H. An Interlude (10:1 - 11:14)
H. AN INTERLUDE (10:1 - 11:14)
As in the case of the seals, there is an interlude between the sixth and the seventh trumpets. In both cases the effect is to set off the seventh visitation as particularly important. We are all keyed up for the climax but it does not come. This is not simply a literary device, but part of life. We cannot predict how God’s judgments will work out. They take unexpected courses. There are delays which give opportunity for repentance.
This interlude centres on an open book, which is surely the Word of God (10:2). John is to eat it after which he will prophesy ‘about many peoples, nations, languages and kings’ (10:11). The gospel is to be preached everywhere before the End comes (cf. Mk. 13:10). John has dealt with the fate of sinners during the days leading up to the climax. Now he turns to the church during that time. It has duties to perform and troubles to undergo. John warns it.
i. The little book and the seven thunders (10:1-4)
Some of the things in Revelation are more mysterious than others. With the seven thunders we come to something so secret that it may not be revealed.
1. Another mighty angel looks back to 5:2 (cf. also 8:3; 18:21). John saw him in the act of coming down (present participle) from heaven (cf. 18:1; 20:1). The direction perhaps means that John is now on earth (cf. also vv.4,8), whereas he has been writing from the perspective of heaven (e.g. 9:13). Ladd reminds us of ‘the fluidity of apocalyptic thought; one can move from heaven to earth in vision without explanatiori . Up till now little has been said about the appearance of angels, attention being rather on what they did and said. But this one’s appearance is described fairly fully. Each of the points mentioned has elsewhere some connection with God or with Christ, so this angel is clearly important. Some (e.g. Stoffel) have identified him with Christ, but this is not justified. Christ is never called an angel in this book (let alone ’another angel‘) and this angel is not accorded divine honours. He is not worshipped, for example. The swearing of an oath ’by him who lives for ever and ever’ (v.6) does not look like an action of Christ. The angel was dressed in a cloud (cf. Ps. 104:3 for the clouds as God’s chariot), his hat was a rainbow (cf. the rainbow round the throne, 4:3), his face was like the sun (cf. 1:16), and his legs like fiery pillars (a pillar of fire was the symbol of God’s presence with his people in the wilderness, Ex. 13:21-22). Several commentators see the rainbow as produced by the sunshine of the angel’s face falling on the cloud.
2. The mighty angel of 5:2 was associated with a book, that one being written inside and out. It was called a biblion, and in this angel’s hand was also a little scroll, a biblaridion. This word is not previously attested so we do not know whether the diminutive termination is to be taken seriously or not (biblion is also a diminutive). The distinction between a ‘book’ and a ’little book’ is apt not to be so very marked when it is merely the question of the length of a roll. If the present word means a genuinely small book the significance will be that it contained part only of the revelation of God’s purpose. The book lay open (the perfect participle may point to permanence; the book is not concealed nor likely to be). The angel planted his right foot on the sea and his left foot on the land. The reason for the choice of foot is not apparent, but treading on both land and sea probably indicates mastery over both (cf. Ps. 60:8). He treads the sea as easily as the land. It also means that his message is a universal message. It concerns all whether on land or sea.
His posture is also an indication of gigantic size. The world despised Christians as members of a little, insignificant church. It held all that they stood for as of no account. But their faith was based on the word of God and that word is in the hands of this colossal figure, who, though only dimly seen through the enveloping cloud, spans both land and sea. God’s word is supremely significant. It towers above all the affairs of men.
3. The previous mighty angel cried out with a loud voice (5:2), and so does this one. His voice is likened to that of a lion roaring (actually the verb mykaomai is mostly used of the bellowing of oxen, but the use of its cognate noun for the roar of lions is attested). His shout is followed by the seven thunders, where the article points to a definite group. Some see a reference to the sevenfold use of ‘the voice of the Lord’ as that voice is likened to thunder (Ps. 29). But if there is an allusion to some such definite group we have no means of identifying it with certainty.
4. The seven thunders not only sounded but spoke, uttered sounds with meaning. John was about to write down what they said but was forbidden. The voice that forbade him is anonymous, but it was divine in origin (from heaven). Seal (sphragiz
) is found in the New Testament in the sense ‘keep hidden’ only here and in 22:10. Sealing was common in the ancient world, but mostly as a means of identification or of certifying and authenticating. In apocalyptic, however, it does seem to mean ’keep hidden’ (cf. Dn. 12:4). Charles speaks of it as a technical term in this sense. But its use here for ‘sealing’ something spoken, not written, seems unparalleled. The meaning is clear, however, and it is reinforced by the following do not write it down (there is some emphasis on ’them’; NIV, it).
) is found in the New Testament in the sense ‘keep hidden’ only here and in 22:10. Sealing was common in the ancient world, but mostly as a means of identification or of certifying and authenticating. In apocalyptic, however, it does seem to mean ’keep hidden’ (cf. Dn. 12:4). Charles speaks of it as a technical term in this sense. But its use here for ‘sealing’ something spoken, not written, seems unparalleled. The meaning is clear, however, and it is reinforced by the following do not write it down (there is some emphasis on ’them’; NIV, it).Human nature being what it is there has been a good deal of speculation as to what the thunders said. Most think that a series of judgments is meant, and some hold that, as enough of judgment has already been disclosed through the seals and the trumpets, to write more would be unnecessary, especially as the subject of the book is now to be the church rather than the world. But such an explanation makes the thunders completely inexplicable. Why would God make a revelation that was unnecessary? It is better to think of the thunders as conveying a revelation to John (clearly he understood them), but which he was not to pass on to others. Paul speaks of such experiences (2 Cor. 12:4). Not all the counsel of God is open to everyone (cf. Colclasure, ‘there is much, much more to the eternal plan of God than we can ever imagine’). It is timely to be reminded that there are some parts of it which people like John can know but which are beyond ordinary people like ourselves. A further value in our knowledge that the thunders are sealed is that it is a warning against the kind of date-fixing that has characterized some schemes of prophecy based on this book. On John’s own showing we do not have all the information. God has kept some things back from us. Let us not proceed as though all has been revealed.
ii. The angel’s oath (10:5-7)
The angel solemnly proclaims the imminence of the fulfilment of what he calls ‘the mystery of God’ (v.7). This stands for the whole divine purpose (see note) and conveys to John’s readers the assurance that there is an answer to the perplexities of history. The mystery of God will be completed. Prophecy will be fulfilled. The angel solemnly confirms this with an oath.
5.
The angel is identified with him of verse 1 by his standing on the sea and the land. He now swore a solemn oath. He lifted up his hand to heaven, a common accompaniment of oaths in antiquity (cf. Gn. 14:22; Dt. 32:40; Dn. 12:7).
6. The oath is made very solemn by its prolonged reference to God. The angel singles out his eternity and his activities in creation. This brings out the point that what follows is not some panic device to which a surprised deity must resort in reaction to unexpected machinations of evil men and evil spirits. He is supreme over time and over creation. He fulfils what he plans. ‘The last days, no less than the first, are in His hands’ (Kiddle). The content of the oath is that there will be no more delay. AV translates ’there should be time no longer‘, and this has been made the basis for a view that in the next life there will be no such thing as time. We will live in a great eternal present. But the angel is not contrasting time with eternity. He is solemnly swearing that the events of which he speaks will take place certainly and speedily when the seventh angel blows his trumpet. NIV is correct.
Charles thinks that John had in mind the reference to ‘a time, times and half a time’ (Dn. 12:7; cf. Dn. 7:25), words which refer to the period of the antichrist’s power, which is already present in the visions of Daniel, but here is still future and is to be introduced by the seventh trumpet. This is possible, all the more so since the angel is speaking between the sixth and the seventh trumpets. From that vantage-point he assures John that when the necessary conditions have been fulfilled there will be no delay. The End will come. The fact that the seventh trumpet does not sound until 11:15 is no contradiction. The intervening sections do not describe a series of happenings intervening chronologically between the sixth and seventh trumpets. Rather they represent a parenthesis in which the task of the church throughout the ages comes before us.
7.
But is the strong adversative alla and signifies, ‘but, on the contrary’. This strengthens the view that ‘delay’ rather than ’time’ is meant in verse 6. The time is defined more exactly as in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet. For mystery see on 1:20. The word is not uncommon in the New Testament and the very expression we have here occurs elsewhere (1 Cor. 2:1 [see mg.]; Col. 2:2; the plural without the article in 1 Cor. 4:1; cf. Eph. 1:9). Moffatt translates it here ‘the secret purpose of God’. The word is usually associated with the gospel and this may be in mind when John uses the verb eu
ngelisen (announced), which usually means ‘preach the gospel’. There is that about the gospel which unassisted reason would never attain. Left to ourselves we would never have worked out that God would save men in this way. It has to be revealed.
ngelisen (announced), which usually means ‘preach the gospel’. There is that about the gospel which unassisted reason would never attain. Left to ourselves we would never have worked out that God would save men in this way. It has to be revealed.The good news was proclaimed to his servants the prophets (cf. Am. 3:7). We should probably understand prophets here to mean the New Testament prophets as well as the great prophets of the Old Testament. God has one purpose through the ages and it comes to its climax at this point. From the very beginning he has planned to bring his people to salvation, and thus his whole purpose is coming to its culmination. It involves the judgment of evil, but also the deliverance and vindication of his people. John’s readers are to reflect that the mighty world forces of which they were so conscious, far from being triumphant, are about to be overthrown decisively. A purpose that God has planned before the world and has matured throughout all ages will not lightly be abandoned. The mystery of God will indeed be accomplished.
iii. The little book (10:8-11)
John takes the scroll from the angel’s hand and eats it. This gives him the message he must use in prophesying to many peoples. Charles regards the contents of the little book as ‘a proleptic vision of the reign of the Antichrist’ (on v.1). It is not necessary to be so specific. It is the word of God to John. But since he does not specify to what it refers with any precision we are on dubious ground when we attempt to improve on him.
8. John now hears again the voice that I had heard from heaven (v.q.). Once again there is no indication of the speaker, but the command is authoritative. The voice instructs the Seer to take the book from the angel, who is described for the third time in terms of the places where his feet rested. Clearly his position on both land and sea is seen as important. The word for scroll is biblion whereas both before and after the word is biblaridion (vv.2,9,10). There appears to be no difference in meaning, and it is not clear why John should use biblion just this once. The book is again said to be open. This is important. The revelation is not hidden.
9. So John went to the angel and asked him for the little book. The angel said, Take it and eat it. This last verb, kataphage means ‘devour it’, ‘eat it down’, i.e. ‘make its contents completely your own’, ‘take them into your innermost being’. The angel proceeds to assure John that it will turn your stomach sour, but in your mouth it will be as sweet as honey. Jeremiah had a similar experience when he ate God’s words and they became joy and delight (Je. 15:16). So did Ezekiel. He was commanded to eat a scroll and as he did so it was sweet as honey in his mouth (Ezk. 3:1-3). Neither, however, reports John’s experience of bitterness in the belly. Being God’s word it is necessarily sweet to the believer (cf. Pss. 19:9-10; 119:103). But when it contains stern denunciations and tells of woes on evil-doers it is also bitter. We should not miss the point that it is the belly of John, the firm believer in Jesus Christ, which is made bitter. As verse 11 makes clear, the scroll is concerned with the message he must proclaim. The true preacher of God’s word will faithfully proclaim the denunciations of the wicked it contains. But he does not do this with fierce glee. The more his heart is filled with the love of God the more certain it is that the telling forth of ‘woes’ will be a bitter experience.
Some interpretations miss this. Thus Hendriksen understands the bitterness to refer to the persecutions the believer must undergo. While it is true that suffering is inevitably the lot of the faithful disciple that scarcely meets the present case. Here the bitterness is internal, something within the believer. It is not external like the persecutions that come from without. Again, Kepler misinterprets John when he says, ‘The book is “bitter” because its message foretells persecution and death; but when the message is digested, it is “sweet as honey,” since the rewards of the “New Jerusalem” await those martyred for their faith.’ The fact is that the sweetness is in the mouth, and the bitterness when the message is digested. Kepler has reversed John’s sequence. The wickedness of man grieved God at his heart (Gn. 6:6), and the true preacher of God’s word enters to some degree into this suffering.
10. Now we have the fulfilment of the angel’s words. Twice John was told to ‘take’ the scroll. He asked the angel to ’give’ it to him. But the angel told him to ‘take’ it. And in the end he did ’take’ it. The revelation of God is something the messenger of God must take for himself. He cannot be passive. So John took the scroll and devoured it. He found it in his mouth sweet as honey. But it made his stomach bitter.
11.
I was told is more literally ‘they say to me’, which is curious for up till now there has been a single speaker. NIV is probably correct in taking it as equivalent to a passive.
Again is a little strange, for up till now John has not so much prophesied as heard and seen things. But he has also recorded his visions, and throughout it has been clear that he will proclaim the things he has seen. He has spoken of his book as a prophecy (1:3), so he can be said in a measure to have prophesied already in what he has recorded. But now he is called upon to prophesy again, and to do so on a larger scale, about many peoples, nations, languages and kings (for this expression see on 5:9; this is the only one of seven similar expressions which includes kings). The word of John is concerned not with any one group of people, be it church, nation, or empire, but with many. This has had a striking fulfilment through the centuries. The reference to kings is appropriate as reminding us that the word of God through his prophets is superior to even the highest among men (cf. Je. 1:10).
iv. The two witnesses (11:1-14)
John goes on to speak of the tremendous opposition faced by the people of God throughout the centuries and especially in the last days. He tells of two witnesses who bear unflinching testimony to the word of God and of the terrible figure of the antichrist, who however, is not able to overcome God’s people in the end.
The chapter is extraordinarily difficult to interpret and the most diverse solutions have been proposed. Some see it as irrelevant, an interpolation into the book or at best a digression in which John uses some material he happens to have at his disposal, but which does not fit in well with his main theme. It is not uncommon to find verses 1-2 and 3-13 regarded as originally two distinct Jewish works, the one composed in the expectation that the Temple would be preserved though Jerusalem itself would be destroyed in the war of AD 66-70, and the other presuming that Jerusalem would stand. Why John should take over prophecies which had proved false is not explained. At the other extreme Kiddle thinks that in many respects this is the key to John’s main theme. This view is more likely to be correct than the former. Even if John did take over this chapter from some earlier source (which is far from proven) we must assume that it expressed his meaning when he incorporated it.
It is important we take this whole section (vv-1-13) symbolically. It is plain enough that the sanctuary of verse 1 is symbolical, but most expositors take the witnesses and the holy city literally. Then difficulties multiply. They are fewer and a coherent pattern emerges when we see it all as symbolic. John is saying that the spiritual temple, the church, will be preserved (cf. the sealing of 7:1-8), though it will be subjected to physical oppression as the Gentiles trample it. John has already used the lampstand and explained it as referring to churches (1:20). Thus we should take the witnesses as symbolizing the witnessing church (or part of it). As John has spoken of seven churches only two of which (Smyrna and Philadelphia) are not blameworthy, it is tempting to think of the two witnesses as standing for that part of the church which is faithful. Perhaps he has the martyrs in mind. It is possible that part of the significance of the number ‘two’ is that in the law the testimony of two witnesses is required (Dt. 17:6). God has provided all the witness that is needed.
Kiddle speaks of ‘a brilliant reinterpretation of another familiar apocalyptic theme’. Elijah was expected to return before the End to preach repentance to the Gentiles, sometimes in company with Moses or Enoch. John sees the task as too great for any two men, but ‘the martyrs, John believes, will be endowed with a spirit of prophecy no less powerfully than the greatest prophets of old. The opposition they must face will be equally fierce - it will come from the same source. Their need for supernatural protection will be equally great. Therefore they shall be equipped with the same powers as Moses and Elijah’ (pp.183f.).
The great city (v.8) is often identified with Jerusalem. But the very verse which allows us to do this calls the same city Sodom and Egypt. ‘The great city’ recurs in 16:19; 17:18; 18:10,16, 18,19,21. It is better to think of it as the earthly city in opposition to the heavenly city of chapters 21 and 22. It is man in organized community and opposed to God. It is another name for this world as a worldly system.
What John is doing then is outlining the function of the witnessing church. Its lot will be hard, but its eventual triumph is sure. This is a heartening message for his troubled readers.
1. It is not said who gave John a reed but plainly the divine authority is behind it. Kalamos is used of a reed swaying in the wind (Lk. 7:24), but here clearly something stiffer is meant for the reed is like a measuring rod. As often, the speaker is not named, but the command is authoritative. John is told to measure the temple of God (cf. Ezk. 40:3ff.). Hitherto he has been a spectator of visions (with an indication in 10:11 that he is to prophesy), but now he is to be active (though this does not last). He is to measure the temple of God (or rather, the sanctuary, naos), the altar, and the worshippers. There are references to a sanctuary in heaven (7:15; 11:19). But as John’s standpoint when last mentioned was on earth, and as the courtyard of this sanctuary is to be trodden by Gentiles (v.2), a sanctuary on earth is meant. If a material building is meant the Temple at Jerusalem is most probable. But it is more likely that John is referring to the church, elsewhere called God’s sanctuary (1 Cor. 3:16; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21).
The altar is a most important part of the equipment of the temple and points to the sacrificial nature of Christian service. The worshippers are the people of God in their capacity as a worshipping community. It is not clear how they are to be measured with a reed, but NIV’s count probably gives the sense of it. Measuring may be either for destruction or for preservation (2 Sa. 8:2), but here clearly for preservation. What is measured at God’s command is under the direct control and care of God. The church will be protected in the coming disaster (cf. the sealing of 7:3). This does not mean that none will perish. There will be martyrs. But the church will not be destroyed.
2. The outer court is not to be measured for it has been given to the Gentiles. This is not easy to interpret. The starting-point for John’s imagery is the Jerusalem Temple, where the outer court might be used by Gentiles, but the inner courts, including the sanctuary, only by Israelites, the people of God. The church, the true Israel, is the sanctuary in the vision, which may mean that there is to be a reversal: Judaism is now the outer court and it is to be under the control of the Gentiles. More likely John is dividing mankind into Christians and Gentiles (cf. 1 Cor. 5:1; 1 Thes. 4:5).
Further, he seems to be using the temple, the outer court, and the holy city as symbols of the church under different aspects. The Gentiles have power over the church in some aspects, but notice, has been given: they can exercise no power other than what is given. They are allowed to trample on the holy city for 42 months (for trampling a holy place cf. Is. 63:18; Dn. 8:13; Zc. 12:3, LXX; Lk. 21:24). They are not permitted to destroy the church, but they are permitted to oppress it for a limited time. The distinction between the sanctuary and the outer courts shows that there is a limit on the extent to which the Gentiles can do their trampling, and the time stated puts a limit on the period too.
Forty-two months (again in 13:5) is the same period as 1,260 days (11:3; 12:6), or ‘a time, times and half a time’ (12:14; Dn. 7:25; 12:7; ’a time’ = one year, ‘times’ = two years, ’half a time’ = six months). That is to say, the same length of time as in Daniel is allowed for the treading down of the holy city by the Gentiles, the prophesying of the two witnesses, the woman’s stay in the wilderness, and the beast’s exercise of authority. This is the length of time that Antiochus Epiphanes tyrannized in Jerusalem, a time of unbelievable horror for the pious Jew, but a time which came to its end. So John will mean his readers to discern that the trial of the people of God will be of measurable duration and that they will be delivered out of it. Perhaps we should also notice that forty-two is the number of the encampments of Israel in the wilderness (Nu. 33:5ff.). As John uses a good deal of symbolism from the deliverance from Egypt (see note on 12:3) it is possible that some of the time periods contain an oblique reference to the wilderness story.
3. Without any warning, my two witnesses make their appearance. As a result of the divine gift they will prophesy for 1,260 days (for the period see on v.2). Their identity is not completely clear. Some think of Moses and Elijah, who would suit verses 5-6 very well. They are referred to in an oracle of hope at the end of the Old Testament (Mal. 4:4-5), and they appeared on the Mount of Transfiguration (Mt. 17:3). Other suggestions are Elijah and Elisha, Enoch and Elijah (who both ascended to heaven super-naturally), the Law and the Prophets, the Law and the Gospel, the Old Testament and the New. There is no shortage of suggestions. The context seems to demand something directly associated with the church, and in view of verse 7 perhaps we should think particularly of the martyrs.
The number two may stand for adequacy of testimony (as in Dt. 17:6). Or it may derive from the two faithful churches in chapters 2 and 3, and point to that section of the church which is faithful unto death, the martyrs. The clothing of the witnesses in sackcloth points to mourning. They are prophesying doom and their attitude accordingly is sad and penitent. The church is a powerful church only when it is penitent. A comfortable, easy-minded church has no power to stir the world either to salvation or to opposition.
4. The witnesses are described as the two olive trees, as in Zechariah 4:3. In both places they indicate a plentiful supply of oil. In Zechariah the oil and the Spirit are connected, so that the message is ‘ “Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,” says the LORD Almighty’ (Zc. 4:6), a message very appropriate to John’s situation. Zechariah’s olive trees are described as ’the two who are anointed to serve the LORD of all the earth’ (Zc. 4:14) which closely resembles John’s words. John then is referring to their dependence on the Spirit of God and their closeness to God.
He goes on to refer to them as lampstands. Zechariah speaks of one lampstand, but John’s symbolism is probably the same as that in his first two chapters, where he uses ‘lampstand’ six times, each time referring to the churches. The witnesses are collective rather than individual and stand for the church. But as there are seven lampstands in 1:12 and but two here, it is only part of the church that is meant. The combination of the word ’witnesses’ (martyres) and the death of the two point irresistibly to the martyrs. We should not overlook the reference to the Lord of the earth. John never forgets that God is a great God with dominion over all the world.
5. No-one can harm God’s witnesses before their mission has been accomplished (cf. Lk. 10:19). Those who try succeed only in bringing destruction upon themselves. The fire is to be taken figuratively. The witnesses are not concerned with the physical destruction of their enemies. They are concerned with a message (which has a fiery aspect, Je. 5:14). It is probably not out of mind that Elijah was vindicated by a God who answered ‘by fire’ (1 Ki. 18:24,38). Devours (katesthiei) signifies total destruction. The word of the faithful witness is a consuming fire. Must (dei) points to a compelling divine necessity. The death in question is inevitable.
6.
During the time they are prophesying the witnesses have a privileged position. They can prevent rain (cf. Elijah, 1 Ki. 17:1; Jas. 5:17). Their powers are connected with water again when it is said that they can turn waters into blood (cf. 8:8; Ex. 7:20; 1 Sa. 4:8). Their third power is to strike the earth with every kind of plague. There are other references to unusual power given to the servants of God, a power limited only by their lack of faith (e.g. Mk. 11:23; Jn. 15:7). John may well have in mind here that the faithful performance of the church’s duty is itself one of the ways in which the judgments of God are set in motion against an evil world (cf. 8:5). His imagery here expresses the truth that God’s servants in the new dispensation have as great resources as did Moses and Elijah in the old.
7. But there is a limit to their exercise of power. When their testimony is concluded, their invulnerability goes. Finished (telessin) means that the testimony has reached its end or aim (telos). The witnesses are not cut short. They accomplish their task. Then they are opposed by the beast. It is not ‘a’ beast, but the beast, an evil being who is prominent throughout the second part of this book. He comes up from the Abyss (see note on 9:1), which indicates his connection with the forces of evil. The two witnesses are clearly not individuals but a mighty host, for the beast will not simply kill them; he will ’make war’ (poisei polemon) with them (cf. Dn. 7:21). In this war he will be victorious, with fatal consequences for the witnesses. When Christ’s martyrs have completed their task they are removed from the scene. The words have relevance to every persecution the church has suffered, though especially to that in the last days. Hendriksen, commenting on verse 8, sees this illustrated by conditions in countries (such as Russia) where the church is seriously restricted: ‘Thus, just before the second coming, the corpse of the Church, whose public and official testimony has been silenced and smothered by the world, lies on the great city’s High Street.’
sin) means that the testimony has reached its end or aim (telos). The witnesses are not cut short. They accomplish their task. Then they are opposed by the beast. It is not ‘a’ beast, but the beast, an evil being who is prominent throughout the second part of this book. He comes up from the Abyss (see note on 9:1), which indicates his connection with the forces of evil. The two witnesses are clearly not individuals but a mighty host, for the beast will not simply kill them; he will ’make war’ (poisei polemon) with them (cf. Dn. 7:21). In this war he will be victorious, with fatal consequences for the witnesses. When Christ’s martyrs have completed their task they are removed from the scene. The words have relevance to every persecution the church has suffered, though especially to that in the last days. Hendriksen, commenting on verse 8, sees this illustrated by conditions in countries (such as Russia) where the church is seriously restricted: ‘Thus, just before the second coming, the corpse of the Church, whose public and official testimony has been silenced and smothered by the world, lies on the great city’s High Street.’8.
Bodies is actually singular, ‘body’, which may point to a close unity between the two. There is no verb and we must supply one (NIV will lie). The meaning apparently is that they are killed in the street and their corpses are left there. The city is identified in two ways. First it is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt. The two names are proverbial for wickedness and oppression (for Sodom, Is. 1:9-10; Ezk. 16:46,55; Egypt is the place where Israel was a slave; Sodom and Egypt are linked in Wisdom 19:14-15, and Egypt is a name for persecuting nations in Gn. Rabbah 16:4). They also both felt the judgment of God. Despite its might Sodom was destroyed. And despite its might Egypt was ‘ruined’ by the plagues God sent (Ex. 10:7). Secondly, the city is the place where also their Lord was crucified. Some conclude that Jerusalem was in mind. But if the passage is symbolical, as I have maintained, it is unlikely that any one earthly city is meant. The ’great city’ is every city and no city. It is civilized man in organized community.
9.
Men from (partitive ek; part of each of the groups) every people, tribe, language and nation (see note on 5:9) is very comprehensive. John is speaking of representatives of all mankind, which is another indication that it is not one earthly city that he has in mind. The bodies are left where they fell for three and a half days (cf. three and a half years, v.3). No reason is given for the refusal of burial, but among the Jews proper burial was important. To refuse it was to heap shame on the deceased. In this case it is also probably an expression of triumph. The persecutors rejoice in the discomfiture of the Christians.
10. For the inhabitants of the earth see note on 6:10. People in general will gloat. The coming of the beast sees wickedness triumphant and that on an unprecedented scale. The reason for the world’s joy is that the witnesses, now called these two prophets, had tormented them. The faithful preaching of the gospel is never soothing to the impenitent, so that the removal of an outstanding preacher is commonly a matter of rejoicing for those whose consciences he has troubled. This provokes Torrance into some searching questions: ‘Why does the Church of Jesus Christ today sit so easy to her surroundings? Why do Christian people live such comfortable and such undisturbed lives in this evil and disturbed world? Surely it is because we are not true to the Word of God.’
11. When the three and a half days were ended the witnesses came to life again because a breath of life from God entered them (cf. Ezk. 37:10). There is a change to the past tense which now becomes characteristic. The location in time has not changed, but John sees these events as so certain that he can speak of them in the past. The witnesses stood up and terror struck those who saw them. History has often seen the church oppressed to the very verge of extinction, but it has always seen it rise again from that verge of death. Each such resurrection strikes consternation into the hearts of the oppressors.
12.
They will refer to the two witnesses, but it is not clear whether the voice was heard by anyone else. As so often in this book there was a loud voice from heaven, but with no indication of the speaker. The voice called them up to heaven whither they ascended in a cloud. In the fullest sense this is to be fulfilled in the rapture Paul describes (1 Thes. 4:17). ‘But meanwhile it has been partly anticipated in the sight of the world by the tribute paid to the victims of a persecution, sometimes within a few years after their dishonour and death ... paganism saw the men it had hated and killed called up to heaven before its eyes’ (Swete).
13. The removal of the two is accompanied by a severe earthquake. One-tenth of the city collapsed. This is the only mention of this proportion in the whole book. One-third and one-quarter are much more common. It perhaps indicates a significant but not a crippling proportion. The number of the dead is given as seven thousand. Kiddle thinks that this is another way of saying a tenth, on the grounds that 70,000 is the number that represents mankind in general. But it still remains curious that on this occasion John has given a fixed number, whereas previously he has always spoken of a proportion, mostly a third. The effect of all this was that the survivors were terrified. But they not only gave way to fear, they also gave glory to the God of heaven. This is a new note, for John has not hitherto spoken of sinners as being other than hardened by the judgments of God (e.g. 9:21). But these happenings were so striking and so clearly from God that even sinful men could not forbear from ascribing glory to him. This is more than the attitude of 6:15-17, which recognized indeed God’s judgment, but sought only to escape.
14. The completion of the first woe had been signalled in 9:12. The end of the second is now recorded in similar fashion. But this time there is an added note that the third is coming soon (cf. 10:6-7).