In the Book of Revelation Bible prophecy comes to a magnificent climax. This is the greatest prophecy of all, given by Jesus himself. It is “the Revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave unto him.” A recognition, therefore, of the main characteristics of Bible prophecy should be a considerable help towards understanding Revelation In two outstanding respects this turns out to be true.

The first is this: Practically every prophecy of the Old Testament springs out of the immediate circumstances surrounding the prophet at the time of writing. The terminology employed and the imagery with which the prophecy is clothed both grow naturally (or, more correctly, supernaturally) out of what is familiar and vivid in the prophet’s own experience.

Moses, the first and greatest of the prophets, assures the people that “a prophet like unto me” shall be given to them. David describes Messiah’s kingdom in terms of the great hopes, which he had for the reign of his blessed son Solomon. Jeremiah’s terrific, almost blood-curdling, prophecy of the judgement of God on the nations in the Last Days is couched in terms of the Babylonian threat hanging over much of the known world of his day. The Messianic prophecies in the early chapters of Zechariah spring out of contemporary events associated with Zerubbabel the prince and Joshua the high-priest at the time of the restoration from Babylon. The wonderful prophecies of Isaiah, perhaps without a single exception, after the first few chapters, are built round the character and experiences of good king Hezekiah. Any expositor attempting a study of the later relevance of that tremendous book without taking this fact into consideration is hamstrung from the start. Indeed, it is possible to go further and assert that the Hezekiah background to Isaiah 40-66 provides perhaps the strongest refutation available of fashionable theories about “Deutero-Isaiah.”

The examples available of this characteristic of Bible prophecy are so very numerous that it is hardly possible to list here more than a small fraction of them. The experienced Bible student takes this factor into consideration automatically whenever he is working in the field of Old Testament prophecy.

Then ought not this feature to be taken into account in the study of Revelation also? At the time when the prophecy was given to John (A.D. 66 – see chapter 7), the outstanding circumstances of importance to the early believers were the ferocious persecution of the Christians by Nero, and the seething restlessness and turmoil in Judaea which already gave plain promise of worse to come in the troubles of the Jewish War, A.D. 67-70. It would be strange indeed, and altogether out of character, if this latest and most wonderful example of Bible prophecy were to shew no sign of the proximity of these critical developments.

MORE THAN ONE FULFILMENT

Much more important, for present purposes, is another feature of Old Testament prophecy. This, closely related to what has just been mentioned, is best explained by means of a familiar example.

Psalm 2 describes an organized opposition to the Lord’s Anointed by the kings of the earth. This psalm of David doubtless sprang out of that king’s personal experience in the early years of his reign when he captured Jerusalem and established it as his capital. Very soon after that, David found himself beset by Gentile enemies who came at him from all directions. Philistia, Moab, Hamath, Edom, Syria, Ammon, Zobah – all of these, separately or in confederacy – made violent attempts to wreck the consolidation of the kingdom, which David had lately achieved (2 Samuel 8, 10).

But the New Testament makes a different and more important use of this inspired Psalm. After the first futile attempt by the Jews to persecute the early disciples, the prayer of praise and thanksgiving (Acts 4:24 28) included this quotation from Psalm 2 together with the interpretation of it: “Lord, thou art God . . . who by the mouth of Thy servant David hast said, Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together, against the Lord and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed (his Christ), both Herod (the kings of the land), and Pontius Pilate (the rulers) with the Gentiles (the heathen), and the people of Israel (the people) were gathered together (same word as in v. 6).”

It is possible to continue the reference of the rest of the Psalm to the events in the early church, but that is not advanced here because such a suggested interpretation would not have behind it the Holy Spirit’s inspiration which this, just quoted, undoubtedly has. Acts 4 provides an unimpeachable warrant for reading Psalm 2 with respect to the experience of the church in the First Century.

But, equally clearly, Revelation 19:15 gives yet another application of the Psalm in the time of the Lord’s manifestation in power: “Out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron” (Psalm 2:9).

Yet another, closely related, application of the Psalm is given in Revelation 2:26, 27: “He that overcometh . . . to him will I give power over the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father (in the fiat of Psalm 2).”

Thus in the New Testament this inspired Scripture, clearly based 011 David’s experiences, is given two (or three) other applications to the greater work of Christ, one of these being the time of his first coming, and another the time of the end.

A NORMAL FEATURE OF PROPHECY

Other examples follow a similar pattern. The familiar prophecy in Joel 2 about the outpouring of the Spirit could be shewn to have its roots in events of the prophet’s own day. But its true fulfilment was at Pentecost (Acts 2:17-21), and without doubt more fully in the days to come.

Similarly with the equally familiar Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he hath anointed me . . .” The entire chapter is marvelously relevant to certain events in the reign of Hezekiah. In the synagogue at Nazareth Jesus applied it to his own ministry. Today the faithful await with eagerness its yet greater fulfilment.

Indeed, this is the pattern of much of Isaiah’s matchless Scripture. From beginning to end the relevance of the prophecies to his own time can be traced. But the real fulfilment is in Christ-sometimes his first Advent, sometimes his second, sometimes both. Even the wonderful prophecy in chapter 11 about the great Messianic King is given a preliminary application by Paul to the preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles in the First Century (Romans 15:12).

Jeremiah’s denunciation of the temple, as being in his day “a den of robbers” destined to destruction (7:11), was applied by Jesus to his contemporaries (Mark 11:17) and may yet conceivably have another fulfilment in our time.

Ezekiel’s repetitious “I will overturn, overturn, overturn it” (21:27) is probably more than just emphasis, but is intended to teach the reader to seek applications of his prophecies not only to the time of Nebuchadnezzar, but also to A.D. 70 and to the Twentieth Century.

The well-known words of Micah 5 were written primarily with reference to contemporary events – verses 5, 6 are explicit about this. But there is New Testament authority (Matthew 2:6) for interpreting verse 2 with reference to the birth of Jesus. And the general character of the prophecy makes it only too evident that the rest of it is yet to be fulfilled by Christ in his Second Coming.

“A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you like unto me,” Moses promised Israel (Deuteronomy 18:15-19). And no doubt the less discerning among them were satisfied that the prophecy was fulfilled in Joshua. But even without the apostle Peter’s authority (Acts 3: 22) it is easy to see that the true reference is to Jesus.

In a completely authentic superscription Psalm 18 declares itself to be spoken unto the Lord by David “in the day that the Lord delivered him from the hand of all his enemies, and from the hand of Saul.” But even if there were not at least four Messianic allusions to it in the New Testament it would be evident enough that the entire Psalm belongs to Christ in his suffering and his glory.

And David knew this! Peter’s exposition of Psalm 16 in Acts 2:25-32 has these significant words: “Therefore being a prophet, and knowing . . . he seeing this before, spake of the resurrection of Christ . . .” So when David penned Psalms about his own experiences he knew that he was enacting beforehand the experiences of the Messiah. What he wrote out of the vicissitudes of his own life (he is a type of Christ at least five times over!), he wrote also about Christ.

With little effort this catalogue of Bible prophecies with dual (or triple) fulfilment could be extended to four or five times its length. But the principle is surely evident by now.

IN REVELATION ALSO?

The question demands consideration: If this is the character of so much Bible prophecy, is it unlikely that the greatest prophecy of all – Revelation – has none of the same characteristics?

And, further, why is it that we have had to wait so long before this question was even asked?

LASTLY, A WARNING

Familiarity with the continuous-historic method of interpretation has left a marked effect on the thinking of many students of a kind which they are often hardly aware of. One finds an almost obsessive determination to seek an interpretation of Revelation (even if it is not the one advocated by John Thomas) which puts the fulfilment in chronological order, demanding (for example) that Seal 3 be fulfilled before Seal 4 begins to operate, and Trumpet 6 only after Trumpet 5 has come and gone.

It cannot be too strongly emphasized that much Bible prophecy does not follow this pattern at all. The sequence of the “In that day” prophecies in Zechariah 12, 13, 14 is anything but chronological. Nor, by modern standards, is there a nice tidy development about Isaiah’s Little Apocalypse chapters 2~27. Similarly, it is very evident that God’s “four sore judgements on Jerusalem” (Ezekiel 14:21; 33:27; 5:17) all came together, and not one after another. Even the Olivet prophecy lacks straight chronological order.

The long-received continuous-historic exposition itself could be somewhat more consistent in this respect. For instance, chapters 11, 12 (the two witnesses, the seventh trumpet, the woman and man-child) are hardly in chronological sequence if they refer to the Huguenots, the resurrection, and the Christian take-over in the time of Constantine. Similarly with chapters 14, 16.

The point will have to be made more than once in this exposition that the visions of Revelation present a series of “snapshots” of big developments in the divine purpose, without special regard to time sequence. Seals, Trumpets, and Vials will be fulfilled together in a tremendously powerful complex of divine judgements on an evil system. And there are clear hints in the Vials (16:2, 10, 19) that its fulfilment is to be regarded as contemporaneous with or even after chapter 17.

The document you are looking for may have been removed or re-named. Please contact the web site owner for further assistance.

The visions accompanying the opening of the Seals in Revelation 6 immediately provoke a problem of first-rate importance. Whilst the general symbolism of the Seals (or of some of them!) may be easy of interpretation, e.g. Seals 2, 3, 4 clearly signify War, Famine, Pestilence – to what particular events does the series refer? For without question, the details of some of the Seals are of such a precise and particular character as to make it certain that they have reference to specific events.

Working on this principle, John Thomas and others have suggested an impressive correspondence between the Seals (and also succeeding sections of Revelation) and certain epochs of Roman and Church history, a correspondence running right through the Trumpets, Beast Visions and Vials to the titanic events associated with the coming of the Lord.

Whilst there may be places where the equation of prophecy and history staggers somewhat, there can be no question that in general the way in which the one answers to the other is impressive. Viewed even in the most unsympathetic fashion, it has to be granted that this is hardly likely to be accident. But it is necessary to point out a fact much overlooked, so much overlooked, indeed, that at first some will be loth to believe the truth of it. This “continuous-historic” method of interpreting Revelation is, of necessity, un-Biblical.

What is meant by this seemingly radical statement is this: When a prophecy like Revelation is considered in detail, its symbols interpreted in a reasonable fashion, and the prophecy then given an application to certain epochs in world history, there cannot – from the very nature of the case – be any Biblical warrant for so doing. The only sanction available lies in a resemblance between a piece of history (say, for the sake of argument, some particular phase of the Holy Roman Empire) and the interpretation that has been put on the symbols of a certain portion of Revelation. There is no known hint in the Bible saying either explicitly or in veiled fashion: “This part of the prophecy concerns the Holy Roman Empire.”

In order that this point may be seen more clearly, contrast might well be made with Daniel ch. 2, where the various parts of the Image are given a definite Biblical interpretation in the same chapter, an interpretation that is completely beyond criticism (vv. 37 45). Or, again, consideration might be given to some of the Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament, which without any doubt whatever should be applied to the work, and experience of Jesus because Jesus or his apostles say so in the New Testament.

Thus, whilst it is possible in the study of a great many Old Testament prophecies to have one’s feet planted on the solid foundation of New Testament authority, from the very nature of the case this is not possible with the “continuous-historic” method of interpreting Revelation. At the same time it has to be insisted that lack of Biblical confirmation does not at all constitute disproof. And certainly the resemblances between history and this particular scheme of interpretation of Apocalyptic symbol should not be dismissed with an airy wave of the hand. Those inclined to consign them to the wastepaper basket should think carefully.

But it has to be said that even the warmest enthusiasts for the continuous historic exposition must admit, and usually do so concede, that the results of this approach are somewhat unequal. For example, most students find the historic link-up of Revelation 11, 12 less satisfactory than other sections of the prophecy. But this does not necessarily mean that the rest is of no consequence.

THE BIBLE INTERPRETS ITSELF

Next, attention must focus, and must remain focussed, on a big fact concerning Revelation which – to one’s lasting surprise – has been almost completely ignored in the standard interpretation of the middle section of Revelation. This big (biggest!) fact about Revelation is that the entire book from beginning to end is a masterly mosaic of quotations from and allusions to the rest of the Bible. Approximately 500 of these have been catalogued in Westcott and Hort’s Greek Testament. The present writer is certain that this hopelessly underestimates the true figure.

In the rest of Scripture the citation of or allusion to earlier parts of the Bible is normally taken as an inspired directive as to how such a passage should be interpreted. Jesus applied Isaiah 61 to his own work of redemption; therefore Isaiah 61 must be given an interpretation on these lines. In Romans 15 Paul quotes Isaiah 11:1, 10 applying the words to the gospel concerning Christ; therefore the conscientious exponent of the Word must follow where Paul has led. Peter and Paul both apply to Christ the two Isaiah prophecies of the stone of stumbling and the chief corner stone (Isaiah 8:14 and 28:16; 1 Peter 2:6, 8; Romans 9:33); therefore the Holy Spirit intended these as prophecies of Jesus. One might go further and note Matthew’s use of “Rachel weeping for her children” (Matthew 2:18; Jeremiah 31:15) and infer – though with what reluctance this is done by some! – that Jeremiah 31 should also be read as having definite Messianic content. Alas! Instead, too many students of such Scriptures are over-ready to confess the ignorance of the inspired writer rather than their own. It is seriously to be doubted whether there is a single page of the New Testament without Old Testament links of this kind.

All these various echoes of the rest of Scripture to be encountered in Revelation, and especially in the middle section of it now about to be attempted, are to be regarded as so many hints as to what the various parts of the prophecy are about. Here is a lead to the interpretation of Revelation, which is too valuable to leave ignored. Even with this guiding principle difficulties abound. But a patient attempt on these lines to integrate Revelation with the rest of Scripture instead of regarding it as something altogether separate and distinct is bound to bring big results.

RESULTS OF THIS METHOD

It can be said right away that in the main the use of the rest of the Bible to elucidate Revelation leads to the emphatic conclusion that practically all the book from chapter 6 onwards applies either (1) to the grim events associated with the fall of Jerusalem in AD. 70 and God’s rejection of Israel, or else (2) to the great events prior to and contemporary with the return of the Lord, or else (3) to both.

Thus, both method and results in this study will prove to be drastically different from those of the familiar continuous-historic interpretation yet neither need exclude it. Since Scripture presents many instances of prophecies framed by the wisdom of God in such a way as to anticipate accurately in the same words two or more widely separated crises-in the divine programme (see chapter 8), there need be no difficulty whatever in the idea of yet another fulfilment of Revelation on the lines suggested here, in addition to the scheme made familiar through “Eureka.” (In this study emphasis wil1 not be put on the continuous-historic scheme simply because it has already been set out elsewhere fully and completely).

A SPECIAL BLESSING

The considerations just advanced illuminate and are themselves illuminated by the opening words of the Apocalypse: “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy.” Why the special blessing which understanding of Revelation is to bring?

Firstly, because Revelation is so much dependent on the rest of the Bibl’ that he who would understand it must first understand the rest of Scripture In other words, the one who hears (i.e. understands) this Book is special, blessed because he must first have profited richly from the rest of the Word of God.

Secondly, if the view to be advanced in this study is correct, then in ever, age the devout and faithful reader of the Apocalypse has found and will find strong confirmation of his faith. The early Christian of the First Century would see how much of its vivid symbolism was fulfilled in A.D. 70. The brother of Christ, tenaciously holding to truth amidst error in the Twentieth Century, is able to discern that much, which the Book reveals, may be this modern world’s experience at almost any moment. And the obscure faithful remnant at any epoch throughout the ages would be able, in whatever generation, to find some part of this divine panorama passing under hi gaze from prophecy to history.

So, then, the exposition, which follows, will be, in the main, a Biblical exposition, seeking to follow the directives supplied by the copious link with other parts of Scripture. Now and then, to emphasize (rather than prove) the A.D. 70 application, there will be reference to First Century history, chiefly to Josephus, who is invaluable here. And to point the imminence of the final and great fulfilment in the Last Days some attempt will be mad to spot-light the relevance of those Apocalyptic prophecies to the Twentieth Century. The present writer is convinced that there is need of only little patience before a truly startling fulfilment of some of these things through current affairs becomes plain and undeniable.

No reader of the Apocalypse can miss the seven-fold features out of which it is constructed. There are seven letters to the Churches, seven Seals, seven Trumpets, seven Vials. These are self-evident.

There is also mention of seven Thunders (10:3, 4), but because of the instruction: “Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and wrote them not,” it has commonly been assumed that nothing can be known about these awe-inspiring utterances, for the simple reason that nothing has been written. Yet the language plainly implies that something was written for it is only possible to “seal up” a message after it is committed to paper. The most reasonable view, then, is that when the “seven thunders uttered their voices” John wrote a description of the visions by which they were accompanied and the words that were spoken, but did not write the explanation of the message. Alternatively, “write them not” may mean “do not write these details just now but later.” One of these two interpretations must surely be accepted if only because, when the reader comes to chapter 14, he finds a seven-fold sequence of revelations each of which involves “an angel with a great voice,” that is, an angel with a voice like thunder, speaking on God’s behalf (see John 12:28, 29).[10] It may be well to list these, so as to make this point more evident.

	14:6,7:	“Another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel… saying with a great voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him…”
	14:8:	“Another angel, saying (mightily with a strong voice: see 18:2), Babylon is fallen, is fallen.”
	14:9:	“the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image … the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God.”
	14:15:	“another angel came out of the temple, crying with a great voice, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap.”
	14:17:	“Another angel came out of the temple … he also having a sharp sickle.” This brief picture is expanded in ch. 19:17: “an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice … Come and gather yourselves together to the supper of the great God …”
	14:18:	“Another angel came out from the altar … and cried with a great voice … Thrust in thy sharp sickle …”
	16:1:	“And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven (vial-bearing) angels, Go your ways, and pour out …”

Thus the seventh of these “thunders” opens up into the series of seven vial judgements, just as the seventh seal becomes seven trumpets.

This identification of the seven thunders means that the entire Apocalypse is now taken up with sequences of seven-fold judgements, except for chapters 12, 13 and the last few chapters, 17-22 or 19-22, according to whichever view of the scope of the vials is adopted. A re-examination of these sections discloses the existence of a seven-fold structure here also.

In chapters 12, 13, there are seven dramatis personae:

	12:1:	the woman clothed with the sun.
	12:3:	the great red dragon.
	12:5:	the man-child born to rule with a rod of iron.
	12:7:	Michael the archangel.
	12:10, 17; 13:7:	the other seed of the woman, the “saints.”
	13:1:	the beast out of the abyss.
	13:11:	the two-horned beast like a lamb.

And the concluding section of Revelation is made up of seven visions each introduced with the words: “And I saw …”

	19:11:	the rider on the white horse.
	19:19:	the warring armies.
	20:1:	the thousand years.
	20:11:	the great white throne.
	20:12:	the judgement.
	21:1:	new heaven and a new earth.
	21: 22:	the glory of the holy city.

With the exception of short sections coming between the groups of revelations already mentioned, the entire Book of Revelation is now seen to be composed of seven sections each of which is itself in seven parts.

Further examination brings to light that each of these unallotted sections is a vision of the heavenly sanctuary and each includes a hymn of praise. Also, each seven is divided into four and three by the mention of a heavenly voice.

Ch. 1:	the glorified High Priest.
	(Anthem: “Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood … to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen “)
Ch. 2:	FOUR LETTERS
	(Voice: He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches.)[11]
Ch. 3:	THREE LETTERS
Ch. 4, 5:	the heavenly tabernacle and the Lamb with the Book of Life.
	(Anthem: “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power.”)
Ch. 6:	FOUR SEALS
	(Voice: “How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood?”)
	THREE SEALS
Ch. 7:	the great multitude before the throne.
	(Anthem: “Amen: Blessing, and glory and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever ever. Amen “)
Ch. 8:	FOUR TRUMPETS
	(Voice: “Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth …”)
Ch. 9:1l:	THREE TRUMPETS
Ch. 9:19:	the temple of God opened in heaven.
	(Anthem: “We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned. “)
Ch. 12:1-9:	FOUR DRAMATIS PERSONAE
	(Voice: “Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ.”)
Ch. 12:13-13:18:	THREE DRAMATIS PERSONAE
Ch.14:1-5:	the Lamb and the redeemed on Mount Zion
	(Anthem: A new song before the throne, and no man could learn that song.)
Ch. 14:6-11:	THREE THUNDERS
	(Voice: “Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth. “)
Ch. 14:14 20:	FOUR THUNDERS
Ch. 15:	The temple of the tabernacle of the testimony in heaven opened.
	(Anthem: the Song of Moses and of the Lamb: “Great and marvelous are thy works, Lord God Almighty …”)
Ch. 1 6:1-4:	THREE VIALS
	(Voice: Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and which wast, because thou hast judged thus.”)
Ch. 16:8-18:24:	FOUR VIALS
Ch. 19:1-10:	The praising multitude.
	(Anthem: “Hallelujah: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.”)
Ch.l9: 11-20: 5:	THREE VISIONS
	(Voice: “Blessed and Holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection …”)
Ch. 20:7-22:5:	FOUR VISIONS

The conclusion (22:6-21) has a three-fold “I come quickly” and a threefold prayer for that coming. Only the Second Coming itself can complete this – the eighth – set of seven.

[10] Cp. also Exodus 9:28, where the Hebrew expression “voices of God” is translated “mighty thunderings.”

[11] These words are apparently deliberately dislocated from their usual place (v.26) in order to fill this role.

1. Sardis. Famous in earlier history. Capital of Lydia, the kingdom ruled by wealthy Croesus. At this time it was a declining city and had been ever since a destructive earthquake at the begim1ing of the century.

he that hath the seven Spirits and the seven stars. Ch. 4:5 and 5:6 and 1 :16, 20. Thus “seven spirits” emphasizes angelic action among the ecclesias, or the operation of Holy Spirit powers in the ecclesias. “Seven stars” emphasizes responsibility of ecclesias to Christ their llead.

I know thy works. Contrast the force and tone of this with 2:2, 9, 13, 19. Only here and in v. 15 does Christ begin with condemnation.

a name that thou livest and art dead. Ecclesia and city were alike-both living on a splendid past. What was wrong? (a) Indulgence in pleasure; cp. the similar language of 2 Timothy 3:5, 4; 1 Timothy 5:6; Titus 1:16, 12. (b) Lack of prayer may be inferred from “Be watchful ;” prayer and “watching” are frequently associated together; e.g. Matthew 26:38, 41; Luke 21 :36; Ephesians 6:18; Colossians 4:2. (e) Lack of faithful testimony to the Truth may be inferred from the allusion at the end of v. 5. What a shock when these words were read out before the ecclesia! There is a serious lack of this type of downright exhortation today. Why did not Jesus introduces himself by ch. 2:8?

become watchful. Nehemiah 7:3.

2. establish the things which remain. The reference is to the gifts of the Spirit. See on “fulfilled” in this verse and on “received” (v. 3). Evidently, the up-building power of the gifts of the Spirit was being neglected in Sardis Restraint of the exuberance of these powers had been necessary in Corinth (1 Corinthians 14) and in Thessalonica (1 Thessalonians 5: 19, 22). Had Sardis drifted into cold formality through striving after seemliness at the expense of spiritual fervour?

I have found. Greek: “eureka,” perfect tense, implies: “I found som~ time ago and it is still true.” This condemnation is not summary or hasty

no works of thine fulfilled. Romans 15: 13, 14; Ephesians 1:23; 3:19; 4:10; 5:18; Philippians 1:11.

before my God. Luke 12: 9, 6 and 15: 10.

my God. Only other occurrences: John 20:17; Revelation 3:12. What is the special significance of this? The expression is useful against the doctrine of the Trinity. Note that only dead Sardis and lukewarm Laodicea have no enemies, either in or outside the ecclesia!

3. Therefore. Twice in one verse, in consequences of “thy works not fulfilled…”

remember-”keep on remembering”-the key to faithfulness; Luke 22:19; Mark 14:72; whence 2 Peter 1:12, 13 and 3:1, 2.

how thou hast received (the gifts of the Spirit), as in Romans 8:15, Galatians 3:2; 2 Peter 4:10; 1 John 2:27. Gk. perfect tense implies that they were still possessed, but not honoured or used with profit.

how emphasizes the eager zeal of Sardis in its early days.

and didst hear (the word of life).

and keep (my commandments).

and repent. And apparently Sardis did! In the mid-second Century Melito bishop of Sardis was one of the outstanding characters of the early church. Among other things, he wrote a commentary on Revelation! If the leader of the ecclesia was faithful the rest would follow his lead. if thou wilt not watch. Luke 21:36; Matthew 24:42.

I will come as a thief. Matthew 24:42, 43 (Luke 12:39, 40), alluded to in 1 Thessalonians 5:2, 4, 6; Revelation 3.18 and 16:15; 2 Peter 3:10. The phrase always applies to the Second Coming, but what meaning could it have for Sardis in the first Century?

thou shalt not know what hour. Quote from Matthew 24:42 where context defines what is meant by “watching.” Should it be inferred that the watchful will know the hour?

4. a few names. Idiom for the faithful remnant; John 10:3; Acts 1:15; Revelation 11 :15; Numbers 26:63-65. These few faithful are not commanded to separate themselves from the rest!

not defiled their garments. Ch. 16:15, where also, “I come as a thief.” What is the point here in what seems to be a deliberate reference to the letter to Sardis?-to suggest that at the coming of the Lord the Truth will be in a Sardian state? Revelation 14: 4; 2 Corinthians 7:1; Jude 23.

their garments. Their Christ-righteousness; Galatians 3:27; Ephesians 4:24 and 5:27; Revelation 6:11 and 7:9.

with me. In fulfilment of Christ’s High Priestly prayer; John 17:24; Revelation 2:1.

walk with me in white. Cp. Genesis 5:22; Luke 9:29; Matthew 13:43. Or, read as an allusion to Zechariah 3:3, the next verse becomes an appropriate reference to the Satan of Zechariah 3: 1-those in Ezra 2 :62, 63 whose names were blotted out of the book of the priesthood.

for they are worthy. What a contrast with 16:6!

5. he that overcometh. The one who repents: v. 3. Even his defiled garments shall be cleansed.

white raiment. The priestly robe; Matthew 6:29; Zechariah 3:4. Contrast Revelation 2:26-28 (royal majesty).

not blot out his name. Implying that it is possible for a name once written in the Book to be blotted out; Ezra 2:63. Cp. 2 Samuel 23, includes in David’s mighty men Joab’s armour-bearer, but not Joab; Ahithophel’s son, but not Ahithophel; the priest Benaiah but not the priest Abiathar. Revelation 7 omits Dan and Ephraim.

Direct reference here to Psalm 69:28. Implication: these Sardians by their empty service have put themselves among the Lord’s crucifiers, as in Hebrews 6:6 and 10:29. Cp. 1 Corinthians 11:27.

book of life. Revelation 13:8 and 17:8 and 21:27; Exodus 32:32; Psalm 69:28 and 56:8 and 87:6; Daniel 12:1; Isaiah 4:3; Ezekiel 13:9; Philippians 4:3; Luke 10 :20; Hebrews 12 :23; Malachi 3:16. There is no Book of Death, except Jeremiah 17:23. In fact, if there were, all would be written in it; Romans 3 :9, 23.

before my Father and 6efore His angels combines Matthew 10:32 and Luke 12:8. Implies a protasis; “he that confesses me before men.” Evidently Sardis was failing in this respect.

before His angels, who will be sent to gather the elect; Matthew 24:31.

7. Philadelphia. Further inland than the churches mentioned so far. It had been more devastated by earthquakes than any other town in the Roman Empire. Ignatius (died c. 112) has several interesting allusions to this letter in his letter to Philadelphia.

angel of the church (according to Apostolic Constitutions) was Demetrius. Probably the same as 3 John 12, where read: “Demetrius hath the witness (commendatory letter?) of all (the elders here?), and of the Truth itself (in the copy of the Gospel which he brings?),” and cp. rest of verse with John 19:35 and 21:24. If this suggestion be well-founded, there is special point in “he that is true,” and in “an open door,” and “no man can shut it” (contrast Diotrephes). Verse 7 is largely quotation from Isaiah 22:22. Almost this entire letter is shot through with allusions to that chapter and its background, so a diversion to study it becomes almost, if not quite, essential.

Isaiah 22:15-25.

Setting of the prophecy: Throughout the reign of wicked Ahaz, the Temple had been shut up, and the Temple area given over to base idolatry imported from Assyria (2 Chronicles 28:24, 25; 2 Kings 16:1~12). Shebna, along with Urijah the High Priest, was probably responsible to the king for the furtherance of this policy. With the accession of Hezekiah came drastic reformation. The Temple was re-opened (2 Chronicles 29:3) and cleansed (29: 16-19). Shebna was first transferred to a new office (Isaiah 36:2 and 22:15) and later thrust out altogether (Isaiah 22:17-19). Probably it was he that is denounced in Psalm 49. A man of godliness -Eliakim, replaced the time-serving Urijah. Using Shebna as a type of the old order, Isaiah foretells the replacement of Jewish self-sufficiency by the acceptable approach to God through Christ.

	15.	Shebna=sit down now. His name is symbolic of his imminent thrusting out of office. Contrast Eliakim (= whom God will raise up) son of Hilkiah (= the Lord is my portion).
		over the house. Not only the royal palace, but the temple (the two buildings were in the same enclosure); cp. 1 Chronicles 9:11; 2 Chronicles 31: 10, 13; Jeremiah 20:1.
	16.	sepulchre. As though seeking to guarantee himself a glorious resurrection?
	17.	R.V. “hurl thee away.” s.w. Jeremiah 16:13.
		R.V. “will wrap thee up closely.” An allusion to Leviticus 10:5?
	18.	the chariots of thy glory. Imitation cherubim. 2 Kings 23:11 (contrast 1 Chronicles 28:18 R.V.).
	19.	I . . . he. God, and His servant.
		station. Priestly office, as in 1 Chronicles 23:28.
	20.	my servant. So the “servant of the Lord” is a feature of “Proto”- as well as “Deutero!”-Isaiah 49:1, 3. Read: “I will call my servant (Hezekiah the Suffering Servant of the Lord) to Eliakim”-the leper coming to the priest to be cleansed: Leviticus 14:2. Or perhaps the reference is to 2 Chronicles 29-the Temple restoration by Hezekiah. It is not Eliakim but “my Servant” who is the subject of this prophecy.
	21.	robe . . . girdle have special reference to priestly and royal garments; “government . . . father . . . shoulder” (v. 22) are all in Isaiah 9:6 a further hint that the whole of this Shebna transaction has Messianic significance.
	22.	key of the house of David. Kingship and priesthood are inextricably intertwined in this prophecy, as in v. 21 and again in v. 23, 24.
		opens and none shall shut. Reference to the temple, as in Malachi 1:10; see 2 Chronicles 28:24 and 29:3, 7. Contrast Isaiah 60:11 speaking of the day when temple and city shall be synonymous.
	23.	a nail in a sure place, and v. 24. Hezekiah is likened to a wall-hook in the temple on which to hang securely various things for the temple service (2 Chronicles 28:24 and 29:18, 19). The figure of Christ upon whom all depend is an obvious one. So understood by Ezra and Zechariah; Ezra 9:8 and Zechariah 10:4.
		a glorious throne. The King-Priest; Zechariah 6:12, 13. The words imply divine nature also: Jeremiah 17:12 and 14:21; Matthew 25:31.
	24.	they shall hang upon him. Israel being an utter failure in this particular respect (Ezekiel 15:3), God turns to one “made strong” for the purpose. “All the vessels . . . of cups . . . and of flagons” are interpreted as symbolic of “the offspring and the issue” in Christ.
	25.	In that day, further demonstrates the application of the prophecy to other than Hezekiah.
		the nail . . . removed . . . cut down . . . fan. Either (a) reference to Shebna the type of an unworthy priesthood, in which case, it adds nothing to v. 15-19; or (b) a prophecy of the humiliation of Christ on the cross; cp. Isaiah 52:13 (his dignity) and 53:8, 11 (his shame). Cp. also Daniel 9:24, 26-Messiah the prince cut off; 1 Corinthians 2:8-the Lord of glory crucified. Difficulty here is in the anticlimax of the prophecy. “In that day” so often refers to the glorious consummation.

It is now easy to see Shebna as a type of the offensive self-seeking of Israel’s priesthood, a shame to its Lord’s House and eventually to be utterly abolished. Luke 16:3 is almost a quotation from LXX of v. 19 here. And every detail written about Hezekiah finds much greater fulness in an application to Christ.

he that is holy. This title apparently not in ch. 1. But it is: cp. Psalm 16:10, the one raised from the dead; this in turn connects with Revelation 1: 18, where note reference to “keys.” Same title associated with resurrection in Acts 3:14, 15: John 6:69 R.V. (but the reading is doubtful). This is another of God’s titles appropriate to His Son; Revelation 4:8; John 17:3, 11.

he that is true. v. 14 (the Amen) and 6:10 (to open the grave for his martyrs, and no man shutteth), and 19:11 (to shut his enemies in the grave, and no man openeth). The word “true” often signifies “true” in contrast to “type” (Hezekiah), not in contrast to “false”.

the key of David. Again, as in Isaiah 22:22, 23 there is both kingship and priesthood here. On occasions Peter was deputed to use this key (Matthew 16:19), but no intrinsic right was conferred on him. That remains Christ’s. Alongside mention of false Jews in v. 9 this figure is appropriate: see Luke 11:52, and note Galatians 4:17 R.V.: same attitude shown by Judaisers in the ecclesia, seeking to shut out those not circumcised. John 10:7, 9 is also a parallel with this verse; for by metonymy “I am the door” probably means: “I am the shepherd who shews the way through the door;” otherwise, the Lord’s parable loses all coherence.

he that openeth and none shutteth. Not (a) the meaning of Scriptures; nor (b) the sealed Book of Life, but, as Isaiah 22 shows, (c) the way of approach to God (the temple doors); Colossians 1:13; and also (d) the way out of the tomb; ch. 1:18.

shutteth and no man openeth. Again, apply to the way of approach to God. The Jewish means of access (v. 9) is now shut by Christ. True also of the way out of the tomb; Christ will close the grave upon his enemies.

8. set. Gk.: “given” is Hebraism for “appointed.”

behold, suggesting urgency about the work before them.

a door opened. R.V. as in Hezekiah’s day, a door for access to God (Romans 5:2) and thus for communion with Him; a door also by which to bring men into God’s temple. (a) 2 Chronicles 26:16 and 27:2 and 28:24 and 29:3 Isaiah 22:22. (b) Acts 14:27; Colossians 4:3; I Corinthians 16:9; 2 Corinthians 2:12. Philadelphia had a vast opportunity-providing hinterland. It was to be before all else a missionary ecclesia.

no man can shut it. Not even Jewish obstinacy.

I know thy works . . . that thou hast a little strength. (a) The words about the “open door” may be a parenthesis, as though Jesus were eager to reassure this struggling but faithful ecclesia. “Little strength” probably means “few in number and resources.” If taken as applying to lack of spiritual vigour, it accords ill with the rest of this commendatory epistle. (b) But A.V. reading is possible. In that case the sense is: “because thou hast but a little strength, I have appointed for thee an open door, with immense opportunities for preaching” i.e. the reward for faithful work in Christ is more work. Note too that Christ is best able to use those without confidence in their own power.

a little strength . . . thou hast kept my word. Allusion to 1 Kings 7:20; Boaz = in him is strength. Jachin = he will establish or make firm. Now see v. 12.

kept my word. 1 John 2:4, 5. Philadelphia = love of the brethren, v. 10; see also on v. 10 here.

didst not deny my name. R.V. Staunch loyalty in the face of persecution of the name Christian.

9. Behold (repeated), emphasizing the surprising outcome of their “little strength.” Make – ”give” as in v. 8.

synagogue of Satan. The adversary synagogue of Jews rebelling against the light by rejecting the gospel. Contrast the synagogue of truth; James 2:2 R.V. These Jews who boasted in their descent from Abraham were not Jews at all in the eyes of Abraham’s Seed; John 8:39. The “works of Abraham” are “belief in Christ” (v. 56).

but do lie. John 8:44.

make them to come and worship. If from Isaiah 60:14, a prophecy of Gentiles worshipping Jews is applied by Jesus to Gentile Jews worshipping Jewish Gentiles! Note there also “the city of the Lord, the Zion of the Holy One of Israel,” and compare Revelation 3:7,12. If from Isaiah 49:23 note: “they that wait for me”-”keep the word of my patience” (Revelation 3:10); and v. 24, 25=“keep thee from the hour of trial.”

worship before thy feet continues the figure of a re-opened Temple and worshippers prostrating themselves in the temple court before the entrance of the Holy Place, flanked by Jachin and Boaz (v. 12). Is this a promise of conversion of hostile Jews in Philadelphia? This would be an utterly unexpected meaning to the “open door.” The fulness of the promise can only be at the Second Coming; Zechariah 8:20-23 (“him that is a Jew”=Christ and the spiritual seed of Abraham; Romans 2:29) Zechariah 12:10.

I loved thee. Christ died for these Gentiles also as well as for the natural seed of Abraham. Gk. aorist refers to the death of Christ, as in 1 John 4:10, 11.

10. the word of my patience. (a) My commandment with patience. (b) My commandment concerning patience; Matthew 10:22. (c) The word, which commands steadfastness such as I also shewed. (c) is preferable.

the hour of trial. A phrase full of meaning for Philadelphians. Philadelphia was the most earthquake-stricken city in the whole world of that day. What hour of trial? (a) The spreading Neronic persecution afflicting “all the world” of Christians. This persecution died suddenly with Nero, so it might never have reached Philadelphia. (b) The earthquake of Revelation 16:14, I8. The promise then assures the faithful remnant of safety in the divine visitation; Isaiah 26:20, 21. (c) Suggestion included in next note.

them that dwell on the earth. In Revelation this phrase almost always means “them that dwell in the Land (of Palestine”). Gk.: Luke 21:23. But this seems to contradict “all the inhabited earth.” Interpret thus: The impending Jewish war and destruction of Jerusalem would not only “try them that dwell in the Land,” but would also be an “hour of trial” to the millions of Jews already scattcred throughout “all the world.” I7or all Jews, in Palestine and out of it, A.D. 70 was to mean the utter abolition of all that their religion stood for. But whilst Philadelphia’s Jewish advcrsaries were to suffer in this way, these same events would be a consolidation of faith to faithful Christians at Philadelphia. In fact the fall of Jerusalem may have been the Lord’s means of bringing these Jewish adversaries to “worship before thy feet,” by accepting the faith they had hitherto reviled.

11. I come quickly: hold fast only makes sense on the assurnption that an early coming of the Lord was (at that time) the divine intention (see Appendix).

hold fast that which thou hast. So the primary duty of a faithful ecclesia is not to find new truth different from the principles already learned, but to maintain in purity those already received.

that no man take thy crown. As David supplanted Saul, or Matthias Judas, or the Gentiles the Jews. Modern examples?

thy crown. In the light of the reference in v. 12 to “a pillar in the temple” this should be read first as an allusion to Jachin and Boaz (cp. v. 8); I Kings 7:15-22, 41, 42; 2 Chronicles 3:15-17. Note detailed descriptions of “chapiters” or “crowns” which were later “taken away;” 2 Kings 25:13, 16, 17. Reference to Exodus 28:36-38 is unlikely because this crown was peculiar to the High Priest.

12. a pillar in the temple of my God. See precious note. But allusion to Jachin and Boaz by no means exhausts the force of this phrase. “In the temple (sanctuary)” may now allude to one of the pillars supporting the Veil (Exodus 26:32; 1 Kings 6:31, 33). Such a conclusion would harmonize well with the rest of the verse. See next note but one. Galatians 2:9 speaks of Apostles as pillars in God’s spiritual house (there is no innuendo about the word “seemed”); 1 Corinthians 3:16, 17; 2 Corinthians 6:16; I Peter 2:5. The new Jerusalem has no temple in it; ch. 21: 22, 23. It is all temple. City and temple are one and the same.

and he shall go no more out. The words appear almost unnecessary until the fate of Jachin and Boaz is recalled. And following Galatians 2:9 it is to be remembered that Cephas was crucified in Rome, James the Lord’s brother was battered to death in Jerusalem, the other James was slain by Herod, and John was banished to Patmos. Nevertheless: John 6:37 and 10:28, 29. Contrast 1 John 2:19.

Both these phrases would be specially eloquent to the much earthquaked Philadelphians. To be a “pillar” must mean ability to withstand unmoved the worst shocks that life can administer. To “go no more out” would provide startling and satisfying contrast with the masses of panic-stricken populace camping in the open fields in time of earth tremors.

the name of my God . . . of the city of my God . . . my new name. Another triad. Jeremiah 33:16 and 23:6 put it beyond all doubt that the name is The Lord our Righteousness (contrast the name of the Beast). Righteousness is essentially a personal quality, and yet-amazing fact – here is one who is the Righteousness of others. How so? Because besides being a King (Jeremiah 23: 5) he is also an altar – for every other example of a compounded Jehovah name in the Old Testament applies to an altar: Judges 6 :24; Genesis 22:14; Exodus 17:15; Ezekiel 48:35 (and see also Exodus 20:24, 25). Thus the allusions in this letter have taken the steadfast believer from the Temple door into the very Holy of Holies, where the Mercy Seat was the altar, or propitiatory, on the Day of Atonement. Consider also Genesis 28:22 (very probably an inscribed stone, as Joshua 24:27), alluded to in 1 Timothy 3:15, where “pillar and ground of the truth (i.e. the promise)” may possibly be in apposition to “thou,” the earnest Timothy.

new 7erusalem which cometh down from God. A remarkable anticipation of ch. 21: 2, almost suggesting that the letters to the churches were written after the rest of the book. The detail here is necessary to avoid unhappy confusion with the literal Jerusalem soon to be destroyed, leaving not even a pillar standing. In his Gospel John uses the Greek form Hierosoluma, but in Revelation writing of the new Jerusalem, he always has the Hebrew form: Hierousalem.

my new name. In the New Testament this always means the beginning of a new life different from the old; e.g. Cephas, Boancrges, Paul, Barnabas. See on ch. 2:17. It was only after his resurrection that Jesus became the Lord our Righteousness; Romans 4:25; Philippians 2:9-11. This detail is highly appropriate here, for Philadelphia had adopted a new name Neo-Caesarea, in honour of the Emperor Tiberius who gave material aid to help recovery after the A.D. 17 earthquake.

14. Laodicea. A very wealthy city in the Lycus valley near Hierapolis and Colosse. Big trade in woollen manufactures (fine black wool). Banking centre. Famous also for a local eye-ointment. There were hot springs in the vicinity. Utterly destroyed by earthquake in Nero’s reign (not long before this letter) and, unlike other cities, was completely and magnificently rebuilt without any Imperial aid.

the angel. Almost certainly the “bishop” of this ecclesia was Archippus, son of Philemon; Colossians 4:16, 17; Philemon 2. And so also in Apostolic Constitutions. It would seem that Archippus was slack in his service and the ecclesia took its tone from him-a warning to ecclesial elders in this generation! Also Nymphas (Colossians 4:15) was prominent at Laodicea. The name is probably a shortened form of the word for “the one who leads the bride.” Now note the contacts of this letter with the Song of Songs: 5:2, knock; 5:1, sup; 5:3, raiment; 5:17, naked; 5:11 fine gold; 3:10, 11, throne; 1: 3; 4:10, ointment. In 1st Century ecclesias there was a vocal response from all the congregation: 1 Corinthians 14:16. Why not in the 20th Century? Amen-the “verily” of Christ- “as I live, saith the Lord,” in the Old Testament. So the title here contrasts the unwavering purpose of God in Christ with the vague purposelessness of Laodicea. It is another title of God applied to the Son: Isaiah 65:16 R.V.m. Where does this descriptive title of Christ come in ch. 1? – in v. 18? in v. 5? The context of Isaiah 65 is magnificently appropriate: (v.11) “ye are they that forsake the Lord” = “lukewarm”; (v. 12) “When I called ye did not answer” etc. = “behold, I stand at the door and knock;” (v. 13) “ye shall be hungry . . . thirsty . . . ashamed,” “cry for sorrow of heart, howl for vexation of spirit” = “wretched, miserable, poor, blind, naked.”

faithful and true witness. See on ch. 1:5. In apposition to “the Amen.” Each explains the other. Isaiah 65: 16 LXX-the true God. Psalm 89:37 connects this title with thc rainbow, which in Gcnesis 9: 12-17 symbolized the end of troubles and the bringing in of new heavens and earth-now see again Isaiah 65:16, 17. “True,” Greek: alethinos, is in contrast to the type (the rainbow). Revelation 22: 6 and 21:5 and 19:11 are all associated with the “new heavens and earth,” and are all guaranteed by the words “faithful and true”. Amen, it shall be so! Revelation 19:11 would have an ominous ring for these Laodiceans: this glorious being could bring judgement and war on Laodicea too. Jeremiah 42:5, 6 (another divine title appropriated by Christ!) hints at the spirit Christ fain would see in Laodicea.

the beginning of the Creation of God. Revelation 1:5; Colossians 1:15, 18. The first to rise from the dead to immortality, the first of God’s new creation. Or, possibly, in an active sense: the beginner of the new creation; cp. John 1: 1-3, where the meaning is precisely that.

15. cold or hot Boiling hot – allusion to Laodicea’s beneficent hot springs. The verb is used in Acts 18:25 (a fine example) and Romans 12:11. The noun translated zeal, indignation, jealousy (in good or bad sense) is from the same root. Here, obviously: zealous, enthusiastic.

cold can hardly be a synonym for spiritually dead, because 1. It is never so used in Scripture. 2. The order of the words “cold or hot.” Would Jesus wish his disciples cold, in that sense? For, using a different figure, he said: “If the salt have lost his savour . . .” Instead, Matthew 10:42, Proverbs 25:25 point to the meaning “spiritualIy refreshing.”

16. neither hot nor cold. R.V. After “lukewarm” these words are, strictly speaking, superfluous. But who shall say this additional emphasis is unnecessary? Why is the order of the words switched from v. 15?

spue thee out. Appropriate after “lukewarm.” Comparing Laodicea to Israel in its worst apostasy, Leviticus 18: 24-28 (note the context and compare “that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear!”). How startled these very proper but lukewarm Laodiceans would be by the comparison. Yet the same comparison is valid in these days! See on v. 18.

will spue thee out. Gk: I am about to; cp. Luke 12:19-21: “this night.” What practical action does this figure symbolize? How can “about to” refer to a Second Coming 1900 years later?

17. rich etc. Another triad. Cp. Paul’s irony in 1 Corinthians 4:8. Contrast ch. 2:9. It is not literal riches of Laodicean bankers that is referred to here though doubtless it was their literal wealth that fostered this self-sufficiency (there is no more potent cause). Cp. Hosea 12:8, alluded to here. Laodicea was another faithless Isracl, the grounds for whose complacency are in v. 8b, 11 (where “heaps” = dung-heaps).

have need of nothing. Allusions to Laodicea’s self-sufficiency after recent earthquake; see on v. 14. Apparently Laodicea knew better than its Lord; Matthew 6:8.

wretched etc. Read: “the wretched and miserable one, even poor and blind and naked.” Then this triad of spiritual diseases are separately prescribed for in the next verse. All these words describe the man who cannot help himself and who must needs beg aid from others. Laodicea could get this help only from Christ (v. 18).

the wretched one. The outstandingly wretched one amongst all the churches? Or, he who is spiritually poor and yet imagines himself to be rich is specially the wretched one. He is beyond aid. Everyday Gk. used this word of the one compelled to earn a hard living by excessive physical effort; i.e. Laodicea must work for its living in Christ. The Old Testament (LXX) uses it of those plundered by the strong and unscrupulous.

blind. Christ’s eyesalve (v. 18) is so restorative that it will even bring back sight to the completely blind; John 9:6. Note how in this verse the Lord is driven to pile up stinging epithets in order to get under this thick Laodicean skin! As are its leading ministers, so is the ecclesia, nearly always. And these leaders are held responsible for their ecclesia! But this may have been more directly the case in the days of Holy Spirit gifts.

18. I counsel thee. Ironic? Where else in Scripture does Jesus advise? Isaiah 9:6?

buy of me, at the cost of self-esteem, as Paul; Philippians 3 :7-9. The thrce items following correspond to Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19 23: 9, 10, 8 R.V. The idea therefore is: Get back to the spirit and meaning of your baptism. Also, all three are allusions to local activities: see on v. 14.

gold tried in the fire. Tried faith? Very doubtful. 1 Peter 1:7 is a contrast not a comparison. More probably reference to the gold of the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies (ch. 1:12, 13 and 8:3 and 15:7); i.e. you may think of yourself as sharing divine fellowship, but you don’t; yours is worldly wealth only; Zechariah 13:9-a figure for the discipleship of the faithful remnant.

rich. Colossians 2:2, 3 (see 4:16); Revelation 2:9; Ephesians 1:18 and 3:8.

white raiment. Colossians 3:10, 12, 14.

shame of thy nakedness. When? At the Lord’s Coming, Matthew 22:11. When else? Revelation 16:15, with v. 3, 4, 10 here, suggests that Sardis Philadelphia and Laodicea (ecclesias like them!) will still exist in the 6th Vial these letters have a further application in the Last Days.

eyesalve. Their own sent forth a stinking savour (Ecclesiastes 10:1); contrast John 9:6; 1 John 2:20, 27 (was Laodicea another ecclesia not using Spirit gifts to the full advantage?) and v. 28c.

19. as many as I love. Gk: phileo, indicates the Lord’s natural affection for these erring disciples. Use of this word might imply that he had known some of them personally in the days of his flesh.

rebuke. In New Testament=reprove and convict; John 1(J:8.

chasten. Cp. David; 2 Samuel 12:13 (convicted), 14 (chastened). This verse is a dircct allusion to Proverbs 3:11, 12. Entire context there is relevant to Laodicea. v. 10 = true riches. v. 12b = Revelation 3:21. v. 14 = Revelation 3:18a. v. 21 = Revelation 3:18c.

be zealous. Cognate with “hot” (v. 15). Continuous imperative: “be always zealous; “ Colossians 4: 17.

20. Behold. A matter of urgency.

I stand at the door and knock. Song of Songs 5:2. In the elaborate type of the Song of Songs this refers to a literal (not mystical) coming of the Beloved deferred because his “sister-spouse” is unprepared for him. Note also that verse 3d here = Revelation 3:18b.

hear my voice and open— Luke 12:36, 37, (as the next words prove), and not John 14:23.

Come in and sup with him. Does not refer to present fellowship with Christ, but to Luke 12:36, 37, the Second Coming, ep. James 5:9. This is equivalent to the repeated “I come quickly” in the other Letters.

he with me – “(the Lord) shall gird himself, and come forth and serve them ;” Luke 12:37. Cp. John’s fondness for Christ’s “sayings of reciprocity:” John 6: 56 and 10:38 and 14:20 and 15:4, 5 and 17:21, 26, a rich collection.

21. sit with me in my throne. Christ’s earthly throne; John 17:22, 24. Contrast Matthew 20: 23. This v. (3: 21) supplies the answer to their question.

with my Father in his throne. The Father’s heavenly throne; ch. 4:2. But the two thrones are one and the same; ch. 22:1; Matthew 16:27 and 25:31.

THE LETTERS TO THE CHURCHES AND THE PROBLEM OF FELLOWSHIP

The bearing of the Letters to the Churches on the difficult problem of Fellowship is very direct and important. Sardis is “dead.” The Truth in its midst is “ready to die.” Its works are “not prefect.” Nevertheless there are here “a few names which have not defiled their garments.” There is no hint that these few are to separate themselves from an otherwise “dead” ecclesia. There is no reproach that they are defiling themselves by present associations, no instruction that they are to take any kind of drastic action. This is left to the Lord himself. Instead, these few are pronounced “worthy.”

Pergamos has the pernicious doctrine of Balaamites and Nicolaitans, but whilst there is reproach because these are tolerated, there is no hint to the rest of the seven churches that they dissociate themselves from over-tolerant Pergamos.

On the contrary the Lord speaks of himself as the one who “holds the seven stars in his right hand.” This includes Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis and Laodicea! Indeed every implication of the Letters is that he continues to hold them until he “comes quickly to fight against them with the sword of his mouth,” until he comes “as a thief.”

Most impressive of all is the Letter to Thyatira. Here there is “that woman Jezebel” who both practiced and taught evil. Nevertheless there is even a certain commendation for this ecclesia. There is also the express charge: “Unto you . . . as many as have not this doctrine I will put upon you none other burden. But that which ye have already hold fast till I come.” Quite explicitly, then, there is no warning that the faithful in Thyatira were in duty bound to separate themselves from the corruption in their midst. But there is clear intimation of the need to discipline the false teacher.

Without any emphasis needed, it is evident that the Letters to the Churches, far from lending support to the doctrine of “iron curtain” excommunication, quite clearly require the faithful to remain even in unfaithful ecclesias holding tenaciously to their own faith and doing all possible to save the rest.

The first vision described by John was the intensely symbolic appearance of his High-Priestly Lord amidst the seven candlesticks. The next, following on the messages to be conveyed to the seven churches, was that of the glorious heavenly throne – the Almighty Himself enthroned above the cherubim.

Like so many of the visions revealed to John later, this vision also was seen in heaven. “Behold, a door opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me, which said, Come up hither . . .” (4:1).

A simple rule will be found to be the key to the interpretation of this vision and of much that follows; What the Apostle beheld taking place in heaven has to do with those in covenant with God, those who are even now “in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” What the Apostle saw transpiring on the earth has reference to those, whether Jews or Gentiles, who are not within the Covenants of Promise.

A similar idiom appears to be employed in the Old Testament in connection with Solomon’s Temple. Solomon prayed to God that “Thine eyes may be open toward this house day and night . . . to hearken unto the prayer which thy servant prayeth toward this place[1] . . . hear thou from thy dwelling place even from heaven; and when thou hearest, forgive” (2 Chronicles 6:20, 21). It is possible here to impart a nice distinction between “this place” and “thy dwelling place, even heaven.” But the words certainly read more naturally if they are understood to speak of the Holy of Holies, towards which prayers were made, as the “heaven” which was God’s dwelling place among his people.

This “confusion” between heaven and sanctuary crops up in a number of Scriptures: “The Lord is in his holy temple, the Lord’s throne is in heaven” (Psalm 11: 4); “The Lord . . . send thee help from the sanctuary, and strengthen thee out of Zion . . . the Lord saveth His anointed; He will hear him from His holy heaven” (Psalm 20:2, 6). Comparison of 2 Chronicles 7:1 with Leviticus 9:24 is another example of the same equivalence.

The relevance of this idea to John’s vision of the heavenly sanctuary will be apparent.

The door in heaven was not opened for John’s benefit (and, of course, for his fellow-disciples) for more than a short while. The Greek verb implies that the door had been opened to stay open. There is here the counterpart to the rending of the veil in the temple at the death of Christ. Is it also the open door set before the faithful in Philadelphia (3: 8), a door of access to the heavenly Presence which no man can shut (Romans 5:1, 2)?

The voice, which invited and directed John, was that of the Apostle’s angelic mentor and guide-the angel of ch. 1:1.

ENTHRONED ABOVE THE CHERUBIM

That it is the Almighty who is described as seated on the throne of glory hardly needs to be proved. But the hymn of the twenty-four elders (verse 11) leaves no room for doubt: “Thou art worthy, our Lord and our God (R.V.), to receive glory and honour and power: for Thou hast created all thit1gs, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.”

In substance what John beheld was the cherubim vision seen by Ezekiel, Isaiah, Daniel and the rest. Here, so far as the heavenly throne and the cherubim themselves are concerned, detail after detail corresponds. There are the four cherub faces, the wings and eyes, the “lightnings, thunderings, and voices”, the Holy One vivid with effulgent glory and seated upon an exalted throne, and the bow round about the throne.

Other details seem to be different, but on more careful examination they also fall into line. For example, the Divine Being on the throne is described as “like a jasper and a sardine stone to look upon.” A phrase like this meets the reader in Revelation 2:11, where the light of the holy Jerusalem is described as “like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal.” But jasper is not “most precious;” it is scarcely in the semi-precious category. Then is this John’s way of referring to a diamond? The phrase “clear as crystal” strongly supports the idea. The absence of any mention of diamond in Revelation or in any of the Old Testament lists (modern versions) makes this identification more likely. There is now special appropriateness in the first foundation of the new Jerusalem (21:18) being jasper (diamond) for thus it is seen to begin with immortality.

The sardine stone is reddish in colour. Thus jasper and sardine stone together suggest brilliant flashing, as of the diamond, together with the appearance of fire. And this is precisely what Ezekiel has in his description of the heavenly glory: “and out of the midst of thereof as the colour of electrum (a bright silvery metallic alloy), out of the midst of the fire” (Ezekiel 1:4).

“And there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald” (ch. 4:3). This detail implies that the word “bow” refers to shape rather than colour and that it is intended to suggest a “halo” of glory about the throne.

One of the most difficult questions to answer in this section is why the bow should be “in sight like unto an emerald”, i.e. green. This colour seems to have no very definite symbolic meaning in Scripture. Because of the predominance of green in Nature it may well be that in this vision the green bow suggests the idea that God is the Lord of All Life. But one could wish for further light on this.

It is a matter of first-rate importance that the student of this part of Revelation should recognize that all the rest of the description given here has as its basis the camp of Israel as it existed in the wilderness. In one particular after another this chapter and those that follow suggest deliverance from Egypt, the journeying in the wilderness and the appointments of the Tabernacle. In fact, what are here described (and also are frequently alluded to elsewhere in Revelation) are “the things in the heavens,” of which the Tabernacle system as inaugurated by Moses was a “pattern” (Hebrews 9:23 – one of the many allusions in that Epistle to Revelation):

	(a)	God enthroned in the Holy of Holies above the wings of the cherubim.
	(b)	The bow round about the throne corresponding to the shining forth of the Shekinah glory.
	(c)	The seven-branched candlestick: “Seven lamps of fire burning before the throne.”
	(d)	By and by there is reference to the altar of burnt offering (ch. 6:9 etc.) and the altar of incense (ch. 8:3).
	(e)	The encampment of priests and Levites next to the Tabernacle and all round it – “round about the throne . . . four and twenty elders sitting”. It is not known whether the Tabernacle order in the wilderness had anything to correspond with the 24 courses of priests arranged by David for his Tabernacle and for Solomon’s Temple (1 Chronicles 24:4), but it is highly probable that this is the allusion here.
	(f)	Just as the camp of ancient Israel was arranged round the Tabernacle outside the inner ring of Levite tents, so Revelation 7 goes on to describe the numbering of a symbolic 12,000 out of each of the tribes.
	(g)	The life in Christ is described in terms of Israel’s wilderness journey (7:14-17).

Further details of correspondence with the camp of Israel will emerge by and by.

The cherubim are described as being “in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne.” These phrases seem to be mutually contradictory. How is it possible to “be in the midst” of anything and at the same time round about it? Reference back to the Tabernacle arrangements clears up this difficulty immediately. The first phrase, “in the midst of the throne,” presents no problem (Isaiah 61:1, 2). Nor will the second, “round about the throne,” once it is remembered that in the Holy of Holies there were cherubim not only on the mercy-seat (“in the midst of the throne”) but also on all the walls and ceiling, and also on the veil. Consequently the heavenly throne had cherubim “in the midst” and also other cherubim “round about.”

A SEA OF GLASS

Another problem concerns the sea of glass: “And before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal.” At first appearance it would seem evident that there is here an allusion to the laver in the Tabernacle court or in Solomon’s temple. However this interpretation runs into serious difficulty in Revelation 21:1, 3: “and there was no more sea;” and in 15:2, where A.V is correct, and R.V., R.S.V., N.E.B. are inaccurate.

A better alternative is available. When Moses and the representatives of Israel went up into Mount Sinai after the covenant had been made between God and the people, “they saw the God of Israel, and there was under His feet as the paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in His clearness” (Exodus 24:10). Here was a symbolic representation of the vast expanse of heaven. The roof of man’s world is the floor of God’s: “The Lord our God, who dwelleth on high, humbleth Himself to behold the things that are in heaven” (Psalm 113:6).

Ezekiel saw the same features of the divine glory and wrote this description: “And the likeness of the firmament over the heads of the living creature was as the colour of the terrible crystal stretched forth over their heads above” (1:22). It is this, which is now pictured in Revelation 4 as “a sea of glass before the throne.” Let it be remembered that the word “firmament” simply means “an expanse,” and is just as applicable to sea as to sky. How like they seem on a calm summer’s day! Both are like “the paved work of a sapphire stone.” “Hast thou with Him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?” (Job 37:18).

The same sea of glass is described in Revelation 15:2 as being “mingled with fire.” This detail corresponds with Daniel 7:10: “A fiery stream issued and came forth before Him,” and explains why Ezekiel says it was like “the terrible crystal.” The reference is probably to God’s lightning in the sky-a symbol of “His judgements made manifest” (15: 4).

The apparent difference between a sea of glass before the throne, and Ezekiel’s firmament beneath the throne is no difference at all. The Greek word translated “before” means, strictly, “in the sight of, in the presence of.” The twenty-four elders are “before” the throne (same word) and also “round about” the throne (4:4, 10), thus involving the same “contradiction” until the more exact meaning of the preposition is allowed its place.

It is now possible to discern a very lovely meaning in the words of Revelation 21:1: “and there was no more sea.” When the New Jerusalem comes down from God out of heaven, the awful barrier of space (space-time, a fourth dimension?) between God and man is removed. The “firmament” like the “terrible crystal” is done away. God Himself is with men. They experience His Presence in a way, which is at present altogether impossible.

ELDERS AND CHERUBIM

The identification of the twenty-four elders, whilst not quite so straightforward, is not difficult. When consideration is given to the undeniable fact that this vision describes a heavenly sanctuary in the midst of a spiritual Israel these elders correspond to the tribe of Levi with its encampment close to the tabernacle (Numbers 1:53) within the great square of the camp of Israel. There is special reference to the priests, of the family of Aaron, who did duty in turn in the sanctuary. From the time of David onwards (and possibly, but not certainly, before then) these were organized in twenty-four courses (1 Chronicles 24:1-19).

Then since the twelve tribes (Revelation 7) are represented as typical of redeemed spiritual Israel, the twenty-four elders correspond to the leaders of the ecclesias. They are twelve and twelve because the family of God has both Jews and Gentiles. Always, from the time of Abraham, it has been possible for a Gentile to become a Jew, yet only in the first century and at no other time were there both Jews and Gentiles in the congregation of the Lord in anything approaching equal numbers. Accordingly, in Revelation 7, these saints in Christ are represented as twelve tribes of Israel and also as “a great multitude which no man could number,” corresponding to the saved people of Israel in the wilderness and the mixed multitude which shared their exodus from Egypt.

The four living creatures, which deserve more detailed study than is possible in this exposition, typify the saints in the fulness of their redemption. Certain details seem to point fairly clearly in this direction. They are the standards of the parts of the camp of Israel. They “give glory and honour and thanks” to Him that sits on the throne. And in Revelation 19:7 R.V. their song of gladness appropriates the words of the Beatitudes which Christ pronounced for his saints: “Let us rejoice and be exceeding glad (Matthew 5:12), and let us give the glory unto him (the Lamb).” The earlier Sanctus of the cherubim (4:8) carries the same implication, for although the Greek word for “living creature” is neuter, the participle, which introduces the “Holy, holy, holy,” is masculine, showing that these cherubim represent people. And since they each had six wings, the number of wings corresponds to the number of elders.

In their Sanctus Isaiah’s cherubim sang: “the fulness of the whole earth is His glory.” Even though, as will be seen in the next chapter, John’s vision does not anticipate the full establishment of the Kingdom of God, the words (which must be assumed here also) are most fitting, for the Apocalypse was made known at a time when the gospel was being taken to Gentiles everywhere. They were receiving the Good News with an enthusiasm, which should have shamed the Chosen People. At this time it was not the response of Israel but the “fulness of the whole earth” which gave glory to God.

Perhaps there is something of a problem and seeming inconsistency in an interpretation, which has both twenty-four elders and also cherubim as typical of the saints in Christ. This is part of the multiple typology of the sanctuary and its service[2]. The twenty-four courses of priests and their work in the Holy Place represent the consecration of the saints in the present age when only their High Priest can penetrate beyond the veil to minister the fulness of atonement. But the cherubim are in the Holy of Holies where they are of one piece with the Mercy Seat. Thus, as the quotation just made from chapter 19:7 also suggests, these are the saints redeemed and glorified and united forever with the one who is the means of their redemption.

[1] A.V. margin: “in this place” is definitely wrong.

[2] e.g. how many different aspects of the person and work of Christ are represented by the two altars, the laver, the silver sockets, the shewbread, the cherubim, the pot of manna, etc.?

Whilst there is no known indication in the New Testament that the events and characters in the Book of Ruth are of any special typical significance, quite a number of details suggest that such a view is not out of place. Certainly, with Paul’s exposition of the allegory of Sarah and Hagar to teach a lesson of humility it would be folly to assert dogmatically that no such typical significance either was intended or is to be found in the story of Ruth.

The following tentative outline suggestions may be of interest:

1. Elimelech (= “My God is King”), leaving Bethlehem in time of famine to seek security in Moab is a type of God’s people, Israel, throwing off God’s authority and abandoning the Source of Life (Bethlehem = “The House of Bread”) to join with those who are shut out from the people of God (Deut. 23:3). Israel, God’s firstborn, became through apostasy illegitimate (cp. the origins of Moab: Gen. 19:36,37). Mahlon and Chilion (= “weak” and “pining”) illustrate the state of Israel’s faith.
2. The deaths of Elimelech and his sons can be interpreted as the visitation of divine wrath on Israel, culminating in the eventual scattering of the nation (cp. Jesus’ cursing of the fig-tree).
3. Naomi represents the faithful remnant in Israel returning to God.
4. In Orpah and Ruth are figured two classes of Gentiles — those who hear the gospel but turn away from it, and those who thankfully acknowledge their privilege in being allowed to break old associations in order to join “the Israel of God”. (But note: the break with the old life must be made.) Naomi’s discouragement of Ruth has its counterpart in the understandable reluctance of the early Jewish preachers of the gospel to include the Gentiles in their ministrations: e.g. Peter before he went to Cornelius.
5. Naomi’s poverty in her return and her lament that her lot is bitter (“Marah”) suggest that even the devout Israelite in accepting divine forgiveness must acknowledge that at best he can only come empty-handed, driven by bitter experience to acknowledge the unwelcome fact.
6. The name and character of Boaz (= “Strength”) makes him fit the type of the Man whom God “made strong for himself”. “When we were yet without strength….Christ died for the ungodly” (Rom. 5:6).
7. Ruth’s gleaning foreshadows the Gentiles’ eagerness for the spiritual “crumbs” (Matt. 15:27) from Christ’s work. The special portion given her anticipates the spiritual food and drink provided in Christ and also Gentiles taking Israel’s place of privilege.
8. The form of Boaz’s blessing upon Ruth suggests that the godly Gentile has become seed of Abraham. “If ye are Christ’s then are ye (Gentiles) Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
9. Naomi’s recognition of Boaz as the “redeemer” corresponds to the acknowledgement by godly Jews of Jesus as the Messiah.
10. All these things happened at barley and wheat harvest, i.e. at Passover (the death of Christ) and Pentecost (the time of the giving of the Holy Spirit). Does the threshing of the barley represent the sufferings of Christ? If so, Boaz’s sleep by the heap of corn at the end of his labour would typify death and resurrection. (How many more instances in Scripture of sleep and waking being a figure of death and resurrection? Gen. 2:21; 15:12; Ps. 5:3; Jer. 31:26; Dan. 8:18; 10:9-11; Lk. 9:32; Rev. 1:17.)
11. Ruth’s coming — washed, anointed and clothed in her best — to claim the right of marriage shows the Gentiles to be acceptable now through the death of Christ, but they must come washed from their sin, anointed with the Spirit and arrayed in garments of righteousness. That this was done at night at the threshing floor shows (like the deep sleep of Adam that he might receive his bride) that apart from the death of Christ this acceptance of both godly Jew and Gentile would be impossible.
12. ‘Lie down again.’ These two sleeps at the feet of Boaz correspond with (a) baptism – the figurative burial with Christ, and (b) the sleep of death in him until the day of glorious resurrection.
13. The six measures of meal intimate that the perfect rest of God is near. Ruth gained more by the free gift than all her laborious application to duty could ever bring her! But what is the meaning behind the fact that these six measures represent just twice what was waved before the Lord on the resurrection morning — according to the Rabbis (Lev. 23:10,11), and also twice what was used in the spiritual baking in the parable (Matt. 13:33)?
14. The other kinsman disowning his right of marriage is a signal intimation that Moses, with first opportunity, could not by his Law bring redemption. This near kinsman who does not redeem echoes the failure of the Son of Judah (Gen. 38) in a comparable responsibility. Hence the tracing of the genealogy back to Pharez (Gen. 38:29; Ruth 4:18).
15. Ruth’s marriage to her as yet unmarried “redeemer” has its counterpart, of course, in the Marriage of the Lamb. The details of the greeting and blessing accorded to Ruth again suggest the fulfilment of the ancient Messianic promises given to Jacob and to Judah. The mention of Pharez especially is a reminder of the “Seed” who was grudgingly acknowledged.
16. The child of the marriage, Obed, has a name which means ‘Serving’. The glorified saints of God are made happy in continuing service to the one who redeemed them. In the figure of Revelation “they serve him day and night in his temple”.

1.	Is it	(a) a Revelation given by Jesus Christ?
		(b) a Revelation concerning Jesus Christ? (e.g. ch. 1 :13-18).
		(c) a description of the future manifestation of Jesus Christ? (e.g. v. 10; 1 Corinthians 1:7).

The rest of v. 1 is decisive in favour of (a). “It is not Christ who is revealed, but Christ who reveals”. Contrast with revelation through other men; this is through Christ himself (Matthew 11:27).

revelation. The very word implies intelligibility, and not the reverse, which is the reputation the book has somehow gained. Today, would not most students of this Revelation consider “mystery” (in the sense of “secret”) to be more appropriate? Then should it be assumed that some explanation (not written down) went with the symbolism of the book? Or did Christians of the first century have a much greater insight into the meaning of Holy Scripture than is normal today?

which God gave unto him. Emphasizes the inferior status of the Son; Mark 13:22; Acts 1:7; 1 Timothy 6:15 R.V.m. Compare also many passages in John; e.g. 5:20 and 7:16 and 12:49 and 14:10 and 17:7, 8.

things which must shortly come to pass. Cp. Daniel 2:29 LXX: “what thing must come to pass after these things.” There is no “shortly” in Daniel 2. Also=Matthew 24:6, suggesting a connection between Revelation and Olivet Prophecy. This is important; see ch. 10.

shortly. The Greek word does not mean either “swiftly” or “suddenly,” but “shortly”, “soon” (see the analysis in Appendix – An Important and Difficult Problem).

signified. Better: sign-ified them. s.w. Acts 11:28 (how? see Acts 21:11); John 12:33 and 21:19; obviously = “revealed by symbols.” Each of these passages also means “revealed beforehand.”

by his angel. 1 Peter 3:22. Is this the guiding interpreting angel of the rest of the book? 4:1 and 10:4, 8, 11 and 14:3 and 17:1(?), 7 and 19:10 and 21:5, 9(?) and 22:8, 9.

his servants. Amos 3:7; Revelation 22:9 R.V.

John. Thus John authenticates his prophecy. Compare “I John” in v. 9 and 22:8 and also “I Daniel” in Daniel 9:2 and 8:1. John is “the disciple Jesus loved”, and Daniel is “greatly beloved.”

2. The word of God, the testimony of Jesus Christ, all things that he saw. Either: ministry, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus (1 John 1:1, 2; John 19:35); or, Gospel of John, Epistles of John, Revelation John 1:1, 14 and 21:24, 25); or, three descriptions of the same thing. This is the first of a series of triads which occur in Revelation 1; compare v. 4, 5, 6a, 7, 9, 18, 19.

the word of God. Hence the title “John the theo-logian, or the divine.” The Jews applied this title to Moses, and Eusebius used it of the prophets.

the testimony of Jesus Christ means “the truth about Jesus Christ,” compare v. 9 and 19:10 and especially 20:4 R.V. The testimony of Moses (the 10 commandments) was about Jesus Christ (see Exodus 20:6 and compare Luke 1:50 R.V.m.).

that he saw suggests that this preface (v. 1-3) was written after the rest of Revelation. Compare the details in 22:6-8. Similarly, Isaiah 1 may have been the last of the 66 chapters to be written.

3. he that readeth refers to the brother reading Scripture at the Breaking of Bread service (as today); modelled on synagogue service. “He that knows accurately” is a wrong translation.

they that hear-and-keep = the congregation-one class, not two.

hear = hear understandingly; Acts 22:9 (contrast Acts 9:7 where the Gk. grammatical form is different). Was an inspired interpretation forthcoming in First Century days from Spirit-guided elders with the gift of interpretation? Nehemiah 8:8.

keep. Generally used of observing commandments, e.g. Luke 11:28 with 8:21; applies especially to chapters 2 and 3. Note the 7-fold chain in the communicating of Revelation God – Christ – his angel – John – the messenger – the reader – the hearer-and-keeper.

the time is at hand. Cp. 22:10 where the context will hardly allow of: “the time for the fulfillment to begin is at hand.”

4. churches in Asia. Why to churches in Asia? Because they were the only churches with the man who was properly suited to receive it. The only other-Paul, to whom much of it may have already been revealed (see Chapter 26 – The Seventh Trumpet (11:14-19)) had lately suffered martyrdom (18:20; 20:4).

Why seven? – maintaining the figure of the seven-branched lampstand.

Why to these seven (there were many other churches in Asia, e.g. Colosse, Hierapolis, Miletus, etc.)? Ramsay answers: These were each the leading ecclesia in a particular district. Paul also wrote letters to seven churches (1 Samuel 2:5).

grace and peace. Paul’s greeting; John’s conclusion also; ch. 22:21.

is, was, is to come = Jehovah. See on v. 8. The Gk. involves a solecism, which only makes sense when this expression is taken as a name, and not a description, of God.

which is to come = which is the Coming One – a neat variation of “which shall be.” Reference to the literal coming, the manifestation of God in Christ (21: 3). Messiah was often spoken of as the Coming One; John 1: 15, 27; Matthew 11:3 R.V.

seven spirits. If reference here to the Holy Spirit, then the context would require the Holy Spirit to be a person separate from the Father and Son, sending greeting. Rather: these seven spirits are seven archangels. Compare ch. 4:5 and 5:6; Zechariah 3:9 (the eyes are not engraven on the stone, but are fastened attentively on it); Zechariah 4:10; Ezekiel 1:18, 20; Micah 5:5 (Christ and his seven archangels); Luke 1:19. Note the seven-fold spirit in Isaiah 11:2 and also I Corinthians 12:29, 30.

5. faithful witness, first-begotten, prince. All three titles come in Psalm 89:27 37. Whence:

faithful witness = the rainbow (look at Psalm 89:36, 37) =

	(a)	the glory of his Father; Ezekiel I :27, 28; Matthew 16:27;
	(b)	guarantee of the keeping of God’s promise and covenant of redemption; Genesis 9:12-17.

(a)         and (b) are really identical; John 18:37: “the Truth” here is an Old Testament idiom for covenants of promise called “the Truth” because God will not be found a liar. This makes Psalm 89:37 = 89:28. The three titles then come in two verses. So Jesus was born, not to be a king, but to bear witness to his future kingship, fulfilling the promises of God. Thus Jesus was “the faithful witness” before Pilate (1 Timothy 6:13). So the candidate for baptism witnessing his good confession follows closely the pattern of Christ witnessing his – note the context here (6:12). Compare the force of Isaiah 54:9 (and context) applied to the true Israel of God.

first begotten of the dead. Always when Jesus is referred to as First-born it is in this sense, “from the dead.” Hence Colossians 1:15 is to be explained by Colossians 1:18. The entire context shouts for application to the New Creation of whom the Risen Lord was literally the Beginning. Compare 1 Corinthians 15: 20 and Acts 13:33 (which definitely applies to Christ’s resurrection, as is proved by Hebrews 1: 4, 5 and 5: 5).

prince of the kings of the earth. An honour gained through the conquest of temptation, not by submission to it (Matthew 4: 8, 9). These three titles also come together in Isaiah 55: 3, 4:

	(a)	leader and commander of the people = first begotten from the dead; cp. Acts 13:33.
	(b)	witness for the people = faithful witness.
	(c)	everlasting covenant, sure mercies of David = prince of the kings of the earth (see R.V.m. here).

Ioved us, washed us, made us to be kings and priests. Another triad of closely-related ideas.

in his blood should be “by his blood” i.e. it is his blood (metonymy for his sacrifice) which makes the disciple’s baptism a valid washing away of sins.

washed us. Some doubt as to whether this should read “loosed us.” The two Greek words are nearly identical. If “washed,” cp. ch. 7:14 and especially Leviticus 8:6. If “loosed,” see Isaiah 40:2. Job 42:9 LXX has: “he loosed their sin for the sake of Job.”

6. made us kings and priests. This was God’s design with Israel, Exodus 19:6. And since “a priest’s lips shall keep knowledge,” this implied a missionary work amongst the nations. With Israel’s failure, a new beginning was made with a New Israel; 1 Peter 2:9; Malachi 3:17 (reference here to the twelve jewels on the breastplate of the High Priest).

to him be glory and dominion. This doxology is the response to the greeting of Grace and Peace conveyed in v. 4.

7. he cometh with clouds. i.e. in the Glory of the Lord. The interpretation which makes this into a public “manifestation” of a Messiah who is already come, along with “clouds” of immortalised saints is not faithful to the text. It also rests on a very inadequate Biblical foundation, as does the whole idea of a secret coming of Christ. For full details, see “The Last Days” ch. 10, 12, and “The Time of the End” ch. 16. The conventional interpretation of 1 Thessalonians 4:17, even if correct, does not help the idea just mentioned. And Jude 14, 15 palpably refers to angels coming with the Messiah. Also Mark 13:26, 27 makes perfectly clear that this coming “in the clouds” precedes the gathering of the saints and must therefore be distinct from it.

There is a much more satisfactory and much more Biblical interpretation available. The Glory of the Lord appeared to ancient Israel in cloud and fire: Exodus 13:21, 22; 14:19, 20, 24; 16:10; 19:16-19; 20:18; 24:15-19; 33:18-21 with 34:4-7; 40:34-38; Numbers 10:34; 12:5, 10; 14:9 mg. 10, 14, 21, 22; Deuteronomy 31:14, 15; Psalm 105:39; 1 Corinthians 10:1, 2. The same Shekinah Glory appeared to Abraham: Genesis 15:17 (Acts 7:2). In later days the Glory appeared in a Cloud to David (Psalm 18:6-15), to Ezekiel (1:4 and 10:4), to Elijah (1 Kings 19:11-13), to Solomon and his people (1 Kings 8:10, 11), to Job (38:1), to the apostles (Luke 9:34, 35). The judgments of God are to be manifest in the Last Days in this Cloud of Glory: Joel 2:2; Zephaniah 1:15; Ezekiel 30:3; Isaiah 19:1; 25:5. In particular, the Lord Jesus Christ who ascended to heaven in the Cloud of Glory (Acts 1: 9) will so come in like manner: Luke 21: 27; Matthew 26: 64; Revelation 14:14-16, Isaiah 4:5. Revelation 1:7 chimes in perfectly with this latter group of passages. It expresses in another way the simple but powerful truth: “The Son of man shall come in the Glory of his Father” (Matthew 16:27). With such a solid mass of Biblical support for this interpretation it is difficult to see why expositors should ever have looked elsewhere. The idea that “clouds” means “clouds of witnesses” is either almost or completely devoid of Biblical support (Hebrews 12: 1 uses a different Greek word).

the earth. Greek ge means “earth” or “Land” (so also Hebrew eretz). Usually the context decides. Here and in many places in Revelation read: “the Land;” s.w. Luke 21: 23; Matthew 24: 30. Then:

The reference is to Zechariah 19:10-14 where note: v. 10: “me . . . him.”

For this switch of pronoun compare. “why persecutest thou me?’’ v. 11: only divine inspiration would describe a national mourning in the day of deliverance. v. 12, 13: King, Prophet and Priest-and Shimei, type of the rejectors of the Lord’s Anointed in all ages; 2 Samuel 16:5-8 and 19; 16-23.

pierced. Was not the piercing of John 19: 34 done by a Roman? True, but this as well as the actual crucifixion was by procuration of the Jews.

wail. Matthew 23: 39. Contrast Luke 23: 28.

Even so, Amen. Ch. 22: 20. Even so (Gk.)=Amen (Hebrew). If John were so earnest about the Second Coming, we also! 2 Corinthians 1: 20. John, the only one to record the piercing of Jesus, is appropriately the one to add this fervent prayer that these men be brought to acknowledgement of their crime and to contrition for it.

8. Alpha and Omega. In ch. 21: 6, concerning the Father (observe v. 7). In ch. 22:13 concerning the Son. “The Almighty says that I (Jesus) am the and (cp. v. 11). The context requires this. If this verse were applied to the Father, then it stands alone and pointless.

This use of the same title with reference to the Father and to the Son need perplex no-one. Cp. use of “Lord;” and note that much of the language describing Christ in this chapter and elsewhere is used also to describe the Father; e.g. v. 14; 3:14; Isaiah 45:23, 24 (note the pronouns!); Philippians 2:10, 11; Isaiah 8:13 = 1 Peter 3:15; Joel 2:32 = Acts 2:21, 36; Zechariah 12:10 (me, him); Psalm 45:17; Jeremiah 23:6; Isaiah 47:4. The Father is and as being the One who has planned all from the beginning and will yet bring all to perfection. The Son is and since, in the practical outworking of the plan, he has begun redemption by his sacrifice and will yet perfect it by his kingdom. Cp. v. 7 – they who pierced him will see him come in glory.

The first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet were similarly used by the Rabbis as a code-word for the Shekinah Glory possibly because of its occurrence in Genesis 4:1: “I have gotten a man it Jehovah.” This word normally the (untranslateable) sign of the objective case. Therefore read: “I have gotten a Man, even Jehovah.” Eve here is justified by her faith: she looked for the coming of the God-man (Genesis 3:15). That the Lord, in Revelation 1: 8, uses Greek and not Hebrew (Aleph, Taw) is a possible hint of the imminent casting-off of Israel.

Alpha and Omega is pure Old Testament in idea:

	(a)	Isaiah 41:4: “calling the generations from the beginning” = ; “hath wrought and done it” = ; v. 8, 9: the Messiah; v. 11: his sufferings (); v. 15, 16: his glory (); v. 4 = “with the last ones” – “bringing many sons unto glory.” Here the same Hebrew particle precedes “the last ones.”
	(b)	Isaiah 44:6, where note (1) redeemer (2) King, v. 7,8 – the One who declares His unerring Purpose from the beginning.
	(c)	Isaiah 48:12. v. 13-creation (the New Creation?), v. 14 – the Purpose declared; v. 15 -Messiah; v. 16 – Messiah speaks of the Purpose to be fulfilled in himself “from the beginning.”
	(d)	Revelation 1:8 summarises v. 5-7. (1) the sacrifice for sins (2) the King of Glory.
	(e)	Revelation 22:13. v. 14: “tree of life” suggests Genesis 3:15 () now accomplished in the bringing of the Kingdom ().
	(f)	Revelation 21:6. v. 4: the curse of Genesis; v. 1: new heavens and earth.

saith the Lord God (R.V.) etc. This verse has the main titles of God in the Old Testament.

All of these call for much fuller study than can be given here.

1.	Adonai. “Lord” in the ordinary dictionary sense of “master, ruler, prince, chief,” e.g. Psalms 2:4 and 110:1, 5; Psalm 68:17-22. Emphasizes God’s special relationship to Israel.
2.	Elohim. God as a God of might and power. Occurs very frequently. Also used of (a) false gods (b) angels (Psalm 8 :5) cp. Exodus 23 :20, 21 and Genesis 16:11, 13; Hosea 12:3, 5. (c) judges and others in authority on God’s behalf (e.g. the Messiah); Exodus 21:6 and 22 :8,9; Psalm 82:6. This usage is more common than is usually recognized. e.g. Isaiah 64:4 and 40:3, 9 and 65:16; Revelation 3:14; Psalm 138:1; John 10:34 and 20:28.
3.	Jehovah. Moderns insist that Hebrew should read Yahweh or Yahveh. They usually explain the traditional Jehovah as a Massoretic hybrid by addition of vowels of Adonai. This may be correct but should not be taken as proven. From the parallel columns Revelation 1:8 is seen to be an inspired interpretation of the Memorial Name=He who is and was and is to come (see the note on v. 4), cp. Genesis 21:33; Malachi 3:6; Psalm 135:13 (contrast Revelation 17:8). Several scholars have suggested very plausibly that Jehovah (more correctly Y’howah) is a composite name, which would sound in the ears of any Israelite like “Shall-is-was”. Many Scriptures stress this timelessness of God. He has not only been actively manifest in the past, He continues the development of His Purpose in the present, and He will certainly bring all to fulfillment in a multitude of redeemed worthy to bear His Name: Psalm 90:1, 2; Isaiah 41: 4; and 43: 10, 11 and 44:6, 7, 8; Exodus 3: 14-17; Genesis 15:7, 18.
	Jehovah also marks God as a God of Covenant and Promise. This is frequently the main idea where this Divine name is used; e.g. Exodus 3:15 (reference back to the promise of Genesis 15); 6:3 (reference also to Genesis 15:2, 7; “And by my name Jehovah was I not known unto them”?); Genesis 4:1 (Eve knew the Covenant Name!); Psalm 105:1, 8, 42; Jeremiah 14:21, 22; Isaiah 26:8; Micah 4:5; Malachi 3:16. In these and many other passages, emphasis is not only on God’s covenant promises but also on Jehovah being His Memorial Name (Exodus 3:14, 15), that which (by an anthropomorphism) was to be a perpetual reminder to Him, as well as to His people, of the great Messianic Purpose. Many occurrences of “memorial,” “remember,” “remembrance” (use concordance) has this idea.
4.	Almighty. The LXX used the Greek work of Revelation 1: 8 represent the two Hebrew forms El Shaddai (Almighty God) a Jehovah Tsvaoth (Lord of Hosts).
5.	Shaddai is connected with the Hebrew root shadah (to water fertilise) and shad (breast), or with shadad, to destroy. Every occurrence in Old Testament has this idea of fertility and so of prosperity except in Job and a few places in the prophets where the other meaning is prominent. For the first idea see Genesis 17:1-8; 28:3; 35:11; 43:14; 48:3, 4; 49:25; Ruth 1:20; 2 Numbers 24:4, 7; and compare 2 Corinthians 6:18. Thus “Almighty God” is the name, which emphasizes that the multitudinous seed and all other forms of prosperity are the purposed gifts of God. But perhaps in Revelation the other idea is more appropriate: God, the Destroyer of evil men.
6.	Jehovah Tsvaoth: Lord of Hosts. Reference is either to: (a) the hosts of Israel under the control of the Almighty (Exodus 12:41 [R.V.]; Joshua 5:14-Joshua thought he was captain; 2 Samuel 6:1, 2); or to: (b) the host of heaven, the angels (Psalm 148:2; 103:21; 46:7; 1 Kings 22:19; Isaiah 24:23 and 25:6; Luke 2:13). Both (a) and (b): Isaiah 37:36; Psalm 24:10, 1 Samuel 17:45. In Revelation it is always (b) rather than (a) which is intended (ch. 11: 17; 15:3; 16:7, 14; 19:6, I5; 21 :22).

9. John tells how he was commissioned; cp. Isaiah 6:8; Jeremiah 1:1; Ezekiel 1: 3.

1 John. Contrast his anonymity in the Gospel. Why?

tribulation and kingdom and patience. Another triad. Romans 8:17; Timothy 2:12; 1 Peter 4:17 (us = the apostles).

patience = doggedness. Best equivalent is the modern slang “guts”. Not all a passive virtue; e.g. Hebrews 10:32, 36 and 12:1, 2, 3, 7; 2 Timothy 2:10; Revelation 13:10; Luke 2:43 (“tarried” = hung on, loath to leave).

Patmos. Why called Patmos? Did John see significance in the name? cp. John 9:7; Revelation 11:8; 16:16. But what meaning? Just possibly: “Only a little trial,” with a sidelong glance at Massah (Exodus 17:7 “Is the Lord among us or not?” The answer is in 1:10. Banishment to Patmos is said to have been reserved for people of wealth and standing.

for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. “for” = because of. Either: (a) retirement to solitude in order to receive the word of God; cp. Elijah, 1 Kings 19:8; Paul, Galatians 1: 7; 2 Corinthians 12:1,2; Philippians 1: 23. (b) Because of preaching Christ; 2 Timothy 1:8; cp. heading of Syriac Version: “in the island of Patmos to which he was, banished by Nero the Emperor”; Matthew 20:22. Also supported v. 9a and 6: 9 and 20: 4. (b) is almost certainly correct.

10. in the spirit = in a trance, seeing visions (by contrast with a revealed word); ch. 4: 2 and 17: 3 and 21: 10; Acts 10: 10 and 11: 5 and 22: 1 Ezekiel 1: 1, 3 and 37: 1 and 40: 1, 2 and many others. 2 Corinthians 12: 1

Lord’s day. Only other occurrence of this Greek word is 1 Corinthian 11: 20 which is altogether indecisive as to meaning.

(a)	The first day of the week.
	(i)	1 Corinthians 11:20-same word used of the Lord’s Supper. But: what special point is there in having this Revelation on a Sunday?
	(ii)	The early church used the word kuriakos in this sense (Ignatius: To the Magnesians). But this may have been derived from a misreading of Revelation 1:10.
	(iii)	The letters would be read to the ecclesias on this day.
	(iv)	v. 5 R.V. “loveth us” might be an allusion to the Love Feast.
	(v)	ch. 1:18 would harmonize nicely.
(b)	The great day of the Lord’s Second Coming; cp. v. 7; 1 Thessalonians 5:2.
	(i)	1 Corinthians 11:20 (kuriakos) matches Luke 22:16.
	(ii)	Note “in that day” in Zechariah 12:3, 6, 9, 11 and 13:1, 2, 4 and 14:1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 20.
	(iii)	Peshito version uses kuriakos with this meaning.
		Difficulty: this view would seem to require that everything in Revelation shall have reference to the Last Day. Is that absurd? Further difficulty: Is the emphasis here on Jesus as a High Priest appropriate to the day of his return in glory?
(c)	The anniversary of the Lord’s own resurrection. See v. 18. Note: “I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand on me saying, Fear not.” Precisely this in Matthew 28:5, 9.
(d)	The Day of Atonement, called by the Jews: “The Day,” and by Isaiah “a day to (for) the Lord” (58:5). Description of Jesus as a High Priest on duty in the Holy Place (ch. 1) and as sacrifice in the Holy of Holies (ch. 5) harmonizes well. John falling on his face would correspond with prostration of worshippers in the temple court. And “I heard behind me . . . “ would imply that literal observances in a literal sanctuary were now “behind.”

behind me. Often explained as intimating Revelation to be in terms of types and symbols of the Old Testament (which are now “behind”). Or: “No man shall see my face and live.” Hence “behind me” corresponds to the cloud, which veiled the Glory. Then John turns and immediately falls “dead” (v. 17). Recognition that there is here an allusion to Isaiah 30:21 supplies a further idea. That chapter furnishes a prophetic parallel with (or should one write: a straight prophecy of?) the circumstances of John when Revelation was written. Observe:

v. 8	Revelation 1: 11, 19.
v. 9	Israel is about to be cast off.
v. 10	The gospel rejected by them.
v. 12-14, 17	Jerusalem to be destroyed.
v. 19	Consolation of the saints.
v. 20	Saints persecuted, John banished.
v. 22	Christianity v. Paganism.
v. 23, 24	Ultimate blessing.
v. 24b	Day of Judgement.
v. 25ff	The coming of the Kingdom.

Note especially in v. 21: “a word behind thee saying, This is the way, walk ye in it;” the implication is that at the moment the exhortation is received, the “walking” is in the wrong direction. Revelation 2, 3 proves that this was so already in the early church. Those two chapters are the equivalent of: “This is the way walk ye in it.”

as of a trumpet. (a) the voice of God (Exodus 19:13, 16, 19; Joshua 6:9, 10, 13). (b) a summons to God’s people; Numbers 10:2, 8; Judges 3:27 and 6:34; 1 Thessalonians 4:17; Matthew 24:31. (c) a prophetic warning: Isaiah 58:1; Ezekiel 33:3-6. More detail in Chapter 26 – The Seventh Trumpet (11:14-19).

11. in a book. Not in seven separate books. Therefore each ecclesia could read what was written to the others (cp. 1 Timothy 5:20 – a practice of the early church no longer followed. Why?). This was necessary because, whilst the general character of each ecclesia was accurately summed up, there would be some of every type in every ecclesia; cp. ch. 2:23 – a lesson for all churches.

send it to the seven churches. Therefore each would receive the book in turn and make its own copy.

Why seven and not eight? Just as the seven spirits represent the universal activity of the Holy Spirit in the world, so also these seven churches represent the Gentile church everywhere. The sins rebuked are common to the ecclesias everywhere and at all times. The exhortations are such as have been always needed by all ecclesias in Christ. See also notes on v. 16. Why these seven? There were a good many other churches in Asia. Ramsay answers: These were the recognized centres of well-defined districts. Why to Asia and not to Judaea? Because Gentiles are now more important than Jews in the purpose of God? (see on v. 16). Or, because the Revelation had to be given where there was a man fit to receive it?

12. turned to see the voice. Not a solecism, but a synecdoche, or-more probably-a personification; i.e. to see who was “the Voice of God;” cp. Genesis 3:8 (an angel).

seven golden candlesticks. This calls for a study of Exodus 25:31-40:

31.	There was a central shaft and branch and six other branches. Revelation 1:12 demonstrate the incorrectness of speaking of a six-branched candlestick. Candlestick = lampstand. Candles were not used. According to Josephus it was 5 ft. high, 3½ ft. wide. “It terminated in seven heads all in one row… and these branches carried seven lamps … These lamps looked to the east and south (near the southern wall of the Holy Place), the candlestick being situate obliquely” (Jos. Ant. 3.6.7). Did Josephus mean “in one row” or “in one plane?” He himself says the representation on the Arch of Titus was erroneous. If there was a central stem with six others arranged in a regular hexagon round it, the origin of the Star of David is explained.
	“beaten work.” So Christ. Isaiah 53:5, 10. So also his saints: Leviticus 2:1, 14 and 24:2, 5; Exodus 29:40 and 37:7; Galatians 2:20; Philippians 3:10.
	shafts, branches, bowls, knops, flowers. Obviously intended to represent a tree-an almond tree (v. 33)-the Tree of Life (Numbers 17:8). This leads to an interpretation of the “cherubim and flaming sword” of Genesis 3:24. In the Tabernacle cherubim were not angels but symbols of redemption. And there, above them, and in the midst of them, was the Shekinah Glory (“a flaming sword”); Psalm 80:1 R.V. In what sense are ecclesias a Tree of Life? Proverbs 15:4 and 11:30. “The fruit of the righteous (proves him to be) a tree of life;” Psalm 1:3; Revelation 22:1, 2.
33.	70 ornaments in all (Josephus)=the Gentile nations: Genesis 10 (70 names); Deuteronomy 32:8; Genesis 46:27. Cp. Revelation 1 :12-Gentile churches. Solomon’s temple had ten seven-branched candlesticks of gold like a fence before the veil (2 Chronicles 4:7).
34.	The central stem spoken of as The Candlestick.
37.	lamps thereof. The Candlestick shone in the Tabernacle, not outside it. It revealed bread and wine, altar of incense, cherubim on the veil, the way into the Holy of Holies.
	to give light over against it. Boat-shaped lamps at the end of each stem projected so as to cast light on the central stem (Christ?). Thus Scripture testifies to its own glories and to Christ, its chief glory. Cp. also the glory on the face of Moses (Exodus 34:29); Stephen (Acts 6:15; 7:55)
40.	after the pattern. i.e. according to their true significance; Hebrews 8:5 and 9:23, 24.
	Exodus 30:8. Lamps apparently lit at even, to burn during the night; cp. Exodus 27:21; Leviticus 24:2, 3, I Samuel 3:3 (God called Samuel before the light of Truth was quite gone out in Israel); 2 Chronicles 13:11. But the windowless Holy Place would need light in day-time. Cp. also the idea in Scripture of a perpetual lamp: Psalm 132:17 (this is a definite reference to the Candlestick-see context); 1 Kings 11:36; 2 Kings 8:19.
	Exodus 27:20. No quantity specified. Without measure: John 3:34. But it must be “beaten out.” Problem: Why does this section on the Candlestick come here and not in ch. 25?

13. In what sense was Jesus seen “in the midst” of the lampstand?

	(a)	Seen through the grid of the seven branches? But chapter 2:1 “walking” vetoes this.
	(b)	Did John see seven seven-branched Candlesticks? (Each ecclesia mentioned would be the centre of a ring of lesser ecclesias.)
	(c)	More likely, the phrase is interpretative. Jesus was seen beside or behind the Candlestick, and John interprets this as symbolic of his ceaseless activity in the midst of the ecclesias which are represented thus; v. 20; 2:1.

Iike unto the Son of man means “one who is the Son of man.” A common Bible idiom; e.g. Romans 8:3; 5:14; 1:23 R.V.; Philippians 2:7; 2 Corinthians 2:17; Matthew 14:5. The idea that this Holy One seen in the vision is the multitudinous Christ bristles with difficulties.

	(a)	He is Alpha and Omega; v. 11.
	(b)	He sends messages to the churches.
	(c)	He is accoutred like a High Priest (v. 13 and see notes there).
	(d)	John falls down before him (v. 17).
	(e)	“I am the first and the last” (v. 17). If the multitudinous Christ, “last” would be plural (as in Isaiah 41:4), and “first” would be inappropriate.
	(f)	“I have the keys of hell and of death” (v. 18).
	(g)	He walks in the midst of the seven candlesticks (2:1),
	(h)	saying: “I know thy works” (2 2).

It would seem that the main (only?) reason for interpreting with respect to the multitudinous Christ (a thoroughly Biblical idea taught clearly elsewhere) is v. 15: “his voice as the sound of many waters.” But this may carry a different meaning (see notes on v. 15).

The description in Revelation I of the Son of man has its counterpart in almost every detail in the description of the archangel in Daniel 10:

What is the point of this detailed designed similarity? What interpretation is to be put on it? First, this glorious being was actually there (even though the word “vision” is used; v.7). He spoke to Daniel and touched him. This rules out the view that here was a vision of Christ or of the multitudinous Christ (for the last phrase of 10:6 see note on Revelation 1:15). The only interpretation left is that this was an angel, helped by another angel characteristics of the divine nature. There is one significant difference. Revelation 1:14 has: “his head and his hairs were white like wool”. This is part of the description of the Almighty in Daniel 7:9 – another example of Jesus being described in terms appropriate to the Father; cp. “Alpha and Omega”.

clothed with a garment down to the foot. s.w. Exodus 28:4, 31 LXX. So obviously a linen garment of righteousness that John doesn’t even trouble to say so. Here, immediately, is Christ the Priest.

girt about the paps with a golden girdle. The High Priest wore two girdles -one round his loins (Jeremiah 13:1-11), and the other round his chest (Leviticus 8:7). To the latter was affixed the breastplate of judgement containing on its outer face the twelve stones of Israel and within its pouch the stones of judgement, the Urim and Thummim. The second girdle, the one referred to in this verse, was called “the cunningly woven band of the ephod.” Cp. two girdles in Isaiah 11:5 (a High Priest-King). “Righteousness the girdle of his loins” suggests that his “seed” share his righteousness!

Revelation 15:6 – Christ delegates to the angels his office of judgement (breastplate of judgement!) upon the nations-but not upon his servants; cp. Daniel 10:5 (no priestly girdle).

14. All the following details-seven of them-are different expressions describing the glory of the divine nature and of the power of the Holy Spirit.

his head and his hair white like wool. In this way Scripture describes the Glory in his face and the halo of glory about his head, Luke 9:29, Daniel 7:9, where the Father is similarly described – another instance of Christ sharing the Glory of his Father (as in Matthew 16:27); cp. v. 8, 15. Cp. also Revelation 14:14 (= a radiant cloud, the pillar of cloud), and 3.4 (the saints already share Christ’s righteousness, this promises radiant glory of divine nature also: “walk with me”). Is this also the secondary meaning behind Matthew 5: 36?

Iike wool suggests the Lamb of God and the forgiveness of sins; Isaiah 1:18.

eyes as a flame of fire. The piercing glance which discerns between the good and the evil (people); Hebrews 4:12, 13 (Jesus, the Word of God); Psalm 11:4 and 33:18 and 94:7, 9; Proverbs 15:3; Ezekiel 1:18, 19, 20. Contrast Daniel 7:20.

of fire. Judgement of the ungodly; 19:12; 2 Thessalonians 1:8. The seven spirits are the eyes of the Lamb; 4:5 and 5:6.

15. feet, fine brass. In Scripture brass is always a symbol of strength, not of human nature; Daniel 10:6 (Revelation 10:1); Jeremiah 15:20; Job 6:12 (note the setting) and 40:18; 1 Samuel 17:5, 6; Micah 4:13. John 3:14 may be an allusion to the strength of the power of sin, or differently, to the Redeemer as one showing sin’s nature (serpent) but made strong to overcome it

as if they burned. The Greek perfect tense implies this is not a momentary characteristic; Exodus 3:2.

in a furnace. Zechariah 13:9 LXX. To reach the same divine nature, his disciples must endure fiery trial as he endured (and he still endures it with them!).

voice as the sound of many waters. As the voice of God, mighty and authoritative.

	(a)	John 12:28-30; Ezekiel 1:24; Psalm 29 (7 times) and 68:33; 93:4; Jeremiah 51:16; Exodus 19:16, 19 and 20:18, 19; hence
	(b)	Deuteronomy 18:16-19.
	(c)	In his coming again: Joel 3:16; Isaiah 30:30, 31.
	(d)	As is the voice of the Bridegroom so also is the voice of the Bride; Revelation 14:2, 3 and 19:6, 7; compare Daniel 7:14 LXX, 27 (saints).

16. seven stars. Here as in the other details there must be an Old Testament basis; see Isaiah 62:3, where observe “in thy hand,” as here. A strange way to use a crown! Why? There is reason to believe that a crown of 7 jewels was part of the High Priest’s equipment:

	(a)	Isaiah 61:10 “decketh”=to deck as a priest (see mg.). And 62:1 has allusion to the Shekinah Glory. The word for “ornaments” here is the normal one for the priestly head-gear. With 62:3 this suggests a tiara with jewels.
	(b)	Zechariah 9:16: “as the stones of a crown” would seem to have priestly reference. Note v. 15 (bowls and horns of the altar); v. 17, “beauty” is a word often associated with the priesthood and temple.
	(c)	Exodus 28:36-38. If the mitre consisted only of a turban with a golden plate affixed to the front, it is difficult to see why it should be called a “crown.” This Hebrew word is the normal one for a king’s crown; 2 Samuel 1: 10; 2 Kings 11: 12, etc. Further, the word “lace” (v. 37) is somewhat misleading. It should read “circlet ;” s.w. Genesis 38:18, 25.

This, then, was the original of the diadem of seven stars seen in the hand of Christ the High Priest. The seven stars would be seven large diamonds. It is noteworthy that nowhere else was the diamond used in the High Priestly equipment (Exodus 28:18 A.V. is wrong; see R.V. and authorities). It would be strange if the finest of all gems were not to have some hallowed use in the Tabernacle. It is perhaps permissible to argue back from Revelation 1:16 and say that the High Priest’s crown consisted of six large diamonds equally spaced (seven-branched candlestick again!) with one in the centre and with the golden plate “Holy to the Lord” over the forehead. These seven stones symbolize Gentiles: Isaiah 62:5: “so shall thy sons marry thee. But natural sons do not marry their mother. Therefore “sons” = “disciples” (common Hebrew idiom). Who are they? – v. 2: the Gentiles. This interprets v. 3.

Thus the High Priest bore symbols of Israel on his breast and of the Gentiles on his head! But in Revelation 1:16 the High Priest’s crown is in his hand-thus to intimate that at the time of the vision Israel’s precedence was not yet ended but was about to be ended (A.D. 70 not far ahead) Note also that the gems are spoken of in Revelation 1:16 as “stars” because; when reflecting the Glory of Christ, that is how they would appear; cp. Philippians 2:15 (R.V.m.); Psalm 19:1-4 (which Paul applies to the preaching of the gospel; Romans 10:18).

sharp two-edged sword.

• In his ministry; Isaiah 49:2 (= 51:16); Matthew 8: 8.
• Today; Hebrews 4:12, 13, where the reference is to Jesus the “Word of God” – ”his sight.”
• The saints in the Kingdom; Psalm 149:6 (no more literal than Hebrews 4:12).

two-edged.

• Old Testament and New Testament?
• condemning and converting?

countenance as the sun.

• At the transfiguration; Matthew 17:2.
• After his resurrection; Acts 26:13.
• His coming in glory; Malachi 4:2; Psalm 19:4.
• The saints with him; Judges 5:31; cited in Matthew 13:43.

countenance here may = “general appearance,” as in John 7:24. This now agrees with Daniel 10:6.

17. I fell at his feet as dead. Would John fall at the feet of a vision? And if John the disciple whom Jesus loved, who leaned on his bosom, thus fell down as dead, what of us when we see him (Luke 21:36)? This was the normal experience of mortal man in the presence of the Glory of the Lord. It taught that without death and resurrection no mortal man can experience an abiding knowledge of the divine Presence; Exodus 33: 20; Leviticus 16: 13. In each case death and resurrection are symbolized: Daniel 10:9-11 and 8:18; Genesis 15:12; Numbers 16:42~7; Jeremiah 31: 26; Job 42:5, 6 (there can be little doubt that Job saw the Shekinah Glory); Ezekiel 1.28 and 2:1, 2; Luke 9:32; Acts 9:4-8; Luke 21:36 (with allusion to Ezekiel’s experience?). Why was Isaiah’s experience different (Isaiah 6:5-7)?

Iaid his right hand upon me. Cp. the touch of Jesus in his miracles during his ministry. In Scripture the right hand is always associated with approval and blessing, the left with rejection and curse; Genesis 48:13, 14; Deuteronomy 27:12, 13 (since the Tabernacle faced east, and Gerizim was to the south, the blessings would be spoken from the right, and the curses from the left); Leviticus 1:11 (the sacrifice bearing the curse was on the left-hand side of the altar, but the priest’s approach was from the right); Ezekiel 4:4, 6; Matthew 25:34; cp. Old Testament written in Hebrew from right to left, and the New Testament written in Greek from left to right. The right hand that touched John (cp. Matthew 17:6, 7) was the one, which held the diadem (v. 16) as though intimating that one day John is to share it.

Fear not. This consoling imperative is many times associated with the Glory. An explicit instruction (to the worthy) that the divine presence need not be feared by the pure in heart; Daniel 10:7-11, 17-19; Luke 1:13, 20 and 2:10 and 9:34, 35; John 12:15 (though guilty Jerusalem might well fear at the approach of its King); Matthew 28:5; Malachi 4:1, 2; Isaiah 41:5, 10, 13, 14 and 44:1, 2 and 35:4; Revelation 21:8; Matthew 25:25; 5:8. In the Day of Judgement the disciple will pronounce judgement on himself by the way in which he meets his Lord in fear or in confidence- confidence not in himself or his own achievements, but in the love and mercy of Christ (“The Last Days” ch. 11); 1 John 3:21, and 4:17, 18.

In the Transfiguration when Jesus came and touched the disciples, saying: “Be not afraid, they then saw no man, save Jesus only”-and he now divested of the Glory. Is that what happened in this instance also?

18. he that liveth. s.w. Luke 24:5. Numbers 14:21 LXX: “But I live and Living is my name” – another divine title applied to Christ; cp. Revelation 4:9.

alive for evermore. John 5:26, 21 and 14:6, 19.

Amen. Some MSS omit. But if to be included, then it must be understood as John’s instinctive response: “From my own personal experience (John 19:35 and 20:24) I know this statement to be true.”

the keys of hell and of death. Psalm 9:13. Possession of these keys is the qualification to be able to talk with the Almighty (Job 12:14 and 38:17). Are these keys the same as the keys of the Kingdom (Matthew 16:19; Proverbs 1: 21)? Hardly so, for Christ will use the keys of hell and death himself (Genesis 22:17; Isaiah 61: 1; Zechariah 9:11, 12; Revelation 20:3, 13, 14).

death and hell (R.V.). The natural order. The king and his attendant minister; ch. 6: 8.

19. Another triad. The three phrases in this verse all refer to the same things; i.e. to the main body of Revelation still to be unfolded to the Apostle.

which thou sawest. Why past sense? At the time John wrote them the visions would be already past. This “epistolary aorist” is a normal form in Greek; cp. v. 2.

and (i.e. even) the things which are should read “what things they are,” i.e. what they mean. For use of the verb “to be” in an interpretative sense see v. 20 here and 17:9, 12, 15, 18; Matthew 13:37-39; Luke 15:26 Gk., Acts 2:12 and 10:17 Gk.; Ezekiel 37:11. The form of the Greek requires: “What they individually and separately mean.”

Did John obey this instruction and write the meaning of his vision? Yes -by the way in which he reported everything in terms of Old Testament prophecy! And the Apostle’s key has been mostly left untried.

and (even) the things which shall be hereafter. The things to be seen are a prophecy of future events.

write therefore (R.V.). Meaning either:

• having seen this vision which guarantees the validity and importance of all the rest; or
• now that thy fear is past . . . write . . .

The instruction is repeated in 14:13 and 19:9 and 21:5. Why in these places particularly? These passages refer to things heard. All the rest was seen. Revelation 22:10: “Publish the book.”

20. mystery. The unfolded meaning; cp. 17:7, 9.

seven stars. Daniel 12:3; contrast Jude 13 (false leaders). Why should explanation be offered as to “stars” and “angels,” but not for any of the rest of the elaborate symbolism in this chapter and those succeeding?

the angels of the churches.

	(a)	Cannot refer to the messengers carrying the letters from Patmos.
	(b)	Could be either the Bishop (senior elder) of the church (as Timothy at Ephesus or Titus in Crete), or the elders of the church spoken of collectively.
		“Messenger of God” is a description of the instructing priest of the Old Testament; Malachi 2:7; Ecclesiastes 5:6; cp. R.V. of Revelation 19:10, spoken by an angel from heaven.
		Elders in Israel were frequently referred to as “elohim ;” e.g. Exodus 22:8 and 28 and 23:20, 21; Psalm 82:1, 6; John 10:34. And this word “elohim” was also used of angels, Psalm 8: 5; Hosea 12:3; Exodus 3:4 (=Acts 7:30). Thus in John’s Hebraistic Greek the word “angel” might well take on the meaning of “elder;” cp. 2 Peter 2:4; these “angels” are leaders-Korah, Dathan, and Abiram-who left their own principality (Jude 6 R.V.).
		Observe that there is no distinction between Revelation 1 :4, “to the church,” and 2:1, “to the angel of the church.”
	(c)	The “messenger” was the title of a synagogue official who had charge of the scrolls and who was responsible for organization of services. And it is a known fact that the early churches adopted much of synagogue procedure.
	(d)	Careful comparison of Revelation 5:6 and 4:5 and 1:4, Luke 1:19; Zechariah 4:10, suggests that the angels may be angels (everywhere else in Revelation “angel” = angel; what other New Testament examples are there of “angel” = elders?). In which case Revelation 2:1 can read: “For the angel of the church at Ephesus” i.e. on behalf of the ministering angel concerned with the church at Ephesus. More on this in ch. 5: “The Sealed Book.”

Boaz lost no time in putting his purpose and promise into effect. Sunrise found him sitting in the gate of Bethlehem until there should pass that way the (unnamed) near kinsman. According to the rabbis, he was Elimelech’s brother and Boaz’s uncle. Calling him aside, Boaz also quickly assembled a committee of ten of the elders of the town who would authenticate by their witness any agreement that might be reached.

Then he proceeded: ‘Naomi, that is come again out of the country of Moab, hath sold the parcel of land which was our brother Elimelech’s. If thou wilt redeem it, redeem it. But if not, then tell me that I may know: for there is none to redeem it besides thee; and I am after thee’, that is, with the right of redemption. The go’el in this instance had two responsibilities: the redemption of the land which had been Elimelech’s and which might even have been disposed of before the migration to Moab; and also there was the duty of continuing the family of the dead Elimelech and Mahlon, according to the levirate law.

Boaz, in delicacy, put the smaller matter first, and met with immediate readiness on the part of the go’el. Yes, he would redeem the land, he was willing enough to buy it, and add it to his own inheritance until the year of jubilee restored it to the family which originally owned it. He was the more willing to do this since there was no immediate prospect that there would be any other heir upon whom the property might devolve; so there was a fair chance that it might become his for good.

But this very question Boaz now pointedly insisted on: “What day thou buyest the field….thou must buy it also of Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of the dead, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance.”

This however the kinsman was not at all prepared to do, “lest (he said) I mar mine own inheritance”. Why this vague excuse? It seems likely that such a levirate marriage involved also the maintenance of Ruth and Naomi, as well as Ruth’s child that should be born; and the added burden of these extra persons to his household was more than he was prepared to undertake. Or it may be that he was arguing from the dismal history of Elimelech’s family. The migration to Moab, and the Moabitish marriages which ensued, had all been visited with God’s displeasure. For him to continue that tradition by marrying the Moabitess would be perhaps to invite an extension of divine wrath to himself and his family.

This would also explain, maybe, why an obviously attractive young woman like Ruth had received no other offers of marriage since her appearance in Bethlehem.

Whatever the explanation, the kinsman now emphatically and formally withdrew from his rights and responsibilities. By that same act he also withdrew his name from Holy Scripture and from the high honour of appearing in the direct ancestry of the Messiah. His readiness to abandon his prerogative in these matters would be made the more easy by the absence of Ruth herself from this discussion.

“Lest I mar mine own inheritance”, this faithless fellow had said. But by his feebleness he did mar his own inheritance, for the fact that the Messianic line came through Boaz and Ruth fairly plainly implies that this kinsman’s line ceased. In deciding selfishly he decided badly.

Shame on the selfish

In Deuteronomy 25:7-10, the Law required that the go’el who thus declined to fulfil his duties to his deceased kinsman should be publicly shamed. In the gate of the city he was to be spat upon by the woman he refused to aid. However, Boaz had carefully refrained from bringing Ruth with him. So there remained only the symbolic transfer of right of redemption of the property.

This was signified appropriately by the go’el taking off his sandal and handing it to Boaz as the next near-kinsman. The shoe was an easily understood symbol of a man’s right of possession, his right to walk on the redeemed land. “Over Edom will I cast out my shoe” (Ps. 60:8) is David’s phrase for annexation of Edom after his brilliant victory against the combined forces of his enemies. When the prodigal returned home one of the signs of his reinstatement with further right to inheritance was “shoes on his feet”. “Arise, walk through the land, in the length of it and in the breadth of it, for I will give it unto thee” was God’s emphatic instruction to Abraham.

A blessed marriage

Thus Boaz at last became go’el for both Naomi and Ruth, and the entire transaction was settled in formal legal style. All who were present added their witness and their blessings, and all the people that were in the gate joined the elders in saying:

“We are witnesses. The Lord make the woman that is come into thine house like Rachel and like Leah, which two did build the house of Israel: and do thou worthily in Ephratah, and be famous in Bethlehem: and let thy house be like the house of Pharez, whom Tamar bare unto Judah, of the seed which the Lord shall give thee of this young woman.”

They spoke better than they knew, for indeed it was through the offspring of this union of Ruth and Boaz, through David the son of Jesse that God did build the house of Israel. Through his worthy descendant, Jesus (Mt. 1:5), Boaz has truly become famous in Bethlehem.

The allusion to Pharez whom Tamar bare unto Judah is also highly appropriate, for not only was this the only other levirate union mentioned in the Bible, but the grudging acknowledgement by Judah that Gentile Tamar had such a right of marriage is closely paralleled by the attitude of the unnamed kinsman in this Book of Ruth.

The marriage duly took place and, by contrast with the childless years of Ruth’s first marriage, the Lord soon blessed her with a son. What clearer demonstration that it is the Lord who gives and who withholds. The women of Bethlehem celebrated the birth of Ruth’s son as a gift from God to Naomi:

“Blessed by the Lord, which hath not left thee this day without a kinsman, that his name may be famous in Israel. And he shall be unto thee a restorer of thy life, and a nourisher of thine old age: for thy daughter-in-law which loveth thee, which is better to thee than seven sons, hath born him.”

In what sense could the child Obed be a go’el for Naomi, for now she needed neither avenger of blood nor redeemer of property? The words are surely recorded because of their implied prophecy that through Obed the line of Elimelech and Naomi and also of Boaz would be continued in a more certain fashion than through seven sons. Precisely how this would be is indicated by the immediate citation of the family genealogy from Pharez right down to David, the one whose worth was preferred about that of the other seven sons of Jesse.

And through David came Jesus, which is called Christ. “Behold my servant (Obed means servant) whom I uphold, mine elect in whom my soul delighteth.” Thus for all time the name of Ruth stands with special honour in the genealogy of the Son of God, and the Book of Ruth continues to proclaim striking lessons. It underlines the folly of marriage with those who do not share the blessing of God’s covenant. It also shows how God rewards those who with singleness of mind disregard the attractions of a favourable worldly marriage in order to seek first His kingdom and His righteousness. Here also, for the thankful contemplation of the reverent reader, is ample demonstration of how God can and does overrule for good the bad decisions made by His servants in their weakness. Such is the divine condescension to human frailty.

Notes

1.	Sat him down. Excavations of ancient city walls in Palestine have revealed signs of stone benches built into the wall of the city gate.
	Such an one. LXX: Hidden one! Does this mean he had been deliberately keeping out of the way? Or is it put this way to stress how his name is blotted out of the Book of Life?
5.	LXX: And thou must buy her also. No picking and choosing which duties to take over and which not (and so also in the ecclesia). Even if Ruth had been married to the younger brother, the rights of the family would come through because Orpah stayed in Moab a Moabitess, whereas Ruth was here in Bethlehem as Israelite.
11.	Build. There is here a common play on the word for “son”: compare 2 Sam. 7:13.
12.	Tamar and Rahab and Ruth are three Gentile brides all coming close together in Messiah’s genealogy.
17.	Why should the son be called Obed, servant? According to the levirate law, Obed should have reckoned as the son of Chilion; yet there is no hint of this. Perhaps this is because there was no other child born to Boaz, and therefore Obed reckoned as his. Alternatively, it could be argued that the levirate law applied strictly: “if brethren dwell together”, (Dt. 25:5), which was certainly not the case with the family of Elimelech.
20.	In Mt. 1 Boaz is the tenth generation from Abraham: Dt. 23:3.
22.	This is the first mention of David. If, as seems probable, the author of Judges and Ruth was Samuel, then the last word he wrote was an expression of faith that the youth he had anointed would one day be King of Israel.

The problem of the strange conclusion to the Book of Judges has still to be faced. Consideration of it has been deferred long enough. Briefly re-stated, the problem is this:

The main part of Judges consists of the development of a regular pattern in this period of Israel’s history. Declension into apostasy, tribulation, repentance, appeal to God, then the raising up of a deliverer. These features follow one another in regular sequence. Then, when the story of Samson’s single-handed struggles has prepared the way for Samuel, the sequence is interrupted by three appendices:

A. Micah’s Levite and the Danite Migration (Judges 17,18).

B. The Sin of Gibeah and its Punishment (Judges 19,20,21).

C. The story of Ruth.

All of these are chronologically out of place, and none of them concern the activities of a judge. Why the sudden change in the character of the book? Why these additions, so different in theme from the original purpose of the Judges narrative?

A clear hint meets the reader in the concluding verses of Ruth, and in its very last word. One of the main purposes of the Book of Ruth is to supply important links in the genealogy of David, the man after God’s own heart. Again, is it just accident that A and B, like C, are concerned with Bethlehem? In A, a worthless Levite is expelled from the town. In B, a Levite of better quality is given lavish hospitality there. Again, it can hardly fail to evade notice that Gibeah was the city of Saul, the first king of Israel — a fact which seems to be specially underlined by an emphasis on various other details which are picked out because of their association with Saul — the story of Jabesh-gilead, the rousing of the tribes of Israel by sending to each a portion of a carcase (1 Sam. 11:1-7).

It would seem, then, that these Scriptures under review are far from being a chance agglomeration of folk tales. They have a definite intention — to emphasize the striking difference between the origins of Saul and David. Once this point has been grasped, much in these stories of ‘Israel’s Iron Age’ which has hitherto seemed rather aimless and unimpressive now begins to fit into a purposeful pattern.

The man who left the friendliness of Bethlehem and scorned the city of Jerusalem (David’s chosen capital) as a place of lodging was left by Saul’s forefathers to fend for himself. It was a stranger who eventually offered hospitality.

The men of Gibeah, Saul’s ancestors, were the vilest kind of perverts, men of Belial, unfit for inter-marriage. Gibeah should have been not only destroyed but left as a ruin for ever, a warning to succeeding generations (Deut. 13:16). More than this, they were men who refused correction, and later were only too willing to add abduction to their crimes. “Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf.”

The contrast with David’s progenitors in the Book of Ruth could hardly be sharper. There is the picture of the kindly, godly Boaz and of the helpless Gentile who came to Bethlehem with no means of support save an unwavering trust in the God of Israel: “binding…his ass’s colt unto the choice vine “ (Gen. 49:11). There is the quiet devout determination to follow as closely as possible the provisions of the Law which Moses gave, especially a scrupulous carefulness to avoid the slightest breath of ill-fame.

It becomes easier now to cope with the problem presented by the recurring refrain of Appendices A and B: “In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.”

The problem is really a double one:

1. Every man did not do what was right in his own eyes; some men did. Appendices B and C show that others had a genuine desire to obey the laws of God. The allusions to the Law of Moses in these two sections are really impressive.
2. The words seems to imply that, if only there had been a king in Israel in those days, men would have feared the Lord and walked in His ways.

Yet subsequent history hardly bore out such an optimistic expectation. The reign of Saul was marked by the slaughter of priests and a deliberate disregard of divine instructions. And once the influence of David was left behind, the monarchy became an era of spreading corruption, schism, and recurring chaos (except for the temporary influence of men like Hezekiah and Josiah, who set themselves deliberately to recapture the good days of David).

So it looks as though “no king in Israel” has to be read with the idealism of the writer as meaning: ‘no king like David’.

Samuel, compiling this variegated and highly instructive record, had a firm conviction that the boy from Bethlehem would one day make life in Israel very different, to the glory of God.

The three Appendices to Judges would demonstrate to a fickle nation their lack of stability in choosing a man like Saul, and would indicate how much finer were the expectations that could be safely rested on God’s chosen leader from Bethlehem.

Such a hypothesis as this serves immediately to explain quite a number of the characteristics of Appendices A and B. For instance, as already hinted, the mention of Phineas supplies an explanation (see Chapter 22) of the switching of the priesthood to the junior branch of the family of Aaron, culminating in Eli, Samuel’s mentor. The emphasis on the dexterity of Benjamin’s left-handed slingers can now be set over against the story of the lad from Bethlehem, who went in the fear of the God of Israel and slew his mighty adversary with his first sling stone.

Again, the downfall of Benjamin is preceded by what is, in effect, a conflict between Benjamin and Judah (20:18), in which Judah is worsted at first and at second, but ultimately Benjamin is reduced to obscurity. In his declining years Samuel, grieving over the increasing arrogance and godlessness of Saul, would see in the history of these bygone days a prophecy of Saul and David written in advance. And he would be able to go to his long sleep confident that Saul’s hunting of David would fail of its purpose. God had chosen His king from Judah.

Yet again, it is to be noted that in all the narratives under consideration the only outstanding character to go unnamed is the Levite of Mount Ephraim. Can it be that, just as the gospel writers mention themselves either not at all or only indirectly, so the narrative here is designedly vague because this Levite was an ancestor of Samuel’s? And does this explain why his home town also goes unspecified? (See 1 Sam. 1:1.) And is there a touch of fellow feeling in the mention of the old man of Ephraim who offered hospitality in Gibeah?

This Saul-David hypothesis now being explored seems to have relevance to the rest of the Book of Judges also.

The first tribe to go up against the Canaanites (1:2) was Judah, and Judah had to take the lead in the capture of Jerusalem, even though it was assigned to Benjamin (1:8). And apparently it was Benjamin that relinquished Jerusalem again to the Jebusites.

David’s call to serve the Lord was comparable with that of Barak (through a prophet); comparable also with that of Othniel, Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson — by the Spirit of the Lord coming upon him. Whereas Saul came to the kingship by popular demand, as did Abimelech! Facts such as these do not just happen. They are designed.

Further, it is possible to trace quite a number of connections between the Book of Judges and 1 Samuel which can hardly be accidental. It is noteworthy and significant that the contacts with the story of Saul are of a disreputable character, whereas those with the life of David are of an opposite nature altogether.

For instance, the Lord departed from Saul as he did from Samson when at his lowest spiritual ebb (Judges 16:20; 1 Sam. 16:14). And in place of Holy Spirit there came upon him an evil spirit from the Lord, as happened in Abimelech’s experience also (Judges 9:23; 1 Sam. 16:14). And the death of Saul was almost precisely that of Abimelech (Judges 9:54; 1 Sam. 31:4).

By contrast, any parallels with the life of David suggest a comparison with Barak and Jephthah and also Samson at his best.

The Adullam period in David’s chequered career, when he was thrust out from his own folk and was joined in an outlaw life by men in debt and men bitter of soul, is marvellously like the experience of Jephthah. And David and Jephthah are the only two men in Scripture of whom it is recorded that the maidens went forth to greet them in songs and dancing as they returned from the vanquishing of their enemies. It was appointed to Samson to “begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines”; and it was David who finished the work (1 Sam. 17 and 2 Sam. 8:1).

On the other hand, it was the Philistines who brought Saul’s miserable career to an end. When David was encouraged in his struggle against the enemies of the Lord, it was by “the sound of marching in the tops of the mulberry trees” (2 Sam. 5:24) — an experience immediately reminiscent of Barak’s: “Up; for this is the day in which the Lord hath delivered Sisera into thine hand: is not the Lord gone out before thee?”

For the sake of completeness it should be mentioned that the story of Gideon presents two points of contact with the life of Saul which at first glance seem scarcely to agree with the idea now being worked out. When Saul spoke self-deprecatingly of his qualifications for kingship, his words were a clear echo of Gideon’s: “Am not I….of the smallest of the tribes of Israel? and my family the least of all the families….?” (1 Sam. 9:21; cp. Judges 6:15). And when, in 1 Sam. 11:11, Saul divided his forces into three companies to go against the Ammonites, he was copying Gideon’s tactics against the same people (Judges 7:16). But this — let it be carefully observed — is Saul at his best, before the declension into jealousy and disobedience and faithlessness had set in.

Similarly, a complete series of correspondences can be traced between Gideon and — not Saul but — Saul’s son, Jonathan, the Jonathan whose love for David, the Lord’s anointed, was passing the love of women, the Jonathan whose humility and faith in the promises of God was so real and intense that he could say: “Thou shalt be king over Israel, and I shall be next unto thee.” (The words are a prophecy yet to be fulfilled!) Like another Jonathan he was content to say: “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30). Consequently, the Word of God honours him by stressing certain striking resemblances between him and one of the “saviours” whom God raised up. Indeed it may well be that Gideon was a hero of the family and that the resemblances are actually conscious imitations. It looks as though one of the few good things Jonathan learned from his father was a glowing admiration for Gideon the Abi-ezrite. The similarities referred to include the following:

1. When Jonathan went out against the enemy, there was a great trembling in the host of Israel (1 Sam. 14:15 and 13:11); compare Gideon’s army at the well Harod (trembling): “Whosoever is fearful and afraid, let him return” (Judges 7:1,3).
2. In each battle the enemy was “as the sand by the seaside in multitude” (1 Sam. 13:5; Judges 7:12).
3. Both Saul’s and Gideon’s armies were severely reduced; and Jonathan was content to give battle almost single-handed. “There is no restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few.”
4. Both Jonathan and Gideon went forth accompanied only by an armour-bearer (1 Sam. 14:6; Judges 7:10).
5. And in each case there was a sign given from the enemy — and each sign was acknowledged as coming really from the Lord (1 Sam. 14:10; Judges 7:11,14,15).
6. In the victory which each won, “every man’s sword was against his fellow” (1 Sam. 14:20; Judges 7:22).

This impressive catalogue serves not only to heighten the reader’s esteem both for Gideon and for Jonathan, but it emphasizes the contrast between Saul and Jonathan, and so between Saul and David.

Thus, when the relevant facts are marshalled together, the Book of Judges is seen to be a history with a purpose. The condescending critical opinion of the book as an inconsequential collection of old hero stories, exaggerated and distorted by oral tradition and ‘licked into shape’ generations later by an ignorant and none-too-scrupulous editor, must give place to a more reverent and thankful spirit. Not least among the men upon whom the Spirit of the Lord came, to transform them into saviours of a wayward people, was the man who was guided to produce this divine record of history divinely caused.