Iii. A Vision Of Heaven (4:1-11)
III. A VISION OF HEAVEN (4:1-11)
From the immediate concerns of the church on earth John’s attention moves to heaven. From this point heavenly realities are in the forefront right throughout the book. John begins with the vision of God himself, though he does not call it that.
1.
After this I looked is a formula which, with slight variants, always in this book introduces a new vision (7:1,9; 15:5; 18:1; cf.19: 1). There before me (idou) is a vivid touch. John sees it before his very eyes. The door was standing open: the way into heaven was open wide. A minor point is that John uses the singular heaven almost invariably (the plural ‘heavens’ occurs only in 12:12 in fifty-two examples of the term). The word must always be interpreted with care, for John uses it in different ways. Sometimes it is God’s eternal dwelling-place (3:12). But it can also be a heaven which will eventually be destroyed (21:1), and even a place of conflict (12:7). Again, the same word can mean the sky (6:13). Here it is God’s dwelling, but also the place where God chooses to reveal himself, the place where heavenly realities are made plain.
The voice . . . like a trumpet is the voice of the glorified Christ which John heard in 1:10. It now calls on John to come up into heaven (he has been on earth up till this point), and promises to show him what must take place after this. This contrasts with chapters 1 to 3, which have been concerned with the present (i.e. John’s present) situation. The word must is important. The concern of this book is not with things which, as it happens, will take place, as though the future were of absorbing interest in itself. It is rather taken up with things which must happen, the outworking of the divine will. God is in supreme control. John is not writing about matters of chance, but about events which will certainly occur, for they are part of the divine plan.
2. Immediately John came to be in the Spirit (see on 1:10). That this took place again shows that the condition it denotes was an intermittent one. John had evidently ceased to be in the Spirit, but now the state was resumed.
Again the vivid there before me (see on v.1) introduces the vision. John sees a throne. He is very interested in thrones, and specifically in the throne of God which he mentions in almost every chapter. He uses the word throne forty-seven times out of a total of sixty-two times in the New Testament. The emphasis he gives the term may be gauged from the fact that in Matthew, the book with the next highest number, the word occurs only five times. John’s readers were evidently familiar with earthly thrones and they were troubled by all that Caesar’s throne meant. John will not let them forget that there is a throne above every throne.
3. Ezekiel has an account of God on his throne (Ezk. 1:26-28), a passage to which this shows resemblances, though John’s account is marked by greater reserve. He uses suggestion rather than description to convey the majesty and unfathomableness of God. In particular he frequently refers to the worshipping host of heaven. God is usually made known to us by contact with those who know him rather than by direct vision.
John likens him on the throne to jasper and carnelian. The lack of a scientific terminology among the ancients makes identification of precious and semi-precious stones a somewhat hazardous business (JB has ‘a diamond and a ruby’). Jasper may be the same stone as the modern jasper, but some hold that it was green jade or green quartz (NBD), or even diamond on the grounds that elsewhere it is said to be ‘clear as crystal’ (21:11). Carnelian (‘sardius’) was a red stone and most agree with NIV, though some favour ruby. Clearly both were costly, as was the emerald (the same three are linked by Plato, Phaedo 110E). There may be significance in the fact that the sardius and the jasper are the first and last of the twelve precious stones in the high priest’s breastplate, each of which was inscribed with the name of one of the tribes of Israel (Ex. 28:17-21). Flashes of light from precious stones form an apt symbol of the divine presence, at once restrained as regards detail, but clear as regards excellence.
Round the throne was a rainbow, resembling an emerald, ‘a statement which teases the imagination out of all thought’ (Caird). So difficult is this expression that some think of a halo rather than a rainbow (Phillips gets the best of both worlds with ’a halo like an emerald rainbow‘!). Some see a reference to the bow of Ezekiel 1:28 and think of a means of concealing the Deity. It would then be part of John’s restraint in depicting God. It is better, however, to understand it of a rainbow in its usual sense and see a reference to the sign of God’s covenant (Gn. 9:16). The rainbow round the very throne of God then is a way of saying that the covenant is eternal. It will never be repudiated. The word rendered emerald (smaragdinos) is of uncertain meaning, but most accept ’emerald’. If the colour green is significant it will point to the mercy of God.
4. Round God’s throne were twenty-four other thrones and on them twenty-four elders. These are probably a superior order of angels81 (angels may be called ‘elders’, Is. 24:23). Some argue that the number twenty-four is to be seen as the sum of the twelve patriarchs of the Old Testament and the twelve apostles of the New, who are thus seen to form a unity. The song of Moses and of the Lamb are indeed one (15:3). And, while the names of the twelve tribes are on the gates of the New Jerusalem, those of the apostles are on its foundations (21:12,14). It is objected that their song (5:9-10) differentiates them from the redeemed (so Mounce), and that in any case the redeemed do not sit on thrones until the final consummation.
Some, strangely as it seems to me, derive the elders from the twenty-four star-gods of the Babylonian pantheon (what is the Babylonian pantheon doing in John’s heaven?). With more show of reason others see a reference to the courses of priests in David’s organization for worship and the Levites who were responsible for the music at the Temple service (1 Ch. 24:4; 25:9-31). On this view the elders represent the worship of heaven of which that on earth is at best a copy. Best is probably the view of Charles; the elders are angelic beings indeed, but angelic beings who are ‘the heavenly representatives of the whole body of the faithful’. The thrones point to royal state and white is the colour of triumph. The crowns of gold also emphasize the high estate of these exalted beings (the Greek Stephanos usually denotes a wreath of victory or festivity rather than a royal crown: see note on 2:10; but here we must take the crowns in conjunction with the thrones).
5. When John says that flashes of lightning, rumblings and peals of thunder came from the throne we should not understand him to mean that the throne itself originated these phenomena. We have already noticed the reserve with which he speaks of God and there can be no doubt that here the throne is a reverent way of referring to him who sat on it. Lightning and thunder are awe-inspiring, and in this context ‘voices’ (NlV rumblings) is to be understood in the same way. Voices can be quiet and unobtrusive, but clearly John does not mean that kind of voice. Thunder is the voice of God in several Old Testament passages and we should understand all three terms in this way here (see 8:5; 11:19; 16:18 for this conjunction again).
Besides hearing the voice from the throne John sees seven lamps... blazing before it. The present participle blazing denotes continuous activity and the preposition before (enopion) nearness to God. The seven lamps are explained as the seven spirits of God, which seems to mean the Holy Spirit as in 1:4 (where see note).
6. What was before the throne is not clear. Many think that John is speaking of an ocean in heaven above the firmament and appeal to ancient cosmologies to prove the point. Others see a reference to the laver in Solomon’s Temple, which was called a ‘sea’ (1 Ki. 7:23). Such views give John’s language a precision he himself does not give it, apparently of set purpose. He does not say that there was a sea there but ’as it were a sea‘. This is qualified by the adjective ’glassy’ and likened to crystal.
Again John’s reserve about heavenly things is to the fore. He is not giving an exact description but speaking in symbols. To estimate their significance we must bear in mind that modern ideas about glass did not apply in the first century. Then glass was usually very dark, even opaque. Glass as clear as crystal would be enormously expensive. The Koran says that when the Queen of Sheba visited Solomon she thought that a pavement of clear glass which he had set before his throne was water, and lifted up her skirt to pass through it (xxvii). The legend shows that clear glass was thought of as splendidly magnificent, as suitable paving for a royal court. This is part of the symbolism.
But there is dispute about the rest. Thus Torrance can think of the sea as ‘the sea of humanity in perfect harmony with God, without the ripple of trouble upon its many waters’. The trouble is that nothing prepares us for thinking of humanity as before God’s throne. Caird, by contrast, sees it as ‘the reservoir of evil out of which arises the monster (xiii. 1). It is the barrier which the redeemed must pass in a new Exodus, if they are to win access to the promised land (XV.2-3). And in the new heaven and earth there is no more sea (xxi.1)’.
Now it is true that John can use the sea as a symbol of the maelstrom from which wickedness emerges and thus as having no place in the final scheme of things. But that does not mean that here ‘as it were a glassy sea’ has the same significance. Kiddle (commenting on 15:2) takes up a better position when he sees a ’symbol conveying God’s ineffable, absolute holiness - holiness in its original sense of separateness’. None of us can approach God as we are. ’A shining ocean barred all approach‘. John is emphasizing the majesty and the holiness of God.
John now speaks of four living creatures. Their place is ‘in the middle of the throne’, used of them only here, but elsewhere of the Lamb (5:6; 7:17). It indicates special closeness to God, perhaps also a place of honour and their conformity to the divine will. They are also around the throne, a fairly common description which signifies that they attend on God.
They are covered with eyes, in front and behind. They are all-seeing, their eyes being both towards God and towards creation. Many scholars see them as the cherubim (Ezk. 10:2,20), but there are important differences. The cherubim have four wings each, these have six. They carry the throne of God, these are round it. They have four faces each, these have one. There are other differences. We can safely say, in view of their closeness to the throne, that these are the most important of created beings, even that they stand in some way for the whole of creation. But it is hazardous to say more. Their closeness to God’s throne (5:6; 14:3) shows that they are important. They constantly praise God (4:8; 5:8,14; 7:11; 19:4). They are associated with the outpouring of the wrath of God (6:1-7; 15:7).
7. Three of the living ones are said to be like a lion ... an ox and a flying eagle, while the other had a face like a man (cf. Ezk. 1:10 and the beasts of Dn. 7). There is a rabbinic saying in its present form dating from C.AD 300, but possibly much older: ‘The mightiest among the birds is the eagle, the mightiest among the domestic animals is the bull, the mightiest among the wild beasts is the lion, and the mightiest among all is man’ (S Bk). This may give us the clue. As Swete puts it: ’The four forms suggest whatever is noblest, strongest, wisest, and swiftest in animate Nature. Nature, including Man, is represented before the Throne, taking its part in the fulfilment of the Divine Will, and the worship of the Divine Majesty.’
8. The living ones each had six wings (as did the seraphs in Is. 6:2). A second time their eyes are mentioned: the all-seeing function is clearly important. The living ones praise God continually. Their song reminds us of that of the seraphs: ‘Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD Almighty’ (Is. 6:3). The simple repetition is impressive. So is the fact that holiness comes first. John’s readers lived in a world (as we do) where evil was rampant and apparently all-powerful. Goodness was weak and frustrated and ineffectual. But John’s very first vision of heaven shows that these appearances are deceptive. God is holy. The word means primarily ’separate’, and this separateness includes complete purity. Our God is good. And he is the Lord God Almighty. Real power is not with evil, but with God who is holy. Nor is this a passing phase. God is he who was, and is, and is to come (for this dramatic ungrammatical expression see on 1:4). God’s power and eternal being ensure that his holiness will triumph over all evil.
9-10.
Whenever the living creatures give glory ... seems to indicate that the song is intermittent. But only pedantic literalness will find a contradiction with the preceding verse. There John was making the point that in heaven God is worshipped unceasingly. Here he is saying that the worship offered by created beings (the ‘living ones’) is invariably accompanied by that of the representatives of the people of God. The song gives glory, honour and thanks to God. It is difficult to see this in the words already quoted, so the meaning probably is that in heaven a variety of songs is sung.
God is referred to in terms of majesty (the throne) and eternity (lives for ever and ever). The elders join in. They prostrate themselves before him . . . on the throne, worship the Eternal, and throw down their crowns before him. All these are ways of giving him the chief place. They themselves worship: they take the lowliest place. The throwing down of their crowns expresses the truth that he alone reigns. All other sovereignty must yield to his.
11. Their song begins with You are worthy. In the most literal sense they worship (ascribe worthship). They salute God as our Lord and God and ascribe to him worthiness to receive glory and honour and power. The first two are repeated from verse 9, but the ‘thanks’ of that verse is replaced with power. The reason is probably that creation, to which they immediately refer, is a work of power. God, they say, created all things. It was due to his will that they were created and have their being. In view of the troubled state of the little church this is a noteworthy affirmation in the first heavenly vision. God has not abandoned the world, and it is indeed his world. He made all things and made them for his own purpose. John’s readers must not think that evil is in control. Evil is real. But the divine purpose still stands.