A. The Judgment Of The Great Whore (17:1-18)
A. THE JUDGMENT OF THE GREAT WHORE (17:1-18)
The first act in the final drama of judgment has to do with the fate of one described as ‘the great prostitute’. Plainly this woman is to be identified with great Babylon (the next chapter will make this clear). She stands for civilized man apart from God, man in organized but godless community (see introduction to chapter 11 and notes on 11:8; 14:8). This first section on the judgment has three subdivisions: first John sees the woman, then he receives an explanation of her significance, and finally he is informed of her punishment.
i. The woman seated on the beast (17:1-6)
A preliminary description of the woman makes it clear that she is a being of great earthly splendour, but also that she is exceedingly evil and implacably opposed to the people of God. She is plainly to be understood in contrast to the woman of chapter 12 and the bride of chapters 21 and 22.
1. This phase of the revelation is introduced by one of the seven angels who had the bowls, though which is not said. The same description is given later of the angel who showed John ‘the bride, the wife of the Lamb’ (21:9), and it is not unlikely that we are to see a connection. Out of God’s final judgments there emerges a single purpose which means both the destruction of evil and the appearance of the new Jerusalem. God’s purpose is consistent, but the result varies accordingly as it involves the righteous or the wicked.
The angel now calls John to come. He will show him the punishment (‘judgment’) of the great prostitute. There in fact turn out to be some necessary preliminaries and we do not come to the judgment until the next chapter. But this is the beginning of the whole section concerned with judgment. The woman is described as the great prostitute. Outwardly she was all glittering splendour (see note on v.4.). But John sees the glamour as meretricious. It conceals a basic hostility to God combined with a readiness to seduce people from their rightful allegiance.
The figure of sexual looseness is common in the Old Testament where it is used in more ways than one. The people of God is there seen as God’s bride, so that unfaithfulness is likened to adultery (Je. 3:9; Ezk. 16:32). But the prophets sometimes think of this unfaithfulness as habitual and mercenary. Isaiah, for example, can exclaim, ‘See how the faithful city has become a harlot!’ (Is. 1:21; cf. also Je. 2:20; 3:1; Ezk. 16:15-16; Ho. 2:5; etc.). This is a vivid way of describing an unfaithfulness which is horrible. It shows us that sin is first of all a sin against love.
A further way in which the figure is used is to describe insolent and idolatrous world powers as harlots, e.g. Tyre (Is. 23:16-17) and Nineveh (Na. 3:4). They are not said to be adulterous for they are not God’s people, his bride. It is significant accordingly that in the present passage the word is prostitute, not ‘adulteress’. John is not speaking of the people of God, but of a secular power. It is a secular power of low standards, one which has both committed horrible evils and seduced others into sharing her guilt.
The prostitute ... sits on many waters. As the woman symbolizes a city, this might refer to its location as well watered, or even to wide-ranging seagoing commerce. Babylon in the Old Testament can be addressed as ‘You who live by many waters’ (Je. 51:13), a description which aptly draws attention to the facts that the Euphrates flowed through that city and that it was the centre of a network of canals. But the Old Testament can also use streams or rivers to refer to peoples (e.g. Is. 8:7-8; 23:10; Je. 46:7; 47:2; Ezk. 29:10). This is the meaning here (see v.15). For his symbolical Babylon John has taken a conventional description of old Babylon and reinterpreted it along the lines of Old Testament symbolism to give a picture of a world empire exercising dominion over many subject nations.
2. The kings of the earth no doubt regarded their dealings with the city as laudable trade and cultural ventures. John saw them as ‘fornication’ (NIV, adultery) committed with this prostitute. They have joined her in her sins against God. Their commerce with her involved them in the same basic attitude to the things of God as she had. John changes his imagery when he speaks of the inhabitants of the earth (see note on 6:10) as intoxicated by her (cf. Je. 51:7). While the kings of the earth take the lead, the evil infection is not confined to them. It spreads throughout their peoples. The fact that the wine is ’the wine of her fornication’ (cf. 14:8) shows that sexual impurity is still the basic thought. Earth’s dwellers as a whole are happy enough at being seduced by the prostitute.
3. Up till now the angel has spoken about the whore. Now John sees her. For this to take place he is carried in the Spirit into a desert (better, ‘wilderness’). For in the Spirit as a state of exaltation and special receptivity brought about by the Spirit, see note on 1:10. The spot chosen for John’s standpoint is significant. Throughout this book the wilderness is the place for God’s people over against the great city (cf.12:6,14). It is the negation of all that the city stands for, and in the wilderness one is safe from all that the great city can do. It is only here, only in detachment from the great city, that God’s people can see her as she really is. If they identify themselves with her they will be blind to her essential nature.
From his vantage-point John sees a woman seated on a scarlet beast. That she sits on ‘many waters’ (v.1) and now on a beast should not worry us. John never strives for consistency in his visions (see note on 1:17). He has two truths to bring out about this woman. One is given by her position on many waters. Now we come to the other, that she is borne by the beast. We should identify the beast with that in 13:1. The woman’s posture indicates a close connection and identifies her as one of the forces of evil continually supported by the beast. Underlying the differing manifestations of evil is the continuing reality represented by the beast.
Scarlet is the colour of the ‘enormous red dragon’ (12:3, where see note; a different Greek word is used). The word used here (kokkinon) refers to the dye made from the kokkos, ’the female of a scale insect (similar to the cochineal) which clings to the leaves of an oak tree; the dried bodies of these insects, known as kermes, were used by the ancients to prepare a purplish-red dye’ (BAGD). It is a colour of splendour, but also in the Bible, of sin (Is. 1:18). Blasphemy (GNB, ‘insulting to God’) is characteristic of the beast (13:1,5,6), but this is the only place where the animal is said to be covered with (‘full of’) it. This will indicate blasphemy in the fullest measure. For the seven heads and ten horns see note on 12:3.
4. The woman was royally robed; purple and scarlet were colours of splendour and magnificence. They were not for the poor since the dyes producing them were very expensive. Purple was made from the murex, a shell-fish; for scarlet see note on verse 3. Both were costly to extract, so that the colours always indicate splendour and magnificence even more than the particular shades denoted by the words. The woman was also lavishly adorned; ‘gilded’ (kechrys
men
) points to liberal use of precious metal.
men) points to liberal use of precious metal.The golden cup (cf. Je. 51:7) the woman holds leads to the expectation of a specially-satisfying drink. Should not only the best come in such a costly container? But in fact the cup is full of abominable things. This word originally meant anything detestable, but in the Old Testament came to be specially linked with idolatry. This will be its significance here. The following and the filth of her adulteries should probably be understood as ‘even the filth ...’. The attractive cup is revealed as no more than an enticement to people to join the glittering harlot in her evil ways. It is her method of seducing them from God. The picture is a vivid one, combining regal state with utter moral and religious corruption.
5. Names are written on foreheads quite often in this book. Thus God’s servants were sealed in this way (7:3; 9:4), and the servants of the Lamb were marked similarly (14:1; 22:4). On the other side the same is true of the adherents of the beast (13:16; 14:9; 20:4). So now the character of the harlot is shown by her name, displayed on her forehead for all to see. Charles draws attention to passages in Roman authors informing us that Roman harlots wore on their brows labels inscribed with their names. The whore is thus in character.
Mystery (see note on 1:20) will indicate that the meaning of the harlot’s name is not open and obvious to all. It is a subject for revelation, and indeed the angel proceeds to reveal it (v.7). NIV takes mystery to be part of the name, but this is very improbable. It is a way of bringing out the significance of what follows. Moffatt renders ‘by way of symbol’, NEB ‘with a secret meaning’ and JB ’a cryptic name’. Such translations bring out the point that the name has meaning, but obscure the fact that its significance is not discerned other than by revelation. The angel makes it known to John and John to believers. But the worldly would not know it at all.
The first part of the name is Babylon (see note on 14:8). Previously we have come across this city as a great city seducing all mankind, and the object of divine hostility (14:8; 16:19). Now we see her singled out as the mother of prostitutes. She is not only a prostitute herself, but she spawns evils like her own. With this is linked the abominations of the earth. As in verse 4, all kinds of abominable things are ascribed to the great city, and not one particular vice only. Barclay cites some vivid statements from Roman writers such as Juvenal, who describes the way the empress Messalina used to serve as a prostitute in a common brothel, and Seneca, who called Rome ‘a filthy sewer’. Barclay comments, ‘John’s picture of Rome is not in the least exaggerated; it is actually restrained in comparison with some of the pictures which the Romans themselves drew of their own civilisation.’
6. John saw this woman drunk with the blood of the saints, further described as ‘the martyrs’ (those who bore testimony) (cf. Is. 34:5,7, LXX). The metaphor shows that blood had flowed freely. The harlot had slain not one or two of the saints, but a great number. This figure also implies that she enjoyed the process. When she persecuted the church she did not think of herself as performing a distasteful but necessary duty. She rejoiced in it as a drunkard rejoices in his wine. Drunk is a present participle in the Greek; John is talking about a continuing state, not merely past history. In this passage there can be no difference between saints and ’martyrs‘, but the placing of the two terms side by side adds solemnity to the indictment. The explicit use of the term ’martyrs‘, which means ’witnesses’, may also be meant to bring out the guilt of the harlot. She was not ignorant of the issues. Witness had been borne.
John was greatly astonished. This may be because of the contrast between what he saw and what he expected. He had been invited to look at the judgment of the city (v. 1). Instead he sees a harlot magnificently arrayed. It is all very perplexing. It is also possible that some of his astonishment comes because he now sees for the first time the true nature of the Roman Empire, the contemporary representative of the great city.
ii. The significance of the woman and the beast (17:7-14)
Having shown John the harlot and the beast, the angel proceeds to explain their meaning. It turns out that the beast is much more important than the woman.
7. The angel inquired why John had wondered and proceeded to explain the mystery (for this term see note on 1:20) of the woman and of the beast she rides. There is but one mystery for these two. They belong intimately together and to know the one is to know the other. The beast is again characterized by his heads and horns (see notes on 12:3; 13:1).
8. The beast is the more important and is explained first. It is not easy to understand all that we are told, in part at any rate because the symbolism seems to have more than one meaning. Sometimes the beast is the ruler, sometimes he is the kingdom (cf. v.9). Fundamentally the beast is the principal henchman of Satan (the great red dragon) and Satan’s work is done in different ways at different times.
The beast once was, now is not, which is probably an intentional contrast with 1:4. Again, in 13:3 we saw that the beast suffered a mortal wound but recovered. The evil in mankind may seem to disappear, but only seems. It always returns again. The Nero redidivus myth which many see behind this verse is an excellent illustration of what John means (though it does not exhaust his meaning). Nero lived out his evil life. He died. And in Domitian there appeared one who might be called a second Nero, Nero all over again. That the beast was means that he had put in an appearance on the earth. That he is not signifies that he is no longer in evidence.
But this does not mean that the last has been heard of him. He will come up out of the Abyss (see note on 9:1). This identifies him with the forces of evil and indicates that his final sortie will be the climax of the efforts of the evil one. But it will fail. He will go to his destruction. Not for one moment does John lose sight of the certainty of the overthrow of evil. But this is not the way it seems to the inhabitants of the earth, an expression which means unregenerate mankind (see note on 6:10), as the following whose names have not been written in the book of life makes clear. That this goes back to the creation of the world is a reminder of God’s eternal purpose. But the unregenerate do not discern this. They will be astonished at the reappearance of the beast after his disappearance. The beast has a fascination for worldly minds.
9. Now comes the clue, the word to the wise (cf. 13:18, where see note). John is not now speaking of some obvious truth which is apparent to all. But the wise can work it out. The seven heads are explained as seven hills on which the woman sits. This identifies her with Rome, for the seven hills of that city are often mentioned in ancient literature. (Ladd sees a reference to seven empires and their rulers, but most agree that Rome is meant.) But Rome does not exhaust the meaning of the symbol. As we have seen, the great city is every city and no city. It is civilized man, mankind organized apart from God. It has its embodiment in every age. ‘Babylon, then, is the world as the centre of seduction at any moment of history, particularly during this entire present dispensation. The harlot, Babylon, always opposes the bride, new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:gff.)’ (Hendriksen). In the first century, Rome was a striking embodiment of what John means by Babylon. In Rome as nowhere else people could see the city of mankind bent on its own blasphemous way, opposing with all its might the things of God. The heads are also seven kings. They symbolize both hills and kings. Attention moves now to the city’s rulers.
10.
Five have fallen, i.e. they have died. They are out of the way. At the moment of writing the sixth is in occupation of the throne (one is). The seventh has not yet come; his reign is still future.
What are we to make of all this? Many think we should look to contemporary Rome as the illustration of these realities most prominent in John’s mind. In this case the kings are the Roman emperors. Most agree that we should start with Augustus, not Julius Caesar. The five are then Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero. The identification of the sixth depends on whether we accept Galba, Otho and Vitellius as emperors.94 If so, he will be Galba. If not, he will be Vespasian, and Titus will be the seventh who is to have a short reign. Most accept the latter view, though without making it clear how John and his readers would agree on eliminating Galba, Otho and Vitellius.
A different point of view is put forward by, for example, Hendriksen. He thinks that the kings symbolize not individual rulers but empires (so Ladd). The five which have fallen are the Old Babylonian, the Assyrian, the New Babylonian, the Medo-Persian and the Graeco-Macedonian. The one that is is the Roman, and the seventh, yet future, may stand for ‘all anti-christian governments between the fall of Rome and the final empire of antichrist’. Since the eighth is ‘of the seven’, the final kingdom of antichrist may well arise in one of the ancient seats of empire.
Either view is possible, but perhaps better is the view that we are to take the numbers symbolically. Seven will then stand for ‘the power of the Roman Empire as a historic whole’ (Mounce). It is the number of perfection, pointing to the whole. Five kings have passed away, which puts John into the time of the sixth, that preceding the climax (cf. the sixth trumpet and the sixth bowl).
11. The symbolism becomes very complicated. The beast himself (characterized again as who once was, and now is not, for which see note on v.8) is now identified with an eighth, and is also said to be of the seven. If we reject Galba, Otho and Vitellius, the eighth emperor was Domitian, and Swete reminds us that both pagan and Christian writers likened Domitian to Nero. John may mean that Domitian was ‘Nero all over again’ (cf. the identification of John the Baptist with Elijah, Mt. 11:14). A difficulty is how we can apply was, and now is not to Domitian. Perhaps in one sense he was and in another he was not Nero. If we take the symbolic view the eighth implies that the antichrist claims to be someone special, whereas he is in reality no more than one of the seven.
The eighth, be it emperor or empire or symbol, is equated with one of the seven. Now the seven have already been identified with the heads of the beast, so John is telling us that the beast, the basic source of evil, finds a kind of incarnation in each of the seven. In a way he is each of them and he is specially the eighth. But John is not concerned with the beast’s career. Indeed, that is part of our difficulty. He does not say enough for us to make a firm identification. His interest is not in what the beast does, nor in his power. It is in the fact that he is going to his destruction. So ultimately perishes all evil.
12. We move now to the beast’s ten horns which we find are ten kings (cf. Dn. 7:24). These are sometimes taken as ten emperors of Rome, either including Galba, Otho and Vitellius, or taking the line a little further down in history. This is to ignore the angel’s express statement, these have not yet received a kingdom. Their dominion is still future, so that they must be held to differ from the seven, five of whom have already fallen (v.10). Others draw attention to the Nero redivivus myth, which held that Nero would return at the head of large armies from the east, often identified as Parthians. But whether this was done or not, it was thought that he would not be alone. He would have the support of other rulers.
It is something like this that John has in mind. At the End the beast will give rise not only to the eight already mentioned, but also to ten others. These may be earthly kings like the Parthian satraps who were practically independent rulers. Or they may be demonic figures. They are not the same as ‘the kings of the earth’, for these are pictured as mourning over the destruction of the great city (18:9), whereas these ten ‘will hate the prostitute’ (v.16). They are antichrist’s helpers, to be raised up in the last days. Ten may be their exact number, but more probably it is symbolical and points to completeness.
Two things are said about their kingly state. The first is that for one hour they receive authority. This may mean that their reigns will be short as we count time. More likely it means short as God counts time. To us they may appear great, but to God they reign but for one unimportant hour. They are associated with antichrist and their day will be as brief as his. The other thing is that they receive authority along with the beast. They do not reign alone or in their own might. They are not to be understood apart from the beast.
13. This last point is underlined. The ten are not a group of independent thinkers. They have one purpose (gnm), and this leads them to give their power and authority to the beast. They are willing collaborators, not men forced into an unwelcome association.
m), and this leads them to give their power and authority to the beast. They are willing collaborators, not men forced into an unwelcome association.14. John looks ahead to the end of time and sees them making war against the Lamb, but to no avail, for the Lamb will overcome them. He is supreme, which is brought out by saying he is Lord of lords and King of kings (cf. 19:16; Dt. 10:17). Against such a Being the minions of the beast are in a hopeless position. With the Lamb are those who are called, chosen and faithful. These are his retinue, not his resources. They represent no independent source of aid for he needs none. Indeed, the very qualities named show that they depend on him. But they share his triumph.
iii. The punishment of the whore (17:15-18)
This concluding section shows the disunity of the forces of evil, and also the certainty that God’s words will be fulfilled.
15. The angel explains the waters on which the harlot sits (v.1). They are a multitude of peoples over whom she is set (for peoples, etc. see note on 5:9). She has a great empire.
16. It is easy to think of the forces of evil as one united phalanx. But there is no cohesion in evil; it is always self-destructive. Wicked men are not just one happy band of brothers. Being wicked, they act in jealousy and hatred. At the climax their mutual hatreds will result in mutual destruction. There will be hatred between the ten horns and the prostitute, a hatred which will issue in deeds. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked, i.e. they will strip her of every resource (cf. the punishment of the harlot Oholibah, Ezk. 23:25-30). They will eat her flesh, i.e. prey on her and consume her. And they will burn her with fire. She will be completely destroyed.
17. The basic reason for all this is the divine will. ‘The beast and his allies remain in the hand of the God they defy, and by the impulse of the Devil they unitedly fulfil the words of God’ (Beasley-Murray). God causes them to agree. They will not quarrel and break up their coalition and thus allow the harlot to escape. Her doom is from God. He sees to it that the kings have the unity they need for their act of destruction. They give the beast their power to rule till God’s words are fulfilled (for the plural words cf.19:9; 21:5; 22:6; it may indicate a multiplicity in the purposes of God). There is treachery on the part of the beast who sustains the whore (v.3). But God’s purposes are not overthrown. The beast may defeat his own supporters. He will never defeat God.
18. The woman’s identity is now revealed, albeit in a guarded fashion. John learns two things about her: she is a great city and she rules over the kings of the earth. In John’s own day that meant Rome. But in the end-time it is man in organized community (see note on 11:8).