
difficulty in the text. According to i. 10, where the expression
1 10 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 2.
has already occurred, the Seer is in a state of spiritual trance.
That the Seer is still in the ecstatic state is shown by the intro
ductory words of iv. i (see note). Many scholars (De Wette,
Ebrard, Diisterdieck, Hilgenfeld, B. Weiss, Swete) assert that a
higher degree of spiritual exaltation is here necessary. It has
been urged by De Wette and others that the same difficulty lies
in Ezek. xi. i, 5. But the parallel does not hold. For, whereas
in Ezek. xi. i one office of the Spirit is mentioned when Ezekiel
is carried off to witness certain evils in Jerusalem (" the Spirit
lifted me up"), another is mentioned in xi. 5, where the Spirit of
the Lord is said "to fall on Ezekiel" in order to enable him to
prophesy against these evils. Now there is no such distinction
of phrase in i. 10 and iv. 2 in our text. The expression is
identical in both. Moreover, the power conferred by the state
therein described embraces at once the power of spiritual vision
and of utterance or expression. Cf. i. u. J. Weiss (p. 54 n.) has
therefore rightly urged that there is an inconsistency between
iv. i and iv. 2, but he goes needlessly far in maintaining that
whoever introduced the expression in iv. 2 no longer felt that
elSov in iv. i described the visionary state. The Seer is already
in the ecstatic state. It was not till he was in this state that
Christ addressed him in i. 10. That he is still in this state in
iv. i is proved both by the diction (eTSov) and the fact that he
hears the heavenly voice which addresses him anew. In i. 10
the Seer is not addressed by Christ till he has fallen into a
trance, that is, the words eyevo/x-^v ei/ Tn/ev/xo. precede the
address of Christ to the Seer, whereas in iv. 2 they follow the
address of the heavenly voice. The text, therefore, is peculiar.
But the difficulty can, I think, be adequately explained by the
hypothesis that the Seer is here combining visions received
on different occasions. The poetical structure of iv. 1-8 is
broken up by the insertion of certain prose additions in iv. i, 2,
4, 5, as we shall see later (see Introd. to Chapter iv. 3), and
this fact points to iv. 1-8 as recording an independent vision of
the Seer, which he connects with an earlier vision i.-iii., by four
clauses, iv. i bcd , 2 a , three of which, i cd , iv. 2 a , have already
occurred in i.-iii. Some such insertion was necessary; for
whereas i.-iii. imply that the Seer was on earth, iv.-ix. imply that
he is in heaven. Hence the two clauses, iv. i b , KCU ISov Ovpa
f}vew"y[jivr) eV rw ovpavu, and iv. i d , avdpa. d>8e, are indispensable,
the former clause that the voice may issue from heaven (cf.
Matt. iii. 17 ; Acts x. n) and the Seer be spiritually translated
into heaven through this open door, and the latter as giving him
the command to ascend to heaven. We therefore regard the
words KOL tSov . . . eV nvev/um as added here by the Seer in
order to connect i.-iii. and iv.-ix. It must be confessed that the
IV. 2.] SEER S VISION OF GOD 1 1 1
expression eyevopyv Iv irvcvpa. is not what we expect here, since
it expresses nothing more than what is already definitely implied
in fjLra ravra etSov, i.e. that the Seer was in the ecstatic state :
cf. i. 10. Since, as in xvii. 3, xxi. 10, there is here an actual
translation of the spirit of the Seer, we should here expect
a.Trr)vi\6if]v iv Tzreu/xari, or dbrr/veyKe /u,e tv Trve^/xart (or aveXafitv fie
KrA., or e^}/3v fie /crX). Cf. xvii. 3, aTnjveyKeV fie ... ey Trvevftart
and xxi. 10, and Ezek. iii. 12 (nn JNBm), 14 (*:npm ODNBO nn),
viii. 3, xi. i, 24, xliii. 5. In i Kings xviii. 12, 2 Kings ii. 16,
the same Hebrew verb is used of an actual bodily translation, and
d/>7raeiv in Acts viii. 39. For other instances J of bodily translation
see Hebrew Gospel (Orig. Injoan, torn. ii. 6; Hermas, Vis. i. i. 3,
ii. i. i ; Sim. ix. i. 4). For the same idea of a translation of the
spirit see i Enoch xiv. 8, 9, Ixxi. i, 5-6. Whether a bodily or
only a spiritual translation took place in his case St. Paul knew
not : 2 Cor. xii. 2-4.
Kal I8ou Opoyos cKeiTo KT\. Here the original vision of the
Seer really begins.
OpoVos. The throne of God in heaven is frequently referred
to in the O.T. and later Jewish literature : cf. i Kings xxii. 19 ;
Isa. vi. i ; Ezek. i. 26 ; Ps. xlvii. 8 ; Dan. vii. 9 ; i Enoch
xiv. 18, 19, (xl.); T. Levi v. i; Ass. Moses iv. 2 ; 2 Enoch
xxii. 2 (A). See also Weber 2 , Jud. Theol. 164 sq. A throne of
God on earth is described or mentioned in i Enoch xviii. 8,
xxiv. 3, xxv. 3, xc. 20.
In every chapter in our Apocalypse the throne of God is
referred to except in ii., ix.-x., where there is no occasion for
its mention, and in xv. 5-8, where the vision is that of the
Temple in heaven. The phrase OLTTO TOT) 0/ooVov, which is added
asyndetically in xvi. 17 after 0,71-0 rov mov, has been interpreted
as an attempt to harmonize the vision of the throne of God and
that of the Temple. But the two ideas are already combined in
the T. Levi v. i, xviii. 6, and possibly also in the O.T. 2
References to the Temple occur, of course, elsewhere in the
Apocalypse. In iii. 12 there is a reference to the Temple, but in
a spiritual sense. The ideas of the throne and the Temple are
combined in vii. 15, where the worship of the martyrs 8 before
1 Evang. sec, Hcbr., &pn Aa/3^ fte i] ^rfjp p.ov TO &yiov irvevfjia. iv jju$
T&V rpi"X.&v (jt.ov, /cat a.TrrjveyKe fte els rb 8pos rb fj.^ya dafi&p. Cf. Bel 36.
2 Some scholars would discover this combination already in Ps. xi. 4,
! Yahweh is in His holy palace (or temple, 73*fl) ; Yahweh, His throne is in
heaven." But the holy palace is here according to the parallel simply heaven
itself. Others trace its existence already in Isa. vi. I sqq., but elsewhere the
earthly temple is the scene and subject of prophetic visions : cf. Amos ix. i ;
Ezek. viii. 3, x. 4sq. ; Acts xxii. 17. The heavenly palace or temple is
God s abode and referred to in Ps. xviii. 6 ; Mic. i. 2 ; Hab. ii. 20.
3 vii. 917 was * n ^s original form a description of the worship of the
blessed faithful after the final judgment, See pp. 200-1,
112 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 2.
the final judgment is mentioned. After the final judgment there
is to be no Temple in heaven, xxi. 22. The heavenly Temple is
again referred to in xi. 19. Together with the heavenly Temple
there is mentioned the altar, TOV Ova-LacrrrjpLov, vi. 9 (see note),
under which are the souls of the martyrs. This has been taken
to be the heavenly altar of burnt-offering by all commentators,
who have, as a rule, also found references to the altar of burnt-
offering and the altar of incense in viii. 3. But in the note on
that verse I have sought to prove that both according to Jewish
and early Christian ideas there was only one altar in heaven
combining the characteristics of the earthly altar of incense and
partly those of the altar of burnt-offering. Furthermore, this altar
is within the heavenly Temple, vii. 15 ; and as the altar is before
the throne, viii. 3, it follows that the throne surrounded by the
four Living Creatures is also within the Temple. The heavenly
throne, therefore, was probably conceived as being in the Holy
of Holies, where also was the ark of the covenant, xi. 19. Inde
pendently of this natural conclusion, the throne when conceived
as the special scene of God s manifestation would naturally be
held to be within the Holy of Holies.
But when, with the above representation of the Temple with
its Holy place and its Holy of Holies, the throne, and the altar,
we try to combine the conception of the 24 Elders, we are at once
landed in difficulties. Are these Elders with their 24 thrones
also within the Holy of Holies ? This element, which is probably
an addition of our author to the current apocalyptic conceptions
of the heavenly Temple, cannot be really harmonized with them.
But the difficulties do not end here ; for the ideas at the base
of iv.-vii. presuppose a conception of the throne of God which
cannot easily be conceived as standing within the heavenly
Temple. On the other hand, the ideas behind viii.-xi. presuppose
the throne within this Temple an idea as old as Isa. vi. But
our author may have been quite unconscious of these inconsistent
elements.
KeiTo=" stood." Cf. John xix. 29, ii. 6 (xxi. 9); Jer. xxiv. i.
See Blass, Gram. 51.
ir! T. Qpovov KdO^fieKos. He that sitteth on the throne is
distinguished in vi. 16, vii. 10, from the Lamb. In xix. 12 we
have TOV KaOrjpevov CTTI T. Opovov. In vii. 10, xix. 4, we have the
full expression TO) 6tw TW KaO. c-n-l rw Opovot. The variations of
case following on Ka6rja-0ai Im are noteworthy. Alford was, so
far as I am aware, the first to attempt an explanation in connec
tion with the present verse. He gives a complete enumeration
of the passages where this phrase is followed by the gen. the dat.
and the ace., and concludes that "the only rule that seems to be
at all observed was that always at the first mention of the fact of
IV. 2-3.] SEER S VISION OF GOD 113
the sitting, the ace. seems to be used, iv. 2, 4, vi. 2, 4, 5, xiv. 14,
xvii. 3, xix. n, xxiv. 4 (xx. n seems hardly a case in point), thus
bearing a trace of its proper import, that of the motion towards,
of which the first mention partakes." But xi. 16 does not come
under this rule, and no rule he admits "seems to prevail as
regards the gen. and dat." Bousset 2 , 165 sq., does not try to
explain the variations, but brings them together. From him I
draw the following classification slightly remodelled.
Thus TOU KaOrjfxeVou em is followed by the gen., iv. 10, v. i, 7,
vi. 1 6, xvii. i, xix. 18 (PQ min fere omn. : ace. A 61. 69 : dat. K),
xix. 19, 21.
TW K<x0T]fAeV<{> em with dat. iv. 9 (ttA), v. 13 (AQ), vii. 10
(xACP), xix. 4 (tfACQ). Exception : with ace. vi. 4, eVt avrov.
In xiv. 15 with gen. eVi TT}S ve<^e Ar;s, but xiv. 15-17 is not from
the hand of our author.
6 KaOTJpeyos em and TOV .a.6r]^vov em, with ace. 6 Ka^/xei/os,
c. acc. in iv. 2 (P An with gen.), vi. 2, 5, xi. 16 (AP), xix. n.
Exceptions with gen. vii. 15 (dat. Q min pi.), xiv. 16 (Ax
but not from our author s hand), with dat. xxi. 5 (but this
is due to editor). TOV (TOVS) /ca0. with acc. in iv. 4, xiv. 14,
xvii. 3. Exceptions with gen. ix. 17, eV avruv (but due pro
bably to interpolation of ix. i7 ab ), xiv. 6 (where, however, see
note), xx. n, but this is due to editor. Thus, in short, the
participle in the nom. and acc. is followed by eVt and the acc.,
and the participle in the gen. and dat. by the gen. and dat.
respectively.
3. KCH 6 KaO^fxeyos OJAOIOS opdo-ei Xi0a> idurmSt K<XI aapSico. As
Swete remarks, the writer avoids anthropomorphic details . No
form is visible : only lights of various hues flashing through the
cloud that encircles the throne. These hues the Seer seeks to
adumbrate by comparing them to lights reflected by the jasper
and sardius passing through a nimbus of emerald green.
With the idea and diction we may compare Ezek. i. 26, which
appears to have been in the mind of the Seer : rt TOV o/xotoj/xaros
TOV Opovov o/Wto/Aa a>s etSo? avOpwirov (DIN !"IN"IE3). In apoca-
lyptic visions, when a being is described as being " like a man,"
we are to infer that it is a supernatural being that the Seer is
describing. In Dan. vii. 9 we have TraAcuos ^/xepwv ( = "an
ancient of days ") exa^To, where I cannot help believing that
pDV pTiy (i.e. TraAaios f](j,puv) is a primitive error for fov PTIJD,
i.e. o/xotw/ta TraAaiov ^eptuv. pDV pTiy means simply u an old
man." It is hardly possible to conceive a reverent Jew describ
ing God in such terms. In the ist cent. B.C. this title appears in
a slightly different form as " the Head of Days " or " the Sum of
Days," i.e. the Everlasting, in i Enoch xlvi. i, 2, xlvii. 3, xlviii. 2,
etc., and thereby the anthropomorphism is avoided.
VOL. i. 8
fi4 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 3.
OJJLOIOS opdaei \i6w KT\. Cf. Ezek. i. 4, 27, viii. 2, where it is
amber to which the glory of God is compared in colour o>s
opao-ts rj\KTpov, ws ot/av ^Ae/crpou. In i. 28, Ezekiel concludes
the vision with the words, "This was the appearance of the
likeness of the glory of God."
ojjioios . . . IdcnriSi KCX! crapStw. It is difficult to determine
with certainty what stone is represented by the jasper here
(taoTTTis = ns&y). There were several varieties of the toton-is : (i)
a dull opaque stone which is thought by some scholars to be
referred to here, since it is combined with the sardius : (2) a
green stone ( = nBB) partially translucent possibly that referred
to here and in xxi. n, At0o> tao-TnSi /cpvo-raXAt^ovrt : (3) a red
stone ( = -D*D, Isa. liv. 12, a yellow stone, and an opalescent
stone). See Encyc, Bib. iv. 4806, whence these facts are derived.
Of the above varieties the green was very rare and most prized in
ancient times. This may explain the epithet Ti/uwraTos attached
to it in xxi. n. But owing to this epithet Ebrard thinks
that the diamond is meant here. The sardius (*=D1iK, Ex.
xxviii. 17, xxxix. 10; Ezek. xxviii. 13) is a red stone as the name
signifies, the opaque blood-red jasper well known in Egypt,
Babylonia, and Assyria. Cf. Epiphan. De Gemmis, TTV/DWTTOS TO)
ciSei KCU at/xaroeiS^s (quoted by Vitringa). "The material
(translucent quartz stained with iron) is quite common, and
merges in the clearer and lighter-tinted carnelian and red agate "
(Encyc. Bib. iv. 4803). See also Hastings D.B. iv. 620 sq.
K<H ipis KUK\o0i TOU Qpovou ofxoios opdffei <T^a.pa.y^ivw. This
idea of a rainbow round about the throne is derived from Ezek.
i. 28, o>5 opcuris TOOV, OTQ.V vj Iv TTJ i/ec^eX^ ev -^aepais verov otmos
rj o-Tcicris (corrupt? for <acris) TOU ^e yyovs KVK\6dev. The rainbow is
said to be like a smaragdus. o-/xa/3ay8ivos is apparently a O.TT. Aey.
The smaragdus ( = np~a) has been identified with the rock
crystal, the beryl, and finally with the emerald. Petrie (Hastings
D.B. iv. 620) writes: "A colourless stone is the only one that
can show a rainbow of prismatic colours; and the hexagonal
prism of rock crystal, if one face is not developed (as is often
the case), gives a prism of 60", suitable to show a spectrum. The
confusion with emerald seems to have arisen from both stones
crystallizing in hexagonal prisms; and as the emerald varies
through the aquamarine to a colourless state, there is no obvious
separation between it and quartz crystal."
Both Petrie here and Myres in the Encyc. Bib. iv. 4809
attach the meaning of rock crystal to orjtxapaySos in our text.
But it is difficult to translate the line if this meaning is attached
to (r/xapayStVo). Perhaps it might be rendered : " And there was
a rainbow round about the throne like the appearance of rock
crystal."
IV. 3-4.] THE WENTY-FOUR ELDERS IIS
But another view is generally taken of the text. The Tpis is
interpreted as meaning merely a halo or nimbus shaped like a
rainbow, and of one colour, an emerald green. In that case the
writer breaks away from his source, Ezek. i. 28, and opaorei is to
be taken as a dat. modi. The conception of a nimbus encircling
supernatural beings or deified men was familiar to the ancient
world. It was current among the Greeks and Romans see
Dieterich, Nekyia, 41-43, who quotes largely from the Stephanus
monograph on the subject, Nimbus und Strahlen-Kranz :
Me*moires de l acade"mie impe riale des sciences de St. Peters-
bourg, 6 se*r., torn, ix., 1859. ^ i s claimed to be of Babylonian
origin by Zimmern, K.A. T. s , p. 353, who cites Ps. civ. 2 (" He
clothes Himself with light as with a garment ") ; Dan. vii. 9 ;
i Enoch xiv. 18; Jas. i. 17 ; Apoc. John iv. 3; i Tim. vi.- 16,
etc.
In favour of the above we might cite Encyc. Bib. iv. 4804 :
"As early as Theophrastus a very large number of stones, all
brilliant and of all shades of green, from aquamarine to dioptase
/), were included generally under <r/>tapay8os."
In any case the object of the bow is to conceal Him that sat
on the throne. Thus anthropomorphic details are avoided still
more than in Ezekiel.
4. KCU KUK\60ek TOU 0pocou 0poVou5 eiKOoi Teoraapes, 1 KCU em TOUS
reVaapas Opofous irpeajSurepous K<x0T]jjiefous ire pi|3e|3 \YjfjLeVo us
XeuKOts, Kal em, rots Ke<f>aXas auTwc oT6<f>dyous XP U<7 ^5-
The occurrence of this verse in its present context creates great
difficulty. This has already been pointed out by J. Weiss (Die
Offenbarung, p. 54 sq.). He observes, first, that it interrupts
a description of the throne, which is resumed in 5 : in the next
place, that, as the representation proceeds from the throne out
wards, the narrower circle of the four Living Creatures ought to
be mentioned before the larger concentric circle of the four and
twenty Elders. The Living Creatures stand nearer the throne,
and in iv. 9, 10, the Elders do not fall down and worship till the!
Living Creatures give the signal. On these grounds, Weiss would
reject this verse as an addition of the final editor of the
Apocalypse, who put together two independent apocalypses with
large additions of his own. Though Weiss s theory as a whole
is untenable, there are good grounds for regarding iv. 4 as a
later addition, but not, as Weiss urges, from another hand. The
evidence points to its being a later addition, but an addition
from our author s hand, since the diction is wholly his own, and
1 Elsewhere in our author ef/coai Tt<T<rapes stands before its noun except in
xix. 4. We should observe that r&raapes is used not unfrequently as an ace.
Cf. Moulton, Gram. 46 ; Blass, Gram, 20. On the orthography
in the N.T., MSS, and the KOIV-/I, see Robertson, Gram. 183.
116 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN flV. 4-5.
the verse serves to prepare the way for 9-11. For, since the
24 Elders are subordinate in rank to the Living Creatures, they
should not be mentioned before them unless the Seer began
his description with the outer ranks of heavenly beings that
surrounded the throne. Now in vii. 9-11 we find such a
description. First we have a great multitude of the saved which
no man could number; then the various concentric ranks of
heavenly beings round about the throne first the angels, then
the Elders, and finally the four Living Creatures. Probably
in the same way we are to explain the order in xix. 1-4 first
the great multitude of the angelic orders in heaven " saying
Hallelujah" (xix. 1-3), and its repetition by the Elders and
Living Creatures in xix. 4 (see note in loc.). Elsewhere, where
these two orders are simply mentioned together, the Living
Creatures are always mentioned first: cf. iv. 9-10, v. 6, 8, 14,
xiv. 3. The expression KCU TWI> <3o)v /cat r&v Trpcr/3vTpu>v seems
to be a gloss in v. n (see note in loc.). A single Elder is men
tioned in v. 5, vii. 13, and the body of Elders alone in xi. 16.
But as we examine the text more closely we see why the
addition was made by our author after 3 and not elsewhere in
iv. 1-8. For, whereas it would have been natural to make this
addition immediately after the four Living Creatures in 6 b , we
discover that the description of the latter and their thanks
givings are so closely knit together from 6 b to the close of 8
that the addition of a single phrase alien to the subject of the
Living Creatures was practically impossible. Hence the in
sertion was made in the midst of the description of the throne.
Finally, the syntax is defective in this verse. We have three
accusatives, Opovovs, Trpecr/^repovs, crre<avoi;s, but no verb to
govern them. Nor is there any such verb in 3 nor in 2, where
the verbs are intransitive. To explain these abnormal accusatives,
we must hark back to i and borrow eTSov. This is wholly
unsatisfactory. On the possible origin of the conception of the
twenty-four Elders see 10.
5. Kal eic TOU Qpovou cKTTOpeuorrcu darpairai Kal (j>a>m! KCU
Pporrcu. The three nouns recur in the same order in xi. 19,
xvi. 1 8, but in viii. 5 in a different order, ppovral K. <f><m al K.
ao-T/oa-Trcu. <awu =rvOlp in Hebrew, and denote the "voices" of
the thunder; jSpovrai. = D^Dyi, and denote simply " thunderings."
To us moderns, who identify thunder and the "voice" of the
thunder, it is difficult to make a distinction between them. In
Jub. ii. 2, however, we have the very same expression as in
our text ayye\ot ^XDI/WV, fipovrutv KCU a.(rrp(nr^v. We might also
compare Ex. xix. 16, eytvoi/ro <wvai Kal do-rpaTrai : Ezek. i. 13,
CK TOV TTU/DOS e^cTropcvcTo a.(rr pa.TT f]. Both nouns are combined
in Ps. Ixxvi. (Ixxvii.) 18, <J>uvr) TT}S Ppovrfjs crov ("JDJH ^Ip) ; Job
IV. 5-6.] A-S IT WERE A SEA OF GLASS 1 1/
xxxvii. 4, " He thundereth with the voice of His majesty " (DJTP
into ittpa). Cf. also xxxvii. 2, 3, 5.
ica! eTrra XajAirdSes irupos Kcu6|j.i ai tvumiov TOU OpoVou [a lanv
TO, eirra Tri/eujaara TOU 0eou]. We might compare 2 Bar. xxi. 6,
" The holy beings ... of flame and fire, which stand around
Thy throne." Cf. viii. 10 of our text.
The clause a ... 0eov has been recognized as a gloss by
Spitta, J. Weiss, and Wellhausen. It is a gloss, however, which
probably gives a right interpretation: cf. i. 4, 12, ii. i, Hi. i.
The seven lamps are seven spirits. The seven lamps stand in
some original relation to the seven planets, of which, however,
the Seer may have been quite unconscious. See note on i. 4.
But this clause also, KO.I eTrra Xa/xTraSes . . . 0poVov, may be a later
addition of our author or of a later hand. Its structure appears
to be against the former hypothesis. In the description of the
throne the phrase relating to the throne always begins the verse.
Thus iv. 5% CK TOV Opovov : 6 a , ivw-mov TOV Op. : 6 b , lv KVK\.U
TOV Op. This holds also in iv. 2 and in the addition iv. 4*. In
iv. 3 b there is a slight departure from this structure, but not the
complete departure we find in iv. 5 b . Here, further, we have the
awkwardness of Ivu-mov TOV Opovov coming almost at the close of
one verse and recurring immediately at the beginning of the
next, and that in a most carefully elaborated stanza. Notwith
standing I have allowed 5 b , minus the explanatory gloss, to
remain in the text. See Introd. to Chapter, 3.
6. Kal ei wirioi TOU 6p6Vou w9 0<xXaao-a uaXinr) ojjioi a KpuaT<XXa>.
It is to be observed that our author does not say that there was
"a sea of glass" here, but "as it were (ws) a sea of glass" (cf.
xv. 2). There is nothing like it on earth or in human experi
ence, so that all he can do is to use a figure of speech in order
to suggest in some faint measure what he saw in the vision.
This is clearly the present meaning of this phrase in our text.
But having thus suggested the character of the conception, he
can then drop the apocalyptic character of the phrase and use
simply the definite -expression rrjv OdXaa-a-av T^V vaAivr/v (xv. 2).
But this has very little to do with the original form of this idea.
Before the discovery of 2 Enoch, scholars were at a loss to trace
its source. In that book (iii. 3) we find : "They showed me (in
the first heaven) a very great sea, greater than the earthly sea."
This sea, according to T. Levi ii. 7 (a), was in the first heaven
"hanging," or according to ii. 7 (ft), "hanging between the first
and second heaven." The strange word " hanging " = K/>eyu,a/zevoi/
= yjfl, which appears to be corrupt for V^ ja therefore "on
the firmament." Thus this sea is really the waters above the
firmament referred to in Gen. i. 7 ; Ps. cxlviii. 4. According to
Jub. ii. 4 these were separated from the waters below the
Il8 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 6.
firmament (ev Se rrj 8evre/oa . . . e/xepur^?/ ra vSara, TO fjfjuo-v
avToov avefir] 7rai/co roO crepe oj/xaros the Greek version preserved
in Epiphan. Haer. Ixv. 4). These waters were masculine, ac
cording to i Enoch liv. 8, and the waters on the earth were
feminine. From their union, according to Assyrian myths, the
gods were produced. Of this myth there seems to be an echo
in 2 Enoch xxviii. 2, xxix. i, 3, "Out of the waves I created
rock . . . and from the rock I cut off a great fire, and from the
fire I created the orders of the incorporeal ten troops of angels."
But to return to the sea of glass, which ultimately goes back,
as we have seen, to the waters above the firmament. These
waters rest on the firmament, and over them apparently God s
throne was originally conceived as established, Ps. civ. 3, " Who
layeth in the waters the beams of His chambers." Of this
heavenly ocean a portion only is visible in the foreground, "as it
were a sea of glass like unto crystal," in our text. When the
Apocalypse was written it is more than probable that the
original meaning of the sea was wholly forgotten. See Bousset
in loc., and Gunkel, Zum Verstandnis. d. JVT, 44, n. 5.
Kdl [ec fxecrco TOU Opocou KCU ] KUK\U) rou 0p6rou reorcpa ua
Y^juioKTa 64>6aXjJiwi ejjnrpoaOek ica! omaOei .
The Living Creatures are not bearers of the throne (ei> /xe o-u>
T. Op. cannot mean "under the throne"), as in Ezek. i. 22, 26,
but they stand round the throne and prostrate themselves in the
act of worship, v. 8, xix. 4 (in 2 Enoch xxi. i they " overshadow "
it), and are free to move independently and singly : cf. xv. 7.
If the text is right, we must suppose, with Ziillig, De Wette,
Diisterdieck, Bousset, Swete, that the Living Creatures stood
round about (KVK\&) the throne, one in the middle of each side
of the throne (eV /ze o-u>). From the Greek words it seems im
possible to wrest such a meaning. Nor can the passage be
interpreted with Eichhorn, Ewald, and Gunkel (Zum religions-
gesch. Verst, 44), who conceive the four Living Creatures as lying
with the lower part of their body supporting the throne and with
the upper part of their body projecting beyond it. Eichhorn
was misled by following Ezekiel and by failing to follow the text
before him, and also by the passage which he quotes from the
Midrash Tehillim ciii. 19, to the effect that the Living Creatures
were placed under the throne that they might " know that the
kingdom of God ruled over all." In fact, the text is unin
telligible as it stands. Hence eV /*e o-o> TOV Opovov KO.L is to be
taken as (i) a gloss, or as (2) a mistranslation of the Hebrew.
i. It is not impossible that eV /u-eVw TOV Opovov was added here
from Ezek. i. 5, eV TV /xeVu) d>s 6/Wto/xa Tecro-apooi/ ^wa>v (where ev TW
/xe o-w refers to the fiery cloud which envelops the throne of God),
just as some cursives and versions of the LXX add KCU KVKAw
IV. 6.] THE CHERUBIM lip
TOV 6p6vov after ev TO> jue o-w in Ezek. i. 5, probably from the
Apocalypse. Elsewhere throughout the Apocalypse the Living
Creatures are said to be " round the throne," but never " in the
midst of it," as here. That privilege is reserved for the " Son of
Man" or "the Lamb," i. 13, ii. i, v. 6, vii. 17. Konnecke has
also proposed the excision of this clause. 2. Bruston (quoted
by Moffatt) thinks that the clause is a mistranslation of TirD
KD3!"1, which should have been rendered, " And in the midst was
the throne " ; but there is no other evidence that the passage is
a translation, and the sense is hardly satisfactory.
T&raapa wa. To the writer of the Apocalypse these four
Living Creatures, which are akin to the living creatures (n"n) in
Ezek. i., and are called Cherubim in Ezek. x. 2, 20, are simply
an order of angels, and apparently the highest, or one of the
highest orders. We find them mentioned with two other orders,
i.e. the Seraphim and Ophannim, in i Enoch Ixxi. 7 (cf. Ixi. 10).
And with others still in 2 Enoch xx. i, xxi. i, xxii. 2. In
2 Enoch xxi. i (cf. xxi. 3) ten orders are mentioned. (See my
note in loc.}
These Living Creatures in our text are akin, as we have said,
to the living creatures in Ezekiel, but they are in certain essential
aspects different. The Seer does not simply reproduce the
traditions of the past, but speaks in the terms of his own time.
In the present instance I hope to show that the conception in
our text has probably passed through three stages of develop
ment of which the third is that found in apocalyptic literature,
200 B.C. to 100 A.D. In this brief study we shall advance
backwards from Jewish to Babylonian conceptions, from the
statement of ascertained beliefs to the expression of reasonable
hypotheses.
I. In apocalyptic literature 200 B.C.-IOO A.D. (i^ In our
text the Cherubim are four in number, it is true, as in Ezekiel,
but each Cherub has only one face, and not four faces as in the
O.T. prophet. ^2!) They have each six wings like the Seraphim
in Isa. vi., and not four as in Ezek. i. 3} They stand imme
diately round God s throne, Rev. iv. 6, v. 8, xix. 4, and do not
bear it as in Ezekiel. The throne is set (" Ketro," Rev. iv. 2) on
the firmament of heaven, and does not rest on them. There is
no mention of " the wheels," as in the vision of Ezekiel. (4) They
sing God s praises, Rev. iv. 8, like the Seraphim in Isa. vi., and are
not silent servants of Deity. Jo They are * full of eyes," but in
Ezekiel they are " like lamps, i. 13, and it is " the felloes of the
wheels," i. 18, that are full of eyes. Ezek. x. 12, where the Cheru
bim are said to be full of eyes, is recognized by critics as corrupt, /b.y
They move freely about, Rev. xv. 7, and act as intermediaries be
tween God and otb r orders of angels. In most of these respects
120 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 6.
/the conceptions of the N.T. Apocalypse and of Jewish Apocalyptic
between 200 B.C. and 100 A.D. are at one. As regards i, we
have no mention of the number of the Cherubim outside our
Apocalypse nor any description of their form in this period.
They are regarded simply as one of the highest orders of angels :
cf. i Enoch Ixi. 10, Ixxi. 7. 2. They have each six wings
according to Rev. iv. 6, 2 Enoch xxi. i, as the Seraphim in
Isa. vi. 3. They stand round the throne of God and not under
it, as Gunkel and others have asserted. They do not bear it, but
are rather conceived as guardians of it, i Enoch Ixxi. 7. In
1 Enoch xiv. n they appear to be in the "roof" of heaven. In
2 Enoch xxi. i they cover the throne like the Seraphim in Isa. vi.
In the next place the throne is conceived as resting on the firma
ment of heaven, even where the wheels of Ezekiel s vision are
mentioned in connection with it. Cf. Dan. vii. 9, "The thrones
were set. . . . His throne was fiery flames, and the wheels
thereof burning fire." This meaningless survival appears also in
1 Enoch xiv. 18, "I saw ... a lofty throne: its appearance
was as crystal, and the wheels thereof as the shining sun, and
there was the vision of Cherubin." In i Enoch xiv. r7, 18, all
idea of a moving throne has been wholly lost. But other writers
either omitted the mention of "the wheels" as a meaningless
survival, as in T. Levi v. i, xviii. 6, where the throne rests on the
floor of the Temple in the third heaven, and Rev. iv. 2 sqq., or they
transformed "the wheels " (D 25itf) into one of the highest orders
of angels, i.e. Ophannim, as in i Enoch Ixi. 10, Ixxi. 7 and later
Jewish Midrashim. Underneath the throne was not only the
flaming firmament, but also the sources of the fiery streams,
which flowed forth from the stationary base of the throne,
Dan. vii. 10; i Enoch xiv. 19. With this conception we might
contrast Rev. xxii. i, where it is "a river of water of life" that
proceeds out of the throne.
4. Finally, the function of the Cherubim in later apocalyptic
literature is not to support the throne of God (except in
2 Bar. li. 1 1 ?), but to guard it, i Enoch Ixxi. 7, or more
usually to sing the trisagion, as in our text. Thus in i Enoch
Ixxi. 7, together with the Seraphim and Ophannim they are
described as "those who sleep not," but " guard the throne of
God s glory." Now, according to i Enoch xxxix. 12, "those who
sleep not . . . stand before Thy glory and bless . . . saying :
Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Spirits"; and again in Ixi. n sq.
they exclaim, " Blessed is He, and may the name of the Lord of
Spirits be blessed." These orders are carefully distinguished in
xl. 2 from the four archangels. Once more in 2 Enoch xix. 6,
xxi. i, the Cherubim and Seraphim with six wings and many eyes
are described as standing before the throne, singing : " Holy,
IV. 6.] THE CHERUBIM 121
holy, holy is the Lord God of Sabaoth : heavens and earth are
full of Thy glory." Thus the conception of the Cherubim in the
N.T. Apocalypse is essentially the same as that found in Jewish
apocalyptic literature. Both the conceptions, as we shall see,
have their root in the O.T.
II. In the O.T. the Cherubim are referred to, as Bp. Ryle
points out (Hastings D.B. i. 377 sqq.), (i) "in the Israelite
version of primitive myth ; (2) in early Hebrew poetry ; (3) in
apocalyptic vision ; and (4) in the descriptions of the formation
and adornments of the ark, the tabernacle, and the temple."
We are mainly concerned here with (3), but we shall refer to
the passages coming under the other sections as we find
occasion.
1. The form of the Cherubim varies in the O.T. In
Ezek. i. 6, 10 each had four faces the faces of a man, a lion,
an ox, and an eagle. (In x. 14, where the four faces are given
slightly differently, the verse is, with Bertholet, to be excised as
an interpolation, as well as the word " cherub" in 7. These are
omitted by the LXX.) In Ezek. xli. 18 sq. each had two faces
those of a man and a lion ; but this may be due to the fact that
they are here represented on the wall of the Temple. Between
each pair of Cherubim there was a palm tree.
According to Gunkel, Genesis*, p. 25, the simpler conception
of Rev. iv. 6 is older than the very complicated one of Ezek. i.
10 ; indeed Winckler (Altor. Forsch. ii. 347 sqq.), as Zimmern
notes, K.A.T., p. 631, seeks to prove that the four living creatures
in the original text of Ezekiel had only one face each. In any
case, the form of the Cherubim in our Apocalypse, so far as
regards their head, differs from every definite description of them
in the O.T.
2. In Ezek. i. 6, 10 each Cherub had four wings. In
Solomon s temple there were two colossal Cherubim, each with
two wings, i Kings vi. 24 sqq., and standing on their feet,
2 Chron. in. 13. The walls of his temple were also carved
with figures of Cherubim, i Kings vi. 29, and palm trees,
2 Chron. iii. 7, as also on the hanging screen, which separated
the Holy place from the Holy of Holies in the Tabernacle,
Ex. xxvi. 31.
Thus the number of wings assigned to the Cherubim in our
Apocalypse, while agreeing with later apocalyptic literature,
differs from the number assigned in the O.T.
3. The Cherubim in Ezek. i. 22, 26, x. i, support a firmament,
whereon is set the throne of God. The throne is not stationary,
but is borne in any one of four directions by the Cherubim.
The description of the base of the throne recalls Ex. xxiv. 10,
though there ^ no mention there of the Cherubim. In
122 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 6.
Ex. xxv. 1 8-2 1, on the other hand, the figures of the Cherubim
are represented on the mercy-seat of the ark, facing each other,
but looking down on the ark.
Possibly connected with the conception in Ezekiel is that in
2 Kings xix. 15; Ps. xviii. 10, Ixxx. i, xcix. i ; Isa. xxxvii. 16,
where the Cherubim are conceived as bearing God.
In Gen. iii. 24 they guard Paradise. In i Enoch Ixxi. 7 they
they are said to guard the throne of God.
Thus the conception in Rev. iv. 6, etc., stands apart in this
respect also from any in the O.T.
4. The Cherubim are silent in Ezek. i. 5 sqq., x. 2, and in all
passages relating to them in the O.T. as opposed to the function
assigned them in late apocalyptic literature.
III. Some of the above conceptions in the O.T. can with
great probability be traced to an earlier stage, a stage with which
our author was wholly unacquainted, and of which even the O.T.
writers had barely the faintest idea. For research in this
direction we are indebted to Zimmern and Gunkel. The
former (K.A.T. 631 sq.) holds that in all probability the four
Cherubim in Ezek. i., x. 2, are to be traced to the four chief
constellations in the zodiac, 1 and go back fundamentally to
Babylonian ideas, though this has not yet been established.
The ist, 4th, yth, and loth signs of the zodiac are especially
significant as corresponding in space to the dividing limits of the
four quarters of the heavens, and in time to the dividing limits of
the four seasons. These four constellations are the Ox, the Lion,
the Scorpion, and Aquarius. Further, the four winds were prob
ably brought into relation with the four chief signs of the zodiac ;
for in Babylonian- Assyrian sculpture we find on either side of the
holy tree two winged forms, generally with a human body and
an eagle head, and occasionally with a human head and a lion s
body. Of close affinity with these are the colossal winged ox
and lion figures at the entrance of Assyrian temples and palaces,
which have human heads and the bodies of the ox or lion.
Hence Zimmern infers that the ox, lion, man, and eagle were
known in Babylon as symbols of the winds, and that in the
Biblical Cherubim the forms of these four creatures were derived
from the four constellations in the four quarters, corresponding
to the four directions of the wind. The relation of the lion and
the ox to the constellations of the lion and ox is obvious.
The man corresponds to the scorpion-man, while the eagle is
taken not from Aquarius, but from the constellation of the
1 Gunkel assumes this hypothesis as an assured result in Zum religions-
gesch, Vcrstandniss des NT, p. 47, and suggests that the movement of their
wings, perceptible by no ordinary earthly ear, is referred to in Ps. xix. and is
the music of the spheres.
IV. 6.] THE CHERUBIM 123
eagle in its neighbourhood, probably because the former had no
particularly bright stars.
Now in confirmation of Zimmern s identification of the four
winds and the four constellations, it is to be observed that
originally the throne of God was the heaven itself: Isa. Ixvi. i,
"The heaven is My throne, the earth is My footstool." In
Ezek. i. 22 the throne rests on a firmament (]Pp"i, i.e. the heavenly
vault, which is like crystal), borne, as we have seen, by the four
Living Creatures. A very probable emendation of i Enoch xviii. 2
may support Zimmern s identification of "the four winds" and
the four constellations : this passage reads, " I saw the four winds
which bear the firmament of heaven. Now these stand between
earth and heaven." See my edition in loc.
It is obvious that the idea of the Living Creatures and the
wheels supporting the throne are syncretistic. It rested
originally either on the living creatures or on the wheels. Both
ideas were prevalent in the ancient world (Gunkel, op. at., p. 46).
For our present purpose we may leave " the wheels " 1 out of
consideration, especially as they do not appear in the N.T.
Apocalypse.
Again, as confirming the identification of the Living Creatures
and the four constellations, it is to be observed that the former
are " like burning coals of fire, like the appearance of lamps "
(Ezek. i. 13). Now, since in apocalyptic language the " lamps "
signify stars see Zech. iv. 2, 10 and our text, i. 4 (note), 12, iv. 5
the Living Creatures who are like lamps are reasonably to be
identified with stars. And this is further confirmed by the fact
that the wheels which accompany the Living Creatures are " full
of eyes," i.e. are bodies of stars or constellations. In the Veda
(S.J3.E. xlii. 212) the sun-god Surya is himself an eye. In the
next stage Mitra and Varuna have the Sun as an eye (S...
xxvi. 343, xli. 408). And the seven planets are the seven eyes
of Yahweh in Zech. iv. 10, and of the Lamb in our Apocalypse :
see v. 6, also note on i. 12.
Ye|j.oi/Ta 64>0a\p.a>i> ejurpoaOcy Kal oiriaOei/. These words go
back to Ezek. i. 18, x. 12. There the expression is applied to
"the wheels," which are said to be "full of eyes round about"
(-TrXrJpets 6<0aA/A<ov /cv/<:Ao 0ej/, MD D^y n^p). When, how
ever, our author transferred the idea from the wheels to the
Living Creatures themselves, he not unreasonably modified it.
The eyes were on the felloes of the wheels, and therefore the
eyes presented the appearance of a circle. Hence they are
1 In Dan. vii. 9, i Enoch xiv. 13, "the wheels" are merely a literary
reminiscence or survival. The throne is conceived as stationary in both
passages certainly in the latter. In the next stage of development " the
wheels " are transformed into an order of angels (see above, p. 120).
1 24 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 6-8.
described as " round about." But such an expression could not
easily be used of a living creature which had a definite face as a
man, or ox, or lion, or eagle, with their eyes in front. In such a
case naturally the expression is modified to " full of eyes before
and behind," though even here there is some difficulty attaching
to the conception of a creature with a face like a man and yet
full of eyes in front.
The discussion of this question is important, since we shall
find later that the words KVK\69v /ecu ZwOtv ye/xoucnv 6<pOa\iJLwv
in 8 are a meaningless interpolation.
In Ezek. x. 12 the text is recognized by critics as originally
applying only to the wheels. In its present form, which is very
corrupt, it runs : " And their whole body, and their backs, and
their hands, and their wings, and the wheels, were full of eyes round
about, even the wheels that they four had." See Bertholet in /<?<:.,
who proposes Bn nVm DH^I DnntfrrtOI, "and all their naves,
and their felloes, and their axle trees . . . were round about full
of eyes."
7. Kttl TO fe>OV TO TTpUTOP OJJIOIOK \6OVTl,
Kal TO SeuTepoy ^wok OJJLOIOC fAotrxw,
Kttl TO TplTOf (OOy C^Wk TO irpOVUTTOV O>9 CU GpWTTOU,
Kttl TO T6T<XpTOy ^WOl/ OfXOlOf ttTW TTTO|A >().
The order in Ezek. i. 10 is man, lion, ox, eagle. The text
in x. 14 is corrupt, as we have already pointed out. Irenaeus
(iii. ii. 8) seems to have been the earliest writer who identified
the Four Evangelists with the four Living Creatures Matthew
with the man, Mark with the eagle, Luke with the ox, and John
with the lion. Victorinus, on the other hand, understood the
man as symbolizing Matthew, the lion Mark, the ox Luke,
the eagle John. St. Augustine (De Cons. Evang. i. 6) attributes
the lion to Matthew, the man to Mark, the ox to Luke, and the
eagle to John. Such identifications though popular in the early
Church, and indeed in later times, are wholly fanciful. See
Alford and Diisterdieck in loc. ; Swete 2 , St. Mark, p. xxxvi sqq. ;
Zahn, Forschungen, ii. 257 sqq. /nocr^os is here, as it is over 40
times in the LXX, the equivalent of "ii> cf. Ezek. i. 10,
and therefore means an ox. In the LXX it is more frequently
a rendering of "IB, a bull, and occasionally of "ijJJ an d ty-
In line 3 e^wv stands here as in 8 for a finite verb in
accordance with a Hebrew, or a still more frequent Aramaic
idiom. This idiom is found also in the Koii/ij. See note on
xii. 2, where it recurs.
8. Kal Ta Te aaepa wa, ev *a0 tv auTWf x<oi> ava irrepuyas !.
On the form of the Cherubim in this passage see above, p. 119 sq.
For eV Ka& Iv and ai/a used distributively see N.T. Grammars.
IV. 8.] THE CHERUBIM 125
[KUK\60ek Kal eawOei/ yejj.ouo-u o^OaXfAom] Wellhausen (Analysed.
Offenbarung Joh,, p. 9) rightly regards this clause as an interpola
tion, though I can only in part accept his reasons : " KVK\O$W
steht bei Ezek. i. 18 fiir !/x7rpoo-0v /cat O7rto-0ev zusammen. Denn
eo-o>0v bedeutet nach v. i ebenso viel als !/x7rpoo-0ei/ ; innen ist
vorn und aussen ist hinten." I have already shown (see p. 121 sq.)
that our author has modified very considerably the character
istics of the Cherubim as given in Ezekiel, and has transferred to
his description of the Cherubim the eyes which in Ezekiel s
account belong only to the wheels. The grounds on which I
regard this line as an intrusion are : i. The sentence or line begins
without a copula though it contains a finite verb. This is
contrary to the writer s custom throughout the preceding verses
i y 2 3> 5> 6, 7. We should expect KOL Kvi<X60ev. 2. KVK\60ev Kal
ecruOev is in reality a meaningless phrase. It has proved a
hopeless crux to interpreters. If in any form it is original, it
must be corrupt, and we should have to fall back on the text
presupposed by Primasius : "habebant singula alas senas per
circuitum. Et erant plena oculis ante se et retro," or still earlier
Victorinus : " habentes alas senas in circuitu et oculos intus et
foris" (Hausleiter, Lateinische Apocalypse, p. 94). These render
ings presuppose, as Bousset points out, the text KVK\60ev Kal
o>0i/ Kat eoxotfev, which is actually that of Q and a few cursives.
Thus we should have, "they had each six wings round about,
and they were full of eyes without and within." Luther was also
in favour of connecting Kvi<X66ev with what precedes. But this
text is very badly attested. It is only an attempt to smooth
away the difficulties of an unintelligible gloss. 3. The words, if
they had an intelligible meaning, would be a needless repeti
tion of the last clause of 6. 4. The text of Isa. vi., which our
author had undoubtedly before him, describes the Seraphim in
2 as having six wings, and then immediately in 3 their ascrip
tion of praise, " Holy, holy, holy." This fact is in favour of the
excision of this clause, especially as it has occurred before.
But how is the gloss to be explained ? The glosser possibly
drew the unintelligible phrase Kv/o\.o#ev Kat ea-w^ev from the LXX
of Ezek. i. 27, opao-iv Trvpos <r(o0ev aurou Kv /cAa), where, however,
the text refers to a description of God.
Kal dydirauaii OUK exouaiy -qjmepas Kal I/UKTOS Xyon-s. Here it
is distinctly implied that the volume of praise is continuous and
unbroken. This fact does not harmonize with 9-14, as we shall
see presently. For the phraseology, though the sense differs,
cf. xiv. ii.
The widespread conception of praise in heaven is attested
by such passages as i Enoch xxxix. 12 sq., xl. 3 sq., Ixi. 9 sqq.,
Ixix. 26, Ixxi. 1 1, etc. ; T. Levi iii. 8 ; 2 Enoch xvii. i, xviii. 9,
126 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 8.
xix. 6, xx. 4; Ascension of Isaiah vii. 15, 19, 20, 27, 29, 30,
36, viii. 3, 16, 17-18, ix. 28-29, 33, 40-42, x. 1-3, 19, xi. 26,
27, etc.; Chag. i2 b ; Apoc. Zephaniah (Clem. Alex. Strom.
v. ii. 77).
With the trisagion in our text we might compare that in
1 Enoch xxxix. 12, "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Spirits : He
filleth the earth with spirits." Here as in our text (see note
above) the writer has modified the trisagion to suit the main
purpose of his Apocalypse.
We have already shown that the task of the Cherubim
together with the Seraphim and Ophannim is to sing the praises
of God (see above, p.\i20 sq.) in later Apocalyptic literature as in
our text. De Wette, Diisterdieck, B. Weiss, and Alford regard
the Cherubim as representing the whole animate creation.
Diisterdieck and Alford quote the Shemoth rabba, 23, fol. 122,
4 b , as already giving the right point of view : " Quattuor sunt, qui
principatum in hoc mundo tenent. Inter creaturas homo, inter
aves aquila, inter pecora bos, inter bestias leo." " Dass diese Vier
die gesammte lebendige Schopfung reprasentiren sollen, ist durch
die bedeutungsvolle Vierzahl selbst angezeigt" (Diisterdieck,
Bengel). Swete (2nd ed., p. 71), following Diisterdieck, writes
that " the wa represent Creation and the Divine immanence in
nature," and quotes Andreas to the same effect. And again (p.
72) : "This ceaseless activity of Nature under the Hand of God is
a ceaseless tribute of praise." But this meaning of the Cherubim
cannot, so far as I see, be maintained. In the Book of Jubilees
the angels are, speaking generally, divided into two classes :
those which keep the Sabbath with God and Israel, and those
which do not. The former include only the angels of the
presence and the angels of sanctification. This latter class are
those which sing the praises of God (see my notes on ii. 2, 18,
xv. 27, xxxi. 14), and embrace, no doubt, the Cherubim and
Seraphim. Now as for the angels who do not keep the Sabbath,
these are naturally " the angels of service " who are set over the
works of nature. These are inferior in rank and knowledge not
only to the two higher orders, but also to righteous men, accord
ing to the Talmud (see my commentary on Jubilees, p. 12).
Even a knowledge of the law is withheld from them (op at., p.
in). Since, therefore, the angels, that were intimately connected
with nature according to Jewish views, held so subordinate a
position, it can hardly be right to identify with them the Cheru
bim, who are immediately round the throne of God and con
tinually sing His praises, and are the highest order of angels in
the N.T. Apocalypse.
The idea of nature as itself praising God is found in Ps. xix.
2 sqq., ciii. 22, cxlviii. ; but the Cherubim are not regarded as
IV. 8-9.] THEIR DOXOLOGY
vehicles of this praise in our text, but the twenty-four elders (see
n, p. 133 sq.).
The trisagion in our text differs from Isa. vi. 3 in that it does
not voice the praise of creation, but omits the words, " the whole
earth is full of His glory," and confines itself to the holiness,
omnipotence, and everlastingness of God.
On the essential nature of God, our author bases his assur
ance of the ultimate triumph of righteousness.
"Aytos ayios
6 r\v KCU 6 u>v KCU 6
Cf. i. 8, xi. 17. The trisagion is borrowed here with modifica
tions from Isa. vi. 3, ayios ayio9 ayios Kvpios o-a/?aa>0. Our author
has not followed the LXX ; for in every instance niN3 is rendered
by the translator of the LXX in Isaiah by aaftauO. On the
other hand, 6 TravroKparwp is the rendering of this Hebrew word
in the rest of the prophets. Furthermore, our author has inserted
/cv pios 6 0eos = iW TIN a phrase very frequent in Ezekiel (vi. 3,
n, vii. 2, 5, viii. i, etc.). For the second line, cf. i. 4, 8, xi. 17.
For other doxologies, see note on n.
On 6 rfv Kat 6 o>v KT\. see note on i. 4.
9. Kal oral Swcroucrii rot wa 86av Kal TijATjy ica!
TW Ka0K]fAKu> eirl TW 6pof(t>, TW wyTi eis TOUS alums t&
Commentators are practically agreed that OTOV Swo-ovo-iv 1 is
here to be translated "whensoever . . . shall give." That is,
the action in 10-11 is represented as occurring as often as that
in 8. But since the giving of praise on the part of the Living
Creatures is continuous and unbroken (8), it is hard to reconcile
this conception with that conveyed in 10, which implies that the
praise is not continuous, but bursts forth at intervals, whereupon
the four and twenty Elders fall down and worship. The latter
view, moreover, is that which underlies the rest of the Apocalypse.
The Elders are not always prostrating themselves, but on the
occasion of great crises in the Apocalypse, which call forth their
worship and thanksgiving: cf. v. 8, 14, xi. 16, xix. 4. One of the
Elders also comforts the Seer, v. 5, and tells him who are the great
white-robed company that are praising God, vii. 13. Nor are
the Cherubim occupied with unbroken praisegiving throughout
the rest of the book. Separate acts of praise on their part are
implied in v. 9 (orav), and different tasks are ascribed to them
in vi. i, 3, 5, 7, and in xv. 7. Hence we infer that in this
respect iv. 1-8 stands apart from the rest of the Apocalypse.
So^ay Kal TIJJ.T]! Kal cuxapioriac. The collocation S6a Kal
Tiju/j is found in Ps. viii. 6 ("Pirn TQD), but not in the same
1 For other examples of STO.V with indicative in a frequentative sense see
Moulton, p. 168.
1 28 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 9-10.
connection as in our text. A better parallel is furnished by
Ps. xxix. I, XCvi. 7, ei/ey/care TO) /cupuo Soav /cat Ti/j,rjv (where, how-
ever, TL^YI is a rendering of T y. But the best parallels to our text
are found in i Enoch Ixi. 10, n, where the Cherubim and other
angels are said to " bless and glorify and extol " ( = evAoyetv /cat
Soaetv /cat vfyovv) God. For similar statements cf. xxxix. 10,
12, xlvii. 2, Ixi. 12, etc. ( = So^ao-ovcrtv /cat eu;(apt(mj<rovorii/). We
might also compare Dan. iv. 34.
TW <om els TOUS alums. This phrase recurs in 10, x. 6, xv. 7 ;
see also vii. 2. Cf. Dan. iv. 31 (Theod.), TU> uWt et? rov alwva
Tl) rji/eo-a /cat eSoa0-a ; also Deut. xxxii. 40 ; Dan. xii. 7
TI) ; Sir. xviii. 17 ; i Enoch v. i. This phrase repeats the
idea in the second line of the trisagion. See Bousset, Rel. d.
Judentums, 293. This divine attribute is applied to our Lord
in i. 1 8.
10. ot uco<n T<j<raps irpeajSuTepoi. This conception of a
heavenly divan composed of four and twenty Elders is not found
in existing Jewish literature. There are indeed echoes of such a
conception in i Kings xxii. 19 sqq., Job i. 6, ii. i, which represent
God as taking counsel with His angels; and in Dan. iv. 17, vii.
9, where a certain order of angels is regarded as assessors of
God and issuers of the divine decrees. But a still closer parallel
is found in Isa. xxiv. 23 :
/3a<riAeucrei Kvpios e/c Setcoj/ /cat ets
/cat
This passage has been, it is true, assigned by Duhm and
Marti to the latter half of the 2nd century B.C., and the Trpeo-^v-
rcpoi (D^pT) are interpreted as the heads of the Jewish com
munity an interpretation that is already propounded in the
Targum on Isaiah. But whether this be so or not, the passage
could easily have assumed a different meaning in the ist century
of the Christian era, and formed a starting-point for the develop
ment of the conception in our text. In our text the Elders are
crowned as kings, and seated on thrones round the throne of
God : they are thus the heavenly yepowt a.
\Vho then are these Elders ? that is, whom does the author
of our book conceive them to be ? for their original meaning
and their meaning in the text have no necessary connection.
First let us inquire what we know from our text of these
Elders, i. They sit on twenty-four thrones round the throne of
God, iv. 4, xi. 16. ii. They wear crowns of gold, and are clothed
in white garments, iv. 4. iii. They are called 7rpeo-/3vTepot (D Opf).
iv. They are four and twenty in number, v. They occupy these
thrones not at the Final Judgment or the consummation of the
world, but in the present and apparently in the past (since the
IV. 1O.] THE TWENTY-FOUR ELDERS
creation?), vi. The Seer addresses one of them, vii. 13, as
Kupie. vii. They act as angeli interpretes, vii. 13. viii. They
discharge a priestly function in presenting the prayers of the
faithful to God in golden bowls, v. 8. ix. They encourage the
Seer when in the spirit he beholds the inhabitants of heaven,
v. 5. x. They discharge the office of praising God by singing
and playing on the harp, v. 8, 14, xi. 16, xix. 4.
Now these Elders have been variously taken as
I. Glorified men.
II. A College of angels earlier angelic assessors
originally Babylonian star-gods,
III*. Angelic representatives of the twenty-four priestly
orders.
II l b . And in their present context Angelic representatives
of the whole body of the faithful.
I. Glorified men. Thus (i) Bleek, 198 sq. ; De Wette 3 , 72;
Weizsacker 2 , 617, take them to be representatives of the Jewish
and heathen communities. (2) Victorinus, Andreas, Arethas,
Bousset, Stern, Hengstenberg, Ebrard, Diisterdieck, 221 ; B.
Weiss, 438, hold them to be representatives of the O.T.
and N.T. communities, twelve of them being the O.T. patriarchs
from whom the nation of Israel arose, and twelve the N.T. apostles
by whom the Christian Church was founded. It is true, indeed,
that the name Trpeo-y^Tepoi suggests in itself representatives of the
community: cf. Isa. xxiv. 23, quoted above, and Ex. xxiv. n.
As representatives of the entire community of believers there
would belong to them the kingly dignity; for since faithful
believers share the throne of their Lord, and reign, iii. 21, i. 6,
xx. 4, 6, xxii. 5 (2 Tim. ii. 12), and wear crowns, iii. n, it
is pre-eminently fitting that their representatives should enjoy
such kingly privileges. In the Ascension of Isaiah vii. 22,
viii. 26, ix. 10-13, 18, 24, 25, xi. 40, the idea of crowns (oW^avoi
not SiaS^/xara) and thrones as the rewards of the righteous is
repeatedly dwelt upon. Such views, therefore, must have been
widely current in early Christendom. Moreover, the idea of
crowns as the reward of righteousness is pre-Christian ; see T.
Benj. iv. i. Further, it might be urged that there are some
grounds for the identification of these Elders with the twelve
Patriarchs and the twelve Apostles ; for they are closely brought
together in the description of the New Jerusalem. Thus the
names of the twelve Patriarchs are written on the twelve gates,
xxi. 12, and those of the twelve Apostles on the twelve founda
tions of its wall, xxi. 14. Furthermore, the homogeneity of the
Jewish and Christian Churches emerges from the fact that the
redeemed sing the song of Moses and the Lamb, xv. 3 (?).
VOL, i. 9
130 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 10.
But it has been rejoined, there is no true co-ordination of
Jewish and Christian Churches in xxi. 12, 14, else there would
be twenty-four gates or twenty-four foundations. Moreover,
there is not a hint in the text that the Elders refer to definite
persons such as the Patriarchs and Apostles.
But the real difficulty does not lie here, but in the fact that
the Elders cannot be men but must be angels. This follows from
the characteristics mentioned in v., vi., vii., viii., ix. above. These
we must now treat more in detail. The Seer addresses one of
the Elders as /cv pic, vii. 13, a fact which, though not conclusive,
is in favour of the angelic nature of the Elders. That they act,
however, as angeli interpretes, vii. 13 (cf. xvii. 3, xxii. 6), is con
clusive against their being of human origin. Such duties belong
to angels only; cf. Dan. ix. 22 sqq. ; i Enoch xvii. i, xix. i,
xxi. 5, xxii. 6, etc. ; 2 Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Bar. passim. No more
is the function of offering encouragement to the Seer, v. 5, re
concilable with their being men : cf. Dan. x. n.
Furthermore, it is angels and not men that offer the prayers
of the faithful in golden bowls, T. Levi iii. 7; Chag. i2 b ;
Sebach, 62*; Menachoth, no*, and so in our text, v. 8; it is
angels that sing hymns, 2 Enoch xviii. 9, xix. 3, xx. 4, etc., and
so in our text, v. 9, xiv. 3; but this last point must not be
pressed.
And again the fact that the elders sit on thrones prior to the
consummation of the kingdom or the final judgment is against
their being conceived as men. Not till this period arrives will
the faithful wear crowns and sit on thrones. This holds also in
Judaism, as appears from a passage of Tanchuma, fol. 52, quoted
by Spitta and others : "Tempore futuro Deus S. B. sedebit et
angeli dabunt sellas magnatibus Israelis, et illi sedent. Et Deus
S. B. sedet cum senioribus tanquam |H rTO 3K, princeps senatus,
et judicabunt gentiles." To the above passage we might add
Dan. vii., where the thrones are set for the angelic assessors of the
Most High. Thrones were thus not unfitting for angels, accord
ing to pre-Christian Judaism. On the above grounds, therefore,
the Elders are to be taken as angels. Whatever the twenty-four
Elders may have been originally, in the view of our author, they
are not men, but an order of angels.
II. A College of angels earlier angelic assessors originally
Babylonian star-gods. Gunkel (Schopfung und Chaos, 302-308)
and Zimmern (K.A.T. Z 633) examine the various interpretations
adduced, including that given under the next heading, and
conclude that neither in Judaism nor in Christianity can any
true interpretation of the twenty-four Elders seated on thrones
be found. For they urge that the thrones imply that the Elders
are kings and judges : that these Elders are supernatural beings,
IV. 10.] THE TWENTY-FOUR ELDERS 131
and that the number twenty-four is no invention of the Seer, but
that the whole conception has been taken over from apocalyptic
tradition.
They are of opinion that the twenty-four Babylonian star-
gods are the original of the twenty-four Elders, and that these
gods were transformed by Judaism into angels. They support
their view with the following citation from Diodorus Siculus, ii.
31 : fiera Sc rov a>SiaKoi/ KVK\OV CIKOCTIV KO.I Terrapas d<optov(riv
darepas, wv roiis p\v ^/AiVeis ev roTs /?opeiois /xepeo-t, TOUS 8 ^/tuVeis
cv rots VOTIOIS Tfrd^Bai <aat, /cat TOVTWV rovs jjikv 6pw/>tevovs TWV
etvat Karapi^/xoCcri, TOVS o a<f>a.vi<s rols TeTeAeDT^KOcri Trpocrto-
vo/xiov(Ttv, ous SiKaoras TW9 oXcov irpocrayopevovo-Lv. With
the Babylonian star-gods Gunkel (Zww Verstdndniss des N.
Testaments, 43) thinks the twenty-four Yazata of the Persians
are related (Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride, 47). 1 Gunkel admits
that the Seer has lost consciousness of the original meaning of
these beings in that he assigns them priestly functions, though
they were originally kings, senators of the Most High.
This interpretation has received the support of Bousset,
J. Weiss, Holtzmann 3 , and is undoubtedly attractive, but the
evidence of connection between the Babylonian conception and
that which appears in our text is too slight to build upon. It
seems to be, in fact, not more than a coincidence ; for the points
in common between the two can be explained within Judaism.
There is not a trace of what, according to Gunkel, was the
original character of these Elders; for the o-re^ai/ot and
do not necessarily in themselves imply kingship. If
were used instead of o-Te <cu/oi 2 the matter might be different
Nor need the possession of OpovoL involve judicial powers, if we
may reason from the passages cited above from the Ascension of
Isaiah ; while as regards the number twenty-four, it can be
satisfactorily accounted for within Judaism.
Since the Elders are not conceived in any way as kings,
since they never act as judges and are never consulted by God
as His assessors, 3 but are described as angels discharging priestly
(v. 8) and Levitical functions (v. 8), the most reasonable inter
pretation is that which identifies them with the angelic repre
sentatives of the twenty-four priestly orders.
III a . Angelic representatives of the twenty-four priestly orders.
A great number of scholars in past times derived the number
1 2 Enoch iv. I might be compared : "And they brought before my face
the elders and rulers of the stellar orders."
2 I find, however, that artyavos is used of the crown of the sun in
3 Bar. vi., viii.
3 In I Enoch xiv. 22, Sir. xlii. 22, it is expressly stated that God stands
in no need of counsel though thousands of thousands of angels stand around
Him.
132 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [IV. 10.
twenty-four from the twenty-four priestly orders, such as Alcasar,
Vitringa, Eichhorn, Ewald, Hilgenfeld, Renan, Erbes ; but it was
Spitta (275 sqq.) who first recognized in the Elders the heavenly
representatives of the twenty-four orders (i Chron. xxiv. 7-18).
The chief priests were designated not only Dnb>, " princes " (so
angels are designated in Dan. x. 13, 20, 21), and D^fiO, "heads,"
but also "elders of the priesthood," njn3 ^\X (Joma i. 5), and
3K ITO ^pt, "Elders of a father s house" (Tamid i. i); Middoth
i. 8. See Schiirer 3 , ii. 236. They are also called DT6sn nfe>,
"princes of God," in i Chron. xxiv. 5. Spitta quotes the
passage from Tanchuma, 52 (cited above), to show that angels
sat on thrones. These angels, then, would be the heavenly
counterpart of the heads of the twenty-four priestly orders. As
such they themselves offered sacrifice 1 in heaven, v. 8 they
presented the prayers of the faithful a bloodless offering : cf. T.
Levi iii. 6 sq. If, then, this order of angels sat on thrones, it is
to be expected also that they should wear crowns. Spitta might
further have added that there were also twenty-four orders of
Levites, i Chron. xxv. 9-31, whose duty was to "prophesy with
harps, with psalteries, and with cymbals" (i Chron. xxv. i).
This duty is discharged by the Elders in our text : cf. v. 8. In
favour of this interpretation it may be observed that, since the
archetypes of the temple and its accessories, as the altar and the
ark, are represented by the Seer as already existing in heaven, it
is natural to find the archetypes of the twenty-four priestly orders
there also.
These angels Spitta identifies with the 0/ooVot mentioned in
T. Lev. iii. 8, where their duty, as in several passages in our text,
is to offer praise to God (dei v^vov T<3 0eo) Trpoa-fapovrts).
That they sat on thrones is clear from the Ascension of
Isaiah vii. 14, 15, 21, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35, xi. 25.
Finally, this view of the Elders is preserved in the writing, at
8tarayai at 8ta KXrj/jifVTos (Lagarde,y^m ecclesiastiti antiquissima,
1856, 74 sqq.) : ct/coo-t yap /cat reo-(rapes etcrt Trpecr/^urcpot, 8<oSe/<a
c/c Seioh/ /cat Sa>Se/<a t fvwvv/junv . . . ot yaev yap e* &eta>v 8e^o/xti/ot
OTTO TWV dp^ayyeXwv TO.? <taAa9 7rpocr<epoucrt T<3 Seo~7ror>7, ot 8e e
dptcrrepajv eTre^ovcrt TW TrX^et TOJV dyye Awv (quoted by Harnack,
Lehre der 12 Ap> 233). This passage is an early expansion of
our text. It still preserves the priestly element in the con
ception.
III b . And in their present context the Elders may be the
1 The priestly character of the Elders may be hinted at in their great
hymn in v. 9-10, where the Elders dwell on the self-sacrifice of the Lamb as
manifesting His worthiness to take the Book of Destiny and open its seals.
However, it is just possible that the Living Creatures also join in that hymn.
IV. 10-11.] THEIR DOXOLOGY 133
heavenly representatives of the faithful in their twofold aspect as ,
priests and kings.
It is, of course, possible that the Jewish character of the
Elders may persist in our text : but it is not improbable that for
our author the Elders have become the heavenly representatives
of the faithful, all of whom are priests, i. 6. The risen martyrs
are both priests and kings, xx. 6. This conception presents no
difficulty, seeing that every man had his guardian angel,
Acts xii. 15 ; Tob. v. ; Targ. Jer. on Gen. xxxiii. 10; Chag. i6 a ;
Ber. 6o b , and particularly "the little ones," Matt, xviii. 10.
This phrase has in Matthew a secondary meaning, " the weaker
brethren in the faith." The Elders, therefore, may be the
heavenly representatives of the whole body of the faithful.
10. |3aXoG<nr Toug ore<|>diyous auraij evwirtoj TOU 0p6Vou. For this
act of homage familiar in the East, Wetstein compares Tacitus,
Ann. xv. 29, "Placuit Tiridaten ponere apud effigiem Caesaris
insigne regium ... ad quam(sc. effigiem Neronis) progressus Tirid-
ates. . . sublatum capitidiademaimaginisubjecit/ and Eichhorn,
Plutarch, Lucull. p. 522, Tiy/aai/^s TO SiaS^/xa rrjs /ce<aAr)s d^eAo-
i/os eflr/Kc Trpo roil/ TroSojv : and in the Jalkut Shimoni, i. fol. 55 b ,
" omnes reges orientis et occidentis venerunt ad Pharaonem.
Cum vero Mosen et Aaronem in coelesti splendore viderent, tremor
ipsorum in eos incidit et sumserunt coronas de capitibus suis
eosque adoraverunt." Cicero, Pro P. Sestio, 27: " Hunc Cn.
Pompeius, quum in suis castris supplicem abjectumque vidisset
erexit, atque insigne regium, quod ille de suo capiti abjecerat
reposuit.
11. aiog et, 6 Kupiog KCU 6 0eo<; TQJJUOV,
Xa|3eii> TTjy 86ai> Kai T^V TIJATJI Kai TTJK Sumjjuy,
on au eKTicrag TO, irdi Ta,
Kal 8101 TO 0\T)|ULa aou ^aai [xal KTta0T]aai ].
et 6 Kupiog Kal 6 0eog ^jj-aii . The nominative is used
here as the vocative: see Blass, Gram. p. 87; Moulton 2 , 71.
It is possible that the Seer has chosen this title in reference to
God in contrast to Domitian s blasphemous claim to be called
Dominus et Deus noster (Suet. Domitian, 13).
The phrase a^tos . . . Aa/3etv recurs in v.xj, 12. In i Enoch
such doxologies are frequent, and have, as a rule, a close con
nection with their respective contexts: cf. ix. 4, 5, xxii. 14,
xxv. 7, xxxvi. 4, xxxix. 9-13, xlviii. 10, Ixxxi. 3, Ixxxiii. u,
Ixxxiv., xc. 40. The same rule can be traced in the doxologies
of our text: cf. v. 12, 13, vii. 12.
As the doxology of the Cherubim in 8 has for its theme
the holiness, omnipotence, and everlastingness of God, i.e. the
essential nature of God, so the doxology of the four and twenty
1 34 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [iV. 11-V. 1.
Elders has for its theme the glory of God in His works ; for that
all things were created by Him.
Tt]i> So^cty KCU Ti]v TijJiT)i> K<xl TT]i> Suyafui/. Cf. I ChrOH. xvi.
27-28.
8ia TO 0e\T]jjid aou r\<ra.v [KCU eKTio-0-rjo-ai ]. Cf. Ps. Cxlviii. 5,
" He commanded, and they were created." i Enoch Ixxxi. 3,
" I blessed the great Lord, the King of glory for ever, in that He
hath made all the works of the world." Our text is certainly
difficult. We should naturally expect cKriarO qa-av KOI rjarav. The
various corrections in the critical footnotes show how deeply
this difficulty was felt. But none of them is helpful. If any
change of the text were admissible, it would be best to read
eKTia-Orjvav /ecu ^crav, Or to Omit /ecu KT6(r$?7<rav with A as an
explanatory gloss added by a scribe who misunderstood rja-av,
Then we should have
" For Thou didst create all things,
And because of Thy will they had their being "
i.e. to Thy will they owed their existence.
But, if the text is correct, there are two possible interpreta
tions, i. Because of Thy will they had their being (i.e. existed
in contrast to their previous non-existence) and were created.
So Diisterdieck. But this involves an awkward inversion of
thought. 2. " Because of Thy will they existed (in the world of
thought) and were (then by one definite act) created." So also
practically Swete, who writes : " The Divine Will had made the
universe a fact in the scheme of things before the Divine Power
gave material expression to the fact."
But I confess that the text of A seems best, and from it all
the other variations can be explained.
With the idea in our text we might contrast contemporary
Jewish speculation. According to 2 Bar. xiv. 18, Ezra viii. i,
44, the world was created on account of man ; but this was only
a loose way of putting the idea which is definitely expressed
elsewhere, to the effect that the world was created on account of
Israel, 4 Ezra vi. 55, 59, vii. n; Ass. Mos. i. 12, or rather on
account of the righteous in Israel, 2 Bar. xiv. 19, xv. 7, xxi. 24.
Such was the belief of the Rabbis : see Weber, Jud. Theol?
208 sq.
CHAPTER V.
i. Contents and Authorship.
As in iv. we have the vision of Him that sitteth on the
throne, to whom the world and all that is therein owe their
V. 1-2.] DICTION AND IDIOM 135
being, in v. we have the vision of the Lamb into whose hands
the destinies of the world and all that is therein are committed.
By His victory once and for all (evuc^o-ci/, v. 5, and us eo-^ay/xevov,
v. 6) He has shown Himself equal to this task, for whose
achievement none else could be found. And as in iv. the
Living Creatures praise God as the All Holy, the Almighty and
the Everlasting One, and the Elders fall down and worship Him
as the Creator of all things, in v. 8 sqq. first the Living Creatures
and the Elders fall down and worship the Lamb who through His
redeeming death had won the right to carry God s purposes into
effect, next (i i sq.) the countless hosts of angels praise the Lamb
as God, and finally (13) the whole world of created things in
heaven, in earth and under the earth joins in a universal burst of
thanksgiving to Him that sitteth upon the throne and to the
Lamb. Thus as in iv. God the Creator is the centre of worhip,
in v. it is God the Redeemer, who thereby carries God s pur
poses into fulfilment, while the chapter closes in the joint adora
tion of Him that sitteth on the throne and of the Lamb.
As regards the authorship, every clause of it is from the hand
of our author except two glosses in 8, i T, which are intended to
be explanatory and supplementary, but are both in conflict with
the thought of the writer. Whilst the diction and the idiom
( 2), which latter is not so pronounced as in the earlier chapters,
are clearly those of our Seer, there is not an idiom or phrase that
is not his.
2. Diction and Idiom.
There can be no doubt as to this chapter being from the
hand of our author.
(a) Diction.
2. a.yye\ov icryypov I again in X. I, xviii. 21. V (jxoj fj jmeydXT] :
again in xiv. 7, 9, 15. Without Iv in v. 12, vi. 10, vii. 2, TO,
viii. 1 3, x. 3, etc. Contrast the non-Johannirie Iv Icrxvpa <j>wrj
in xviii. 2.
3. UTTOK<TW. Cf. 13, vi. 9, xii. i. Elsewhere in NT 7
times.
4. atos eupe 0T]. For eiipetv with part, or adj. cf. ii. 2, iii.
2, xx. 15.
6. dpiaov. This word is applied to Christ 29 times in our
author and not elsewhere in the N.T., where d/xvos is used
(Fourth Gospel, Acts, i Pet).
9. aSouaii/ u$>r\v K.a.ivf]v : cf. xiv. 3, xv. 3. eoxJxvyTig : cf. 6,
12, xiii. 8. T|YP a(ra s : cf. xiv. 3, 4. tv TU> ai[A<m aou : cf. i. 5
<|>uXT]s K. Y^aaTjs K. Xaou K. eOi/ous : cf. vii. 9, xi. 9, xiii. 7,
xiv. 6.
10. jBaaiXeicu KCU lepeis : cf. i. 6. |3a<nXeuou<ni em rtjs yi]S .
136 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [V. 1.
cf. xx. 4, e/SacriAevo-ai . . . ^tXta en? both statements referring
to the Millennial Kingdom. Contrast xxii. 5.
12. ai6V OTII> TO apviov . . . XajSeiy T. SuVajxii : cf. xi. 17,
t\Tf]<pa<s T. Swa/ziv. TTJK SuVajjuy K. irXouTo^ /crA.. For the same
seven, save in the case of TrXovrov, cf. vii. 1 2.
13. TW Ka0T]jaeV<i) eirl r. 0p6Va> K. TW dpyia). Cf. VI. 16, vii. IO,
xiv. 4, xxii. i, 3.
() Idiom.
I. TOU Ka0Tju.eVou em T. 0p6Vou. Cf. 7, 13, and the note on
iv. 2, for the unique use of these phrases in our author.
4. eKXaioy. The past imperfect is not frequently used in our
author, and its use is very forcible (except in v. 14): cf. i. 12,
ii. 14, v. 4, 14, vi. 8, 9, x. 10, xix. 14, xxi. 15.
5. els CK. Seven times elsewhere in our author : twelve times
in Fourth Gospel : ten times in rest of NT.
6 XeW 6 IK TYJS <j>u\T]s. For this use of the art. connecting the
noun with a following phrase, cf. i. 4, ii. 24, viii. 3, 9, xi. 19, xiv.
17, xvi. 3, xix. 14, xx. 8, 13.
6. eV JJUEOTW . . . iv JJUEO-W = p3i . . . p3 = "in the midst of
. . . and" a Hebraism.
<&s eo-^ay/j.eVoi : A frequent idiomatic use of ws in our
author, apviov . . . t^w. This breach of concord in gender
frequent in our author. Cf. weu jAara . . . direoraXfAeVoi, which
follows.
7. Y]X0ei> Kal eiXir](f>ei/ : cf. viii. 3, xvii. i, xxi. 9 for this
Semiticism, which does not occur in the Fourth Gospel. Introd.
to II.-III. 2 (a), p. 39. It has been pointed out that the use
of the perfect etA^a is characteristic of our Seer.
II. 6 dpiOjjios . . . Xe yorres. Another instance of this breach
of concord common in our author occurs in 13, irav KTio-pa . . .
Aeyovras.
13. rd tv auToIs iran-a. Tras precedes its noun in our author
except here and in viii. 3, xiii. 12.
V. 1. Kal etSoy eiu TTJI 8eiai> TOU Ka9ir]fAei Ou em TOU 0poyou
f3i|3Xioi> YcypafijAekoy Ko-wOey Kal omaOev, KaTea^payio-jJieVoy ox^paYtaik
eiTTd. For the construction CTTI rrjv Se^tav compare xx. i, eVt ryv
X^pa. The book -roll lies on the open palm of the right hand,
not in the hand.
Opinions are divided as to i. the form, and ii. the contents
of the /3t/?Atov.
i. The form. (a) Grotius (ii. 1160), Zahn (Einleit.\\. 596),
Nestle (Text. Crit. of NT, 333), take it to be not a roll but a
codex ; for (i) it is said to be CTTI rty SeiW. Had it been a roll
it would have been ev rrj Seia. This argument is already
answered above. (2) "The word used for opening the Book is
(v. 4) and not, as in the case of rolls,
V. 1.] THE SEVEN-SEALED BOOK
or avoLTrTvo-crew." But this is not so. avol^ai is used in Isa.
xxxvii. 1 4 (rji/oi^ev avro = TO /?t/3A.tW) as a rendering of BHB, the
word which Ezekiel uses in ii. 10, and which the LXX renders
there by avtiXrjcrtv.
avowal is used of unrolling a book also in Luke iv. 17, where
ND correct the di/otas into avcnrrv^, against ABL and most
Versions. In Luke iv. 20 7rrv^a<s is used of rolling up the book.
Nestle further adds : " That it was not written on the outside is
also shown by the fact that it was sealed with seven seals, the
purpose of which was to make the reading of the book impossible.
Not till the seventh seal is broken is the book open and its
contents displayed." But the idea in our text is that with the
opening of each successive seal a part of the contents of the
book-roll is disclosed in prophetic symbolism. Hence these
scholars read ycypaju/xevoy tawOev KOLL OTrtcr^ev Kar(r<j!)payt(r/xei/ov,
taking the two latter words together. To this it has been
reasonably rejoined that such a description is superfluous,
as a roll is never written on the outside and sealed on the
inside.
(b) Spitta, 281, supposes that the ftiftXCov is a book consisting
of parchment leaves, each pair of which is fastened with a seal.
(c) But with most scholars we take the fiifiXiov to be a book-
roll. In Ezek. iii. i, Ezra vi. 2 this is simply called Kc^aXt?
(rfeio), in Ezek. ii. 9 and Ps. xxxix. 8 K<f>a\ls fitftXtov (r6jD
"iBD). The roll was 67mr#oypa</>ov, written on the back also as
in Ezek. ii. 10. In the latter passage it is described as " written
before and behind" yeypa^uyxeW . . . TO. efj,irpo<j-0v /cat TO. oVi trw
(TinKl D^B rairo), but in our text as " written within and with
out" yeypa/x/Aeyov 0xo$ei/ KOU oTncrOev. This may be due, as
Bousset suggests, to the fact that in Ezekiel the roll is open, but
that in our text it is closed. On the use of such o-n-LaOoypa^a
amongst the Greeks and Romans, Wetstein quotes Lucian, Vit.
Auct. 9, rj Trrjpa Se croi Oepfjiwv lorcu ^crr-r] KCU OTno-Ooypaffxav
/?i/3A<W; Juvenal, i. 6, "Summi plena jam margine libri scrip-
tus et in tergo necdum finitus Orestes"; Martial, viii. 62,
" Scribit in aversa Picens Epigrammata charta" t
ii. The contents. (a) According to Huschke (Das Buck mit
den sieben Siege In, 1860), Zahn (pp. at.), and J. Weiss 1 (Die
Offenb. 57 sqq.) the Book represents a Will or Testament relating
to the Old and New Testament Covenant. A will, according to
the Praetorian Testament, in Roman law bore the seven seals of
the seven witnesses on the threads that secured the tablets or
1 A colleague of J. Weiss (op. cit. p. 57, n. 3) has shown that it is possible
to construct a roll in which the seals fastened to the cords can be so fastened
that with the removal of one a part of the roll can be unrolled, while the rest
remains secure.
1 38 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [v. i.
parchment (see Smith, Diet, of Greek and Roman Ant.> p. 1117).
Such a Testament could not be carried into execution till all the
seven seals were loosed.
The Seal visions are, therefore, on this view only signs of the
end, the " woes " of the Messiah. But, if this view were right,
then our author could not have omitted the most significant part
of the whole procedure the opening of the Book itself after the
undoing of the seventh seal.
(b) The roll contains the divine decrees and the destinies of
the world. It deals with the things a /*eAA ycvecrOat. With the
loosing of each seal a part of its contents is revealed in symbolic
representation. In other words, the Book is a prophecy of the
things that fall out before the end. Owing to the solemnity
with which it is introduced and the importance attached to it by
the Seer, it should contain all the future history of the world
described in the Apocalypse to its close ; and so Nicolas de Lyra,
Corn, a Lap., Bengel, Diisterdieck, Bousset, etc., explain. This
appears to be the right view, though it is hard to reconcile this
view with the rest of the Apocalypse.
That this Book is sealed with seven seals shows that the
divine counsels and judgments it contains are a profound secret
(cf. x. 4, xxii. 10 ; Isa. xxix. n ; Dan. viii. 26, xii. 4, 9), which
can only be revealed through the mediation of the Lamb.
In apocalyptic literature we have conceptions closely related
to that of the Book in our text. It recalls the thought expressed
by the phrase "the heavenly tablets" (al TrXa/ces TOV ovpavov)
which is found in the Test. XII Patriarchs, the Book of Jubilees,
and in i Enoch. The conception underlying this phrase is to
be traced, partly to Ps. cxxxix. 16; Ex. xxv. 9, 40, xxvi. 30,
where we find the idea that heaven contains divine archetypes of
certain things that exist on earth; partly to Dan. x. 21, where a
book of God s plans is referred to ; but most of all to the growing
determinism of thought, for which this phrase stands as a
concrete expression. The conception is not a hard and fixed
one: in i Enoch and Test. XII Patr. it wavers between an
absolute determinism and prediction pure and simple. In the
following passages as in our text the heavenly tablets deal with
the future destinies of the world in i Enoch Ixxxi. i sq., xciii.
I _2, cvi. 19, cvii. i ; and the blessings in store for the righteous
ciii. 2. They are apparently called the Book of the Angels,
ciii. 2 (gm, /?), and are designed for the perusal of the angels, cviii.
7, that they may know the future recompenses of the righteous and
the wicked. Here there is a divergence between the Book in
our text and the books in Enoch. The Book in our text is
closed, and can only be opened by the Lamb. Those in Enoch
are open to be perused by the angels. Notwithstanding the
V. 1-6.] TO BE OPENED ONLY BY THE LAMB 139
ideas are closely related. See my notes on i Enoch xlvii. 3 and
Jub. iii. 10.
2. KCU etSoy ayyeXoi/ i<T\vpbv K-qpuorowTa iv 4>wrfj jxeydXY]. A
"strong angel" is referred to again in x. i, xviii. 21. The
strength of the angel is dwelt upon, as his voice penetrates to
the utmost bounds of heaven and earth and Hades. The
phrase ev </>(ov^ ^jdXy (see note on x. 3) recurs in xiv. 7, 9, 15 ;
Kypva-crovra iv is a Hebraism.
TIS aios dyoiai TO |3i|3Xic> ical XG<rai T&S a^payiSas auTou.
aios here = iKavos. Matt. viii. 8 : cf. 2 Cor. ii. 16, vrpos ravra rts
iKavos; In John i. 27 it is combined with u/a. The "worthi
ness " (d|ioT7/9) is the inner ethical presupposition of the ability
(tKcu/or^s) to open the Book. In avolai KOL Xvo-ai there is a
hysteron proteron^ or else we may take A-ucrai as defining more
nearly the preceding word avoi^ai.
3. KCU ouSclg eSumTO iv TW oupacu ouSe eiu, TTJS y^S ouSe UTTO-
icdTW TT]S yf]S ayoL^ai TO |3t3Xto^ ou8e jSXeTreiv auTo. Our author
uses tSvvaTo, never ZSwijOr]. In the whole sphere of creation
none was worthy to open the Book. This threefold division
is found already in Ex. xx. 4 (cf. xx. 1 1 ; Ps. cxlvi. 6), though in
an earlier and different form : "that is in the heaven above, or
that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the
earth." This latter agrees exactly with the Babylonian division
of the world into heaven and earth and water (apsu = water
under and around the earth : see Zimmern, K.A.T? ii. 350, 615),
each of which had its own god. In Ex. xx. 4 the Babylonian
polytheism has of course disappeared, though the cosmic division
has survived. But, inasmuch as there has been a great eschato-
logical development between Ex. xx. 4 and the time of our
Apocalypse, the third division has become synonymous with
Hades. This appears clearly in Phil. ii. 10. On a fourfold
division of creation see note on 13.
4. KCU eKXaiov iroXu, OTI ouSels au>s eupeOrj dcoifai TO j3i|3Xioi
ouTe pXeireii auTo. The Seer began to weep unrestrainedly
because no being in creation was found worthy to open the
Book. Others think that his weeping was due to his fear that
the hoped for revelation would now be withheld, as it depended
on the opening of the Book.
5. Kal els IK TWI/ irpeo-jSuTe pwi/ Xeyci JAOI MTJ KXate* I8ou eraiarjo-ei
6 Xewv 6 CK TTJS <{>uXT)s louSa, r\ pia AaueiS, ayoiai TO |3i|3XioK ica!
Tots eiTTa a<f>payi8as auTou. el? CK is found twelve times in the
Fourth Gospel and eight times in the Apocalypse. One of the
Elders here, as again in vii. 13, intervenes, as elsewhere do other
angels, x. 4, 8 sqq., xvii. i, xix. 9, xxi. 9, xxii. 8, in order to inform
or guide the Seer. ^ ^Ame: cf. John xx. 13. The actual phrase
is used by Christ in Luke vii. 13, viii. 52.
THE REVELATION OF St. JOHN [V. 5-6.
I8ou eyiKTjcrei/. The ioov serves to introduce vividly the scene
represented in the next verse. eViV^crei/ is to be taken here, as
always in the LXX and the N.T., absolutely. It states that once
and for all Christ has conquered : cf. iii. 21, o>s Kayo> eVuayo-a, and
the object of this conquest was to empower Him to open the
book of destiny and carry the history of the world throughout its
final stages. Thus the di/ot<u is to be taken as an infinitive of
purpose. The victory has been won through His death and
resurrection. The Victor is designated as 6 AeW 6 e/c rfjs <vAr)s
lovoa in dependence on Gen. xlix. 9, O-KU/XVOS AeWros lovSa . . .
dvaTrecrwv eKoijjurjOrjs us A.eaii , and as rj pta Aauei S in dependence
On Isa. XI. I, e^eXevo-crat pa/?Sos e/c T^S /HI?S (W.3K)) lea-am, KOL
av6o<s K rfjs pi&js (VBHEfo) avaftrjo-eTcu, and xi. IO, KOL eo-rat ev rrj
rj^pa Kwy fj pta (&"W) rov lecrorcu. The first passage was
interpreted Messianically in the ist cent. B.C., as we see from
the Test. Judah xxiv. 5, and the second in Rom. xv. 12. Since
Isa. xi. 4, "He shall smite the earth with the rod of his
mouth," is applied to the Messiah in Pss. Sol. xvii. 39, we may
conclude that Isa. xi. i-io was interpreted Messianically in pre-
Christian times. In xxii. 16 of our text the author returns
to these designations of the Messiah : eyo> ei/U ^ pia KOL TO
yevos Aavet 8.
6. KCU et8oi> e^ fxeaw TOU Qpovou K.OI TWI> rccro-dpwj wwy Kal e^
jjiecrw TWI^ Trpea|3uTe p(>i> apviov l<rrt]Ko<s a>s eo-^ayjAeVov. The position
of the Lamb, in the scene depicted, depends on the rendering
assigned to ev ^eVo) . . . eV /xeo-w. i. The text may mean
" between the throne and the four Living Creatures (on the one
side) and the Elders (on the other)." In this case the Greek
would be Hebraistic = pi pa. The LXX constantly translate in
this way the Hebrew preposition literally, and not idiomatically,
as in Gen. i. 4, 7, 18, iii. 15, ix. 16, 17, etc. On this view the
Lamb would stand somewhere between the inner concentric
circle of the Living Creatures and the outer concentric circle
of the twenty-four Elders. 2. Or the two phrases eV /xeo-w may
be parallel and emphasize the fact that the Lamb stood in the
centre of all the beings above named. In favour of the latter
view may be cited vii. 17, TO apviov TO ova yuecrov TOV Opovov.
If this view is correct it would imply that the Lamb is stand
ing in immediate closeness to the throne. But v. 7, K<U
rjX.Ov KCU tXr/0i/, is against this. Accordingly the text seems
to teach that the Lamb, when first seen by the Seer, appeared in
the space between the circles of the Living Creatures and the
twenty-four Elders.
The term apviov as applied to our Lord is peculiar to the
Apocalypse elsewhere in the N.T. it is d/xi/o? that is used : John
V. 6.] VISION OF THE LAMB 14!
i. 29, 36; i Pet. i. 19; Acts viii. 32. This last passage is a
quotation from Isa. liii. 7? <*>s irpofiarov e?rt o-^ayyjv r/x^ 7 ? K0t ^
dynvos Ivavriov TOV KfCporros avTov dc/xoros. That this passage was
interpreted of Christ by the first Christians is shown by Acts
viii. 34sqq. The prophet applies it to himself in Jer. xi. 19, eyo>
St w? apviov O.KO.KOV dyo/xevov TOV OvecrOai ov/c eyvoov KT\. The
word is used twenty-nine times in twelve chapters of the Apoca
lypse as a designation of the crucified Messiah. Vischer (38-46)
has tried to show that apviov is an interpolation in the present
passage as well as throughout the rest of the Apocalypse, but
unsuccessfully save perhaps in xiii. 8. So far, however, is Vischer
from being right as to the present passage, that with J. Weiss
(p. 57) the conceptions of the Book and the Lamb are to be
regarded as "the kernel of the Vision." d>s lo-^ay^vov, i.e. as
though slain in sacrifice and still retaining the appearance of
death wounds on its body. These wounds are tokens that
the sacrifice has been offered. The Lamb is represented ws
eV</>ay/x,eVov, because in very truth He is not dead but alive :
cf. i. 1 8, ii. 8.
exw^ Kcpara eirrd. The horn first of all symbolizes power in \
the O.T. Cf. Num. xxiii. 22; Deut. xxxiii. 17; i Sam. ii. i;
i Kings xxii. n ; Ps. Ixxv. 4, Ixxxix. 17, etc. Next it marks kingly "i
dignity, Ps. cxii. 9, cxlviii. 14; Zech. i. 18; Dan. viiT~y, 20, viii.
3 sqq. ; Apoc. xii. 3, xiii. i, ii, xvii. 3. In i Enoch xc. 9 the
Maccabees are symbolized by "horned lambs " : " And I saw till
horns grew upon those lambs " : and in Test. Joseph xix. 8 sq.,
one of this family is designed under the term d/Ws, which
destroys the enemies of Israel. While the idea underlying apviov
o)s eo-^ay/xeVov is clearly derived from Isa. liii. 7, it is very
probable that the conception underlying e^wv Kepara iirra is
sprung from apocalyptic tradition. It is probable also that it is
the Jewish Messiah that is designated d/xvds in the above passage
of the Test. Joseph ; and such is certainly the case in i Enoch
xc. 37, "And I saw that a white bull was born with large horns."
"The Lamb," then, "with the seven horns" is the all-powerful
(observe the perfect number " seven " is used) warrior and king.
Cf. Matt, xxviii. 18 ; John xvii. i, 2. Over against the Christ so
represented we have His counterpart in the Beast with the seven
heads in xiii. i.
KCU 6<j>0a\p,ous eirrd, 01 eionv TO, [cirra] ir^eufiara TOV 6eou direorT-
aXfx^oi eis nrdoray ri]v yr\v. Omniscience appears to be here
attributed to the Lamb. The possession of the seven eyes has
this import : for these belong to Yahweh in the O.T. : cf. Zech.
iv. IO, eTTTO. OVTOI 6(f>OaXfJLoi LO~iV Kvpiov ot eTTi/S/VeVovres (D^ppi^ D)
eTTt, Traa-av rrjv yrjv. The clause ot eto-iv . . . yfjv has been
rejected by Weyla^d, Spitta (p. 67), Volter, iv. p. 12, Wellhausen
142 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [V. 6.
(p. 9) as an explanatory addition. Its removal would certainly
make the interpretation of the text easier. But there is no
objection to this clause as coming from our author s hand : cf. iii. i.
In iv. 5, on the other hand, we found that alike the verse structure
of iv. 1-8 and the order of the words were against the originality
of iv. 5 b (?), but not against its insertion, when he edited his
visions as a whole. Furthermore, since aTreo-raX/x-eVoi or aTrea-raX.-
/jitva seems to be a very loose but independent translation of
Q^DI^D (LXX, eTrt^AeTrovTe?), and since we have already found
that our author does not depend for his knowledge of the
Hebrew on the LXX, this forms a presumption in favour of his
authorship of this clause. Accordingly recognizing its origin
ality, we should next determine the true text. This, we fear,
cannot be done with any certainty. The authorities are divided
between aTrccrraX/zeVoi, aTrecrraX/xeva, and o,7ro(rreXXo/xej/a. This
word could be used either of the " eyes " or of the " spirits,"
and hence gives us no help, though the original passage in
Zechariah is in favour of connecting the words 6</>$aXjuW? and
B. Weiss (p. 442) decides definitely for this view and accord
ingly reads aTreo-raX/xe i/oi. On the other hand, the context is
rather in favour of connecting Trvev/xaro, and the participle. In
this case Bousset thinks we should read dTroo-reXXo/xej/a or
aTrea-raX/xei/a. But there is no necessity whatever for so doing.
Such a construction as 7n/ev/u.ara . . . aTreo-raX/xej/ot is quite a
normal one in our author, however abnormal in itself. The
seven eyes are here identified with the seven spirits of which the
Lamb is Lord and Master, iii. i. The conception of spirits
being sent forth as the agents of Divine Providence is easier of
comprehension than that in Zech. iv. 10.
On the probable origin and meaning of the eyes and " spirits "
in this connection, see note on p. 12 sq.
It is quite impossible to conceive a figure embodying the
characteristics of the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of
David, and the seven-horned Lamb with seven eyes. The
Apocalypse deals with ideas, not with plastic conceptions. The
terms used have become for the most part purely symbolical and
metaphorical. They have been derived from various sources.
Taken by themselves and separately, they are but one-sided and
partial representatives of the Messiah of our author. Without
any fear of seeming contradiction he combines apparently in one
concrete whole these various conceptions, in order to embody
fitly the Messiah of his faith and visions. If we confine ourselves
to the ideas, and ignore the conflicting plastic manifestations, we
shall find no difficulty. The Lion of the tribe of Judah is the
one strong member par excellence of this tribe; the Root of
V. 6-7.] THE LAMB TAKES THE BOOK 143
Jesse, 1 is, of course, the plant springing from the root of Jesse (cf.
Isa. liii. 2; Deut. xxix. 18).
Thus in xxii. 16 r] pia and TO yei/os are practically synonym
ous. These two expressions designate in tradition the expected
Messiah of the tribe of Judah. When we combine with these
the further one, "the Lamb with seven horns and seven eyes,"
we have a being possessing full power and omniscience the
supreme ruler under God descended from the tribe of Judah.
Quite another idea underlies the phrase apviov ws eo-^ay/xevoi/.
As in the former expressions supreme power and omniscience are
indicated, by this latter it is supreme self-surrender and self-
sacrifice. But there is no contradiction between the ideas, how
ever it may be with their symbols ; for this absolute self-sacrifice
which has already been undergone, as our author indicates, has
become the avenue to supreme power and omniscience.
Such appears to have been the meaning attached to the con
ception of the Lamb by our author. But some of the elements
in the conception may possibly, as Gunkel (Zum Verstdndniss
NT, 60 sqq.) and Bousset (259) point out, go back to an
ancient heathen myth. One such element is the opening of the
sealed Book. Magical books, magical rings, magical oaths and
formulas were everywhere current in the East. He who could
make himself master of such books or oaths 2 became to a great
degree lord of the universe, and a new deity. By virtue of his
magical power, however won, he has power to loose the seals of the
book of destiny, to bring the old world to a close and enter on
the sovereignty of the new, and thus be enthroned among the
ancient deities, as Marduk in the Babylonian creation myth.
Gunkel and Bousset assume the currency of some such heathen
myth which was subsequently adopted into Judaism and from
Judaism into Christianity. However this may be, our author
has no consciousness of the existence of this myth, even if in
the above form it ever existed. Some elements of the picture,
however, do appear to go back to a heathen original.
7. Kal ^XOej/ Kal et\T]<f>ei CK T fjs 8eids TOU KaO^jxeVou ITU TOU
0p6Vou. In rjXBev /cat eiA^ev we have a Semiticism (cf. viii. 3)
not found in the Fourth Gospel ; cf. viii. 3, xvii. i, xxi. 9. See
Dalman s Words of Jesus, p. 21. But the rjXOev may not be a
mere Semiticism, but may describe the actual advance of the
Lamb from the place where He appeared between the Living
Creatures and the Elders to the throne of God. Weiss, followed
1 In Jer. xix. 19 the expressions "lamb" and "tree" are applied to the
same subject, i.e. Jeremiah.
2 Compare the magical oath in I Enoch Ixix. 15 sqq., by virtue of which
the heavens were made fast, the sea created, the earth founded on the
waters, and all the planets and stars kept in their courses. Michael the
greatest of all the angels and the patron of Israel had the charge of this oath v
144 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [V. 7-8.
by Bousset and Swete, takes the perfect eiAr/^ei/ as pointing to
the permanent results of the action. " Christ receives the revela
tion of the secrets of the future as an abiding possession." On
the other hand, Moulton (Gram. N.T. Greek, i. 145) and
Blass (p. 200) regard etX^ei/ as a genuinely aoristic perfect, as
well as the perfect in vii. 14, viii. 5, xix. 3, and probably in iii. 3,
xi. 17, ii. 27. Other examples are found in 2 Cor. ii. 13, i. 9,
vii. 5; Rom. v. 2 a ; Mark v. 15. It is characteristic of the
Apocalypse.
8-14. Adoration of the Lamb first by the Living Creatures
and the Elders, 10 ; next, by the countless hosts of angels, 1 1-12 ;
next, by all creation, 13; whereupon the Living Creatures say
"amen " and the Elders fall down and worship, 14.
8. Kal ore HXafJei TO |3ij3Xioi , rA rcaae/aa wa KCU ot eiKocri
Teacrapes irpeajSurepoi eireo-ar ei/wmoi/ TOU apiaou. Spitta (p. 67)
removes tTrecrav . . . d/ovi ov as a gloss, (i) because elsewhere not
the Living Creatures, but only the Elders fall down and worship.
But this is not so in xix. 4, and there is no reason why the
Cherubim in our author s view of them should not prostrate
themselves. (2) As the Elders had harps and censers in their
hands they could not fall down. But Hirscht (Apocalypse und
ihre neueste Kritik, p. 47) adduces the Egyptian picture, in
which Rameses ii. is represented as falling down before the sun-
god Amen-Ra, holding the offering in his left hand and a crozier
and a whip in his right (Lepsius, Aegypt. Wandgemdlde d.
KonigL Museen^, 1882, p. 26). (3) The falling down of the
Elders first takes place in v. 14. This prostration removes, as
Bousset points out, the difficulty alleged in (2). Besides, as
Hirscht states, ii seems to presuppose that the Living Creatures
are again standing, and the Elders are sitting on their thrones.
(4) Through the addition of the verb the following participles
are brought unsuitably into relation with the Living Creatures.
There is no more cogency in this objection than in the first.
The Living Creatures, i.e. the Cherubim, were simply angels, and
no longer bearers of the throne of God. As such there would
be nothing strange, even if the Cherubim were conceived as
holding harps and censers in their hands. But the latter belong
exclusively to the Elders. On the other hand, J. Weiss (p. 55)
would explain the clauses referring to the Elders as additions of
the final editor, as in iv. 4, v. 6, and would thus represent the
Living Creatures as holding the harps and censers. But though
iv. 4 appears to have been added by our author when re-editing
an earlier vision, there seem to be no adequate grounds for the
view of Weiss with regard to the other passages.
IXOI TCS IKCWJTOS KiOdpay Kal <f>idXas xP U(r <*S yejj.ou<ras Gup.iajj.aTOJi
[at etaiK al irpoaeuxai TWK dyiwf]. The words e^ovrcs l/caerros
V. 8.] WORSHIP OF THE LAMB 145
appear to refer only to the Elders, though, so far as the
grammar goes, the e^ovTes could refer to the TO. u>a taken
Kara o-w<ru>. Cf. CXCDI/ in iv. 7. But the office of the
Cherubim is not of a priestly nature, as we have already seen
above, whereas that of the Elders is (see note). They have
harps (cf. xiv. 2, xv. 2) and censers in their hands, and the
theme of their hymn is the self-sacrifice of the Lamb, by the
which He has won the salvation of His people chosen from every
race and tongue. The at refers to tfv/zia/zaVujv and not to <taA.as.
Its gender is to be explained by attraction from Trpoo-ev^ai. The
prayers of the saints^ are symbolized by the incense : Ps. cxl. 2,
KaTCvOvvOiqTw rj icpovwffl JAOV d>s flu/zta/xa CVCOTTIOV <rov. The aytoi
are those dedicated to God, i.e. the Christians; for so the
latter are frequently designated in the Apocalypse : cf. viii. 3, 4,
xi. 1 8, xiii. 7, 10, xiv. 12, xvi. 6, xviii. 20, xx. 9. Spitta (p. 67)
and Volter (iv., p. 13) bracketed the clause at ... dytW
as an explanatory gloss, and a wrong one to boot; for the
incense and the prayers are not identical. At most they can
be compared to incense. The gloss is due to a spiritualizing
of the idea in viii. 3, to the effect that prayer is the true incense
of heaven. This is no doubt a true idea, but it does not belong
to the Apocalypse. The true relation of prayer and incense in
our Book is given in viii. 3.
The office of presenting the prayers of the faithful before God,
which the gloss attributes to the Elders, is assigned to Michael
in Origen, De Prin. i. 8. i, and to the guardian angels in the
Apoc. Pauli, 7-10. In 3 Bar. xi., Michael descends to the
fifth heaven to receive the prayers of mankind. According to
the Apoc. Pauli, 7-10, the doors of heaven were opened
at a definite hour to receive these prayers. Judaism is the
source of these views, as we see by going back to an earlier
work, the Test. Levi iii. 5-6, where it is said that in the highest
heaven the archangels, of whom Michael is the chief, " minister
and make propitiation to the Lord for all the sins of the
righteous, Offering to the Lord ... a reasonable and a bloodless
offering." Next, in iii. 7, in the fifth heaven, is the order of
angels who present the prayers of the faithful to the archangels,
who in turn lay them before God. (See my edition with notes
in loc.) Cf. Tob. xii. i?, 15. Thus in our text (except in
viii. 3-5) the four and twenty Elders have definitely taken the
part assigned in many circles of Judaism to the Archangels,
if the gloss is a valid interpretation of the text. They present
before God the prayers of the saints, which they have probably
received from a lower order of angels. It is a priestly function,
as that of the Archangels in Test. Levi iii. 5-7 ; Origen, De
Orat. 1 1 on Tobit. In the O.T. and later Judaism, as I have
VOL. i. 10
146 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [V. 8-9.
shown in my notes on Test. Levi iii. 5, the angels acted as
intercessors for mankind. Bat in the face of viii. 3-5 the role
of the Elders can hardly be that of presenting the prayers of
the faithful, to God. They exercise priestly functions, it is true,
but their chief function is the praise of God and of the Lamb,
who has redeemed humanity.
9. Kttl aSoucriy wS^y K.aivr]v XeyovreS This Song is sung
exclusively by the Elders, who play on their harps to the
accompaniment of their song. "Heaven is revealed to earth as
the homeland of music " (C. Rossetti). The w8>) Kauvf) (ssnn "Vt^)
was originally a song of praise inspired by gratitude for new
mercies. As such it occurs six times in the Psalter: xxxii.
(xxxiii.) 3, xxxix. (xl.) 4, xcv. (xcvi.) i, xcvii. (xcviii.) i, cxliii.
(cxliv.) 9, cxlix. i. But in Isa. xlii. 10 the phrase has a fuller
content, corresponding to the deeper sense of " new things " in
xlii. 9. The one cycle of events is fulfilled, the other is about
to begin. However great the glories of things of old time, they
shall be dimmed by the splendour of things to come. To this
new cycle the new song belongs. Suddenly in our text the old
God-appointed Jewish dispensation, with its animal sacrifices and
racial exclusiveness, is brought to a close, and the new Christian
dispensation is initiated, as the "new song" declares, by the self-
sacrifice made once and for all (eVc/xxy^s) by the Lamb, and the
universal Church thereby established and drawn from every
people and nation and language. The continuous song (aSouo-iv)
is the note of continuous thankfulness and joy.
The Katvorr/s the newness in character, purity, and perma
nence of the New Kingdom is a favourite theme in the Apoca
lypse, and rightly : for from the beginning of and throughout
apocalyptic literature there had been a promise of a new world
and a new life. Although in earlier times the expected
world may have been in most respects merely a glorified repeti
tion of the world that then was, in later times the expectation
became transformed and a world was looked for that was new,
not as regards time (veos), but as regards quality (/catvos). And
so our Apocalypse, as closing the long development of Apoca
lyptic in the past, dwells naturally on this theme. The Seer
beholds in a vision the ovpavov KO.LVOV KOL yrjv Kauvyv and the
Itpova-aXrjfji Katvrjv the new universe created by God, who in the
vision declares tSou Katva TTOIW Trai/ra, xxi. 5, 2 (cf. iii. 12). Each
citizen, moreover, of this New Kingdom is to bear a new name
OVO/JLO. /catvov, ii. 17, iii. 12, and in praise of this kingdom the
Elders sins: the new song wS^v Katvrji/, and likewise the angels, xiv.
3, and the blessed company of the martyrs before the throne, xv. 2.
Kal di>oiai ras a^payiSas aurou,
V. 9.] BY THE CHERUBIM AND ELDERS
on eo-<f>dyir)9 *al TJyopaaas TW 6ew iv TW aifxart aou
CK Trdcnrjs 4>uXf)s Kal y\<jL>aar\<s Kal Xaou Kal eO^ous,
10. Kal eiroirjaas aurous TW 6ew TQJJLWI/ j3aorXeiai> Kal lepels
Kal {SaaiXeuouaiy eirl rfjs
o-<>d<r0ai is, as Swete points out, used to describe the death of
Christ in this Book (6, 9, 12, xiii. 8) in dependence on Isa. liii. 7,
u>s irpofiaTov 7rt cr(f>ayr)v rjx^j an< ^ tne death of the martyrs in
vi. 9, xviii. 24. dyopdav expresses the idea of salvation as one
of purchase. Christ has bought the faithful for God by the
shedding of His blood (cf. i Pet. i. 19). The power or sphere
from which the purchase sets free is not mentioned here. In
(xiv. 3 it is from the earth and its evils, and in a gloss) xiv. 4
from wicked men that they are withdrawn through the purchase.
dyopdeu> is a Pauline word, i Cor. vi. 20, vii. 23 ; 2 Pet. ii. i.
B. Weiss (p. 443) holds that the word points back to i. 5, so far
as the loosing of the bands of sin makes this possible, in order
that the redeemed may become ayioi.
Bousset is of opinion that the word suggests release from a
hostile power. In later ages many Christian theologians held
that Christ purchased His disciples from the devil by His death.
Iv TW curort aou. Here as in i. 5 ev = the Hebrew H, denoting
price : " at the cost of Thy blood."
CK Trcurrjs <f>u\T]s KT\. This expression does not attribute the
same universal scope to the redemptive power of Christ s death
as I John ii. 2, auros tAaoyxos ecrnv . . . Tre.pl o\ov TOV KOCT/AOV.
<J>U\T)S Kal Y^WCTOTQS Kal Xaou Kal eGi/ous. These four words
occur, but in different order, in v. 9, vii. 9, xi. 9, xiii. 7,
xiv. 6. In no two instances is the order the same. They recur
twice more, but not only in a different order but with ^ao-iAcvo-iv
instead of <J>vXal<s in x. ii, and o^Xot instead of <^>vXat in xvii. 15.
But this last occurs in a gloss. There is a similar enumeration
in 4 Ezra iii. 7, " Gentes et tribus, populi et cognationes " ( = IQvt]
Kal <f>v\ai, Xaol Kal cruyyeVeiai (?)). Nowthe source of all these is
ultimately the Book of Daniel, iii. 4, 7, 29, v. 19, vi. 25, vii. 14,
whether it be the Massoretic, Theodotion, or the LXX. In the
printed texts of the LXX it is found also in iii. 31, but it is to be
observed here that iii. 31-32 were borrowed by Origen from
Theodotion. Now, since the Massoretic has in all the above
passages KJ3B^1 N*?3X NJ9PV and Theodotion Xaot, <f>v\ai,
yXwcrcrai, it will become clear as we proceed that the enumera
tions in our text, which in every case consist of four members
and one of these members Wvos or #1/17, cannot be derived from
either the Massoretic text or Theodotion. On the other hand,
the LXX has ZQvos or Wvrj always as one member of the enumer
ations, and in iii. 4 there are four members in the enumeration
148 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [V. 9-11.
, Xaot /ecu yAaicrcrai. In the remaining
four passages iii. 2, 7, 29, vi. 25, only three are mentioned : in the
first three of these Wvv\ KOI <f>v\al KOL yAwcrorat (in various cases),
and in vi. 25, Wveari K. yAcocrtrats /cat ^copais. Here we observe
that, whereas Xaos is found in all the passages in the Apocalypse
and in Theodotion, it is found only once in the LXX (iii. 4).
Thus this list is more nearly related to the LXX than to the
Massoretic and Theodotion, but diverges also from the former.
Hence our text presupposes either the existence of a translation
differing both from the LXX and Theodotion though more akin
to the former, or the independent use of an older Aramaic text
of Daniel than that preserved in the Canon.
10. pootXcior Kul Upels KT\. On the expression ySao-tXeiW
KOL Upets see note on i. 6. The present /Sao-iAevouo-tv, which is
the harder reading, is also the right reading. It resumes the
idea in /ScunAcia and explains it. In the vision the Seer sees
the saints already reigning. Thus the expression is proleptic^
and refers primarily to the Millennial Kingdom in xx. Or
ftao-iXtvovcriv may, like oruKr/UjScrtu in ii. 27, be a Hebraism for
pao-iXcva-ovo-iv. Others explain it as preserving its natural sense
on the ground that the Church even then was reigning on earth,
and that all things were being put under her feet as under those
of her Lord: cf. Eph. ii. 6 ; i Cor. xv. 25. Not the Caesars,
but the persecuted Christians are the true kings of the earth.
But this sovereignty is not referred to here : it is only potential
and is not realized till xx. 4.
11. KCt! etSoy KCU -qKOLKTO, (JXOCT]! OyyfXtoV TToXXfij KUfcXb) TOU
Opofou [KCU Twy ^wwy KCU rdv Trpea|3uTep<oi/], ica! r\v 6 dpidfxos auTwv
(jLupidBes jmupiaBojy KCU x i ^ l( *^ S X l ^ lt ^ wi/ - The /cat eiSov intro
duces a new feature in the vision : see note on iv. i. Round
about the two smaller concentric circles of the highest angels,
the Seer sees and hears innumerable angelic hosts acclaiming
the Lamb with one voice.
I have bracketed KOI TWV o>on/ K. ran/ Trpeo-^repwt/ as a gloss.
Their special thanksgiving has already been recorded in 9-10 :
that of the countless hosts of the angels comes in 12 ; then the
thanksgiving of all creation. Further, when the various orders
of heavenly beings are mentioned, they are given in the follow
ing order : Living Creatures, Elders, angels ; or angels, Elders,
Living Creatures, according as the Seer s description proceeds
from the throne outwards, or vice versa. See note on iv. 4.
The order of the words ^vpiaSes . . . xiAiaSes is surprising, and
Bousset therefore brackets /xvpiaSes /Avpia&m/ K<U as an addition.
They are omitted by the Vulgate and Primasius. The com
bination is already found, but in its natural order, in i Enoch
xl. I, Ix. I, Ixxi. 8 = ^iXta8e? xiAiaScov Ka fivpiaSes ^ivptaSwv, and
V. 11-13.] BY THE ANGELS AND ALL CREATION 149
these passages may have been in the mind of our author. The
same combination is found also in Dan. vii. 10, though verbs
intervene : ^tXtat ^tXiaSe? eAemwpyow aura) /cat /xvpiat ^xvptaSes
Trapio-T^Keto-av avrw (Theodotion). For partial parallels, cf.
i Enoch xiv. 22; Ps. Ixvii. (Ixviii.) 18 (/x^/atoTrXao-iov, giXtaScs
fvOyvovvTw), Deut. xxxii. 30; Gen. xxiv. 60, and our text, ix. 16.
12. aios Ifrriv TO apviov TO eo-^ayjULeVoy Xapeiy Tr^ Suvajui
Kal irXouToy Kal orocjuai/ Kal lo~xui>
Kal TijxrjK Kal So^ay Kal euXoyiay.
The doxology is uttered either in recognition of the power
already possessed by the Lamb, or on its immediately impending
assumption by Him. The fact of this assumption is subse
quently referred to in xi. 17, eiXycfras TTJV Svvafiiv . . . *ai
In iv. 9, n there are only three predicates over against
four in v. 13, and seven in v. 12, vii. 12. Next, whereas in
iv. n, vii. 12 the article precedes each number of the ascrip
tion, here one article includes them all, as though they formed
one word. Again, the seven members of the ascription in our
text recur in vii. 12, though in a different order, except that for
TrXovros in v. 12 we find euxapio-ri a in vii. 12. The latter
doxology, moreover, is addressed to God, as also those in iv. 9,
ii. The septenary number may indicate completeness. Two
heptads of such titles of honour are found as early as i Chron.
xxix. n, 12, though each member does not always consist of
a single word, but in xxix. n of a clause in two instances, and
in three in xxix. 1 2. In the latter verse four of the members are
the same as those in our text, TrXovro? . . . 8oa . . . lo-^vs . . .
Swa/us (mua ... H3 ... TOD . . . "W). These are not the
renderings of the LXX. If our author made any use of i Chron.
xxix. n, 12 here, he did not use the LXX version of it.
Bousset points out that the seven members of the ascription
fall into two divisions of four and three : the four deal with the
power and wisdom that the Lamb assumes ; the three with the
recognition of the Lamb on the part of mankind. In this way
he accounts for the different order in v. 12 and vii. 12. Spitta
(285) thinks that the different order in the attributes in iv. n,
v. 12, vii. 12 is due to the wish of the writer to bring out more
fully the contrast between TO apviov TO eo-<ay/x/ov and the
attributes Swa//,is, TrAotrros, o-oqua, lo-^vs. Thereupon follow the
So ^a, rifjirj, evAoyia, which in the doxologies addressed to God,
however, are at the beginning.
13. Kal TTO.V KTiafAa o Iv TW oupayw Kal eirl rfjs y H 5
Kal iJTroK<XTa> TTJS yr]S Kal iv rfj daXaVar]
Kal Ta fv auTois Trarra, ^Kouaa Xeyorras.
I 50 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [V. 13.
Again the circle of the worshippers is extended, and on the
doxologies and thanksgivings of the Cherubim and Elders, and
the innumerable hosts of angels, follows the great finale pro
nounced by all creation.
Here the writer, who in 3 had given the usual threefold
division of creation, now gives a fourfold one. Since the inhabit
ants of heaven have already been fully (?) enumerated, we should
expect the mention of those in the air (ei/ r<3 ovpavw), on the earth,
and in the sea (cf. Ps. viii. 7-8) ; and this is actually the text of x,
some cursives, and two Versions, which omit vTro/caro) TT}S 7^5.
But the textual evidence strongly supports this clause, which
is, therefore, to be interpreted of the inhabitants of Hades, as it
cannot well admit of any other meaning. That the inhabitants
of Hades join in the doxology, shows the vast progress that
theology has made from O.T. times, when no praise of God
was conceived of as possible in Sheol : Ps. vi. 5, xxx. 9, Ixxxviii.
10-12; Isa. xxxviii. 18. This being the meaning of this clause,
what meaning are we to attach to o h TO> ov/oai/w? (a) If we follow
the interpretation suggested above, we have the birds of the air,
the men and the animals on the earth, the souls in Hades, and
the fish of the sea. This is a very unsatisfactory list. Other
explanations of o lv TO> oupai/w have accordingly been offered.
(b) Thus Corn, a Lap. has suggested that it refers to the sun,
moon, and stars. This is quite possible, since we know that the
Jews attributed a conscious existence to these luminaries,
i Enoch xviii. 13 sqq., and according to 2 Enoch xi. they belong
to the fourth heaven, (c) Or the clause may be taken as referring
to all the inhabitants of heaven except the Cherubim and the
Elders, who pronounce the amen on this doxology. (d) Or, finally,
the clause is to be taken resumptively as including all that went
before. In favour of this view it may be observed that at the
close of the enumeration in 13 we have another resumptive clause
embracing exhaustively all the creation of God (KCU TO, i/ avrois
Travra). Thus the universe of created things, the inhabitants of
heaven, earth, sea, and Hades, join in the grand finale of praise that
rose to the throne of God. Yet 14 might seem, but not necessarily,
to exclude from these the Cherubim and the Elders.
For a parallel resumptive expression cf. Mark xv. i, ol
dpYfepets fJLTa TU>V TrptcrftvTepwv KOL ypafji/LLarfotv KO.L oXov TO
<rvvc8piov. The phrase TO, iv avroi? Travra is already found in
Ex. xx. 1 1 ; Ps. cxlv. (cxlvi.) 6.
ev TTJ OaXdo-cTY). So N and various Versions. ri, cum gen. impos
sible here.
TW Ka0T]fxeVo) eirl TU Oporw ical TW dpvi w
r\ euXoyta KCU r\ TIJJ.T] ica! f\ 86a
Kal TO Kparos ets TOUS euwkas T&V
V. 13-14.] THE AMEN OF THE CHERUBIM 151
TW Ka9t][xeVa> em (see note On iv. 2) TW 6po^a> Kal TW dp into.
This conjunction of God and the Lamb, which recurs in vii. 10,
attests the advanced Christology of our author. The throne of
Both is one and the same, xxii. i, 3, iii. 21, and the worship
offered to Each is also one and the same : cf. vii. 12.
In this verse we have the climax of chaps, iv. and v. Chap,
iv. relates to God, and v. 1-12 to the Lamb; v. 13-14 to the
conjoined glory of God and the Lamb. The two doxologies
offered respectively by the Cherubim (iv. 9) and the Elders (iv. n)
dwell on the holiness, almightiness, and everlastingness of God,
and the manifestation of His glory in creation. The first two
doxologies in v. which are offered by the Cherubim or Living
Creatures and the Elders (v. 9-10), and by the innumerable hosts
of angels (v. 12), dwell on the redemption of the world by the
Lamb, and pronounce Him as worthy to rule it and to receive
the sevenfold attributes of God (cf. vii. 12). And now the climax
of the world s adoration has come, and the worship offered to God
in iv., and that to the Lamb in v. 1-12, are united in one great
closing doxology, in which all created things throughout the
entire universe acclaim together God and the Lamb, with praise
and honour and glory and power for ever and ever. The
doxology has four members, consisting of the last three attri
butes in the doxology in 12 together with one which is elsewhere
found only in the doxology in i. 6.
14. Kal T& reVaepa wa e Xeyoj Apji . It is fitting that the
Cherubim, the highest order of angels, should close the doxology
of all creation with the solemn d/xrjv of confirmation, as at the
beginning, iv. 8, they had pronounced the first doxology. Both
Cherubim and Elders join in this d/^rji/ in xix. 4. Cf. Deut.
xxvii. 15 sqq.
Amen is used in the Apocalypse in probably four senses.
i. The initial amen in which the words of a previous speaker are
referred to and adopted as one s own : v. 14, vii. 12, xix. 4, xxii. 20.
The earliest instances of this use are found in i Kings i. 36 ; Jer.
xxviii. 6, xi. 5. ii. "The detached Amen, the complementary
sentence being suppressed (Deut. xxvii. 15-26; Neb. v. 13)."
Such may be the use in v. 14 of our text. This amen was used
liturgically, in the time of the Chronicler, i Chron. xvi. 36 = Ps. cvi.
48 though not in the Temple service, when the response was
different, but in the services of the synagogue (Schiirer, GJ. V. n.
ii. 453-454, 458), whence the custom passed over to the Christian
Church (cf. i Cor. xiv. 16). This usage is vouched for by Justin
Martyr, Afol. i. 65, 6 Trapwi/ Xaos eTreu^/xet Xeycov A/x,7?j/, and later
by Jerome, iii. The final amen with no change of speaker, i.
6, 7. This use is frequent from the N.T. onwards, but not found
in the O.T, save in the subscriptions to the four divisions of the
152 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [V. 14.
Psalter, xli. 14, Ixxii. 18, Ixxxix. 52, cvi. 48. iv. See note on iii.
14. For other uses of this word see the article in Encyc. Bib.
i. 136 sq., by Professor Hogg, which I have drawn upon for the
above notes ; and that in Hastings D.B. JEN is rendered in the
LXX by yeVotro in the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalter, but
by d/ATp in the Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Apocrypha. (See
note on vac, d/x,?jv, in i. 7.)
With the doxology in i3 bc and the succeeding amen we should
compare I Chron. xvi. 36, e^Aoy^/xej/os Kvpios o Oeos IcrparyA. oVo rov
ataVos /cat ea>s TOV aicovos, /cat epet Tras 6 A.aos Afjirjv. That the
doxologies in the Psalter were in the mind of our writer will
become clearer when we come to xix. 4.
Swete well remarks in loc., " the whole passage is highly
suggestive of the devotional attitude of the Asiatic Church in the
time of Domitian towards the person of Christ. It confirms
Pliny s report: (Christianos) carmen Christo quasi deo dicere
secum invicem. " This was already remarked by Volter, Das
Problem d. Apok. p. 512, "Wenn Plinius an Trajan schreibt.
dass die Christen am Tag ihrer Zusammenkiinfte gewohnt seien,
carmen Christo quasi Deo dicere, so erinnert man sich dabei
. . . der Lobpreisung des Lammes in Apok. v. 13." Here the
Elders prostrate themselves before God and the Lamb, as in iv.
10 they had done before God.
APPENDIX.
Writers have dealt very variously with this chapter. Vischer,
54 sqq., Schmidt, 35, are obliged from their standpoint of an
original Jewish Apocalypse to reject v. 9-14, since the glorification
of the Lamb and His redemption of the Gentiles cannot appear
in such an Apocalypse. The former rejects also the words apviov
... 0)5 eo-<f>ayfjicvov in v. 6 and apviov in v. 8. Weyland, 148 sqq.,
from the same standpoint goes farther and assigns v. 6-14 to
the Christian redactor, and X. (in Z.A.T. W., 1887, No. i) is still
more drastic and regards v. 2 b , 3-6, 8-14 as derived from a
Christian redactor. Rauch, 79 sq., 121 sq., is content with
excising v. 9 b , 10, the explanatory relative sentences in v. 6, 8,
and the phrase /cat TW apviu in v. 13.
Even critics who start from the basis of a Christian Apoca
lypse remove v. 11-14. So Volter 2 , i. 156, ii. 27 sq., iii.
84-86, iv. 13 sq., 27, mainly on the grounds that the chron
ology is expressed only in general terms and takes no account
of the Lamb taking the Book and opening the seals, and that
He is set on equality with God. This addition he variously
assigns to a reviser of the year 129 or 114. In iv. 145 he
finds additions made by a redactor of Trajan s time, in v. 6 b
VI. 1-2.] THE FIRST SIX SEALS 153
because of the exalted view of the Lamb, and in v. 9 b because of
the contradiction existing between this universalistic conception
and vii. 1-8, and in v. io b where the final clause is added on the
basis of xx. 4, xxii. 5. Erbes, 50, 102, regards v. 11-14 as an
intrusion in their present context, and thinks that it stood
originally after xv. 2-4. Spitta, 280-287, maintains the integrity
of the chapter on the whole, but excises as additions of a redactor
the relative clauses in v. 6, 8, the final clause of v. 10, and i&ov
. . . avrov in v. 5, and eTrecrov . . . apviov in v. 8.
But no valid grounds exist for any such mutilations of the text
of this chapter or the preceding one, seeing that the ideas are so
closely wrought together and elaborated in a growing crescendo
(cf. closing note on v. 13), and that the diction and idiom are so
distinctively characteristic of our author. To the intrusion of
certain glosses in iv.-v. we have already drawn attention.
CHAPTER VI.
The first six Seals preliminary signs of the End.
i. Subject of this Section. This section gives an account of
the six Seals, which in the Gospels and in contemporary and
earlier Judaism were the Messianic woes or signs of the im
mediate destruction of the present world. The world in all its
phases subserves a moral end the training and disciplining of
the children of God. When this end is attained, i.e. when the
number of God s children is complete, 9-11, the present order of
things will be destroyed.
The approach of this consummation will be heralded by the
breaking up of political and social order, 1-8, and the partial
destruction of the present cosmic order, vi. 12-17, w ^l follow.
Our author thought that the time of the end was at hand ; for
he expected a universal persecution and a universal martyrdom.
But that hour had not yet come; for the roll of the martyrs
was still incomplete. Accordingly the cosmic woes in vi. 12-
vii. 3 are still future, and even when fulfilled, are partial and not
universal. 1 History has still some time to run, and the happen
ings of that time are mainly the theme of the rest of the
book.
2. The entire chapter is from our author s hand. Inde-
1 In the Gospels, Mark xiii., Matt, xxiv., Luke xxi., and analogous de
scriptions of the last times, these woes are to be literally and fully realized,
and so to be taken as the immediate heralds of the final judgment ; but in
our author s hands they have ceased to be the immediate heralds of the end,
and are to be realized nly partially.
154 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 2-3.
pendently of the fact that it forms an organic part of his work,
the diction and idiom are obviously his.
(a). Diction.
1. Kal elSoy, Seep. 106. r\voiev passim. TO dp^tor : used
twenty-seven times in our author, but not elsewhere in the N.T.
of Christ
2. Kal etSoK Kal i&ou : also in 5, 8 : see p. 106.
8. OdVaTos = Xoifjios, as in ii. 23. cSodrj aurois e|ouaia : cf. ix. 3,
xiii. 5, 7, ii. 26.
9. TWK ecr4>aY|j,eVwi> : cf. v. 6, 9, 12, xiii. 8, xviii. 24. Only
once in rest of N.T. 8i& T. X6yoi> T. 0eoG : cf. i. 2, note, 9, xii. n,
xx. 4. 8ia T. [xap-rupiai/ : cf. i. 2, note.
10. eKpaay <j>aH fj jxeydXY] : cf. vii. 2, 10, x. 3, xix. 17, etc.
6 ayi<>9 Kal dXrjOii os cf. iii. 7, note. Kpiyei9 K. eicSiKeLS . . . CK :
cf. xix. 2.
11. eppe Or] aurois Iva, cum fut : cf. ix. 4. \povov piKpov : cf.
xx. 3. ol owSouXot aurwK : cf. (xix. 10) xxii. 9. 69 Kal auroi :
cf. ii. 27, iii. 21. Not in other Johannine books of N.T.
13. lireo-ay els T. yfJK : cf. ix. I.
14. iray opos Kal VTJCTOS IK. r. roiruv lK.wr\Qi]<Ta.v : cf. xvi. 20,
where the same idea and in fact the same words recur.
15. ot |3cxcriX.eis T. yr)s cf. xix. 18, 19, xxi. 24. paaiXeis
XiXiapxoi . . . urxupol SouXos Kal eXeu Sepos. These recur
in xix. 1 8.
16. f\ fipcpa. fi jULcydXY] (i.e. of judgment). Recurs in xvi. 14,
and not elsewhere in N.T. save in Acts ii. 20, where it is a
quotation from Joel.
(b) Idiom.
1. JJLUU> IK : cf. tvos K in next clause: frequent in our author.
&&gt;s fywY] a Hebraism for ws (j>wfj. See note in loc.
2. 6 KaG^fAeyos eir auroi/ : cf. 5 : also 16, rov KaOrji^evov 7rt rov
Opovov. In 4 ru> Ka0r)fjicviit CTT fauroi/f, the avrov is corrupt for
avT<3 ; see p. 1 1 2 sq.
3. aXXos ITTTTOS Truppos = " another, a red horse." This classical
idiom recurs in xiv. 8, 9, and John xiv. 16 (yet see Abbott,
Gram. p. 612 sq.) may be interpreted in the same way. Other
wise it is not found in the N.T. crepos is used in this sense in
Luke x. i, xxiii. 32.
4. Iva . . . o-<f>dou<ru : cf. n. iva, cum inf., nine times in
our author, fourteen in rest of N.T.
6. ws $u\ri\v. See note on p 35 sq.
7. (jwui V T - TerdpTou w ou = " the voice," etc.
11. aurois cKaarw : cf. ii. 23. Outside our author only once
in N.T.
3. Method of interpreting the Seven Seals. A short inquiry as
to the right method of interpreting the Seven Seals is necessary,
VI. 3.] THE FIRST SIX SEALS I 55
since the bulk of interpretations proceed on wholly arbitrary
lines. We can take account only of the most notable inter
pretations, and then try to arrive at one which is justifiable on
historical and critical grounds. Our inquiry relates to the first
five seals, since the sixth is universally taken eschatologically.
The methods may be given as follows :
i. Contemporary Historical Method. Volter in all his four
volumes, Erbes, 37 sqq., Holtzmann, and Swete seek to explain
the first five seals by the Contemporary Historical Method.
The first three seals reproduce, Erbes asserts, an ancient eschato-
logical scheme, but correspond to events of the present, and in
regard to the fourth and fifth Seals these writers find correspond
ing historical events. The first Rider is the Parthian King
Vologases, who in 62 A.D. forced a Roman army to capitulate.
Erbes explains the second Rider by the great insurrection in
Britain, 61 A.D., which led to the loss of 150,000 lives and by
contemporary wars in Germany and troubles in Palestine ; the
third Rider by a famine in 62 affecting Armenia and Palestine ; the
fourth by pestilences in Asia and Kpheaus r 61 A.D. : the fifth by
the Neronic persecution. Erbes has here, on the whole, gone on
the same lines as his predecessors. Volter, Holtzmann, and Swete
take the first Rider to represent the Parthian empire, the second
to represent Rome, the third they explain by the famine in
Domitian s time (see note on 6). Though in his earlier editions
Holtzmann seeks to explain the fourth figure as referring to the
failure of the harvests in 44, the famines in Nero s time and the
great pestilence throughout the Empire in 65 (Tac. Ann. xvi. 13 ;
Suet. Nero, 39, 45), in the last he prefers to abandon the
Contemporary Historical Method, though it is true he refers the
fifth Seal to the Neronic persecution.
This method proceeds mainly on the principle that the
symbols used in the Seals are either devised or at all events
arranged in their present order with a view to represent certain
historical events. Now since, as we shall see later, the Apoca-
lyptist has received from tradition both the materials of this
vision and almost the very order in which they are cast, it will
not be possible to acknowledge it as a free composition, as the
Contemporary Historical Method would in the main require,
and though a few clear references to historical events are to be
found, we shall recognize these as reinterpretations of pre-existing
materials, or as additions to a pre-existing eschatological scheme.
ii. Contemporary- Historical and Symbolical with Traditional
Elements. JBousset feels himself obliged to use these two
methods in this interpretation of the Seals. The first Seal must,
he holds, be interpreted by the Contemporary-Historical of the
Parthian empire on two grounds : (a) The meaning of the white
156 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 3.
horse cannot be explained from stereotyped eschatological ideas.
(b) The white horse is placed first in our text in contradistinction
to the order in Zech. vi. The latter reason, already advanced
by Spitta, 291, is not of much weight; for though the horses are
mentioned three times in Zech. vi., they occur in a different order
each time. The second and fourth Seals are explained sym
bolically of war and pestilence, though, of course, individual
features in the Riders are derived from tradition. In regard to
the third Seal, Bousset accepts the Contemporary-Historical
explanation, and interprets this Seal by Domitian s Edict in 92
(see note on 6 of my text).
The fifth Seal is likewise interpreted by the same method
(p. 274). Thus the first, third, and fifth are to be explained by
this method. Spitta, 287 sqq., explains these three Seals by the
same method, but arrives at very different results. The first Seal
refers to Rome, the third to definite famines, and the fifth
(p. 300) to the persecutions of the Christians by the Jews.
Although Bousset s exegesis is, of course, good, it has in my
opinion missed the key to the interpretation of the Seals as a
whole, and therefore has a show of arbitrariness.
iii. The Traditional-Historical. This method has been
applied to the interpretation of the first four Seals by Gunkel
(Zum religionsgesch. Verst. d. N.T. 53sq.), who is of opinion that
primitive Oriental materials lie behind this vision and help to
explain some of its details. The four horsemen, which in the
Apocalypse are conceived as plague spirits, must originally have
had a wholly different significance. This, he holds, is quite clear
in the case of the first victorious and crowned horseman, which
has ever been a crux interpretum. These four horsemen were
originally the four world gods, which ruled each over one of the
four world periods, and are distantly related to the four beasts in
Dan. vii., each of which represents a world empire. The first
horseman was originally a sun-god: his horse is white (as in
vi. 2, ITTTTOS Aev/cos: cf. the white horse of the divine slayer of
the dragon, xix. 1 1 ; the white horses of Mithras in the Avesta
Cumont, Mysteres de Mithra, p. 3). He carries a bow (so vi. 2,
e^wv TOOV) as the sun-god (Zimmern, K.A.T* 368, note 5): he
wears a crown (so vi. 2, cS6@r) aurw (rre ^avos) as Mithras (Cumont,
op. cit. 84; Dieterich, Mithrasliturgie, n, 15), and is always
victorious (so vi. 2, vi/co>v KOL u>a vi/c^Vr?), and hence is called
dnK^Tos, "invictus" (Cumont, op. cit. 82). The second horse
man is the god of war, and the third, originally the god of grain,
is here transformed into a famine god : thence is explained his
sparing the oil and wine.
Now, whilst the above theory is ingenious and offers some
attractive explanations, it is nevertheless unsatisfactory and
VI. 3.] THE FIRST SIX SEALS 157
inconsistent. For, first of all, how can the first of the four
horsemen, who are said to have been originally world gods who
preside over the four world periods, be afterwards described as
the sun-god, the war-god and grain-god ! Gunkel makes no
attempt to find the original (?) equivalent of the fourth horseman,
Odvaros, in our text. In regard to the first horseman, however,
his theory is interesting; but that the Seer had any idea of
the original meaning of this figure cannot be entertained for a
moment.
iv. Contemporary- Historical and Traditional- Historical. Un
der this heading J. Weiss (59 sqq.) is to be mentioned, though it
is difficult to characterize his exegesis accurately. The Apoca-
lyptist, according to Weiss, was using traditional material, and
the particular form into which he cast this material was due to
the eschatological ideas in the Parousia discourses of our Lord,
which he had learnt from the Gospels or from oral tradition.
The recognition of the connection of the Seals with the Woes in
the Parousia discourses, which is already to be found in Alford, is
the chief merit in his exegesis of this passage. And yet he has
only partially appreciated the permanent importance of this
fact, as we shall see presently. In the original Johannine
Apocalypse (circa 60 A.D.) which Weiss assumes, the following
plagues were enumerated: "pestilence, war, famine, Hades,
persecution, earthquakes " ; or " war, famine, pestilence, Hades,
persecution, earthquakes." 1 This Apocalypse the final Apoca-
lyptist re-edited, and this particular passage he transformed by
prefixing the victorious Rider on the white horse and displacing
the mention of mere persecution by an account of actual
martyrdom (vi. 9-11) already in the past. The victorious Rider
represents the victorious course of the Gospel, which must be
preached to all nations before the woes come (so Weiss interprets
Mark xiii. 10). Thus, while in the completed Apocalypse the
fifth Seal represents events already in the past, the first represents
a present process : while in the Johannine Apocalypse the
second, third, and fourth represent future events, yet it is to
be presumed that these too in the completed Apocalypse refer
to past events. This exposition is no more satisfying than those
which precede. I proceed, therefore, to offer another explanation
of the Seals, which explains more or less fully all the difficulties
of this Vision.
1 Weiss (p. 60) is of opinion that originally the four figures were war,
famine, pestilence, and Hades, which gathered the victims of the first three,
and that then the Apocalyptist affixed the first figure, which represents the
victorious course of the Gospel. But to this we reply that our author had
before him an eschatological scheme of seven woes which he found in the
document behind Mark xiii., Matt, xxiv., Luke xxi.
158 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 3.
v. Traditional-Historical Method with incidental references to
contemporary Events. The more closely we study the Seals in
connection with Mark xiii., Matt, xxiv., Luke xxi., the more
strongly we shall be convinced that our author finds his chief
and controlling authority in the eschatological scheme there set
forth. By putting these authorities and our text in parallel
columns we shall make this close connection undeniable.
MATT. xxiv. 6, 7, 9% 29. MARK xiii. 7-9% 24-25.
1. Wars. I. Wars.
2. International strife. 2. International strife.
3. Famines. 3. Earthquakes.
4. Earthquakes. 4. Famines.
5. Persecutions. 5. Persecutions.
6. Eclipses of the sun and moon; 6. (As in Matt.)
falling of the stars ; shaking of
the powers of heaven.
LUKE xxi. 9-12*, 25-26. REV. vi. 2-17, vii. i.
1. Wars. Seal I. War.
2. International strife. 2. International strife.
3. Earthquakes.
4. Famines.
5. Pestilence.
6. Persecutions.
3. Famine.
4. Pestilence. (Death and
Hades.)
5. Persecutions.
6. (vi. i2-vii. 3) Earthquakes,
7. Signs in the sun, moon, and stars ; eclipse of the sun, ensan-
rnen fainting for fear of the guining of the moon, falling
things coming on the world ; of the stars, men calling on
shaking of the powers of heaven. the rocks to fall on them,
shaking of the powers of
heaven, four destroying
winds. 1
Even a cursory comparison of these lists shows that they
practically present the same material. 2
If we accept the Domitian date of the Apocalypse, there can
be no question as to the dependence of our author on the
tradition represented in the Gospels. The six Seals embrace
the seven 8 woes of Luke by combining two woes, i.e. the third
1 This feature may have its parallel in Luke xxi. 25, where the nations are
said to be distressed, v airopiq. fa "* 0a.\d<ra"r]s /cai adXov. The winds in our
text, vii. I, are not to blow upon the sea till the final judgment. The storm
winds of Yahweh are a well-known eschatological element in O.T.
2 Other signs preluding the end are given in connection with the predicted
fall of Jerusalem (cf. Mark xiii. I4sqq. and parallels, Luke. xxi. 20 sq.); but
since Jerusalem had fallen over twenty years before, our author is not con
cerned with these.
8 A scheme of seven plagues was already current in Jewish literature : see
Sir. xl. 9; Test. Benj. vii. 2; Sayings of the Fathers, v. n. Also Lev.
xxvi. 21, " I will bring seven times more plagues upon you according to your
sins." It is noteworthy that in Parsism we find many of the above signs
mentioned as precursors of the end of the world, such as the following : wars
VI. 3.] THE FIRST SIX SEALS 159
and seventh, under the sixth Seal. It is remarkable that neither
in Luke on the one hand nor in Matthew or Mark on the other
can we find the full list of woes that appears in Revelation. In
this respect they are complementary. On the one hand, our text
agrees with Luke rather than with Mark and Matthew. Thus
while pestilence, the fourth plague in Revelation, is omitted in
the first and second Gospels, it is found in the third ; and, while
the predictions in Rev. vi. 15-17 are wanting in the first two,
their equivalent is found in Luke xxi. 25. This shows a greater
dependence on the Lucan form of the narrative. On the other
hand, whereas the eclipse of the sun and moon and the falling
of the stars (Rev. vi. 12-13) are only referred to in the Lucan
account as " signs in the sun, moon, and stars/ they are described
in Matt. xxiv. 29 and Mark xiii. 24 in almost the same language
as in our text. The question naturally arises therefore : Did our
author make use of two of the Gospels, Luke together with
Matthew or Mark ; or did he use the document behind the Gospels
the Little Apocalypse, the existence of which so many scholars
have felt themselves obliged to assume ; or thirdly, was he simply
dependent on oral tradition for his material? The first and
third alternatives are possible, but less likely than the second.
The second seems highly probable, if we may assume the
independent existence of the Little Jewish-Christian Apocalypse
( = Mark xiii. 7-8, 14-20, 24-27, 30-31, and parallels in Matthew
and Luke). In this Little Jewish Apocalypse, so far as it is
preserved in the Gospels, there is no reference to the persecution
of the faithful. But since in the Psalms, Daniel and later
apocalyptic literature this is a constant subject of complaint to
God, it cannot have been wanting in the original form of the
Little Apocalypse. If such an Apocalypse were current, it is but
natural to assume that such a profound master of this literature
as our author would be acquainted with it. However this may
be, the conclusion that our text is dependent on the Gospel accounts,
or rather on the document behind them, seems irresistible. The
subject-matter, then, of the Seals is derived from a pre-existing
eschatological scheme. The number seven in such a connection
is known to tradition (see note in loc.) ; but independently of this
fact it is postulated by our author s plan, in which seven plays a
predominant role Seven Churches, Seven Bowls.
The dependence of our author on a pre-existing eschatological
scheme is further shown by his seeming abandonment of it in two
(Bahman Yasht ii. 24sqq.); social divisions (op. cit. ii. 30); earthquakes,
famines, and pestilences (op. cit. iii. 4) ; falling of the star Gurzihar on the
earth (op. cit. ; Bundahish xxx. 18); the sun losing its light (ii. 31). See
Boklen, Verwandtschaft der Jiidischchristlichen mit der Parsischen Eschato-
logie, p. 88sqq.
160 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 3.
particulars, i. Although he gives a new character to the seventh
woe quite distinct from that of the last woe in these Gospels,
he is careful not to omit the subject-matter of this last woe, and
accordingly embodies it under the sixth Seal. Thus the sixth
Seal embraces the two Gospel woes earthquakes and signs in
the powers of heaven. Our author therefore preferred including
these two woes under one Seal to omitting these elements of
tradition. 2. Our author has changed the order of the woes.
He has relegated the " earthquakes " to the sixth Seal, whereas
it is third in Mark and Luke and fourth in Matthew. Two valid
reasons for this change can be given.
1. In his fresh reproduction of the traditional material, our
author personifies four x of the woes under forms borrowed from
Zech. i. 8, vi. 1-8. Now, since "earthquakes" cannot be so
personified, they are relegated to the sixth Seal, and their place
is taken by "pestilence." Thus the four Riders represent war,
international strife, famine, and pestilence.
2. But there is another and weightier reason. The more
closely the vision is studied, the more manifest becomes the
dramatic fulness of the order of the Seals, and the growing
intensity of the evils they symbolize. These begin with social
cataclysms (Seals 1-4) and end with cosmic (Seal 6). Human
society is overthrown by war, revolutions, famines, and pestilences
(Seals 1-4), which rage without ceasing, till a large proportion of
the number of the martyrs is accomplished (Seal 5). Social
catastrophes are followed by cosmic in the sixth Seal. The
solid crust of the earth breaks, the heaven is rent above, sun
and moon are darkened or ensanguined, and the stars of heaven
fall. From the standpoint of our author, therefore, the necessity
of transposing " earthquakes " from the third or fourth place to
the sixth is obvious.
Thus the subject matter of the Seats, which is derived from a
pre-existing eschatological scheme, is recast under new forms.
But, further, in this reproduction of the first five woes our
author so recasts them as to give three or possibly all of them a
more or less clear historical reference to contemporary events.
Thus the first Rider with the bow refers to the Parthian empire
that was to overthrow the hated Rome ; the second may have a
secondary reference to Rome, as the source of social disorder
and destruction, though earlier regarded as the upholder of order
and peace ; the third possibly (?) to the edict of Domitian, and
the fifth certainly to the martyrdoms under Nero.
But these references are due to our author, and do not
belong to the original eschatological scheme. Such contemporary
1 This number is already suggested by the number of the four Living
Creatures who severally summon the four Riders.
VI. 1-2.] THE FIRST SEAL l6l
historical references are, however, to be looked for, though
primarily the subject-matter is traditional: cf. i John ii. 18.
1. Kal elSoy ore r\voiev TO apviov fuay IK TWK eirra cr^pctyiScov.
The loosing of the Seals is a symbolical action. The visions are
not read out from the Book, but the contents of the Book are
forthwith translated into action in the visions of the Seer. On
Kal tSoi> see note on iv. i. In /uav e/c="the first of," we may
have a Hebraism = p ^ntf ; but there is the possibility, -of course,
as Moulton, Gram. i. 95 sq., contends, that els came in Byzantine
Greek to be used as an ordinal, and that we have such an
instance here. The partitive use of e/c is frequent in the.
Apocalypse : cf. Blass, Gram. p. 97. But the fact that in /u av
IK we have a double Hebraism, and that it occurs in a book
containing so many Hebraisms, is in favour of the phrase being
taken as such. We might compare Ezek. x. 14, "the face of the
first " = TO 7r/oocr&&gt;7rov TOV evds = "in^n "OS, where four are mentioned :
Job xlii. 14. But the phrase may simply mean "one of." The
occurrence of the ordinals, however, in v. 3, 5, 7, appears to be
against this.
Kal TJKOUora eyos eic Ta>y Teacrdpwi/ axoy Xeyoj Tos a>s (fxuyr] jSpoirfjs
"Epxou. On evos eK = "the first of," see preceding note. The
four Cherubim in succession summon the four Riders. This is
the most natural interpretation, as J. Weiss, 59, Bousset 2 , 264,
Wellhausen, 10, and Holtzmann 3 , 444, have recognized. Others
have taken the words as addressed to the Seer ; but elsewhere
xvii. i, xxi. 9, where the Seer is summoned, Sevpo is used.
Moreover, as J. Weiss observes, it is inconceivable that the ZPXOV
should be addressed four times to the Seer. Others Alford
and Swete again suppose it to be addressed to Christ, and cite
as parallels xxii. 17, 20.
ws $wf\. Nearly all the textual evidence is against reading
c/xov^, which in order to arrive at an intelligible text we must
read.
But ws <a)vrj is susceptible of explanation. The writer may
have had SpD in his mind and rendered this as o>s ^vr), whereas
idiomatically it = <I>s <<DI/$, the 3, being suppressed after 3. Cf.
Isa. v. 17, ix. 3.
2. Kal etSoi/ Kal iSou ITTTTOS Xeuicos. On the apocalyptic phrase
Kal cTSov KOL tSov, which recurs in vi. 5, 8, xiv. i, 14, xix. n, see
note on iv. i.
The subject-matter of the first four Seals appears, as we have
seen (see p. 157 sqq.), derived from the woes mentioned in (the
Jewish-Christian Apocalypse) Mark xiii. 7 sqq. ; Matt. xxiv. 6
sqq. ; Luke xxi. 9 sqq., i.e. war, international or civil strife, famine,
pestilence (i.e. death).
The form of the Vision in vi. 2-8 is based on the vision of
VOL. I. II
1 62 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 2.
the four sets of horses and chariots in Zech. i. 8, vi. 1-8 so far
as regards the four horses and their colours. But the functions
and character of the O.T. figures are transformed, and the
messengers of God to the four quarters of the heaven are
changed into agents of destruction.
Next as regards the different colours, these are chosen from
Zechariah to suit the woes they symbolize. Thus red naturally
corresponds to the sword, black to famine, and pale yellow to
death, being a corpse-like colour. The white remains, and this
naturally belongs to the horse on which triumphant war is seated.
Thus Xerxes rode on white Nisaean horses (Herod, vii. 40;
Philostr. Vit. ApolL i. 30), and Mardonius, one of his chief gene
rals, rode on a white horse (Herod, ix. 63). White was the colour
of victory : cf. Virg. Aen. iii. 537, " Quattuor hie, primum omen,
equos in gramine vidi Tondentes campum late candore nivali."
Here Servius notes: "candore nivali. Hoc ad victoriae omen
pertinet." According to Dio Cassius, H.R. xliii. 14 (quoted by
Swete), the four horses which drew the car in Julius Caesar s tri
umph were white : TO, CTTWIKLO. ra Trpoe^^io /xeva CTT/ re Ae^/can/ LTnrayv.
Our author was at liberty to arrange the colours in any order
that suited his purpose ; for in Zech. i. 8, vi. 2-7, they are given
three times, and in each in a different order : i. 8, red, sorrel (or
reddish-yellow), white (defective); vi. 2, 3, red, black, white,
speckled ; vi. 7, 8, black, white, speckled, red. 1
1 The passages in Zechariah call for treatment since they are manifestly
corrupt. Zech. i. 8, D :3 l n D pltf D-DIN ; LXX, irvppoi /ecu [\fapol /cat] Trot/a Xoi
Kal \evKol. Here it is admitted that the text is defective and omits nnnt?,
which is found in vi. 2, 6. The LXX gives, it is true, four colours, but ^apoL
and -rroLKiXoL appear to be duplicate renderings ; for, according to Hesychius,
they have the same meaning. So also Eustathius on the Iliad, xvii. ad Jin.,
\{/apbs ITTTTOS 6 /card rbv \l/apa. Troi/dXos. Next, in vi. 2, 3 we have D DiN
O SDN DH-Q . . . DM3 1 ? . . . Dnnff . . ., LXX irvppoi . . . [AfXaves . . . XfVKOi
. . . Troi/dXoi [fapoi]. Here also it is admitted that the text is corrupt.
0"ycN = " strong," cannot denote a colour. It has possibly been inserted here
from vi. 7. By its omission we have the needed four colours. Finally, in
vi. 6, 7 we have D sflDKn . . . Dman . . . own . . . nnhipn ; LXX, oi ^\ai>es
oi Xeu/cot . . . oi Troi/dXoi . . . ol \papoi (but Aquila has oi irvppoi).
Here D XDN is rightly taken to be a corruption of D !*<=::" red," a reading
which is attested by the Peshitto and Aquila. The text is thus restored so
far as the colours go, but there are evidently two lacunae in vi. 6, 7 ; for
since the four bodies of horses represent the four winds, vi. 5, the four
quarters of the world to which they go as God s messengers should be
mentioned, whereas only the north and the south are. In the next place,
while the black horses rightly go towards the north, the red should go to the
south and not the spotted, the white to the east, and the yellow (" spotted"
in text) to the west ; for the four colours of the horses are said to symbolize
the four quarters (Zimmern, K.A.T? 339, 616, 633; Marti on Zech. i. 8).
We can now reconstruct Zech. vi. 6, 7, 0*137(11 psx p ^K D tts DnntJM D DID.T
p-nn pN ?K D KX Dinxm < anyn p*< VK > n tw on-oni mpn p *? D KJP.
Here I have with previous scholars emended the unintelligible D.vinx into
VI. S.] THE FIRST SEAL 163
Kttl o KaO^juteyos eir* auToy e)((i)v ro^ov, KCU e860K] aurw
teal e^XOeK n.K<ui> Kal tra i/iKrjaif]. As has already been pointed
out, the rider here symbolizes war in the first instance ; for this
is the first woe in the source from which the woes in the Seals
are derived (see pp. 157-9); but owing to the rider carrying a
bow l and riding on a white horse, we can hardly evade the con
clusion that a secondary reference to the Parthian empire is here
designed as representing triumphant war. The great victory of
Vologases in 62 over the Romans gave birth to the idea that
Rome would be finally overthrown by an Oriental power. This
idea recurs later in our author (see xvii. 16). The very form of
the words favours this view. e^A.0ei/ VIK&V would refer to past
achievements of this empire, and Iva viKrjo-y to its ultimate
conquest of the west. The gift of the o-re ^avos is equivalent to
a promise of victory. Furthermore, as regards the crre^avos,
which, as a symbol of victory, was given to him, it may be
mentioned, though the fact probably does not concern our text,
that Seleucus, the Parthian king, who founded Seleucia on the
Tigris, was named Ni/caTwp. The Parthian leaders, according to
Wetstein, rode white horses in battle.
Other interpretations are as follows :
1. The text points first and solely to the Parthian empire :
so Holtzmann, Schmidt, n; Ramsay, 58; Swete, Bousset.
2. Volter in his different works, and Erbes, 37 sqq., interpret
the first Rider of Vologases. This is a less defensible view than i.
3. Spitta, 290, interprets the text of Rome; but this view is
generally rejected.
cnpn pK, and changed w into QW three times (with Wellhausen). Next I
have restored the lost myrr p SK, " to the west country," and finally I have
transposed D N* D D-IKJI before jD nn pN htt from the beginning of 7, where
they are meaningless. Thus we have, "The black horses go forth to the
north country, and the white go forth to the east country, and the spotted go
forth to the west country, and the red go forth to the south country." All
appears right here except the word Q" 1 )"}?, vi. 2, 8= "spotted." In i. 8
D ip-i^=" sorrel," a yellowish or reddish brown colour, appears in its stead.
Since in i. 8 red is already mentioned, we should take this word with
Bochart, Hierozoicon, i. 50, as meaning "yellow." Thus the " yellow "
horses go to the quarter of which yellow is the symbol. This may be the
source of the word %\wp<5s, " pale" or "pale yellow," in our text, vi. 8. As
regards D va I see no way of explaining it from an archaeological standpoint,
nor of reconciling it with the apparently right word a pia* in Zech. i. 8.
Here again our author does not follow the LXX. The above four colours
are said to be connected with the planets Jupiter, Mars, Mercury, and
Saturn. But among the Babylonians white has never been discovered to be
the colour of Jupiter or of the other three. The speculations of Jeremias
(Baby Ionise hes im N. T. 24 sq. , and in Das A. T. im Licht des alien Orients)
on this question are often merely fantastic. See Miiller, Die Apokal.
Reiter," Z.N.T.W., 1907, 290-316.
1 See Herod, v. 49, vii. 61 ; Ovid, Trist. ii. 227 ; Ammianus Marcellinus,
xxii. 8 ; and Wetstein in loc.
1 64 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 3.
4. A great number of interpreters Victorinus, Primasius,
Bede, Bullinger, Paraeus, Grotius, Vitringa, Diisterdieck, B. Weiss,
445, have identified the first horseman with the Rider on the
white horse in xix. u sqq., i.e. the Messiah. But the Messiah
cannot appear before the Messianic woes ; nor can he be at once
the Lamb who opens the Seals, and the Rider who appears in
consequence of such opening. Moreover, the details are distinct.
The former carries a TOOV, the latter a po^aia ; the former wears
a crre ^aKog, the latter StaS^/xara TroAAa. Not a bow, but the
sword of the word belongs to Christ. In fact the two Riders have
nothing in common but the white horse.
5. Hilgenfeld (Z. W.T., 1890, p. 425), Zahn, ii. 592, Alford,
Kiibel take this horseman to represent the victorious course of
the Gospel. J. Weiss, 59 sqq., accepts this interpretation, and
maintains that it receives support from the Parousia discourses of
Christ. For although Mark xiii. 9 treats of the beginning of the
Messianic woes, yet according to xiii. 10 the Gospel must first be
made known to all nations. The woes, therefore, in both
passages begin when the victory of the Gospel is decided.
Despite all tribulations, the victory is once and for all assured.
This view with modifications was earlier put forward by Andreas,
Arethas, Lyra, and Ribeira.
Over against explanations 4 and 5, it is to be maintained
that there is an essential likeness among the Riders : they clearly
belong together, and represent the a-pxy ^Sii/cov (Mark xiii. 8).
All four have to deal with judgments "the beating down of
earthly powers, breaking up of earthly peace, the exhausting of
earthly wealth, the destruction of earthly life" (Alford). The
first horseman like the rest, therefore, is to be interpreted of woe
denoting first of all war, as it did in its immediate source, and
in a secondary aspect through its fresh remoulding by our author,
the Parthian empire.
3. Kal ore r\voi%ev ri\v a<j>payt8a rty Seurepai/, TJKOuaa TOU
Seurepou wou Xeyorros "Epxou. 4. Kal c ^XOey aXXos tiriros iruppos,
Kal TW KaOTjjJLeyw eir f auToy f e860T) [aurw] \aj3elk TYJ^ elpi]kT)i [eK] TTJS
yfjs Kal iVa dXXrjXous oxfxx^cuaii , Kal eSoOrj aurw |xd)(aipa fxeydXTj.
This second horseman is a symbol of international and civil
strife. The immediate source of our author is, as we have seen,
the document behind the Gospel accounts, Matt. xxiv. 7 ; Mark
xiii. 8 ; Luke xxi. 10 (see pp. 157-9). But there are other refer
ences to such civil strife as preluding the Parousia in Jewish
literature: cf. Jub. xxiii. 19; i Enoch Ivi. 7; 4 Ezra v. 9, vi. 24,
xiii. 31 ; 2 Bar. xlviii. 32, Ixx. 3, 6. The expectation that civil
strife would herald the end of the world is found also in
Babylonian literature. See Zimmern, K.A.T* 393. Since we
have here to deal with a stereotyped prediction, which exhibits no
VI. 3.] THE SECOND SEAL 165
new elements pointing to historical events, there is no occasion
to enumerate the various historical interpretations that have been
advanced.
As in the case of the first Seal the Rider is furnished with a
bow (which gives the Seal an historical reference), so here the
second Rider is provided with a sword. This symbol, however,
belongs to eschatological tradition. This sword is mentioned in
this eschatological sense in Isa. xxvii. i, xxxiv. 5, xlvi. 10, xlvii. 6;
Ezek. xxi. 3 sqq., where it is wielded by Yahweh Himself. In
the next stage of development it is committed to Israel to
take vengeance on their own and God s enemies. The very
words e Sd077 . . . /xa^atpa /xeyaAr; are found in i Enoch xc. 19,
" A great sword was given to the sheep, and the sheep proceeded
against all the beasts of the field to slay them." This sword is
again mentioned in xci. 12, xc. 34. The object with which it is
given in Enoch is that the faithful Israelites may therewith
destroy their enemies, who are the enemies of God.
In the third stage of development it is given to the enemies
of God that they may destroy one another with it. This stage
is found in i Enoch Ixxxviii. 2, where Gabriel causes the giant
offspring of the fallen angels and the daughters of men to destroy
each other by giving them a sword. "And one of them drew
a sword and gave it to those elephants and camels and asses :
then they began to smite each other, and the whole earth quaked
because of them." The command to do so is given in apoca
lyptic language in x. 9, " Proceed against the bastards . . . and
destroy the children of fornication, and the children of the
watchers . . . send them one against another that they may destroy
each other in battle." In our text, as also in Matt. x. 34, /*^
vofj.L<rr)re OTL rjXOov /?oAetv elprjvriv CTTI rr)v yrjv OVK rjXBov fSaXeiv
dpijvrjv <!A.A.a fta^atpav (cf. Luke xii. 51), the symbol has the
same eschatological force. Our text, A.a/?iv ryv clp-rjvyv [oc] rrjs
777? . . . $66r) avru> fj^d^aLpa, looks like a reminiscence of the
words of our Lord just cited. The Massoretic text of Ezek.
xxxviii. 2 1 seems to attest the same idea, but it is corrupt, and
the text of the LXX (B) is to be followed here (see Marti in
be.),
Holtzmann and Moffatt have taken the " sword " as symbol
izing Rome, just as the " bow " symbolizes the Parthian empire,
and holds that the two world empires are here designated. But
this is not so. The " bow " is characteristic of the first Rider ;
but the sword is not characteristic of this Rider, but is given to
him, just as the "crown" is given to the first Rider. As the
" crown " is given to foreshow conquest, the sword is given to
bring about civil and international strife. There may, how
ever, be a remote reference to Rome as the destroyer of order
1 66 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 3-6.
and life as opposed to the role it was conceived to play by
St. Paul.
\aj3eu TTJV f.ipr\vv\v [|K] TTJS yr\<$. The object of this woe is to
take away the false peace of the earth. Contrast John xiv. 27.
Thus it seems best here to follow A and some cursives in
omitting e/c. Cf. the kindred phrase "children of earth,"
T Enoch c. 6, cii. 3, over against "children of heaven," ci. i.
For Lva with the fut. Ind. see Robertson, Gram. 998 sq.
5. Kal ore t]i>oiej TY)V ox^payiSa TYJV rpiTTjK, T]KOucra TOU rpirou
wou Xeyoyros "Epxou. Kal elSov, Kal I8ou ITTTTOS fieXas, Kal 6 KaQi^-
jxeyos eir aurok e\<i)v uy6y tv rrj X 1 P^ a " T u- Famine is here
symbolized by the black horse, as we have seen (see p. 161).
For the more detailed explanation see next verse. The vyos is
literally the beam of the balance from which the scales are
suspended. That bread is sold by weight is a token of scarcity.
Cf. Ezek. iv. 16, (frdyovraL ap-rov ev errata) /cat ev evSei a, and Lev.
xxvi. 26, aTroScotrovcri TOVS aprovs iy/-(Juv cV (rra^/xw KOL <ayecr$e /cat
ov fJirj ffJLTrXrjcrOrjre.
6. Kal T]Kouaa ws (Jxui TjK iv fxeaw r&v Teaaapu)^ ^tow Xeyouo-ai/
atrou S-rji apiou, Kal rpeis x^ lK S KpiSwi Sirji/apiou Kal TO
Kal TOV olvov pj d8iKTJo"T)s. On the peculiar use of ws here
see note on p. 33 sq. We have the same use on xix. i, 6.
The voice, as Bousset suggests, may be that of the Lamb.
The voice states a coming price of the wheat and barley
almost a famine price ; for a x^ of wheat about two pints
constituted the daily consumption of a man. So Herodotus
assumes in estimating the amount of food consumed by Xerxes
army : vii. 187, cvptV/co) -yap o-u/x/:?aAAo/u.j/os el -^OLVLKO, TrvpoJv
eKcurros r-^5 fjfJLeprjs eAa/x/Jave /cat /////Sev TrAeov. Thucydides, IV. 1 6,
mentions as the allowance made for the Spartans in Sphacteria
crlrov . . . &vo ^on/i/cas eKacrra) Arrt/cas a.A<trooi/ /cat 8vo Kori;Aas
OLVOV /cat /cpcas, Otpdirovn Se TOVTWV rj/jao-fa. The quantity here
stated was the ordinary allowance made at the Spartan mess, the
allowance both of grain and wine being double of that which was
supposed to be necessary. Similarly in Athenaeus, iii. 20, rrjv Se
XotWa ^//,epor/ooc/>tSa, and Diog. Laert. Pythag. viii. 18, and
Suidas under Pythagoras : rj yap XW L ^eprjo-tos Tpo<f>rj. For
other references see Wetstein.
The denarius, which was worth about gjd. (see Hastings
D.B. i 427), was the ordinary daily wage (cf. Matt. xx. 2 sqq.).
The following passages from Cicero are instructive. Cicero,
Verr. iii. 81, "Idque frumentum Senatus ita aestimasset, quater-
nis H.S. tritici modium, binis, hordei. . . . Cum in Sicilia H.S.
binis tritici modius esset . . . summum H.S. ternis . . . turn iste
pro tritici modiis singulis ternos ab aratoribus denarios exegit. 84,
Cum esset H.S. binis aut etiam ternis . . . duodenos sestertios
VI. 6.] THE THIRD SEAL
exegisti." Here wheat appears to have been twice the price of
barley in Sicily ; whereas it was three times in our text. In the
next place the modius of wheat cost 2 or 3 sesterces, or accord
ing to the estimate of the Senate 4. Now, since a modius
contains 8 choenices, and a denarius = four sesterces, it follows
that the price in our text was 16 times the lowest price of
wheat in Sicily, lof times the highest, and 8 times the estimate
made by the Senate.
Thus at the time designed in our text a denarius a man s
daily wage could purchase only two pints of wheat a quantity
sufficient merely for his own immediate needs, whereas at other
times its purchasing power was 8, 12, or 1 6 times as great, if we
may use the data supplied by Cicero. But since the workman
would not buy wheat but barley, he could earn enough to
procure something for his family as well, though the supply
was inadequate and deaths occurred through starvation (see 8).
The text, then, speaks of a time of very great dearth, but not of
absolute famine, that was coming upon the world. It is the XIJJLOL
predicted in Mark xiii. 8 ; Matt. xxiv. 7.
But the words that follow, TO eAcuov KOL rov olvov ///) dSi/o^o-^s,
when taken in conjunction with what precedes, may point to a
special time when the necessaries of life were scarce and its
superfluities abundant.
According to Erbes, 40, the more moderate the scarcity is
represented, the more manifestly it belongs not to the region of
fancy but to history, and in his opinion to the year 62 (Tac. Ann.
xv. 5 ; Joseph. Ant. xx. 9. 2) ; whilst Volter in his various works
assigns this event to the latter half of Nero s reign (Suet. Nero,
45 ; Tac. Ann. xv. 18). But a more satisfactory explanation has
recently been advanced by Harnack (T.L.Z., 1902, col. 591 sq.)
in a short notice on S. Reinach s "La mevente des vins sous le
haut-empire remain," Rev. AcheoL, ser. iii. t. xxxix., 1901, pp. 350-
374. Owing to the lack of cereals and the superabundance of
wine, Domitian issued an edict (Suet. Dom. 7 : cf. Euseb. Chron.,
on 92 A.D.) that no fresh vineyards should be planted in Italy,
and that half the vineyards in the provinces should be cut down.
But, as Suetonius observes, Domitian did not persevere in
this matter ; for the edict set the Asiatic cities in an uproar,
and owing to their agitation they prevailed on Domitian not
only to withdraw his edict, but to impose a punishment on
those who allowed their old vineyards to go out of cultiva
tion (cf. rov olvov pr) dSi/ojor^s of our text). 1 Our author
from his ascetic standpoint had sympathized with Domitian s
decree, which according to its own claims was directed against
1 Our author, according to Harnack, added the oil of his own initiative, or
else found it in a decree unknown to us.
1 68 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 6-7.
luxury, and was accordingly the more indignant when it was
recalled. Accordingly, he predicts an evil time, when men will
have oil and wine l in abundance, but suffer from lack of bread.
In favour of this view it may be added that the date of the
Apocalypse therein implied would agree with that assigned to it
by Irenaeus and Epiphanius. This explanation is accepted by
Boirsset and Swete, but is treated as doubtful by Holtzmann
and rejected by Wellhausen.
Though Wellhausen suggests no alternative explanation, he is
right, I think, in rejecting the last mentioned. At all events the
decree of Domitian, if here operative at all, was not the cause,
but only the occasion of the statement in our text. The scarcity
of bread and the plentifulness of the vintage in the last days was
an old Jewish expectation. Thus we have in Sotah, 49 b , " In the
times when the Messiah is at hand shamelessness will increase,
and there will be a dearth : the vine will yield its fruit, but wine
will be dear ("ipl^ prvi JTnB fnn fBJn Kin 11 ipvi) ; the empire of the
world will become minaean : there will be no discipline . . . the
son will despise the father, the daughter resist the mother, the
daughter-in-law the mother-in-law : a man s foes shall be they of
his own household (WK nmom nta nK3 nnp ra nx 330 p
lira HWK B*N)." The last clauses here may have been in the mind
of our Lord when He uttered Matt. x. 35 sq. ( = Luke xii. 53),
while the opening words may explain our text. Rabbi Nehe-
miah (in Hadrian s time) quotes the first part of the above, and
R. Nehorai and R. Judah, his contemporaries, other portions of
it in Sanh. c,7 a . It seems, therefore, to have been in an old
apocalypse. This apocalypse states that there will be a general
dearth, but not of the vintage, though, owing to the disorder, wine
would be dear. Domitian s edict may have occasioned the
mention of this old eschatological expectation.
7. K<xt ore r\voiev TTJI oxj>payi8a TTJI TerapTTji/, YJKOutra <f>cji r]i TOU
TerdpTOU <oou Xeyon-os "Epxou. 8. KCU i8o>, ica! i8ou iiriros x^ w PS-
The fourth horse is described as xX<0p&, "pale yellow,"
"pallid," or " pale." This appears to be an independent render
ing by our author of D jpj? in Zech. i. 8 (see note on p. 162).
The LXX has here Troi/a Aos. Now 7rot/a A.os evidently pre
supposes D^TO, as in Zech. vi. 3, 7, and not D p"!^. But as we
have seen in the note referred to, we require in Zechariah a word
signifying " yellow " or " pale yellow." Bochart (Hieronzotcon,
i. 50) gives good grounds for assuming this to be the meaning of
P""IB>, and holds that \H& and pi were related colours, since
in Lev. xi. 18, Deut. xiv. 17, the same bird is called Kpnp"P in
1 In Jub. xxiii. 18 the first Messianic woe is given thus : " There shall be
no seed of the vine and no oil."
VI. 7-8. j THE FOUkTH SEAL 169
Onkelos and Nplpnt? in Ps. Jon. The Nisaean horses were some
what of this colour, as Phavorinus attests : Ntcratos (Wos o ecrri
av@6<s fj yap NcVa Tracra? ra9 ITTTTOVS av$as c^ct (see Bochart, Joe.
tit.). Now Aristotle (Meteor, 3, 4, 5) defines aj/0osas the colour
in the rainbow between red and green. " Pale yellow " then is
the meaning required by our text and most probably by that of
Zech. i. 8. Possibly our author found a form D^p") 11 or D^plpT
instead of p~)&? in Zech. i. 8 ; for x\ w Ps ls tne most frequent
rendering of this word in the LXX. JipT means " paleness,"
" lividness."
8 b . 6 KaOrjjaeyos eiraVw aurou oVofxa aurw 6 OaVarog 1
[ital 6 a&Tjg TjKoXouOei JULCT aurou]
Kal ?>o0Tj auTw eoucria em TO reraprov TTJS yr}s>
[dTroKTeiyai eV pojuuf>aia Kal iv XIJJLW
Kal iv Oamrw Kal UTTO r&v Orjpiwi rt]9 Y Hs]-
Either the above text is corrupt or the writer confused beyond
all precedent. I have come to the former conclusion, the
grounds for which are given below. The Rider symbolizes " the
pestilence" (6 ddvaro^). And the original text is to be trans
lated as follows : " He that sat upon him was named Pestilence,
and there was given to him authority over the fourth part of the
earth."
Let us now study the text as it stands. First of all, Death and
Hades are personified as in i. 18, xx. 13, 14. But how are we
to conceive them in the present passage ? There is only one
horse and there are two figures. From the analogy of the pre
ceding Seals we expect here only one figure. Hence J. Weiss,
59, thinks that Hades is here "suspiciously" thrust into the
corner and granted only a shadowy existence, since he scarcely
appears to be aught else than a double of Death. This writer
then goes on to conjecture that tfaVaros here was in the original
conception a personification of pestilence ( = im), and that Hades
then represented Death in a general sense, whose function was to
gather the victims of the preceding plagues. Originally, there
fore, the four were War, Famine, Pestilence, and Hades, and not
as in our text. These four became in our author s hands five,
when he prefixed the first Rider, who, according to J. Weiss,
symbolizes the progress of the Gospel. Death and Hades were
then of necessity represented as one. This theory is attractive,
but the evidence, as I have sought to show (p. 157 sqq.), is in favour
of the vision of the Seals being based on the material given in
Mark xiii., Matt, xxiv., Luke xxi., by means of which we can
explain the first six Seals. Besides, we cannot accept this
1 The irregular construction here is due to a Hebraism (cf. ix. u). The
line=izx> rwp vty nrnn.
1 70 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 8.
scholar s explanation of the first Seal (see p. 163). How then
are we to recover the original text ? By a careful study of the
details.
1. There is only one horse mentioned under the fourth Seal :
there could not be two ; for there are only four horses altogether
presupposed. Hades then cannot be riding a separate horse, as
there is only one horse ; nor can he be riding on the same horse
as Death, for then we should expect ot KaOrj^voi and not 6
/ca#7J/xevos. Hence the clause /cat 6 0:8775 . . . avrov introduces
confusion of thought and diction, and looks like an intrusion.
2. We should expect AOI/AO? here, as in Luke xxi. n. But
Odvaros can be used in the same sense, as it frequently appears in
the LXX as a translation of 131. In Sir. xxxix. 29 we have the
combination ")im<:}>jn ; LXX, Ai^os KOL 6dvaro<s: Vulg. "fames
et mors " ; and also in Pss. Sol. xiii. 2, Xipov KOL 6a.va.rov. But the
fact that $oVaT09 and not Aoip>s is used is instructive. It forms
an additional argument that our author is using not our Canonical
Gospels, but the document behind Mark xiii., Matt, xxiv., Luke
xxi. ; for the word in this Aramaic document would be Nnio ; 1
for this is the rendering in the Targum of Onkelos of "OT in
Ex. ix. 15; Num. xiv. 12 ; Targ. Jon. of Jer. xiv. 12, xxi. 6, 7, 9,
xxiv. TO, xxix. 17, 18, xliv. 13 ; Ezek. v. 12, 17, xiv. 21, xxxiii. 27,
etc. Now NmE> can mean either " death " or "pestilence." Luke
rendered it by the unmistakable word XO//AOS in xxi. 1 1, but our
author by flai/aros, which might mean either " death " or
" pestilence." But to return. We expect, as we saw in i, a single
Rider : in the next place we expect him to be named " the
pestilence," as in the source used by our author. And this, in fact,
Oavaros could mean, and not only the source, but the context
requires such a meaning ; for such a plague as " the pestilence "
would be in keeping with what precedes and what follows ; for
all these refer to plagues or evils which bring about death, but
are not synonymous with death. Death conceived generally,
according to the traditional text, as the lord of all kinds of
destroying agents, and Hades do not belong to the present
category of evils.
3. The reading eSoflr? avrw, strongly attested by the Versions
and Q, is in favour of one figure only, i.e. Odvaros, "pestilence."
Accordingly we reject /ecu 6 aS??? rjKoXovOti /ACT avrov as the
interpolation of a scribe who was familiar with our author s
combination of these two conceptions, Death and Hades.
Cf. i. 18, xx. 13, 14. But his perverse industry did not stop
here; for to him we owe the final clause, as will appear from the
next paragraph.
1 If the source were in Hebrew, "iin ( = Xoi/A(5s in Aq. or Sym., or Odvaros
in the LXX) would account for the above facts.
VI. 8-11.] THE FIFTH SEAL 171
4. If the above conclusions are right that only one Rider is
referred to and that his name is " pestilence," then the last
clause of the verse, d-TroKTeu/ai . . . 77}?, can hardly be genuine.
It cannot be said that power was given to "the pestilence " to
destroy " with the sword, and with famine, and with pestilence,"
etc. Even if by any possibility 6dvaro<s in the first instance
meant death itself, the lord of destruction, it would have been
culpably careless to use the same word again in the same sentence
with quite a different meaning.
It is further to be observed that the clause aTroKrcu/ai . . .
777?, which seems intended to resume the evil activities of the
second, third, and fourth plagues, is clearly otiose here. The
statement adds nothing to the weight of what is already
better said, and the reference to Odvaros is extremely awkward,
since it obliges us to assume Odvaros ( = lord of all the plagues)
controlling Qdvaros ( = a single plague), or Odvaros ( = pestilence)
controlling its underling OdvaTos ( = pestilence).
Hence I conclude that the clause is an interpolation.
Furthermore, its subject-matter and, in fact, its diction are based
on Ezek. xiv. 21, po^aLav KOI Xt/xov KOL O^pta Trovrjpa KOL Odvarov.
This borrowing explains the presence of po/x,<aiav instead of
(j,dxa.ipav (cf. vi. 10) and the concluding phrase, i.e. VTTO TO>V OrjpLw
rrjs yfjs, which has no connection with the context as the other
three plagues have. The construction of VTTO after an active verb
is unexampled elsewhere in the N.T. and is found very rarely
in classical Greek. With Qrjpiwv TTJS yJJs (Gen. i. 30 ; Ezek.
xxxiv. 28), the only near parallel in the N.T. is Acts xi. 6.
The fact that there are four plagues described in our text,
and that Ezekiel in xiv. 2 1 speaks of " four sore judgments," may
have led to the incorporation of this gloss in our text.
9-11. In a certain mechanical manner the first four plagues
are grouped together and the last three. The first four possess
one characteristic in common the impersonation of their
leading features: another is their connection with the four
living beings. But in another aspect the first five are more
nearly related to each other as evils affecting man directly,
whereas the two evils which are combined in the sixth Seal the
breaking up of earth and heaven are in their first reference
cosmic, and affect man indirectly.
The fifth Seal. Verses 9-1 1 deal with Christian martyrdom.
In the corresponding sections in Mark xiii. 9-13, Matt. xxiv.
9-10, Luke xxi. 12-18, persecutions and martyrdom are fore
told. In our text they are in part already accomplished. The
standpoint, therefore, is wholly changed. Instead of reproducing
the stereotyped description of persecutions still to come carrying
with them the sanction of Christ Himself, our author refers in
1^2 tHE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 9.
unmistakable language to a great persecution in the past : nay
more, with his own eyes for he is in heaven he beholds the
souls of the martyrs already offered on the heavenly altar before
God; hears them supplicating for judgment on the heathen
world, and sees them being clothed with their heavenly bodies
a spiritual privilege limited exclusively to the martyred righteous ;
for the rest of the righteous could not receive their heavenly
bodies till the final resurrection.
9. KCU ore r\voiev TTJV 7refxirTT]i> a4>paYiS<x, ctSov UTTOK<TW TOU
0u<nacrnr]piou ras \|/uj(ds r&v tafyayiifvwv 8id -rov \6yov TOU 6eou Kal
8td Tty |j.apTupiai> TJK elxoy. In this verse we have to deal with
three questions: i. The altar in heaven. 2. The souls under
the altar in Judaism and Christianity. 3. The reasons for
which the faithful suffered martyrdom.
1. The altar in heaven. The fact that the altar, though not
mentioned hitherto, is preceded by the article, points to a current
belief in the existence of an altar of burnt-offering in heaven. 1
That, according to Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic, there was
only one altar in heaven, and that this altar had the character-
istics partly of the earthly altar of incense and partly of the
V altar of burnt-offering, but mainly of the former, I have shown
later on at some length. (See note on viii. 3.) How early
this belief arose cannot be definitely determined. Since,
however, according to Ex. xxv. 9, 40, Num. viii. 4, the earthly
altar and tabernacle were to be made after the likeness of
heavenly patterns or originals, a view which recurs in Heb.
viii. 5, ix. 23, the belief in question may be of very early origin
as early as Isa. vi. i sqq., though scholars are divided as to
the scene of the vision in that chapter, Duhm, Whitehouse,
Gray, Marti contending that it is in the earthly temple, while
Delitzsch, Dillmann, and Jeremias maintain that it is in the
heavenly. At all events it was current in the 2nd cent. B.C., as
we have seen above.
2. The souls under the altar in Judaism and Christianity.
The souls in our text are those of the martyrs. It has been
generally supposed that our text is to be explained from the
Jewish ritual, according to which the blood of the victim was to
be poured on the base of the altar (Lev. iv. 7, TO atjaa TOV /AdVxov
eK^eet Trapd TT]V ftdcriv TOV 0vo-iao-r>7/oiov). Since the life was in
the blood, the souls were thus conceived to be beneath the altar.
1 Spitta, 296 sqq., argues strongly for the altar in Jerusalem ; but most of
his arguments are beside the mark. On the other hand, the whole vision
implies a heavenly scene, witnessed by our Seer iv TTVCIJ/JUITI. All the
visions in iv. I x. the Seer beheld while in heaven (see p. 109). The
white garments in which the martyrs were arrayed is a heavenly vesture.
Furthermore, the situation implies the age of Domitian, when the Temple was
no longer standing.
VI. 9.] THE FIFTH SEAL 173
But this is unsatisfactory. The souls are beneath the heavenly
altar; for they have already been sacrificed thereon. Let us
examine the evidence. That a sacrificial death of the martyrs
is implied in our text is clear from the words OvcnacrrrjpLov and
eo-</>ay//,eVa>j/. Elsewhere in the N.T. the martyrs are regarded as
victims offered to God, 2 Tim. iv. 6; Phil. ii. 17; and in later
times cf. Ignatius, Ad Rom. ii. 2, TrXeov Se /tot /AT) Trapao-x^o^e
TOV (T7rov8LarOyjvai 0ew, ws ert ^uo-iacm/ptov ITOI/AOV ecrrtv : iv. 2, tW
. . . Ocov Ovo-ia vpe0w. But the belief that the martyrs were
a sacrifice was already current in pre-Christian Judaism, as
appears from the passages quoted from 4 Maccabees below. 1
These passages refer to martyrs. In later times the souls of
the righteous are conceived by the Christians as well as by the
Jews (see later) as offered in sacrifice. Cf. Questions of
Bartholomew i. 29, 6 Sf. Bap^coXa)//atos aTroKpi^els elirev Trpos TOV
w Kvpi, TI S ea-TLv fj ev T<3 TrapaSctVa) dva<epo/x,ev?/ Owia. ; 6 Se
Xeyef i/a^at SIKCUGOV. Vita Pachomii abbatis taberinensis
xxxviii. " Multitude sanctorum angelorum cum magna laetitia
sumentes animam ejus velut electam hostiam Christi conspectibus
obtulerunt."
In Judaism also we find the belief that the souls of the
righteous were under the altar in heaven. This in the Aboth
R.N. xxvi., " Rabbi Akiba declares . . . that whoever was buried
in the land of Israel was just as if he were buried under the altar,
and whoever was buried under the altar was just as if he were
buried under the throne of glory?
In Shabb. i52 b it is stated that "the souls of the righteous
are preserved under the throne of glory," and in Debarim rabba,
n, God says to the soul of Moses: "Go forth, delay not, and
I will bring thee up to the highest heaven, and cause thee to
dwell under the throne of My glory amidst the Cherubim and
Seraphim and heavenly hosts." But if the souls of the righteous
were under the heavenly altar, they had first been offered upon
it. Thus in the Tosaphoth on Menachoth, no a , it is said,
according to some teachers, that Michael sacrifices upon the
heavenly altar the souls of the students of the law. In the
1 According to 4 Mace. vi. 29 the martyr s death was conceived to be
a true sacrifice and possessed an atoning power. Kaddp<nov aurwv irolrja ov r6
e/j.bv cu/xa /ecu avrtyvxov avr&v Xd,8e rty ^TJJ/ \f/vxv v - Cf. also op. cit. xvii. 21,
22. Moed Qatan, 28% where the death of the righteous is said to atone as a
red heifer. In Gittin, 57 b , the mother of the seven martyrs exclaims : " My
sons . . . tell Abraham your father, Thou didst build an altar whereon to
offer thy son as sacrifice. I have built seven altars." Now, if the Jewish
martyrs were regarded in pre-Christian times as an atoning sacrifice, it is
more than probable that the belief in the abode of righteous souls under
the heavenly altar arose first in connection with the martyrs^ and that this
privilege was afterwards extended to the righteous generally. See I Enoch
xlvii. 4, which is quoted uader n.
TIIE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 9-10.
py p TID (ed. Jellinek, /?*/ ^ Midrasch, iii. 137), "And there
stands . . . the great prince Michael and the altar before him,
and he offers all the souls of the righteous on that altar (rnjJ D3 i>D
Ninn naron ^y D^pnvn)." In the Jalkut Rub. f. H2 b (Schottgen,
Home, i. 1220), " Et ille (i.e. Michael) stet et offert animas
justorum " ; and similarly in Jalkut Chad. f. 118, col. 4.
Again in Jalkut Rub. fol. 14, col. 3 (Home, i. 1215), the
souls of the righteous are offered (on the heavenly altar) : " Ex
quo tempore conditum est altare terrenum dixit Deus : Nolo ut
mihi in altari caelesti oves aut boves offerantur nisi tantum
animae justorum." See, further, Lueken, Michael, 48 sq.
The above Jewish authorities are late, but they must repre
sent, when taken with analogous phenomena, a Jewish tradition
anterior at all events to Christianity; for it is not reason
able to suppose that it was borrowed from early Christian
sources.
We conclude, therefore, that by our author the martyr was
conceived first and chiefly as a sacrifice to God, and that though his
body was slain on earth, the sacrifice was in reality made in
heaven, where his soul was offered on the heavenly altar. Our
text, therefore, has come to represent symbolically the con
summation of the idea expressed by St. Paul in Rom. xii. i,
where he exhorts his readers, Trapaaryo-ai TO. o-w/xara V/JLWV Ova-Lav
a>o"av ayiaj/ TW $ea> euapecrrov, rrjv AoytKr^j/ Aarpeicu/ vyueoi/. Cf.
Rom. vi. 13 ; Phil. ii. 17 ; Col. i. 28.
3. The reasons for which the faithful suffered martyrdom.
The martyrs were put to death because of the word given by
God and the witness borne by Jesus. The testimony no less
than the word is an objective possession of the faithful. Many
scholars have taken the witness to be that which the martyrs
had borne to Christ ; but the expression eT^ov is against such a
view, and implies a testimony that has been given them by Christ
and which they have preserved. John iii. 32, o ewpa/cev /cat
rjKovorev TOVTO fjLaprupfl, KOL TT)V fjiapTvpiav avrov ouSeis hau(3avi 6
Aa/8a>v avrov T?/V jjiaprvpiav r</3ayicrej cm 6 $eos aX-rjOrj? ICTTLV.
Thus the clause in our text is the exact equivalent of the fuller
clause in xii. 17, xx. 4. The martyrs are incontestably Christian
martyrs, to wit, the martyrs of the Neronic times. 1
10. Kal 6Kpa|a> <f>a)rrj jj.ya\T] Xe yorres "Ecos irore, 6 SeaTTOTTjs
6 ayios Kal a\T]6iyos, ou xpi^eis KCU exSiKeis TO aijia qjiaij K rail
KdToiKourrwj/ cm rrjs Y^ s >
eKpa^aK. The aorist appears here to refer to a single definite
prayer ; the righteous souls made one appeal to God and it was
immediately answered. They are not represented as continuing
1 Spitta, 300, is of opinion that only Jewish persecutions of the Jews are
referred to here.
VI. 10.] THE FIFTH SEAL 175
to urge such supplications, as in the Jewish Apocalypses quoted
below.
ews TTOTC. Cf. Matt. xvii. 17 = Mark ix. 19; John x. 24.
The phrase is frequent in the LXX, especially in the Psalms.
Cf. iv. 2, vi. 3, xii. (xiii.) i, 2, Ixi. (Ixii.) 3, etc. 6 8eo-ir6TT|s =
SeWora. On the vocative with the article see Moulton, Gram.
70 sq., 235 ; Blass, Gram. p. 87. Seo-Tror^s ( = |T1N or WK, Gen.
xv. 2, 8 ; Josh. v. 14; Isa. iii. i; Dan. ix. 8, 15, 16, etc.) is applied
to God in only two other passages in the N.T., Luke ii. 29 ;
Acts iv. 24. It is applied to Christ twice, in 2 Pet. ii. i ; Jude 4.
6 ayios KCU d\T]0t^6s. These epithets are used in reference to
Christ in iii. 7 (see note). Kpii/cis ica! cancels. For this com
bination cf. xix. 2, on t/cpii/ei/ . . . KOL e^cSiKT/o-ev, and I Sam.
xxiv. 13 in the Hebrew, "ODpJI . . . DBB*. xix. 2 affords another
parallel to our text in the epithets aX-^Otval /cat Si /cami which are
applied to /cpiWs. In fact, xix. 2 describes the fulfilment of the
prayer in our text.
eVSiKeis TO aifxa . . . IK. ( = JD UOT HN Dpn). Cf. xix. 2,
where this phrase recurs. e/c8iKeu/ is followed by e/c (Deut. xviii.
19; i Sam. xxiv. 13) or O.TTO (Luke xviii. 3) in reference to the
persons from whom the vengeance is exacted. Cf. also 2 Kings
ix. 7, 6*86/070-619 TO. al/jLara rwv SovXcw ftou. On the meaning of
the phrase KaroiKowrcuv en-l r?}s y?ys see note on iii. 10.
As regards the thought of the words, it has been maintained
that they " only assert the principle of Divine retribution which
forbids the exercise of personal vengeance (Rom. xii. 19)." It
has been urged also that Luke xviii. 7, 6 Se 0eos ov /xry Tro^a-y rty
K$LKr)(rLV TWV .K\KT(J!)V OLVTOV TOJV y8o(OVT<OV ttVTO) ^yltepaS KCU WKTOS,
practically expressed the same view.
The teaching of the Gospel passage and of our text is,
however, different. In Luke the entire passage refers to the
living elect (cf. xviii. i), and the spirit of the teaching must
be construed in keeping with the context. In our text, however,
the departed souls are referred to, and the note of personal
vengeance cannot be wholly eliminated from their prayer. The
living pray to God to free them from unjust oppression and
secure them their just rights. On the other hand, the departed
pray for vengeance for what they have suffered or lost. The
former is prospective and breathes the spirit of justice, the
latter is retrospective as well as just. Both Luke xviii. 1-8
and our text appears to go back to Jewish originals or
Jewish traditional views. The former has several elements in
common with Sir. xxxii. 15-22, where it is said that God is a
just God, and hearkens to the prayer of him that is wronged,
and to the supplication of the widow, and that He will not be
slack in doing justice to them, nor will He be slow over them
176 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 10-11.
(fjiaKpoOvfJL7]crL eV avrols : cf. Luke xviii. 7, /ecu /xa/cpo^u/xet CTT
avrois), "till He have smitten in sunder the loins of the un
merciful." Both Luke xviii. 1-8 and Sir. xxxii. 15-22 refer to
the living ; and the former, at all events, when taken in conjunc
tion with Christ s other teaching, postulates the surrender of all
desire for personal vengeance. The same postulate cannot be
said to hold for the Sirach passage ; for in Sirach, policy is laid
down no less frequently than principle as the motive of action.
We thus discriminate the temper underlying our text from
that in Luke xviii. 1-8.
The true forerunners of our text are to be found in i Enoch
xlvii. 2, 4, " The prayer of the righteous (that the shedding of
their blood) may not be in vain before the Lord of Spirits, That
judgment may be done unto them, And that they may not have
to suffer for ever." 4, " And the hearts of the holy were filled
with joy, Because ... the prayer of the righteous had been
heard, And the blood of the righteous been required before the
Lord of Spirits." In xxii. 5, 7 the spirits of the righteous, who
are in Sheol and had suffered persecution or violent death, pray
for vengeance. In a contemporary work, i.e. 4 Ezra iv. 35, the
souls of the righteous in the chambers of Sheol ask, "How long
are we to remain here ? when cometh the fruit upon the thresh
ing-floor of our reward ? " Prayer for vengeance is taught as a
continuous duty in i Enoch xcix. 3, civ. 3, therefore it was the
manifestation of a permanent attitude of mind. This is not so
in our text.
The prayer of the souls under the altar for a righteous
vindication on their persecutors, made here once and for all and
not uninterruptedly pressed as in Judaism, is represented as
fulfilled in xviii. 20, xix. 2. Therein is reflected the temper that
in part animated the Church in the persecutions of the ist
century. We might compare the attitude of the martyrs towards
their judges in Polyc. Mart, u, or the later Acts of the Martyrs.
11. KCU eSoOyj auToIs eicdoTw crroXt] XCUK^. This white robe was
their heavenly body (see note on iii. 5, and Additional Note at
close of this chapter : cf. vii. 9).
The martyrs have thus in a great degree attained their con
summation. . Their reception of the heavenly body at this stage
is a special privilege accorded to the martyrs, just as they ex
clusively are to return with Christ to reign for the 1000 years ; cf.
xx. 4. 1 To ail the righteous these white robes are given finally.
K<xl eppe 0T) aurois Iva. dKcnraucrorrai In \povov jjiiKpot/. AugUS-
tine, Alcasar, Ribiera, Bengel, De Wette, Bleek, Holtzmann,
Bousset, etc., explain these words as meaning that the martyrs
1 Erbes, 42 sq., seeks to explain the text by the individual martyrdoms of
Jews and Christians before 62 A.D.
VI. 11.] THE FIFTH SEAL 177
are to be patient and to abstain from their cry of vengeance ;
but Hengstenberg, Diisterdieck, Kliefoth, Alford, Swete, and
others, as meaning that they are to rest in blessedness, as in
XIV. 13, iva avoLTrarj<rovTai e* TOV KOTTWV OLVTWV.
IMS TrX^pojOwaiy KCU 01 owSouXoi auTWK Kal ot d8eX(J>ol aurwi/ ot
jj-e XXorres diroKTeVj eo-Sat <&s Kal auroi. The martyrs are kept
waiting until their fellow-servants also (i.e. KCU), who with them
have the same Master (Seo-Trcmy?, 10), and their brethren (i. 9),
have also been slain. The o-uVSovAot and the dSeA^ot are the
same persons viewed under different aspects. The repeated
cdrreov can best be explained as an unconscious Hebraism.
The above clause looks back to the martyrdoms under Nero,
and anticipates a final and universal persecution under Domitian
which would follow " in a little time." In this persecution he
expects the number of the martyrs to be completed. Then
would ensue the end.
Instead of either of the above explanations of dvaTravo-oi/rai
en, the evidence of contemporary literature is perhaps in favour
of the following : the souls of the martyrs, now clothed in
spiritual bodies (cf. Asc. Isa. ix. 6 sq., where Abel, Enoch, and
others are represented as being so clothed, and in the seventh
heaven, but not yet in possession of their full privileges), are
bidden to enjoy their present rest and quietness for a little while
longer, when, on the completion of the roll of the martyrs, the
judgment they demanded would ensue. In a much earlier work,
i Enoch c. 5, the righteous souls in the intermediate state are
referred to :
"And over all the righteous and holy He will appoint
guardians from amongst the holy angels,
To guard them as the apple of an eye."
In cii. 5 they are bidden "to wait for the day of the judg
ment of sinners," and in civ. 3 (cf. xxii. 5-7, xlvii. 2, xcvii. 3-5),
to pray for judgment on their oppressors. From the contrast of
the conditions of the righteous and wicked in Sheol in xci.-civ.,
it is clear that, though the righteous demand vengeance on the
evil-doers, they are enjoying peace and rest.
In 4 Ezra vii. 85 part of the torment of the wicked souls
after death will consist in seeing " how the habitations of the other
souls are guarded by angels in profound quietness," whilst part
of the blessedness of the righteous souls will consist in beholding
the present evil condition of the souls of the wicked, and the still
greater torments that await them (vii. 93), and in appreciating
"the rest which they now, being gathered in their chambers,
enjoy in profound quietness guarded by angels " (vii. 95).
From the standpoint of the Gospels we cannot understand
VOL. i. 12
1/8 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 11.
how the souls of the righteous could enjoy such rest in the
presence of such suffering.
The view that the end of the world would ensue when the
roll of the martyrs was complete was current in pre-Christian
Judaism.
This thought is highly characteristic of later Judaism, which
held that everything was carried out in the divine government of
the world according to a certain predestined number, time, or
measure. This appears in 4 Ezra iv. 36 sq. :
" For He has weighed the age in the balance,
And with measures has measured the times,
And by number has numbered the seasons :
Neither will He move nor stir things
Till the measure appointed be fulfilled."
In i Enoch xlvii. the end will come when the number of the
martyrs is complete.
Thus in xlvii. i it is said that
" In those days (i.e. the last) shall have ascended the prayer
of the, righteous,
And the blood of the righteous from earth before the Lord
of Spirits."
In the next verse (xlvii. 2) the angels supplicate and intercede
" On behalf of the blood of the righteous which has been
shed,
And that the prayer of the righteous might not be in vain
before the Lord of Spirits,
And that judgment should be done unto them,
And that they may not have to suffer for ever."
Here clearly the souls of Jewish martyrs are referred to,
which demand vengeance and pray against the further postpone
ment of it. In xlvii. 3 the books are opened and the Lord of
Spirits seats Himself on the throne of judgment. In xlvii. 4
reads :
" And the hearts of the holy were filled with joy,
Because the number of the righteous had been offered,
And the prayer of the righteous had been heard,
And the blood of the righteous been required before the
Lord of Spirits."
Here, as the context shows, the righteous are martyrs. This
is the earliest form of this conception, and is reproduced in our
text. A later development of it (see p. 173) is found in 4 Ezra
iv. 35. " Were not these questions of thine asked by the souls
VI. 11-12.] THE SIXTH SEAL 179
of the righteous in their chambers ? How long are we to remain
here? When cometh the fruit upon the threshing-floor of our
reward? And to them the archangel Jeremiel made reply and
said : Even when the number of those like yourself is fulfilled ! "
And in 2 Bar. xxx. 2, "And it will come to pass at that time
that the treasuries shall be opened in which is preserved the
number of the souls of the righteous."
From the above passages it follows that our author is follow
ing a current Jewish tradition. There is no need for supposing
that he had any acquaintance with 4 Ezra ; for the latter repre
sents a later development of this conception, as we have shown.
Bousset, as Spitta, 298, had already done, regards our text and
4 Ezra iv. 35 sq. as independent, but as derived from a common
older source. He represents our author as transforming the
current Jewish tradition, that the world would come to an end
when the number of the souls of the righteous was completed,
into the form given in our text ; but Bousset s view was due to
the unintelligible text of i Enoch xlvii. 4, which, however, when
retranslated into Hebrew, presents the same tradition as our text.
The unintelligibleness was due to the Greek translator rendering
nip as "had drawn nigh" (a possible meaning), instead of "had
been sacrificed," as the context here required (so in later Hebrew
and Aramaic). See p. 172.
11- VII. 8. Tke sixth Seal its plagues and the ensuing pause
during which the faithful Israelites are sealed to secure their safety.
These woes are still in the future. They are not in our author
the immediate heralds of the end, as in the Gospels. The end
cannot come till the great persecution and martyrdom of the
faithful have taken place. With the text compare Mark xiii. 8,
24-25 ; Matt. xxiv. 7, 29; Luke xxi. n, 25-26, xxiii. 30. The
woes, therefore, are not to be taken in their full literal signifi
cance. This is manifest from the fact that after the stars of
heaven had fallen, the heaven been removed as a scroll, and
every mountain and island had been removed out of their places,
the kings of the earth and the mighty, the bond and the free,
could hardly be described as hiding themselves in the caves and
rocks of the earth and imploring the mountains to fall upon
them.
12. KCU, etSoy ore r\voi%ev ri\v acjjpayiSa ri]v IKTYJI ,
KCU aeicrjAos fJieyas eyeVero,
KCU 6 rjXios eyei/exo jj,e\as a>S O-<KKOS Tpt^tfos,
Kal T) acXi^nf) o\T] eyeVero as aipa.
The earthquake here is not to be explained by that in
Laodicea in 61, or at Pompeii in 63. It is rather a single great
earthquake, which is ^ precursor of the end of the world. Thus
180 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN [VI. 12-13.
the <moyxot Kara TOTTOUS ( = Mark xiii. 8) has not only been trans
formed into a single world catastrophe, but also transposed from
holding the third or fourth place in the list of woes to the sixth,
as we have already pointed out.
Earthquakes belong, of course, to the traditional eschato-
logical scheme. Cf. Amos viii. 8, ix. 5 ; Ezek. xxxviii. 19 ;
Joel ii. 10 ; Ass. Mos. x. 4 ; 4 Ezra v. 8, ix. 3; 2 Bar. Ixx. 8. See
Gressmann, i2sqq. There are further references to an earth
quake in our text: viii. 5, xi. 13, xvi. 18. The darkening of the
sun is also a constant eschatological phenomenon : Amos viii. 9 ;
Isa. xiii. IO, 1. 3, evStVw rov ovpavov O-/COTO? /cat cos O-O.KKOV 6r)cra> TO
7rpij3o\aiov avrov : Ezek. xxxii. 7; Joel ii. 10, 31 ( = Mass. iii. 4),
6 ^Ai09 /ATacrTpa<^creTai eis <T/COTOS /cat rj <T\r)vr) eis al/ma
Trplv eA$etv fjfjiepav Kvpcov : Matt. xxiv. 29; Mark xiii. 24; Luke
xxiii. 45 ; Ass. Mos. x. 5 ; Acts ii. 20 (quotation from Joel ii. 31) ;
Rev. ix. 2.
To Joel ii. 31 (see quotation above) and Ass. Mos. x. 5,
"(luna) tota convertet se in sanguinem" we have a very remarkable
parallel in our text. The passage in Ass. Mos. appears to be
directly dependent on the text of Joel save that it adds tota.
Now our text, while it gives a free rendering of the Hebrew
behind both passages (D"6 "]iT), embodies the addition of oXry
in the Ass. Mos. This might be a coincidence, but it seems to
be more. Our author may not improbably have had the text of
this book before him in some form ; for the Ass. Mos. x. 4-5
contains references to earthquakes, the eclipse of the sun, the
ensanguining of the moon, and the disorder of the stars : " Et
tremebit terra ... sol non dabit lumen . . . et (luna) tota
convertet se in sanguinem et orbis stellarum conturbabitur." In
any case he is not dependent on the LXX. For the expectation
in Babylonian literature that the sun and moon would be
darkened, see Zimmern, K.A.T* 393.
13. KCU ol dorepes TOU oupa^oG eireo-ay ets TT]k yfy, ws O-UKTJ
J3d\\i TOUS 6Xui/0ous aurrjs UTTO dyejaou jj-eyaXou aeiojxenrj, 14.
ica! 6 oupai/os aTrexwpur&rj d>s pijSXioK IXioxrojxei oj/. This pas
sage appears to be based on Isa. xxxiv. 4, /cat Ta/c^o-oi/Tai
Tracrat at 8vva/xeis TWV ovpavtoi , /cat eXty^<rTa6 
TVNews
OpenLibrary