A Bible School Manual
Studies in the Book of Revelation
An Introduction, Analysis, and Notes
Containing a concise interpretation according to the symbolic view,
numerous references to authorities, and general mention of other
interpretations,
With the Text of the American Revised Version Edited in Paragraphs, for
the use of Bible Students.
By
Stephen Alexander Hunter, Ph.D., LL.D.
Pittsburgh Printing Company
Pittsburgh, Pa.
1921
CONTENTS
Foreword
Master‐Thoughts upon the Revelation
Preface
Introduction
1. General Introduction.
2. The Title.
3. The Author.
4. The Unity.
5. The Date.
6. The Place.
7. The Canonicity.
8. The Form.
9. The Theme.
10. The Occasion.
11. The Purpose.
12. The Interpretation.
13. The Outline Analysis.
14. The Literary Structure.
15. The Literature.
Scripture Text
Analysis And Notes
I The Prologue, Ch. 1:1‐3:22
1 The Superscription, Ch. 1:1‐3
2 The Salutation, Ch. 1:4‐8
3 The Introductory Vision (The Glorified Son of Man), Ch. 1:9‐20
(1) The Trumpet Voice, Ch. 1:9‐11
(2) The Triumphant Son of Man, Ch. 1:12‐13a
(3) The Gracious Apparel, Ch. 1:13b
(4) The Glorious Appearance, Ch. 1:14‐15, and 16c
(5) The Seven Stars, Ch. 1:16a
(6) The Two‐Edged Sword, Ch. 1:16b
(7) The Assuring Message, Ch. 1:17‐20
4 The Seven Epistles, Ch. 2:1‐3:22
(1) The Epistle to the Church in Ephesus, Ch. 2:1‐7
(2) The Epistle to the Church in Smyrna, Ch. 2:8‐11
(4) The Epistle to the Church in Thyatira, Ch. 2:18‐29
(5) The Epistle to the Church in Sardis, Ch. 3:1‐6
(6) The Epistle to the Church in Philadelphia, Ch. 3:7‐13
(7) The Epistle to the Church in Laodicea, Ch. 3:14‐22
II THE MAIN APOCALYPSE, Ch. 4:1‐22:5
I The Vision of God on the Throne (A Vision of Sovereignty). Ch.
4:1‐5:14
1 The Throne and the King, Ch. 4:1‐3, 5a, and 6a
2 The Four and Twenty Elders, Ch. 4:4, 10 and 11
3 The Seven Lamps of Fire (or Torches), Ch. 4:5b
4 The Four Living Creatures, Ch. 4. 6b‐9
5 The Sealed Book (or Scroll), Ch. 5:1‐5
6 The Lamb, Ch. 5:6‐8a
7 The Heavenly Worship, Ch. 5:8b‐14
II The Vision of the Seven Seals (A Vision of Trial). Ch. 6:1‐17,
and 8:1
1 The Opening of the First Seal, Ch. 6:1, 2
2 The Opening of the Second Seal, Ch. 6:3, 4
3 The Opening of the Third Seal, Ch. 6:5, 6
4 The Opening of the Fourth Seal, Ch. 6:7, 8
5 The Opening of the Fifth Seal, Ch. 6:9‐11
6 The Opening of the Sixth Seal, Ch. 6:12‐17
7 The Opening of the Seventh Seal, Ch. 8:1
IIb The Episode of the Sealed Ones (A Vision of Salvation Assured).
Ch. 7:1‐17
A The Sealed of Israel, Ch. 7:1‐8
1 The Angels Holding the Winds, Ch. 7:1‐3
2 The Number of the Sealed, Ch. 7:4‐8
B The Redeemed Out of All Nations, Ch. 7:9‐17
1 The Innumerable Multitude, Ch. 7:9
2 The Cry of the Church Triumphant, Ch. 7:10‐12
3 The Redeemed Before the Throne, Ch. 7:13‐17
III The Vision of the Seven Trumpets (A Vision of Threatening). Ch.
8:2‐9:21, and 11:14‐19
A The Preparation for the Trumpets, Ch. 8:2‐6
1 An Angel Offers Incense upon the Golden Altar, Ch. 8:3‐5
2 The Seven Angels Prepare to Sound, Ch. 8:2, 6
B The Trumpets Sounded, Ch. 8:7‐9:21; and 11:14‐19
1 The Sounding of the First Trumpet, Ch. 8:7
2 The Sounding of the Second Trumpet, Ch. 8:8‐9
3 The Sounding of the Third Trumpet, Ch. 8:10‐11
4 The Sounding of the Fourth Trumpet, Ch. 8:12
(1) The Eagle and Its Message, Ch. 8:13
5 The Sounding of the Fifth Trumpet, Ch. 9:1‐12
6 The Sounding of the Sixth Trumpet, Ch. 9:13‐21, and 11:14
7 The Sounding of the Seventh Trumpet, Ch. 11:15‐19
IIIb The Episode of the Angel with the Book; and of the Two
Witnesses (A Vision of Divine Help). Ch. 10:1‐11:13
A The Angel with the Little Open Book, Ch. 10:1‐11
1 The Angel Foretells the End, Ch. 10:1‐7
(1) The Thunder Voices, Ch. 10:3b and 4
2 The Book Delivered to John, Ch. 10:8‐11
B The Two Witnesses, Ch. 11:1‐13
1 The Measurement of the Temple, Ch. 11:1‐2
2 The Two Witnesses and their Martyrdom, Ch. 11:3‐13
IV The Vision of Conflict (A Vision of Warfare). Ch. 12:1‐14:20
A The Woman and the Dragon, Ch. 12:1‐6, and 13‐17
1 The Sun‐Clothed Woman, Ch. 12:1‐2, 5‐6, and 13f.
2 The Great Red Dragon, Ch. 12:3‐4, and 13f.
3 The All‐Ruling Man‐Child, Ch. 12:5
4 The Wilderness Refuge, Ch. 12:6a, and 14a
5 The Persecution of the Woman and her Seed, Ch. 12:4‐6, and
13‐17
B War in Heaven, Ch. 12:7‐12
C The Two Beasts, Ch. 13:1‐18
1 The First Beast—the Beast from the Sea, Ch. 13:1‐10
(1) An Admonition to Patience, Ch. 13:9‐10
2 The Second Beast,—the Beast from the Land, Ch. 13:11‐18.
(1.) An Admonition to Wisdom, Ch. 13:18
D. The Lamb on Mount Zion, Ch. 14:1‐20
1. The Redeemed with the Lamb, Ch. 14:1‐5
2. The Three Angel Messages, Ch. 14:6‐11
(1) The Message of the Eternal Gospel, Ch. 14:6‐7
(2) The Message of Babylon’s Fall, Ch. 14:8
(3) The Message of Doom for the Beast and his Followers,
Ch. 14:9‐11
3. The Blessedness of the Holy Dead, Ch. 14:12‐13
4. The Harvest of the Elect, Ch. 14:14‐16
5. The Vintage of Wrath, Ch. 14:17‐20
V. The Vision of the Seven Vials [or Bowls] (A Vision of Judgment).
Ch. 15:1‐16:12, and 16:17‐21
A. The Preparation for the Vials, Ch. 15:1‐8
1. The Angels with the Plagues, Ch. 15:1‐2a
2. The Victors by the Sea, Ch. 15:2b
3. The Song of the Redeemed, Ch. 15:3‐4
4. The Judgment Made Ready, Ch. 15:5‐8
B. The Vials Poured Out, Ch. 16:1‐12, and 17‐21
(1.) The Command to Pour Out the Vials, Ch. 16:1
1 The Pouring Out of the First Vial, Ch. 16:2
2 The Pouring Out of the Second Vial, Ch. 16:3
3 The Pouring Out of the Third Vial, Ch. 16:4‐7
4 The Pouring Out of the Fourth Vial, Ch. 16:8‐9
5 The Pouring Out of the Fifth Vial, Ch. 16:10‐11
6 The Pouring Out of the Sixth Vial, Ch. 16:12
7 The Pouring Out of the Seventh Vial, Ch. 16:17‐21
Vb The Episode of the Frog‐like Spirits (A Vision of Warning). Ch.
16:13‐16
1 The Unclean Spirits of Evil, Ch. 16:13‐14, and 16
2 John’s Word of Warning, Ch. 16:15
VI The Vision of Victory (A Vision of Vindication). Ch. 17:1‐20:15
A The Mystic Babylon and Her Fall, Ch. 17:1‐18:24
1 The Harlot and the Interpretation, Ch. 17:1‐18
(1) The Judgment of the Harlot Announced, Ch. 17:1‐2
(2) The View of the Harlot, Ch. 17:3‐6
(3) The Interpretation Given, Ch. 17:7‐18
2 The Fall of the City Proclaimed, Ch. 18:1‐24
(1) The Announcement of Her Overthrow, Ch. 18:1‐3
(2) The Warning to God’s People, Ch. 18:4‐8
(3) The Lament of the Kings of the Earth over Her Doom, Ch.
18:9‐10
(4) The Lament of the Merchants, Ch. 18:11‐17a
(5) The Lament of the Seamen, Ch. 18. 17b‐19
(6) A Call to Heaven and to the Church to Rejoice, Ch.
18:20
(7) The Symbol of Her Irretrievable Ruin, Ch. 18:21‐24
B The Triumph of the Redeemed, Ch. 19:1‐10
1 The Choral Song of Hallelujahs, Ch. 19:1‐8
2 The Blessedness of the Marriage Supper, Ch. 19:9
3 Worship Refused by the Angel, Ch. 19:10
C The Last Things, Ch. 19:11‐20:15
1 The End of the Holy War, Ch. 19:11‐21
2 Satan Bound, Ch. 20:1‐3a
3 The First Resurrection, Ch. 20:4‐6
4 The Millennium, Ch. 20.: 2b, 3b, 4b, 5a, 6b and 7a
5 Satan Loosed Again and Overthrown, Ch. 20:3c, and 7‐10
6 The Second Resurrection, Ch. 20:11‐12a, and 13a
7 The Last Judgment, Ch. 20:11‐15
VII The Vision of the New Jerusalem (A Vision of Triumph). Ch.
21:1‐22:5
1 The New Heaven and the New Earth, Ch. 21:1
2 The Holy City, Ch. 21:2‐22:5
(1) The Tabernacle of God with Men, Ch. 21:3‐4
(2) The Bride, the Lamb’s Wife, Ch. 21:2, 9‐10
(3) The City of New Things, Ch. 21:5‐8
(4) The City of Glory, Ch. 21:11‐21
(5) The City of Many Nations, Ch. 21:24, and 26
(6) The City of Exclusions, Ch. 21:1, 4, 22, 23, 25, 27; and
22:3, 5
(7) The City of Life, Ch. 22:1‐2
(8) The City of God, Ch. 22:3‐5
III THE EPILOGUE, Ch. 22:6‐21
A The Final Words of the Angel, with the Promise of Christ, Ch.
22:6‐16
1 The Message Reaffirmed, Ch. 22:6‐9
(1) The Witness of the Angel, Ch. 22:6‐7
(2) The Witness Confirmed by John, Ch. 22:8a
(3) Worship from John again Refused, Ch. 22:8b‐9
2 The Book Not to be Sealed, Ch. 22:10‐11
3 The Promise of Christ to the Victors, Ch. 22:12‐16
B The Closing Testimony of John, Ch. 22:17‐20
1 A Last Universal Invitation of Grace, Ch. 22:17
2 A Last Impressive Warning of Exhortation, Ch. 22:18‐19
3 A Last Assuring Promise of Hope, Ch. 22:20a
4 A last Ecstatic Prayer of Yearning, Ch. 22:20b
C The Author’s Benediction, Ch. 22:21
Appendix A: Some Fundamental Conceptions of the Apocalypse
Appendix B: Current Questions of Divided Opinion
Appendix C: Heptachords of Song and Blessing
Appendix D: The Formal Series of Sevens
Appendix E: The Symbolism of Numbers
Appendix F: The Literary Structure of the Apocalypse
Appendix G: The Apocalyptic Literature
Footnotes
[Cover Page]
[Illustration]
Map of Proconsular Asia. Following Ramsay, in _St. Paul the Traveller and
Roman Citizen_.
Η ΑΠΟΚΑΛΥΨΙΣ
The Text of Revelation given in this volume is that of the American
Standard Edition of the Revised Bible, copyright 1901 by Thomas Nelson &
Sons, and is used by permission of the publishers.
TO
ALL MY CLASSMATES, FRIENDS,
AND
FELLOW PILGRIMS ON LIFE’S JOURNEY,
FOR WHOM THE BOOK OF REVELATION,
TINGED THOUGH IT IS WITH MYSTERY,
CONTAINS A MANIFESTATION OF THE DIVINE PURPOSE
IN CREATION AND REDEMPTION,
AND A VISION OF THE FAR GLORY IN THE WORLD BEYOND,
THIS VOLUME—
WRITTEN IN THE HOPE THAT THE INTERPRETATION OFFERED
MAY CONTRIBUTE IN SOME DEGREE TO A CLEARER APPREHENSION OF THE BOOK,
AND MAY HELP IN SOME MEASURE TO MAKE ITS MESSAGE RICH,
AND SWEET, AND ABIDING—
IS RESPECTFULLY AND AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED
BY THE AUTHOR.
FOREWORD
The manuscript of this Commentary was completed several years ago, but its
publication was unfortunately deferred until the author’s health no longer
permitted him to see it through the press or even to be consulted in
regard to modifications. For this latter reason no change of any kind has
been made either in the language or the arrangement of the material. In
the bibliography we have added the two recent monumental contributions to
the literature on the Book of Revelation, commentaries by I. T. Beckwith
and R. H. Charles. Had the author possessed the physical strength after
their appearance, we feel sure that he would have drawn upon these two
extensive works which are intended for the use of technical scholars.
The significance of Dr. Hunter’s “Studies in the Book of Revelation” lies
in its clear and accurate presentation of the results of the investigation
of modern scholars, in language which is comprehensible to the intelligent
reader of the English Bible. The Revelation of St. John has been an enigma
from the earliest Christian centuries. On the one hand, it has been
shunned because of its mysteriousness; on the other, it has been
discredited for sober‐minded, intelligent Christians by the absurd
vagaries of its interpreters. Too often the caprice or predilection of the
commentator, rather than impartial study, has determined the meaning of
the closing book of the New Testament canon. The removal of this reproach
has been one of the signal achievements of the Biblical scholarship of the
last twenty‐five years. Such a notable result has been accomplished by the
discovery and the interpretation of the Jewish Apocalyptic, a type of
literature that flourished from 200 B. C. on for several centuries. The
Revelation belongs to this type of literature. It is the expression of a
Christian’s faith in the triumph of his Lord’s kingdom through the use of
symbolism and imagery peculiar to Jewish Apocalyptic literature. Our
author, in common with all modern scholars, has used this key for
unlocking the mystery of the closing book of the Christian Scriptures. By
its employment he has made clear the meaning of the Revelation to the
open‐minded reader of the English Bible. On every page the work gives
evidence of scholarship, wide in its range, and thorough in its grasp, as
well as of sanity of judgment in the discussion of controversial
questions. Because of these qualities, Dr. Hunter’s treatise is worthy of
wide circulation. It meets a special need at this time as it is especially
adapted to counteract fantastic theories of interpretation and theology
which are based on a misunderstanding of both the purpose and the
symbolism of a New Testament book that ranks as an equal of the greatest
pieces of imaginative literature.
The proofs have been read by Mr. Walter H. Millinger, of the senior class
of the Seminary, and the publication of the book has been made possible
only by the painstaking effort of a devoted friend and fellow‐worker of
Dr. Hunter, Mr. W. H. Wicks of the Pittsburgh Printing Company to whom
both the author and the reader are deeply indebted.
JAMES A. KELSO.
_The Western Theological Seminary,_
_Pittsburgh, Pa._
MASTER‐THOUGHTS UPON THE REVELATION(1)
“*I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and
the end*” (Rev. 22.13):—“This is the unifying thought of the whole book:
nay of the whole Bible. _The Revelation of St. John is the meeting ground
of the Old and New Testament_: what binds the long succession of books—by
so many authors, of so many different ages—into a unity is expressed by
the saying that ‘the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.’ The
whole of prophetic literature yields its imaginative figures to adorn this
final Revelation; all history is made one by the central thought of the
kingdom of the world becoming the kingdom of Christ.”—RICHARD G.
MOULTON,—in _Literature of the Bible_.
“_The Book of Revelation is the sum of all prophecy._ It carries the
devout reader to a height from which he can see the history of God’s
kingdom from its beginning to its consummation in glory. It is the
sublimest book in the Bible, and its study awakens the profoundest
worship.”—J. M. STIFLER,—in unpublished _Classroom Lectures_.
“_The Apocalypse constitutes the meridian of Hebrew poetry and art_,
embracing in its individual forms the most diverse elements.... If the
laws of its construction be but recognized, the obscure Book of Revelation
will present itself to our eyes as a radiant constellation, a symmetrical
cathedral built upon a plan of perfect clearness and transparency.”—JOHN
PETER LANGE,—in _Commentary on the Revelation_.
“_The book has an imperishable religious worth_ because of the energy of
faith that finds expression in it, and the splendid certainty of its
conviction that God’s cause remains always the best, and is one with the
cause of Jesus Christ; but it is unreasonable to treat the detail of its
phantasies as an authentic source for a history of the past or future.”—A.
JÜLICHER,—in _Introduction to the New Testament_.
“_In the Apocalypse the emphasis placed upon the omnipotence of God rises
to a climax._ There only in the New Testament (except II Cor. 6.18) is the
epithet Παντοκράτωρ [All‐Ruler] ascribed to Him; and the whole purport of
the book is the portrayal of the Divine guidance of history, and the very
essence of its message that, despite all surface appearances, it is the
hand of God that really directs all occurrences, and all things are
hastening to the end of His determining.... It is the completeness of the
Divine government to which the world is subject by the Lord of lords and
King of kings, the Ruler of the earth and King of the nations, whose
control of all the occurrences of time is in accordance with His holy
purposes, that it is the supreme object of this book to portray.”—B. B.
WARFIELD,—in art. “Predestination”, Hastings’ _Dict. of the Bible_.
“_The Apocalypse is doctrinally the connecting link between the Synoptists
and the Fourth Gospel._ It offers the characteristic thoughts of the
Fourth Gospel in that form of development which belongs to the earliest
apostolic age.... The points of connection between the Apocalypse and the
Gospel of St. John are far more numerous than are suggested by a first
general comparison. The main idea of both is the same. Both present a view
of a supreme conflict between the powers of good and evil.... In both
books alike Christ is the central figure. His victory is the end to which
history and vision lead as their consummation. His Person and Work are the
ground of triumph; and of triumph through apparent failure. Both present
the abiding of God with man as the issue of Christ’s work.”—BP.
WESTCOTT,—in _Introduction to John’s Gospel, Bible Commentary_.
“_In Revelation_, as in John’s Gospel and First Epistle, _the
consciousness of a world‐conflict, a world‐process, and a world‐triumph is
manifest_. The return of Jesus is contemplated in relation to the enlarged
environment in which Christianity stood. Revelation testifies to the
existence of the hope with which Christianity had begun; but also to the
fact that into that hope had centered the fuller conception of Christ and
His salvation which the apostles had taught, and the broadened vision of
the purpose of God which history had made clear. Yet it was still the same
hope, ‘Behold He cometh,’ and the prayer was still the same, ‘Come Lord
Jesus’.”—GEORGE T. PURVES,—in _The Apostolic Age_.
“_The fundamental conception of the book is_ neither human weakness upon
the one hand nor divine power upon the other, but _divine power victorious
through apparent human weakness, life triumphant over death_.”—WILLIAM
MILLIGAN,—in _Discussions on the Apocalypse_.
“However long the conflict, _this book assures us of the ultimate triumph
of the Lamb_. That figure suggests Incarnation in order to Redemption; and
the description of the New Jerusalem shows us Light and Life reigning
eternally because the Lamb is ‘the lamp thereof’.”—MATTHEW B. RIDDLE,—in
unpublished _Classroom Lectures_.
“St John knew himself to be a prophet, and his writing to be a prophecy;
that he was commanded to consign his visions to a book was an assurance to
him that their purpose would not be fulfilled in one generation or two. He
sees the book going down to posterity, and like the Deuteronomist he
endeavors to guard it against interpolation and excision. As he writes the
last words upon the papyrus roll that lies upon his knee, the conviction
dawns upon him that _the Revelation of Jesus Christ was given for the
warning and comfort of the whole church to the end of time_.”—HENRY B.
SWETE,—in _The Apocalypse of St. John_.
“_The author of this great book has bequeathed to mankind a_ κτῆμα ἐς αεί,
_an imperishable possession_, the worth of which lies in the splendid
energy of its faith, in the unfaltering certainty that God’s own cause is
at issue now and here and must ultimately prevail, and that the cause of
Jesus Christ is inseparably linked therewith, and the main aim of which,
as is clear from every page, is to emphasize the overwhelming worth of
things spiritual as contrasted with things material, and in the next place
to glorify martyrdom, to encourage the faithful to face death with
constancy, nay more, with rapturous joy.”—R. H. CHARLES,—in _Studies in
the Apocalypse_.
The closing book of the New Testament with its prophetic outlook and
divine forecast, leaves us in the attitude of expectancy:—“*Looking for
that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our
Savior Jesus Christ*.”—THE EPISTLE TO TITUS, Ch. 2:13.
PREFACE
The purpose of this volume is to present in concise form the general
thought and meaning of the Book of Revelation, to give an analytic view of
its contents, and to summarize the results of critical study. It is
intended both as an aid to interpretation, and as a guide to the use of
the many valuable commentaries which are now accessible to the English
reader. It is specially designed to meet the needs of the student in the
theological seminary or the modern Bible school, the busy pastor in his
field, the teacher of adult Bible classes, the Christian Association
worker, and the general reader of the Bible. With this object in view it
essays to provide in a direct and helpful form (1) the essential points of
Introduction; (2) an Analytic Study of the book which aims to discover its
meaning as a whole rather than to deal with it text by text; and (3) a
brief statement in a series of Appendices of some of the underlying
conceptions which give color to its thought and enter into its literary
structure.
The increased impetus given to Biblical study by advanced scholarship in
late years has created a demand for a class of works that give the results
attained by the masters of exegesis and critical research, without
attempting to give the various steps by which these results have been
reached. And it is one primary aim of this work, while attempting to give
a fresh statement of the teachings of the book, and to present such
thoughts as have come to the Author in the course of extended study, at
the same time to give due consideration to the varying opinions of others,
and for the most part to reproduce in the form which these have taken in
his own mind the best and most satisfactory explanations of the many
difficulties in the book which have hitherto been given by leading
scholars and commentators. For the book has proved a fertile field for
expositors that has been widely even if not always well worked in the
past, while in the last half‐century really substantial progress has been
made toward the general interpretation; and it may be confidently assumed
that any one who ignores these results has almost certainly nothing to
contribute to the solution of the real difficulties that confront us. In
response to extended popular inquiry some excellent commentaries and
expository works on the Revelation have been prepared in late years for
the general reader. And it is in order to further meet this requirement of
intelligent Bible study, and to contribute in some measure to what is
believed to be one of the most common needs of the general student of
Scripture, _a comprehensive view of each book_, that the publication of
the present Studies in the Book of Revelation has been undertaken.
It is necessarily true that a work so largely poetical in its thought as
the Apocalypse, and appealing so much to the imagination, does not lend
itself easily to logical analysis. Every such division, if exhaustive,
must be in a measure arbitrary. The main purpose in attempting it is to
present the principal ideas of the book in what is conceived to be their
proper relation. And in this we need not assume that the particular
outline which we adopt was formally in the mind of the writer. It is quite
enough if we can be assured that the formative ideas were conceived of in
somewhat the same relation, and that the analysis we accept at least
measurably represents the author’s point of view. This form of statement
enables us to grasp the contents of the book in their entirety and to
retain them in memory.
The view presented in the Analysis and Notes of this volume is not
intended to be controversial but interpretative. Hence other views of
particular passages have often not been stated, or are given only in foot‐
notes, and no special effort has been made to support the view given by
any extended discussions, as that would lead us too far afield for the
purpose in mind. For those who wish a wider view, references are given to
well‐known authorities. Much that might have been said has been left out
for the sake of brevity; for in this busy age few find time for extended
study, and the great works on the Revelation often lie unread on the
shelves. To reach the man of this generation the message must be short,
clear, and decisive. And with this in view the chief aim is to show that
the general meaning of the Revelation can be clearly understood, whatever
difference of opinion there may be concerning the more difficult portions;
and as a contribution toward this end to give in a direct form what the
Author of the present work regards as the correct method of interpreting
it. Other interpretations have been introduced where they serve to
illustrate this main purpose, or have special force and afford additional
light, or have been widely accepted and have affected the course of
opinion. The outline interpretation given in this work, while it does not
follow without deviation any particular view throughout or in every
respect—for a blind acceptance of any one method of interpretation would
often block the path to better knowledge, and perhaps cause us to miss the
real meaning—yet it accepts the principles of the Symbolical or Spiritual
School as affording in the main the best solution of the problems of
interpretation. The authorities cited in connection with any passage, when
not quoted, though they may differ somewhat in statement, will be found to
hold in some form the view given in the analysis.
It is not without considerable hesitation, and a personal sense of the
shortcomings of the present work, that it is now given to the public. It
necessarily contains much that is already familiar to the reader, and it
should be regarded as an effort to present in concise form and in one’s
own way what has been gathered through many years of patient study, and by
constant comparison with the works of the best commentators, together with
such thoughts as have come to the Author in the course of his inquiry. And
if thereby the reader should be in any measure led to a clearer
understanding or a more careful study of this marvellously beautiful and
strangely eloquent message of Christ to his church which is contained in
the Book of Revelation—the meaning of which has been too often
misunderstood by the Christian reader, or passed by as an insoluble
mystery,—it will be to the Author an abundant reward for his effort and a
cause for personal gratitude to Almighty God.
STEPHEN A. HUNTER,
Pittsburgh, Pa.
INTRODUCTION
1. General Introduction.
The Revelation is the most difficult book to interpret of any in the New
Testament canon. Its meaning is often involved in much obscurity, and the
interpretation of eminent scholars has differed so widely in the past that
we cannot always be sure, especially in the more difficult portions, that
the particular view which appears to us the more satisfactory or
convincing is certainly the correct one. This divergence of opinion has
had the unfortunate effect of disparaging the worth of the Apocalypse as a
part of the Word of God in the mind of many earnest students, who have
come to regard its meaning as so obscure, and hidden in such hopeless
perplexity, that any further attempt to interpret it is entirely
fruitless. So much, too, has been written about the book which abounds in
manifest vagaries that men of sober mind have often been thereby deterred
from forming or expressing any definite opinion concerning its teaching.
Indeed it is difficult to say whether the Revelation has suffered more in
the hands of expositors by means of fanciful and mistaken interpretation
of its true contents, or by the interpolation of ideas wholly foreign to
its thought. But, however brought about, we have reached this strangely
incongruous result, that what was originally designed to be the
_revelation_ of mystery has become instead the _mystery_ of Revelation.
There is evident necessity, therefore, of particular care in forming our
views with regard to the meaning of many portions of the book, and also of
often holding our opinions tentatively and subject to review, especially
in our earlier studies, as probable rather than positive interpretations.
We should avoid alike the mistake of dogmatically asserting that the
Apocalypse cannot be understood at all, or of affirming that it can be
fully understood.(2) And yet with this reservation in mind the book is
still a rich mine of spiritual wealth, much of which lies upon the
surface, while even its deeper mysteries abundantly reward our careful
search. For we are not justified in casting aside any part of divine
revelation upon the plea of apparent obscurity; and to do so is
practically to deny that it is a revelation. On the contrary we are under
manifest obligation to interpret the message of the Apocalypse so far as
we can, for to fail of this is to neglect the sure word of prophecy. And
even though the original meaning of the visions to John’s mind, and the
interpretation given them by those to whom they were first made known,
oftentimes cannot now be definitely determined,(3) yet the value of the
book does not depend solely upon that, however helpful it would be. The
matter of supreme importance for us is to apprehend aright the far‐seeing
and ulterior purpose in the mind of the Spirit in giving the Revelation.
And in search for this we should not allow our zeal for the original
interpretation to lead us to forget the significant lesson of the Old
Testament, that the primary teaching of prophecy has often not voiced its
deeper message, that God’s thought has mostly proved wider than man’s
first apprehension; so that in our reading of the prophets we are not
limited to the primary application, however important it may be, but
should strive rather to grasp the broader sweep and deeper thought made
plain by the fuller development of the divine purpose—the general meaning
for the whole church in all time rather than the particular meaning for
one age or generation. This consideration we will find of great value in
dealing with the generic and flexile forms of imagery contained in the
symbols of the Apocalypse, where in attending to a multiplicity of detail
the deeper and broader thought may so easily be misapprehended or even
entirely escape our notice.
The visions of the Apocalypse are generally conceded to belong to the
latter part of the first century, and manifestly relate in main portion to
the then future, whether near or far, of the church of Christ in the
world, for they pertain to a profoundly impressive prophetic experience.
The divine path of God’s people among the nations is beheld in symbol,
type, and figure, ever leading on to victory through Jesus Christ his Son
and our Lord; the church and the world are seen engaged in a multiform and
deadly conflict, while the consummation is depicted in the fall of evil
and the ruin of nature wrought by sin; and the triumph of the holy is set
forth in a vision of complete restoration to the divine presence amid the
beauty of a new world and the glories of the New Jerusalem—an outcome
never once in doubt, for God rules through all and wins. And though in
this ever changing picture the conditions of the early church and of the
first century are constantly reflected in every part, yet the
representative character of the whole may be clearly seen. Indeed one
cannot but be impressed with the fine insight and spirit of reserve which
is manifested by John throughout the book, in avoiding such explanations
as might serve to narrow the visions to a purely local and temporary
perspective, thereby evidencing that he had risen to a truly prophetic
view, and that to his mind the visions belonged to a wider horizon as well
as to the nearer limit of his own day. For whatever application or
fulfilment these may have had, and surely _did_ have, in the period in
which they were given, has not exhausted their meaning. To the ear that is
open to God’s voice they have a lesson and significance that belong alike
to the past, the present, and the future, a perennial freshness that time
can neither fade nor destroy, for they manifest the principles of the
divine government which abide for all the ages.
In the light of modern criticism the primary question to be decided is
whether we are dealing with an ordinary Jewish‐Christian apocalypse of
similar value with a multitude of others in the past, and with no
essentially deeper meaning or diviner message; or whether we have not in
the Apocalypse of John a true revelation, given in this literary form
because of its particular suitability to the condition of the time, and
its fitness for the needs of the generation that first received it. And
the answer to this question must be sought in the contents of the book
itself as vindicated by the Christian conscience—an answer that the church
has never been slow to make, and that never can be changed so long as the
needs of the human heart remain the same. We must therefore regard the
fundamental question which lies back of that of interpretation, viz. the
inspiration of the book itself, which alone can give it permanent value to
the Christian mind, as definitely settled by the clear message which it
contains for life, by the multitudinous voices of God which reverberate
within it, and by the heaven‐born solace which it ever affords to tried
and tempted men in the midst of the conflict of life. And we shall find
that the general meaning, so far from being hopelessly obscure, may be
fairly understood by the attentive student and devout reader.
The obscurity of the Revelation arises both from its literary form and
from the mystical character of its contents. The Apocalyptic form is so
foreign to our way of thinking, and the mysticism is so peculiarly
Oriental and Jewish, that these are apt to perplex rather than enlighten
us. The Apocalyptist, deeply absorbed in the later prophecies of the Old
Testament, especially those of Daniel and Ezekiel, and his mind steeped in
the dreams and images of current Jewish apocalypses, found under the
influence of the Spirit a fitting sphere for his prophetic fervor in a
series of strange symbolic visions such as belonged to the fashion of his
time. The chief symbolism throughout is that of the Old Testament,
quickened and vivified by the thought of the New,—for it is everywhere
assumed that the mysteries of the former dispensation find their only
adequate solution in the supreme and final testimony of Jesus the
Christ,(4)—but the atmosphere of the visions is that of Apocalyptic, which
curiously enough has contrived to cast its own peculiar glow upon all the
Old Testament teachings and thus create a new symbolism out of the old.
And even when many of the symbols are assumed to be drawn in their present
form from apocalypses then current in the Jewish world but which are no
longer extant, and these to be derived in part from Babylonian and Persian
sources, as held by one class of interpreters, they are yet found to have
become so assimilated by the Jewish mind that they reflect the later
development of Old Testament thought. These visions of the seer, like
shadows cast upon the foreground of the future, depict in outline great
fundamental truths or pervasive principles of the divine government that
are, and are to be, manifested in multiple facts in the progress of the
ages. It is not the purpose of the visions to disclose the facts
themselves, for that belongs to the development of history, but rather to
furnish the means for interpreting the facts, when once they appear, by
the exalted standard of the divine ideals. There are, indeed, a few
cardinal facts of the future that are kept well in the foreground, such as
the second coming of Christ, the triumph of God’s kingdom, and the end of
the present world; but these belong to the content of previous revelation
as well, and are not new or peculiar to this book. The content of the
visions is generic and not specific, and whenever we depart from broad
generalization and attempt to enter into detail in our interpretation, we
destroy the beauty and force of the lesson conveyed, and wander into the
field of speculation concerning things that were never intended to be
revealed, if the analogy of all other prophecy can be relied upon as a
guide.(5) For though the Apocalypse undoubtedly contains an element of
predictive prophecy, yet such prophecy is not history written before its
time, but a divinely inspired and profoundly discriminative pre‐view of
certain dominant issues in the future that belong to the purpose of God,
and are the resultant of well established principles of the divine
government—issues that stand out to the prophet’s illumined eye in bold
relief against the sky‐line like the headlands of a continent amid the
surrounding mists which envelop them.
Prophecy in this view is looked upon as much broader in its scope than the
_fore_telling of things that are future. This element should be regarded
as subordinate to the general purpose of prophecy, which is the
_forth_telling of the mind of God.(6) And we should avoid that “dwarfed
sense of the word prophecy in modern speech” which leads most readers (and
even interpreters) to fasten upon a revelation of the secrets of the
future. For it is evident that “Old Testament history and prophecy make
prominent another kind of revelation—the unveiling of the ideal, as when
the pattern of things sacred was unfolded to Moses in the mount”.(7) In
the true sense of prophecy it manifestly contains both these conceptions,
viz. the Prophetico‐predictive, and the Prophetico‐ideal, which enter in
varying proportion into the great messages of old. But it is believed by
many of our best authorities, and it will be found in a careful study of
the book of Revelation, that the prophetic element is not chiefly
predictive in the strict sense, and can for the most part be best
interpreted as the unveiling of the divine ideal which is being inwrought
in the sphere of human life, or the manifestation of the divine purpose
which is discovered as interpenetrating all the moral struggle and
apparent contradictions of earthly experience, and which is leading up to
the final victory; and only such glimpses of the future are given as serve
to assure a better comprehension of this main idea.(8)
The two most obvious principles that pervade the book of Revelation and
underlie its ever changing scenes, are, _first_, God’s method of
government in the world by the trial of his people and the judgment of the
wicked; and, _second_, God’s method of developing character in moral
agents by moral conflict. Accepting these as in a measure interpretative
of the ways of God with men, the Apocalypse approaches the standpoint of
the divine perspective, and traces the great lines of the divine purpose
as they traverse the entire field of human history. It makes Christ’s
relation to his people both in time and in eternity the ground of an
exhaustive inquiry into the mysteries of earthly life, which aims not only
to discover God in the trend of history but also to interpret God through
history wrought out to its end. It affords glimpses of God’s far reaching
plan in the process of redemption, leading up to the final salvation of
unnumbered multitudes; it finds the key to earth’s long‐drawn‐out story of
sin and suffering, of conflict and of death, in wider victory at larger
cost; and it teaches us to look calmly out beyond the ebb and flow of
tides and noons to the shoreless, timeless life that ever abides in the
presence of God. To the heart of faith it speaks of an unwavering trust
when days are dark and storms fill the sky; like a clear voice out of the
night it tells of the coming day; and with persuasive force its visions
bring man face to face with God, his Creator, Redeemer, and Eternal
Friend.
2. The Title.
The Title used in the Authorized Version of our English Scriptures, and
retained by the English Revisers, is “The Revelation of St. John the
Divine,” a name given to the book by the early church, though many of the
older manuscripts omit “the Divine”. Our American Revisers read, “The
Revelation of John;” but the more correct title is the one that is
commonly used, and that is printed in the upper margin of the text, simply
“The Revelation,” i. e. the unveiling, or uncovering [viz. of the mystery
of the divine purpose and method in human life and history]—the opening
words of the book itself—or, if preferred, the original Greek name, “The
Apocalypse”,(9) which perhaps should have been retained without
translation as in the Douay Version, but of which “The Revelation” is the
exact equivalent. The phrase “of St. John”, or “of John”, may properly be
omitted because of its ambiguity; for the book is declared in its opening
sentence to be “the Revelation of Jesus Christ”, i. e. a revelation of or
from Jesus Christ, and it is only in a secondary sense “the Revelation of
John”, i. e. a revelation made to and recorded by John. The occasion for
the use of this title, “The Revelation of St. John”, in the first
centuries was in order to distinguish the canonical Apocalypse from many
others then in circulation, but this necessity has long since ceased to
exist. For us it stands alone, it is _the_ Apocalypse, the Revelation.
3. The Author.
That the Author of the Revelation was named John we have no reason to
doubt, if we believe the statements of the book itself, for this is
distinctly affirmed three different times.(10) He is also further
described in one form of the title as “the Divine,” i. e. the one who
discoursed about God, or the theologian. This latter designation, though
of uncertain origin and date, and omitted by the American Revisers as
without sufficient support, is yet undoubtedly as old as the latter part
of the third century(11) while it may be much older, and has therefore
some claim to traditional authority. The title, however, in any form is
subsequent to the book itself. The statements of the Author concerning
himself and his relations to the church in Asia, appear to the general
reader to be decisive, and to indicate with sufficient clearness that the
writer was none other than John the son of Zebedee, the apostle whom Jesus
loved, though this is not the view of the majority of the later critics.
Some consider it to be the work of another John known to tradition as the
Presbyter;(12) others attribute it to an unknown author of that name, or
to some one writing under that name. But notwithstanding the frequency and
positiveness with which the Apostolic Authorship and the Unity of the Book
have been called in question during the last half century, the entire
results of critical research may with some confidence be said not to have
discredited either of them.(13)
The considerations which support the Apostolic Authorship are chiefly the
following:—(1) the evidence of early Christian tradition imbedded in
history is practically unanimous in its favor, and the book was accepted
as the Apostle’s without question by the church in Asia where it
originated: (2) the internal evidence is to most minds convincing and even
decisive, viz. (a) the Author declares himself to be John, and addresses
the churches in Asia as their “brother, and partaker in tribulation,” and
there is no satisfactory historical evidence of any other John in Asia,
except the Apostle, of sufficient standing and influence to have spoken to
the churches with the authority of a prophet;(14) (b) there is a deep and
essential similarity of thought, diction, and doctrine in the Apocalypse
and in John’s Gospel and Epistles which outweighs all differences of
language, grammar, and style that appear upon the surface; (c) there is an
undercurrent “tragic tone” found in the Apocalypse, such as is manifest in
all of John’s writings, especially when he deals with the sad and terrible
phases of human life and character, and this serves to point toward the
Apostle as the author.
The grounds upon which the Apostolic Authorship is denied are:—(1) the
general inconclusiveness of tradition, even though in this case the
evidence is admitted to be particularly strong: (2) the pseudonymity of
all other apocalypses, with the apparent exception of “The Shepherd of
Hermas”, and hence the probability that this in a similar way may have
been written under the assumed name of John in order to give it
acceptance:(15) (3) the marked differences observable between the
Apocalypse and John’s Gospel and Epistles, viz. (a) the Greek of the
Apocalypse is full of striking peculiarities, of solecisms, and of
Hebraisms, quite at variance with the purer style of the other Johannine
writings;(16) (b) the spirit of the Apocalypse as revealed in its ideas,
terms, tone, and temper, differs widely from that of the Gospel and
Epistles. These differences, however, it should be noted, were recognized
and their force as objections to a common authorship was felt as early as
the time of Dionysius (circ. A. D. 260), for they are apparent to every
careful student of the Greek text; but they may be accounted for in a good
degree by the difference of occasion, purpose, and theme, as well as of
form and structure incident to the choice of a literary style that has
definite and necessary limitations. The differences have also been further
accounted for on the part of some by accepting the earlier date of the
Apocalypse, which in that case is assigned to the period just preceding
the fall of Jerusalem. The peculiarities of language are in this view
attributable to an imperfect knowledge of Greek, which was later overcome
by John’s long residence in Ephesus, while the apocalyptic form and
general contents are held to indicate an earlier stage of Christian
thought.(17) On the other hand it has been efficiently maintained,
favoring the later date, that the differences are mainly due to
psychological effects wrought by old age in the mind of John, whose mental
activities reverted to the familiar thought‐forms and apocalyptic
conceptions of his youth, the Greek he used being simply a modified
translation of Hebrew thought, while the Christological conceptions of the
Apocalypse are manifestly among the most advanced in the New
Testament.(18) In any case it will be seen that the reasons given under
(1) and (2) have little force apart from the question of internal
evidence, and are at most only inferences, while upon the other hand the
divergent qualities given under (3), forceful as they are, cannot be
assumed as without parallel in the history of literature. It has been
pointed out that the difference in style between Carlyle’s earlier and
later productions, as well as those found in the works of Milton, Watts,
Burke, and Wordsworth, written at different periods in their lives, is
quite as marked as that of the writings in question.(19) And we must not
leave out of view the possibility that John, if at an advanced age, may
have used one of his disciples as a collaborator, which would necessarily
modify both the language and style of the work produced. So that after all
has been said, it may be accepted as the concurrent judgment of the
majority of interpreters,—the advanced critics being excepted,—that as
great or greater difficulties are met in denying the Apostolic Authorship
as in accepting it. For notwithstanding the confident assertion of most of
the later critics that the Apocalypse was not written by the Apostle, yet
indications are not lacking in some quarters now, influenced perhaps by
the really cogent arguments so well stated by the decadent school of Baur,
of a return in opinion to the recognition of the Johannine authorship as
in some sense at least undeniable, though foreign elements are conceived
to enter into it.(20) It has indeed, not infrequently been held, among
those who deny that the Apostle was the author of the Fourth Gospel, that
he wrote the Apocalypse; but still more commonly it is accepted that the
work belongs to the “so‐called Johannine writings”, and originated in the
same circle at Ephesus to which these writings are now attributed by
advanced critics,(21) leaving the personal authorship more or less
indefinite. The question of authorship, however, is a subordinate one, for
the book maintains its own message, and it should be dealt with purely as
a subject of historical inquiry and not one of dogmatic importance, in the
interest of correctness rather than of traditional opinion.
4. The Unity.
The question of Unity is one of modern literary criticism. The view now
generally accepted that Jewish apocalypses, as we find them, are often of
composite origin, representing an original writing to which various
additions have been subsequently made by editors and redactors,(22) has
had its influence upon the judgment formed by critics concerning the
Apocalypse of John. The present tendency of critical investigation is to
consider the book as a composite structure, and to direct its effort
toward searching out the various sources from which it is supposed to be
derived, and determining what parts of the book are original, as well as
in pointing out various minor passages that are regarded as drawn from
other sources, or are the work of a later hand. This tendency has been
carried to such an extreme that the results are largely theoretical and
inconclusive, depending upon the personal taste of the critic and having
little force for other minds. The grounds upon which the unity of the book
has been disputed are:—(1) Frequent breaks in continuity which make it
difficult or impossible to trace the connection of thought: (2) a lack of
harmony in its various conceptions that is more or less incongruous, and
that is apparently inconsistent with its being the work of one author: (3)
an apparent indication in various parts of the book of different dates of
writing—see remarks in the section on Date. All of these reasons, however,
if taken together, and it be granted that they are well‐founded, are yet
insufficient to establish a diversity of authorship. The most that can be
said is that they suggest it. For it should be remembered that logical
sequence is not a quality of Apocalyptic thought; and also that there is
not even an approximate agreement, as yet, among advanced scholars as to
the character or extent of the material regarded as drawn from other
sources.
In favor of its Unity we find:—(1) a uniformity of style throughout which
is scarcely possible in the combined product of different authors without
such redaction as is equivalent to authorship: (2) an elaborate literary
structure quite incompatible with the existence of more than one
author—see section on Structure: (3) an essential Unity, whatever the
extent to which elements of Jewish apocalyptic may have been made use of
in its composition, which appeals to the literary judgment in a way that
is both forcible and convincing, for the personality of the author is
interwoven in every fibre of its frame. Though the present trend of
critical opinion is largely against the Unity of the book in the general
sense of the term, yet its essential unity is so manifest that it is
commonly conceded—“its inner unity is the foundation of all more recent
works on the Apocalypse”.(23) This is accounted for on the part of those
who accept a composite origin by attributing its unification to the final
editor, redactor, or author, a judgment that fails to carry conviction
with it for those who approach the question from the broader standpoint of
literary composition in general, instead of the narrower one of the
apocalyptic writings. The later critical views have, however, not yet
reached a conclusive stage, and indeed in the face of so great diversity
of judgment, can scarcely be said to have assumed a consistent form;
though it may be confidently predicated that no hypothesis of composite
origin is ever likely to command general assent in the case of a book
marked by such a definite unity of style and plan. The effort to discover
in it an original Jewish apocalypse which has been wrought over by
Christian editors into its present form,(24) or to reconstruct the various
sources, Jewish or Christian, from which it has been derived,(25) may well
be said to have been “thoroughly worked out”, and to have apparently
failed, though the labors of the critics have added largely to our
knowledge of Apocalyptic, and contributed not a little to a better
understanding of the book. The view now in the ascendant admits one
author, but attributes various portions of greater or less extent to a
common stock of Jewish, or Jewish‐Christian, apocalyptic fragments,
current at that time, which have been appropriated from and used in its
composition.(26) This, to the more conservative Christian mind, involves
an apparent denial of its true unity, and proceeds upon a theory of its
origin that is scarcely consistent with its effective inspiration. But it
fails to be conclusive on other grounds, for upon careful examination it
must become more and more apparent to the thoughtful student of Scripture
and apocalyptic that this view does not accord with the author’s use of
his materials, so far as we have any knowledge of their source. For
although he draws largely from the thought and figures of the prophets,
and uses freely the general form of imagery found in extant Jewish
apocalypses, yet everything has been transmuted in the crucible of his own
vivid imagination into new combinations, and there is not a single
instance in which he interpolates an entire passage from any known
author—indeed there are no quotations at all, in the strict sense, found
in the Apocalypse, but only allusions, reminiscences, and echoes, literary
devices which reflect the thought without reproducing the form—and it is
certainly an exceptional assumption that he interpolates only from authors
whose works are now lost, or from sources furnished solely by
tradition.(27) The impressions of unity are entirely too strong to be
dissipated by visionary and purely theoretical views.
A modified form of the Apocalyptic‐Traditional view, advanced by some late
writers,(28) indicates a healthful reaction from the piecemeal theories of
the earlier source‐criticism, and affords valuable suggestion for further
study—whether, indeed, we can follow them or not in finding evidence of
the introduction of a limited number of fragments of earlier origin,—viz.
that the author drew freely from a mass of apocalyptic ideas and forms, or
“apocalyptic conventions” as they have been called, which were widely
current in Jewish circles, and with which his own mind was richly stored;
and that this suggestive material was wrought over in his mental processes
and used like that from the Old Testament, with which it was closely
allied, as a framework for expressing the new and higher Christian thought
peculiar to his message, the old form being constantly adapted to new
meanings. The origin or source of these forms is chiefly a matter of
theory; but the probability of their use is the more practical side of the
problem. It will be seen that this view would account for all that the
theory of diverse origin does without doing violence to the real unity of
the book;(29) and it does not affect the question of the inspiration or
reality of the visions, for the thought of the seer necessarily took form
from his own mental furnishing, and his imagination, though quickened by
the prophetic ecstasy, was not essentially altered in its mode of
operation. But, with it all, let us not fail to apprehend that these
questions pertaining to the method used in the composition of the
Apocalypse, and to the introduction of foreign elements into its literary
structure, which so largely occupy the minds of critical scholars in the
present day, are, after all, mainly secondary to the larger question. In
it has God spoken? And if so, what are the spiritual lessons of the book
for the devout Christian mind and heart?
5. The Date.
Two different Dates of authorship have been commonly maintained by
different authorities, viz. either about A. D. 69 under one of Nero’s
immediate successors, Galba or Vespasian; or about A. D. 96 under
Domitian. Many modern critics have accepted the earlier date, though the
majority of commentators favor the later and traditional one. The evidence
cannot be considered as decisive for either, but the preponderance seems
to be in favor of the later date.(30) The earlier date, though accepted by
the majority of critics a score and more years ago, is not now in such
favor. The influence of present criticism, which is chiefly taken up with
discussion of the sources from which the book is assumed to be derived,
has produced a marked drift in opinion toward the acceptance of a date
near the close of the first century (the traditional view) as the time of
composition, or at least the period of final editing.(31) This view,
though accepting in a sense one author, yet holds that the contents of the
book indicate different dates of writing, and that it is made up of
visions of different origin, and composed at different times, which have
been subsequently formed into one consistent whole(32)—a conclusion that
would require something more than a theory to sustain it. The exact date,
however, is not of any great importance, as the difference does not
materially affect the interpretation, especially if we accept the symbolic
view of the purpose and teaching of the book; for though the date fixed
upon does affect somewhat the historical situation, and hence the
immediate reference, it does not affect the larger meaning which belongs
to all time.
The indications of the Earlier Date that usually obtain are:—(1) the
linguistic peculiarities already referred to under the head of Unity,
which are considered by many to indicate an earlier period in John’s life
and thought when he was still Hebraistic in method: (2) the historical
allusions in the book that seem to favor the earlier date, and which some
have thought are even decisive, viz. (a) the condition of the churches in
Asia as set forth in the Seven Epistles, which fairly accords with what is
known of the period of Nero’s reign and shortly thereafter; (b) the
references to persecution, war, earthquake, famine, and pestilence, which
find a ready explanation in current events of the earlier date;(33) (c)
the measurement of the temple directed in ch. 11:1f., which appears to
indicate that it was still standing; (d) the apparently veiled allusions
to Nero found in the description of the Wild Beast in chs. 13 and 17,
which, according to a widely accepted interpretation, point to a period
shortly after his death, when he was still a prominent figure in the
public mind.
For the Later Date the chief considerations are:—(1) the early and uniform
tradition concerning the origin of the book, viz. that it was written by
the Apostle John near the end of the reign of Domitian (see the section on
Canonicity): (2) the historical situation described and implied, which as
a whole is considered by most authorities as more suitable to and more
fully met by the later than the earlier date, viz. (a) the churches in
Asia, as indicated in the Seven Epistles, are in a more highly developed
condition than is likely to have been attained at so early a period as the
close of the sixth decade of the Christian era, and the omission of any
reference to the Apostle Paul as their founder within a quarter‐century of
their establishment would be entirely unaccountable; (b) the indications
of persecution are better suited to the time of Domitian than that of
Nero,(34) while the references to war, famine, and pestilence are equally
applicable to all the latter part of the first century; (c) the advanced
stage of the conflict between Christianity and the state religion of Rome,
shown in the worship of the Beast and the antagonism of Babylon, is a
strong indication of the later date;(35) (d) the assumed allusions to
Nero, and to the temple as still standing, depend in each case upon a
particular interpretation, and rest upon no certain foundation,—or
admitting an earlier date for this section, it is regarded as having been
inserted later,(36) which is a critical guess of uncertain value. This
seems to leave the balance of evidence upon the side of the later date,
though the best authorities have formerly been nearly equally divided.
6. The Place.
The Revelation was given in Patmos, one of the group of the Sporades, a
small, rocky, and irregularly shaped island, some ten miles long by five
miles wide, lying in the Ægean Sea, off the coast of Asia Minor, about
sixty miles from Ephesus and thirty‐five miles from Miletus,(37) to which
John was banished “for the Word of God and the testimony of Jesus”.
According to tradition offenders of rank were banished to this island
under the Roman Empire to work in the mines and marble quarries; and the
Apostle John perhaps shared in this harsh lot during his imprisonment, as
asserted by Victorinus in his commentary, the earliest work on the
Apocalypse, written toward the close of the third century. The chief
feature of the modern island is the Monastery of St. John, founded in A.
D. 1088, which lies a mile and a half south of La Scala, the landing
place; while halfway up the hillside a grotto, known as the cave of the
Apocalypse, is pointed out as the traditional place where the visions of
the book were seen. The natural scenery of the island is rugged and the
view of the sea and of the neighboring islands very fine, which may have
contributed somewhat to the imagery of the book, as has been suggested by
different travelers.(38) The content of the visions was doubtless
committed to writing soon afterward, and probably while John was still a
prisoner in Patmos, though the general work of authorship may have been
done later at Ephesus.(39)
7. The Canonicity.
The right of the Book of Revelation to a place in the New Testament Canon
is well attested both historically and by internal evidence. The
historical evidence is especially complete, and is regarded by some as
stronger than that of any other book in the New Testament:(40) the
objections have all arisen from the internal evidence, which has been
differently estimated by different minds.
The Historical Evidence covers the question both of authorship and of
canonicity,—for these cannot well be separated, since the apostolic
authorship carried with it for the early church the canonicity also—and it
may be briefly stated as follows, viz:—
(1) Papias (circ. A. D. 130). Bishop of Hierapolis, “the hearer of John”,
and “the companion of Polycarp”, regarded it as authoritative, and is the
first to attest it, though he does not affirm its apostolicity. We are
indebted for his testimony to Andreas of Cappadocia (about the end of the
fifth century), who refers to Papias along with Irenæus and others, and
quotes from a work by Papias his comment on Rev. 12:7‐9. In this early
witness of its canonicity we can scarcely conceive of Papias being
mistaken, and his testimony is of great value.
(2) Justin Martyr (circ. A. D. 140) says it was written by “a certain man
whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ”. This testimony is
within fifty years of the later date assigned to the book, and seventy‐
five years of the earlier one, and is therefore of special importance; and
there is no hesitancy in affirming that the author was “one of the
apostles of Christ”.
(3) According to Eusebius, Melito, Bp. of Sardis (circ. A. D. 170), wrote
a lost work on “the Revelation of John”; also two other bishops,
Theophilus of Antioch, and Appolonius of Ephesus (both before the close of
the second century), cited from it in their writings.
(4) In a letter from the churches of Lyons and Vienne (circ. A. D. 177)
the Revelation is cited, and is described as “sacred Scripture”.
(5) Irenæus (circ. A. D. 180) defends its apostolic authority, and asserts
frequently and positively that the Apocalypse was written by “John, a
disciple of the Lord”.
(6) Clement of Alexandria (circ. A. D. 200) refers to the four and twenty
elders with an explanatory clause, “as John says in the Apocalypse”.
(7) Tertullian (circ. A. D. 200) cites it frequently, ascribing it to John
the Apostle, and attests its recognition in Africa.
(8) The Canon of Muratori (circ. 200) includes it without question, and
says, “John in the Apocalypse, though he writes to the Seven Churches, yet
says to all, &c,” and the context shows that the reference is to the
Apostle.
(9) Hippolytus (circ. A. D. 210) wrote on “the Gospel and Apocalypse of
John”; and he also cites the Apocalypse as a Scripture authority against
Caius. After this time its canonicity was regarded as established by the
Western Church.
(10) Origen (circ. A. D. 250), the pupil of Clement of Alexandria, and the
first textual critic of the New Testament, whose knowledge of the opinion
and usage in different parts of the church was very wide, knows of no
doubts concerning the Apocalypse, but quotes it as the recognized
composition of the Apostle and Evangelist.
The authority of the Apocalypse was not, however, destined to remain
unquestioned, though its apostolic authorship and canonical right were
practically unchallenged until toward the end of the second century—and in
fact it was generally received by the church until the middle of the third
century—but subsequently both of these were questioned, viz:—
(1) Marcion, the so‐called “Heretic” (circ. A. D. 150), rejected it in
forming his Canon because of its apparently Jewish character, and not
because he did not regard it as genuine. This, however, did not represent
a church view, and had little influence on opinion outside of his own
sect.
(2) Dionysius of Alexandria (circ. A. D. 247) argues that it is not by the
Apostle, though he does not reject the book. With him the question is
mainly one of authorship, and not of canonicity.
(3) Eusebius (circ. A. D. 270) follows the opinion of Dionysius and may be
regarded as “wavering”, for he cites much in its favor. After Eusebius,
however, opposition to it became general in the Syro‐Palestinian Church,
and it does not appear in the Peshito Version, though St Ephraim Syrus,
the chief father of the Syrian Church, cites it and ascribes it to the
Apostle John.
(4) Cyril of Jerusalem (circ. A. D. 386) omits the Apocalypse from his
list of the canonical books of the New Testament.
(5) In the Eastern Church the book was questioned on dogmatic grounds
connected with the Millenarian controversy, and it was omitted from the
Canon by the Council of Laodicea (circ. A. D. 360).
(6) Finally, however, in deference to the strong testimony of the Western
Church, and influenced somewhat, no doubt, by the internal evidence of the
book itself, it was authoritatively accepted and universally recognized by
the church at large.
The Internal Evidence for the canonicity of the book, apart from the
difficulties discussed under the head of Unity, is quite clear and
satisfying and is practically irrefutable, for the disputed questions of
authorship and date are not of such character as to affect its canonicity.
This evidence may be briefly stated as follows, viz:—
(1) The historical situation and references correspond to the time in
which the book claims to have been written, the latter half of the first
century, and are fully sustained by contemporaneous history.
(2) The literary form and diction are each suitable to the period and
authorship to which the book is ascribed.
(3) The doctrinal teachings are fully and distinctively Christian, and are
such as we would expect in a work of the period, written by inspiration
for the whole church, viz:—(a) the Christianity it bears witness to has
escaped from the particularism of Jewish thought into the broad
catholicity of the Pauline Epistles; (b) Christ is presented as the divine
atoning Lamb seated in the midst of the throne, co‐equal with the Father;
(c) the personality of the Holy Spirit is recognized, and his illuminative
work illustrated; (d) the chief duties of the Christian life are those
presented in the Gospels, faith, witness, and purity, while the reward of
overcoming is set forth in terms of apostolic hope; and (e) the entire
contents of the book, so widely different from the non‐canonical
literature, appeal to the instincts of the Christian heart now as in the
first generation, and verify themselves afresh to the Christian
consciousness in such a forceful and convincing way that this goes far to
overcome any apparent objections to its canonical authority based upon
subjective judgments of another class. In fact the impartial verdict of
careful investigation serves to confirm the opinion that the Apocalypse is
rightfully received on ample and concurrent testimony both of Historical
and Internal Evidence as a part of sacred Scripture by the whole church
throughout the world.
8. The Form.
The Book consists of a series of strange and impressive symbolic visions
which contrast present and historic conditions of trial and suffering in
the church and in the world with future and prophetic conditions of
triumph and reward for the holy and of wrath and punishment for the
sinful. It is an interpretative view of the divine path and plan of the
centuries that is evidently given for the comfort and help of God’s
children in the midst of trial and distress. Its Literary Form is marked
and significant, and belongs to that highly figurative style of late
Jewish and early Christian writings which is known as the Apocalyptic
Literature.(41) And though John must often have felt himself hampered and
impeded by the fanciful and more or less unreal character of this literary
form, yet it doubtless met more fully than any other the conditions of the
time, and afforded an adequate method of reaching the devout Christian
mind of that generation. This literature is distinguished both by its
peculiar style and by the exceptional range of its thought, and may be
described as consisting of all of that particular class of the Apocryphal
writings which are couched in mystic symbols and figures, and which
attempt to give an account of hidden things miraculously disclosed,
especially those pertaining to the other world and to the closing events
of human history. The word Apocalyptic in its present sense belongs to
recent usage, being introduced by the modern critical school as a generic
term to designate these writings as a distinct department of the
Apocryphal books, and also to denote the literary style or art‐form in
which they are cast. The use of the word Apocalypse to designate the
writings or books now known by that name (as the _Apocalypse of Baruch_,
and others) is undoubtedly very old, though it did not apparently begin
before the end of the first century, and seems to have taken rise from the
common use of the title “The Apocalypse of John” in Christian circles to
designate the Revelation, from which the word came to be applied to all
writings of a similar class. Every Apocalypse is thus an example of
Apocalyptic; but, owing to the late introduction of the latter term as now
used, most dictionaries do not give an adequate definition.(42)
The unique symbolism of these writings constitutes their most striking and
characteristic feature; and it is this uniform use of cryptic symbols
instead of ordinary figures of speech that invests the Apocalypse of John
with its peculiar charm, and at the same time creates the special problems
of its interpretation. A symbol may be defined as a conventional objective
form chosen to represent something else, often not otherwise capable of
portraiture, because of some real or fancied resemblance that appeals to
the mind; an ideal representation couched in sensuous form that embodies
one or more of the prominent features of its subject, and that comes to
represent a fixed conception in the world of fancy, a lower and material
sign being used to represent a higher and abstract idea. The use of
symbols of some sort is instinctive and universal, and grows out of a
natural effort of the mind to clothe its ideas in forms that give free
scope to the imagination. But the peculiar nature of the symbols and the
profusion of their use in the Apocalyptic literature, serve to mark it as
separate from all other literary forms. Oriental symbols, too, are so
unfamiliar and oftentimes so incongruous to our minds, such as the Dragon,
the Scarlet Beast, the Two‐horned Beast, and even the Cherubim, that we
perhaps fail to realize how much they meant to people of a primitive
civilization who were possessed of a vivid imagination without scientific
precision of thought. This difference in the instinctive appreciation of
the nature and value of symbols, together with the wide possibilities of
meaning that are apparently inherent in the symbols used in the
Apocalypse, has always given room for the fertile fancy of interpreters.
But the later study of the Apocalyptic writings as a class has made it
plain that this effort was largely misspent, and has led to more
discriminating views of the meaning and use of symbols as there found, and
to their limitation by established usage, where such is known to have
existed. For while the growth of recognized symbols is necessarily slow,
and their origin often impossible to trace yet when they have once been
formed, and have come to possess an established meaning in the public
mind, they exhibit a remarkable persistence; and though their meaning may
be somewhat modified by subsequent use and by particular application, yet
it can scarcely suffer sudden and radical change. And let us remember that
the symbols, metaphors, and other figures found in the Revelation are not
purely literary: they have had a history and have acquired a recognized
and conventional meaning. We have, therefore, an available guide to the
interpretation of the symbols in the book furnished by their use not only
in the Old Testament, in which by former interpreters they were mainly
sought, but especially in Jewish apocalypses, which give the current
meaning of many of them at the time when this book was written, a sense
which could not well have been departed from to any great extent without
making their meaning wholly unintelligible. And the more clearly we
apprehend this fact, the more constantly we apply it in our
interpretation, the more likely are we to arrive at the meaning
intended.(43) For while the Western mind revolts against the oftime
obscurity of Apocalyptic symbols, yet we not infrequently recur to the
same method of illustration. For instance, a good example of the present
day use of symbols, aided by illustrative skill, is found in such a
cartoon as “The Modern Juggernaut” that appeared a few years ago, in which
the wheeled car of India was transformed into a huge wine bottle full of
intoxicating drink that rolls along its way, crushing out the lives of
thousands of miserable victims, while the fierce dogs of War, Famine, and
Pestilence have under its malign influence slipped their leash and go
forth to prey upon men.(44) This symbolism in some measure parallels that
of the Scarlet Beast in the Revelation, and shows how a great destructive
force operating in the world may be presented to many minds in an
objective form much more effectively than by any abstract verbal
statement. Like a parable an apocalypse flings a great truth across our
path, instinct with the touch of spiritual life.
The revelation made to John doubtless took the Apocalyptic form because it
was the prevailing literary method of that time for the treatment of the
theme dealt with by his prophecy, and its constructive symbolism already
filled and colored his thought. But notwithstanding that it is cast in a
Jewish mould, the Christian thought everywhere triumphs over the Jewish
form. The line of thought is limited to the peculiar range of Apocalyptic
subjects, and is found to be closely related to that of our Lord’s
discourse upon the last things (the so‐called “little apocalypse” of our
Lord in Mat. 24), though it should not be regarded as formally an
amplification of that discourse, or as chiefly or wholly determined in
content by it.(45) The prophetic mood is manifest in every part of the
book, and the exalted mental state of the writer is sustained throughout
after the manner of a rhapsody, in the structure and movement of which all
literary forms are in a measure fused together.(46) Indeed by a deeper
study of this unique work we come to feel as though in it “we touch the
living soul of Asiatic Christendom”.
It remains to be said that while we class the Apocalypse of John with
Jewish apocalypses as to literary form, yet it so manifestly rises above
its class both in method and content that it is universally accorded the
first place among Apocalyptic writings, and fully establishes its claim to
a place among the inspired books of Scripture by reason of the penetrative
prophetic insight which it everywhere displays in dealing with the
greatest, the most central, and the most mysterious theme in the whole
sphere of Christian thought.
9. The Theme.
The Theme of the Revelation, stated in its broadest terms, is Christ and
the Church through Time to Eternity; the mystery of God in human life and
history made manifest through the disclosure of the divine redemptive plan
becoming effective and triumphant.(47) The theme we assign to the
Revelation will, of course, be determined largely by our view of its
contents. Many interpret it to be Jerusalem, Rome, and the End, limiting
its outlook to the horizon of the early church; others make it the Course
of History, or the Future Path of the Church in the World; still others
affirm it to be the Last Things, or the Second Coming of Christ. But the
wider view is the truer one, which includes many phases of the kingdom,
and the theme is properly interpreted as Christ and the Church here and
hereafter, or Redemption in its present and future relation to Human Life.
This theme is wrought out in prophetic vision by an evolving drama that
moves forward in multiple and progressive cycles of trial and triumph, of
conflict and victory, ever advancing toward the complete and final
consummation, when righteousness shall win, sin be punished, and the
redeemed be restored to the immediate presence of God; and whereby the
divine plan shall be abundantly vindicated notwithstanding all apparent
anomalies, and seeming contradictions, and temporary reverses, for it is
confidently affirmed that the night of sin shall ultimately pass away, and
the day dawn at last in which “the glory of God and of the Lamb shall be
the light thereof”; and “He that sitteth on the throne shall spread his
tabernacle over them ... that come out of great tribulation”. Thus the
book gives answer to the deep call of the soul for some sign concerning
the future that shall point the path of faith and cheer the heart for
service; and the answer is abundantly satisfying, for those who interpret
the theme aright. Occupied with such a subject of thought it finds its
proper place at the end of the inspired volume; it forms a fitting close
for the entire line of prophetic voices; and it binds the long succession
of books into an unbroken unity.(48) With illimitable sweep its visions
look backward through time and forward into eternity, downward on earth’s
struggles and upward upon heaven’s victory, inward to the soul’s conflicts
and outward to God’s eternal peace, while through it all there rings out
the one transcendent note, Christ reigns but to triumph.
10. The Occasion.
The conditions which gave Occasion for this sole Apocalyptic book of the
New Testament have left their impress on its form and thought, viz.
persecution from without, and trial and distress within the church. These
conditions which are subsumed throughout must be clearly recognized in
order to interpret the message aright, and to estimate its proper value
for the age which first received it. For, whether we accept the earlier or
later date of writing, the deadly power of the Roman Empire was being put
forth to repress and destroy the church. At the later date the worship of
the Emperor was being made the test of obedience to law, and at either
time many Christians in the face of persecution were weak and wavering.
The immediate outlook was increasingly dark, and the future prospect full
of gloom. The failure of the Messiah to reappear and of the church to
triumph; the bitter experience of persecution already endured, and the
certainty of greater suffering yet to follow; in a word, the apparent
reversal of the brightest hopes of early Christianity, all of these called
for some divine message of cheer that would inspirit the discouraged,
throw light upon the path of sorrow and shame, and make their lot
endurable because of the assuredly glorious outcome of the future. And
there was no kind of message so well suited to meet such a crisis as the
form of Apocalyptic, which grew out of similar conditions, and had a tone
and temper peculiarly adapted to infuse a triumphant hope in the midst of
growing religious despair.(49) But let us not fail to perceive that though
the Apocalypse was specially designed to meet a great crisis in the life
of the early church, its effectiveness does not end there. Its lessons are
for us and for all time; it has the course and end of world‐history in
view, and this is an ever‐living theme for the church of Christ in every
age.
11. The Purpose.
The Purpose of the Apocalypse, as indicated by its introductory words “The
Revelation”, is the revealing or unveiling of mystery. In the Christian
sense a mystery is a former secret of divine truth that has now been at
least partially revealed (Eph. 3:1‐11), while an apocalypse is the process
of revealing it, and also the revelation itself containing the truth made
known. The comprehensive design of the book is to unfold and interpret the
divine purpose and method in human history, especially in relation to the
redemptive process, by portraying in scenic outline the present and future
course of the church of Christ through conflict to victory, for the
vindication of God’s righteousness in the final issue, and for the comfort
and encouragement of tried and persecuted Christians in the midst of the
pathway of life.(50) The more immediate purpose was to strengthen the
church in the strain of present distress, while the ultimate aim is to be
found not in the disclosure of history itself, but in the establishment of
the moral order of the world, in illustrating the fact that history is a
divinely guided “moral process toward a goal”, as the substantial ground
of a true philosophy of life, and as a permanent defense against false and
partial views. And this purpose is so wrought out by the portrayal of the
world as an ideal battlefield full of opposing forces, with alternating
scenes of triumph and danger, that the whole becomes a fervent and
powerful appeal to the heroic in Christian life and character, and a clear
call to new faith and courage. For whatever else may be its lessons, we
must not leave out of view this practical purpose of divine monition to
the world of men, which has so deeply impressed itself upon every
generation of Christians. Its message of warning is inwrought with and
reënforced by its prophetic scenes of terror and reward: for the
Apocalypse is the book of the future as well as of the past and present,
and that future is ever near in prophetic vision, however far it may be in
historic relation, and to John’s eye is always filled with the figure of
the returning Christ who comes to judgment and to victory. The message,
however, viewed in its entirety, while it contains a sympathetic element
of encouragement for the saints, and a monitory element of exhortation and
warning for all men, is yet fundamentally a philosophic interpretation of
the divine method in history for all who would see God in the story of
man’s life on the earth—a theodicy based upon prophecy. And any view which
assumes for the author a narrow field of vision, such as that he merely
grouped together the current apocalyptic conceptions of his time in order
to fling them in fierce polemic against the Roman Empire and to foreshadow
its defeat and fall,(51) rests upon a manifestly imperfect judgment that
fails in religious depth, missing the spiritual significance of the
message, and lacks in literary insight, denying the evident marks of
originality, genius, and inspiration in the most wonderful and unique
composition of its kind that has ever been produced.
12. The Interpretation.
There are two essentially different methods of Interpretation that have
been followed in attempting to arrive at the meaning of this manifestly
difficult book, which are founded upon different conceptions of its
didactic purpose, and proceed upon different lines of inquiry, viz. the
Historical, and the Symbolical.
The Historical Interpretation regards the book as a _prophetic review and
forecast of history_ veiled in symbol, and seeks the meaning and
fulfilment of the visions in certain specific historical events which
either have occurred, are occurring, or will occur within the sphere of
human life and experience. There are three different forms of this method
of interpretation, all of which specialize the prophecy but differ as to
the time and nature of the fulfilment, viz. (1) the _Preterist_ view (also
called the Contemporaneous‐Historical), which regards that the visions
relate mainly to events in the history of the early church, and that they
have been already fulfilled in the far past; (2) the _Futurist_ view (also
called the Future‐Historical), that the visions relate mainly to events
which shall occur in the last days, and that the fulfilment is to be
looked for chiefly in the more or less remote future; and (3) the
_Progressivist_ view (also called the Continuous‐ or Church‐Historical),
that the several visions constitute a continuous and progressive series,
covering the whole period of the church’s history from the time of John to
the last judgment, and that their fulfilment is therefore to be found in a
successive line of historical events, part of which lie in the past and
part in the future.
The Symbolical Interpretation, upon the other hand, regards the book as a
_prophetic idealization of history_, dealing with the general course and
outcome of man’s life upon the earth, and disclosing under the form of
symbols the spiritual and moral forces which give to history its deeper
meaning; and seeks the significance and fulfilment of the visions not,
therefore, in particular events, but rather in classes of events, not
solely at one definite time, but at many different times, finding the
revelation mainly illustrative of general principles of the divine
government rather than predictive of particular facts of history, a view
of various phases rather than of historic stages of the church’s
experience,(52) and interpreting its symbols in the genuine spirit of
Apocalyptic as pictorial representations of the prevailing fortunes of the
church in the world as she moves forward to the final consummation.(53)
This method of interpretation, which is commonly known as the _Symbolist_
view (also called the Spiritual), presents no such marked difference of
form as the Historical, but with a wider outlook regards that the visions
relate to all such like events in every age as specially manifest God’s
rule in the world sending forth judgment unto victory, and such as
particularly exhibit the progressive development of good and evil in human
life, together with their constant conflict and their final reward and
punishment.
All the current interpretations may be classified under one or other of
the above heads, yet in the hands of individual interpreters they are
often modified and blend into each other in their application—a manifest
recognition of the fact that there is an element of truth underlying each
view, which we may perhaps say has been unduly emphasized, for all agree
that the interpretation is somehow and somewhere to be found in human life
and history.
What might be called still another method of interpretation is the
Apocalyptic‐Traditional (or Tradition‐Historical) view of late critical
writers on the Apocalypse already referred to, which approaches the
question from the viewpoint of literary origin, and attributes certain
portions of the book to the introduction of traditional Jewish or Jewish‐
Christian Apocalyptic fragments that have been utilized by the author and
applied to the historical conditions of his time, adapting them to a new
meaning. This, however, is not so much a separate method of interpretation
as it is a corollary of the present Literary‐Critical method of dealing
with the book, which regards it as an early Christian work in successive
editions that has taken into itself certain Jewish elements. With this
origin assumed the interpretation does not differ materially from the
Preterist view except, perhaps, that it is less rigorous in its
application to current events, and recognizes more fully the idealism of
the author; for the historical outlook has measurably lost its value
except as an indication of the date of writing, and for most who hold this
view the book has no longer any distinctive prophetic message for the
church; it has become chiefly a fantastic dream, a pious dream it is true,
but only a dream of the far past.
The principal question of interpretation, as will be seen by a
consideration of the current views, relates not only to the view‐point,
but also to the aim or design of the Revelation. The Historical method
centers the chief aim of the book in a _predictive_‐prophetic element
which it finds throughout and regards as pointing to specific events in
particular periods of history that are designed to teach important
spiritual lessons. With this idea of the didactic purpose, it yet presents
the widest variation of opinion concerning the viewpoint of the book, and
includes upon the one hand the extreme rationalist who considers it a
purely human writing, a Jewish apocalypse that has been revamped to
include Christian ideas, which blends history with prediction and reflects
only the horizon of the first century; and on the other hand the devout
mystic who accepts its message as chiefly predictive prophecy of the far
future, and interprets it well nigh literally as a prophetic account of
the world’s ending amid terror and blood. The Symbolist method, with a
quite different conception, centers the aim of the book in an
_interpretative_‐prophetic element which it finds in every part, and
regards as setting forth the principles of the divine government, and
pointing to their exemplification in multiple events occurring in
different periods of history that are working together toward the final
consummation. According to this method of interpretation the viewpoint is
idealistic, universal, and timeless, and the scope of the visions
correspondingly wide.
The latter view, which is the one presented in the following outline,
affords a fairly satisfactory interpretation that has been steadily
gaining ground during the last half‐century, and to the present author
seems destined in some form to attain general though perhaps not universal
acceptance. The views of the leaders in the symbolical school present no
material divergence in general interpretation,(54) and the principles of
this interpretation seem likely to prevail throughout the Christian church
of the future, though the form and application may be somewhat modified.
The objection that “this system of interpretation is out of keeping with
the general purpose of Apocalyptic literature”,(55) loses its force if we
grant that the book is inspired, and realize that the literary form was
chosen because of its adaptability for the treatment of the topics dealt
with in the Apocalypse; for once, the Apocalyptic form becomes the vehicle
of a divine revelation, it thereby escapes some of the main limitations of
its class, one of which was “the consciousness of no new message from God
for the generation to which it was addressed”; and accordingly it should
here be regarded as only the literary setting in which the message
continually overtops the form, the art‐form in which the art is lost sight
of through the beauty and power of the truth which it presents. This view,
although not without difficulties, is yet believed by a good proportion of
eminent scholars to be based upon sound and temperate exegesis, to be best
suited to the character of the book, and to give relative value to all the
elements of truth contained in other views. The importance of the
historical situation of John’s time and of the lessons for that age is
fully recognized, the eschatological element throughout is given due
consideration, and the application of the prophecy to the entire trend and
events of history is made apparent, while the precise time‐relation of the
visions is for the most part eliminated, and thus the field of prophetic
prospective is maintained in its true breadth, and not narrowed as in the
historical interpretation to a particular age or series of events. And the
interpretation as a whole rests for its validity upon the scope and tenor
of the book throughout, and can therefore be maintained without
determining the full or specific meaning of every part. The Revelation
thus understood ceases to be either a political diatribe of the first
century, or the terrored story of the End; it rises above an epitome of
history whether near or far, and takes rank as a true prophetic book in
Apocalyptic form, dealing with the all‐embracing plan of God for the ages,
and the munificent purpose of redemption; and it is thereby rescued from
many conjectural and contradictory interpretations which have obscured its
meaning, and becomes a living prophecy of value to the church in every
age.
The tendency toward wiser methods in the interpretation of the Apocalypse,
and the growing spirit of unanimity concerning its larger lessons, provide
good ground for encouragement to the troubled reader. And while, no doubt,
the influence of the individual type of mind will continue to be felt in
the interpretation, the rationalistic emphasizing the preterist
application, the mystic the futurist, and the practical mind the symbolic
and universal reference, yet it should always be kept in view that the
chief importance of the book for the church at large transcends any
question of theoretical interpretation, and lies in its practical worth in
providing a rich source of religious inspiration, an invigorating aid to
imperfect faith, and an abiding stimulus to the Christian imagination, in
enabling the ordinary mind to realize the spiritual in the midst of and
transcending the natural, and in making the deep conflict of life with its
divine superintendence an ever present fact to the human soul. Indeed the
book was evidently written for common use in the early church in public
worship (ch. 1:3), which indicates an appreciation of its value in
striking contrast with the modern indifference that passes it by as
unintelligible. The Apocalypse has also a historical value, quite apart
from its general meaning and use, that we should not overlook, for it
throws important light upon the political and social conditions as well as
the inner thought and development of the Christian church in the latter
part of the first century. It reflects throughout the faith and temper in
which the early church faced its growing conflict with the world. And it
serves to show that at the close of the apostolic age there was a
Christianity which was free from the law and universal, and yet continued
to adhere to Jewish modes of expression.(56)
13. The Outline Analysis.
I THE PROLOGUE (OR INTRODUCTION): Ch. 1:1‐3:22
1 The Superscription: Ch. 1:1‐3
2 The Salutation: Ch. 1:4‐8
3 The Introductory Vision: Ch. 1:9‐20
4 The Seven Epistles: Ch. 2:1‐3:22
II THE MAIN APOCALYPSE (OR REVELATION PROPER): Ch. 4:1‐22:5
1 The Vision of God on the Throne: Ch. 4:1‐5:14
2 The Vision of the Seven Seals: Ch. 6:1‐17, and 8:1
2b The Episode of the Sealed Ones: Ch. 7:1‐17
3 The Vision of the Seven Trumpets: Ch. 8:2‐9:21, and 11:14‐19
3b The Episode of the Angel with the Book, and of the Two Witnesses:
Ch. 10:1‐11:13
4 The Vision of Conflict: Ch. 12:1‐14:20
5 The Vision of the Seven Vials: Ch. 15:1‐16:12, and 16:17‐21
5b The Episode of the Frog‐like Spirits: Ch. 16:13‐16
6 The Vision of Victory: Ch. 17:1‐20:15
7 The Vision of the New Jerusalem: Ch. 21:1‐22:5
III THE EPILOGUE (OR CONCLUSION): Ch. 22:6‐21
1 The Final Words of the Angel, with the Promise of Christ: Ch. 22:6‐16
2 The Closing Testimony of John: Ch. 22:17‐20
3 The Author’s Benediction: Ch. 22:21
14. The Literary Structure.
The elaborate and artistic Literary Structure of the Apocalypse, the
numerical symmetry of its parts, the parallelism of its visions, and the
recurrent climaxes in its development, together unite to give it a unique
place among the writings of Scripture; and a clear perception of these
relations becomes a distinct aid to the better understanding of its
message, for these belong to it as the outer robes which enfold its inner
thought. The predominance of the number seven in the arrangement of its
subject‐matter throughout, especially the recurrence of formal series of
sevens in the Epistles, Seals, Trumpets, and Vials, has commonly led to
the conclusion that the book is somehow capable of division into seven
parts fundamental to its structure. And although the failure of
commentators to agree generally upon any lines of division yet proposed
scarcely seems to support this opinion, yet the possible correctness and
the general helpfulness of such a division is fully recognized. Any such
division which we may make, however, is chiefly one of analysis, for the
visions are continuous and develop without any distinctive break of
prophetic view. The outline analysis given above divides the Visions, or
main portion of the book, into seven parts, the Episodes being made
parenthetical and subordinate, as their contents and connection serve to
indicate; while the four subdivisions of the Introduction and three of the
Conclusion taken together, form another seven. This general division,
which is not an uncommon one, agrees in the main, though not in statement
or in full detail, with that in the _Pulpit Commentary_,(57) and is one of
the most natural as well as the most helpful in bringing out the chief
thought of the book. The carefully wrought out and remarkably suggestive
division and subdivision into complete series of sevens, given in the
_Modern Reader’s Bible_,(58) after the same manner as the Prophecy of
Ezekiel, and the Rhapsody of Joel, is worthy of attentive consideration,
though it may well be doubted whether such an extensive subdivision found
place in the Apocalyptist’s thought.(59) With discriminative literary
insight the author of that work says, concerning the general outline of
the book, “The seven visions of St. John’s Revelation seem in the line of
their succession to trace the figure of an arch, the keystone of the arch
being the master‐thought of the prophecy;... On either side of it [in the
arrangement of the visions] III is closely parallel with V, and II with VI
... while I and VII are separate from the rest.... As always, literary
form is here pointing to the deepest spiritual meaning”. The theme of the
central vision according to this view, is “Salvation: the Kingdom of this
World becoming the Kingdom of Christ”, which puts the purpose of the
Christian warfare to the front, and has much to commend it; for the
warfare is in order that the redemptive purpose of God may become
effective and triumphant. There are reasons, however, in the scheme of the
book which seem to place the main emphasis upon the warfare itself as
leading to salvation, and that view has been accepted in this work.
Following the fertile suggestion given above, though with a somewhat
different conception of the theme of the several visions, we arrive at the
following outline of the thought and plan of the chief part of the
book,(60) viz:—
IV
III V
II VI
I VII
[Transcriber’s Note: In the book, the above table had the following text
for each of the seven sections; they are laid out here to make it look
correct with modern readers.]
IV—A Vision of Warfare—the Church‐Historic World‐Conflict of the Evil
against the Just. (Ch. 12:1‐14:20)
III—A Vision of Threatening—the World’s Punishment Threatened. (Ch.
8:2‐9:21, and 11:14‐19)
V—A Vision of Judgment—the World’s Judgment Executed. (Ch. 15:1‐16:12, and
16:17‐21)
II—A Vision of Trial—the Church’s Trial Foreshown. (Ch. 6:1‐17, and 8:1)
VI—A Vision of Vindication—the Church’s Vindication Manifested. (Ch.
17:1‐20:15)
I—A Vision of Sovereignty—the Throne during Conflict. (Ch. 4:1‐5:14)
VII—A Vision of Triumph—the Throne after Victory. (Ch. 21:1‐22:5)
If we follow the natural order of the visions from I to VII, we find it to
be one of _progression_, viz. from Sovereignty to Trial, then to
Threatening, and on through Warfare, Judgment, and Vindication to Triumph,
each being a separate step in advance: if we compare I with VII, II with
VI, and III with V, we find the order to be marked by _parallelism_, viz.
Sovereignty corresponding to Triumph, Trial to Vindication, and
Threatening to Judgment, vision IV, that of Warfare, holding the balance
between them: while if we regard the central vision in relation to the
rest, we find the arrangement to be one of _climax_, vision IV forming the
connecting link between I and VII, II and VI, and III and V, the visions
preceding and following it forming an ascending and descending scale to
and from the center, viz. that of Sovereignty leading through Warfare to
Triumph, that of Trial through Warfare to Vindication, and that of
Threatening through Warfare to Judgment. The movement of thought is
thereby indicated to be from the throne challenged to the throne
triumphant, from the church tried to the church vindicated, from the world
threatened to the world judged, through a world‐conflict which forms the
acme of the dramatic purpose, and discloses the entire sweep of redemptive
history as buttressed upon the eternal throne. The seven visions,
according to this view, are not bound together by any temporal succession,
but each displays a world‐process complete in itself, and they are so
arranged that the climax is reached at the center instead of the end,
after the analogy of Hebrew poetry, the central vision furnishing the key
to the interpretation of the whole.(61) The value of such an analytic
interpretation, when sustained by the contents of the book, lies not alone
in the help which it affords in penetrating the deeper purpose of the
writer, and of the revelation made through him, but in the illuminative
effect which, in a case like this, it throws upon the disputed question of
unity; for if any such clearly marked and continuous current of thought
can be shown to thread its way throughout the entire book, despite all by‐
currents and eddies, then the various theories of diverse or composite
authorship cease to be credible except to pure theorists.
15. The Literature.
The Literature relating to this difficult book is very extensive, more
works, strange to say, having been written on the Apocalypse which has
been so imperfectly understood than upon any other part of Scripture,
though many of them are now rightly regarded as of little value. A careful
study of one or more of the leading authorities representing each of the
current methods of interpretation will give a fair view of the whole
field, and will serve to show that in many points there is essential
agreement among all schools of thought, though for advanced work one’s
reading must necessarily cover a wider range, for the student should then
know all the best that has been said upon the problems of the book. The
most important qualification, however, for this difficult study is to
approach the whole subject with an open mind and a fresh spirit of
inquiry, resolved to be quite untrammelled by traditional interpretations,
to investigate with scrupulous care the various points of view, and to
apply with fearless courage all the _well‐established_ results of
investigation, especially those of the later fruitful studies in
Apocalyptic literature, which enable us to approach more nearly the
viewpoint of the earliest readers of the book, but which yet remain to be
duly correlated with our previous knowledge, being confidently assured
that there is “light yet to break” for the earnest soul upon the deep
things of the Apocalypse.
It is not likely that any one commentary will prove entirely satisfactory
to the thoughtful reader, owing to the wide variation of opinion upon many
minor points among those holding the same general view. Milligan is very
suggestive though not always convincing, for he is oftentimes too
indefinite in interpretation to be satisfying to the reader, telling us
that “no detail of historic events need be looked for”. His discussion of
principles, however, is always illuminative, even when his application is
not quite so clear; and not infrequently his work is of more value in
showing the inconclusiveness of other views than in establishing his own.
We are indebted to him, through the general circulation of his works,
perhaps more than to any other writer, for the present prevalence of the
symbolic view in the English speaking world, and his _Lectures_, and one
or other of his _Commentaries_, should be read by every student. Plummer,
in the _Pulpit __ Commentary_, will be found more satisfactory by the
general reader, especially if he inclines to the symbolic interpretation,
and there is, in fact, no better commentary for common use, though we may
not agree with all his conclusions. To his wise and discriminative
judgment the present author wishes to express a deep indebtedness. The
short introduction to that volume, with its scholarly notes on
manuscripts, versions, &c, will also be found very helpful to the busy
student. Farrar, supporting the preterist view, gives the historical
conditions of the Neronic period in a striking way, many of which are
equally applicable to the whole latter part of the first century. Lee is
especially valuable for the condensed _résumé_ of opinions concerning many
obscure passages throughout the book, though the great diversity of views
at times presented is apt to be confusing. Faussett is excellent from his
point of view, ranking among the best premillennial interpreters. Seiss is
also a popular authority with those who share the premillennial
expectation, but his exegesis is often faulty, and his interpretation
fanciful. Moulton’s _Modern Reader’s Bible_ vol. John, is indispensable
for its literary analysis and aid in gaining the general perspective, and
should be in the library of every student. The Introduction to Revelation
in the _New Century Bible_, by C. A. Scott, gives an admirable and concise
statement of the present status of opinion concerning the problems of the
book, and the notes of the same volume are especially valuable for their
references to Jewish Apocalyptic. This is the best small book for the use
of the student who wishes to get an outline of the modern view concerning
the incorporation of Jewish apocalypses. For those who are acquainted with
the Greek text, Alford, Stuart, and Düsterdieck will be found quite
helpful, even though they belong to a former generation, for each has a
special excellency; but the late work of Swete, the _Apocalypse of St.
John_ (1906), which is both thorough and scholarly, is indispensable for
the critical use of the student in that it meets more fully the questions
of modern inquiry and present discussion, and maintains a moderate view of
the opinions now to the fore concerning the origin of the book. On the
other hand Briggs’ _Messiah of the Gospels_, and Moffatt’s _Historical New
Testament_ give a good account of late theories of composite authorship
and deserve attention. Also the able work of Moffatt on Revelation in the
final volume of the _Expositor’s Greek Testament_ has been issued (1910),
and deserves careful notice. The author adopts the modern critical view,
that portions of the book have been incorporated from current apocalypses,
and devotes considerable attention to source‐criticism as an aid to
interpretation, but too much time is given to pointing out what he regards
as parallel thought in Greek, Roman, and Jewish writings, and this often
has little interpretative value. The work is adapted to the ripe scholar
rather than the earlier student, and though rejecting extreme views, it
will not be found altogether satisfying to those of more conservative mind
who believe that the Apocalypse is entitled to a primary rather than a
secondary place among the books of Scripture. Another work awaited with
much interest is the volume on Revelation in the _International Critical
Commentary_ which is in course of preparation by Charles, the eminent
authority upon Apocalyptic.(62) This volume when issued will no doubt add
much of value to the modern point of view, and serve to throw additional
light upon the relations of Apocalyptic literature to this its greatest
masterpiece. His _Studies in the Apocalypse_ (1913) serves to indicate the
general line of interpretation to be expected, and it must be said that
this is somewhat disappointing to the conservative reader, for it is
highly critical. One naturally hesitates to disagree so widely with such
an eminent scholar and distinguished apocalyptist as has been found
necessary to do in the following pages; but it should be remembered that
all Scripture is written for the world of men, and that the opinion of no
one scholar or number of scholars can authoritatively determine the
meaning of any part of it, but that rather the interpretation must be
arrived at by a general consensus of opinion among men of learning and
piety throughout the world. That this opinion, though now veering toward
the critical view, will not be eventually sustained by more thorough
research is the confirmed judgment of many scholars. But with it all there
are many points of interpretation formerly in dispute that may now be
regarded as already settled, their essential meaning in any case being
substantially the same, and thus the book so long aglow with mysteries has
virtually become every man’s book in the light of intelligent
interpretation.
Finally, with special emphasis it should be said, that it is of prime
importance for those who would understand the Apocalypse in its proper
relations to Biblical thought, that a careful study should be made of the
prophecies of Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Isaiah, Amos, Joel, and
Habakkuk, together with the Book of Psalms, in connection with the
Revelation, in order to catch the inner thought of the book; also of some
portion of the Apocalyptic literature, particularly the _Book of
Enoch_,(63) the _Apocalypse of Baruch_, and the _Fourth Book of Ezra_, for
these will furnish the atmosphere of Jewish thought in which the
Apocalypse was conceived, and will provide substantial aid in
understanding the peculiarities of its literary form and the general
spirit of the work, as well as in freeing the mind from the trammels of
traditional interpretation. But, above all, we should not forget that the
book of Revelation is a properly recognized part of canonical Scripture in
practically the universal judgment of the entire Christian world, and that
notwithstanding its many and persistent difficulties of interpretation, it
is yet entitled to our earnest study and attentive thought as containing a
living and abiding message from Almighty God, through his Son Jesus Christ
our Lord to John the last of the apostles, and through him to the sin‐
burdened souls of men the world over.
A few authorities are named below, which will be found sufficient to give
most that is of value in interpretation for the general reader; others are
referred to in the foot‐notes. For a fuller list, especially of the older
books, consult the Schaff‐Herzog _Encyclopaedia_, or Smith’s _Dictionary
of the Bible_, art. “Revelation”; while for the later literature see
Hastings’ _Dictionary of the Bible_, and the _Encyclopaedia Biblica_.
FOR THE ENGLISH READER.
Preterist View:—
Farrar, _Early Days of Christianity_;
Maurice, _Lectures on the Apocalypse_.
Futurist View:—
Faussett, in _Jamieson, Faussett, and Brown’s Commentary_.
Seiss, _Lectures on the Apocalypse_.
Progressivist View:—
Wordsworth, _Lectures on the Apocalypse_;
Barnes, _Notes on the Book of Revelation_.
Symbolist View:—
Milligan, in _Expositor’s Bible_, and in _Popular (International)
Commentary_;
Plummer, in _Pulpit Commentary_;
Lee, in _Bible (Speakers’) Commentary_.
FOR CRITICAL STUDY.
Preterist View:—
Düsterdieck, in _Meyer’s Commentary_;
Stuart, in _Commentary on the Apocalypse_.
Preterist View—Modern Critical:—
Moffatt, in _Expositor’s Greek Testament_;
Swete, _Apocalypse of St. John_.
Progressivist View—Modified Historical:—
Simcox, in _Cambridge Greek Testament_.
Futurist View—Modified Historical:—
Alford, in _Greek Testament_.
FOR RECENT CRITICAL VIEWS.
Moffatt’s _Historical New Testament_;
Scott’s “Revelation”, in _New Century Bible_;
Dean’s _Book of Revelation_;
Alexander Ramsay’s “Revelation and Johannine Epistles”, in _Westminister
New Test._;
Briggs’ _Messiah of the Apostles_;
Barton, art. “The Apocalypse and Recent Criticism”, in _Amer. Journ. of
Theol._, Apr. 1884;
Porter, art. “Revelation”, in Hastings’ _Dictionary of the Bible_;
Bousset, art. “Apocalypse”, in the _Encyclopaedia Biblica_.
Moffatt, art. “Wellhausen and Others on the Apocalypse”, in the
_Expositor_, Mar. 1909;
Charles, _Studies in the Apocalypse_;
Charles, _Revelation of St. John (I. C. C.)_;
Beckwith, _Apocalypse of John_.
FOR GENERAL DISCUSSION.
Fairbairn, _On Prophecy_;
Bleek, _Lectures on the Apocalypse_;
Vaughan, _Lectures on the Revelation of St. John_;
Milligan, _Lectures on the Apocalypse_; and _Discussions on the
Apocalypse_;
Scott, “Book of Revelation”, in the _Practical Commentary_;
Stevens, _Theology of the New Testament_, Part VI;
Ramsay, _Letters to the Seven Churches_;
_Introductions to the New Testament_ by Salmon, Dods, Bacon, Jülicher, and
others;
_Introductions to Revelation_ in the leading _Commentaries_, and in the
_Modern Reader’s Bible_, the _New Century Bible_, the _Temple Bible_, and
the _Modern American Bible_; and the text of Revelation in the _New
Translation of the New Testament_, by Moffatt.
The Text here given is that of the _American Standard Edition of the
Revised Bible_, copyright 1901 by Thomas Nelson & Sons, which is used by
permission of the publishers.
The arrangement of the text belongs to the present volume, and is offered
as a contribution to the correct interpretation. This in itself is of the
nature of a commentary, though no changes have been introduced into the
body of the text. The paragraphs, however, have been changed, and many new
paragraphs made, in order to emphasize the thought of the text.
SCRIPTURE TEXT
THE REVELATION
[OF JOHN]
I The Prologue
1 The Superscription
Chapter 1.
(M1) 1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave(64) him to show unto
his servants(65), _even_ the things which must shortly come to pass: and
he sent and signified _it_(66) by his angel unto his servant John; 2 who
bare witness of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ,
_even_ of all things that he saw.
(M2) 3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the
prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at
hand.
2 The Salutation
(M3) 4 John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and
peace, from him who is and who was and who is to come(67); and from the
seven Spirits that are before his throne; 5 and from Jesus Christ, _who
is_ the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the
kings of the earth. Unto him that loveth us, and loosed(68) us from our
sins by(69) his blood; 6 and he made us _to be_ a kingdom, _to be_ priests
unto his God and Father(70); to him _be_ the glory and the dominion for
ever and ever(71). Amen.
(M4) (7 Behold, he cometh with the clouds; and every eye shall see him,
and they that pierced him; and all the tribes of the earth shall mourn
over him. Even so, Amen.
(M5) 8 I am the Alpha and the Omega, saith the Lord God, who(72) is and
who was and who is to come, the Almighty.)
3 The Introductory Vision
(M6) 9 I John, your brother and partaker with you in the tribulation and
kingdom and patience(73) _which are_ in Jesus, was in the isle that is
called Patmos, for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus. 10 I was in
the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a great voice, as of a
trumpet 11 saying, What thou seest, write in a book and send _it_ to the
seven churches: unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamum, and unto
Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
(M7) 12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And having
turned I saw seven golden candlesticks(74); 13 and in the midst of the
candlesticks(75) one like unto a son of man, clothed with a garment down
to the foot, and girt about at the breasts with a golden girdle. 14 And
his head and his hair were white as white wool, _white_ as snow; and his
eyes were as a flame of fire; 15 and his feet like unto burnished brass,
as if it had been refined in a furnace; and his voice as the voice of many
waters. 16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth
proceeded a sharp two‐edged sword: and his countenance was as the sun
shineth in his strength.
(M8) 17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as one dead. And he laid
his right hand upon me, saying, Fear not; I am the first and the last, 18
and the Living one; and I was(76) dead, and behold, I am alive for
evermore(77), and I have the keys of death and of Hades. 19 Write
therefore the things which thou sawest, and the things which are, and the
things which shall come to pass hereafter; 20 the mystery of the seven
stars which thou sawest in(78) my right hand, and the seven golden
candlesticks(79). The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches and
the seven candlesticks(80) are seven churches:—
4 The Seven Epistles