4 And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me,321Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.4.And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices.After he had listened to those thunders; or when they had passed by. ¶I was about to write.That is, he was about to record what was uttered, supposing that that was the design for which he had been made to hear them. From this it would seem that it was not mere thunder—brutum fulmen—but that the utterance had a distinct and intelligible enunciation, or thatwordswere employed that could be recorded. It may be observed, by the way, as Professor Stuart has remarked, that this proves that John wrote down what he saw and heard as soon as practicable, and in the place where he was; and that the supposition of many modern critics, that the Apocalyptic visions were written at Ephesus a considerable time after the visions took place, has no good foundation. ¶And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me.Evidently the voice of God: at all events it came with the clear force of command. ¶Seal up those things.On the wordseal, see Notes onch. v.1. The meaning here is, that he was not to record those things, but what he heard he was to keep to himselfas ifit was placed under a seal which was not to be broken. ¶And write them not.Make no record of them. No reason is mentionedwhythis was not to be done, and none can now be given that can be proved to be the true reason. Vitringa, who regards the seven thunders as referring to the Crusades, supposes the reason to have been that a more full statement would have diverted the mind from the course of the prophetic narrative, and from more important events which pertained to the church, and that nothing occurred in the Crusades which was worthy to be recorded at length:Nec dignæ erant quæ prolixius exponerentur—“for,” he adds, “these expeditions were undertaken with a foolish purpose, and resulted in real detriment to the church,”pp.431, 432. Professor Stuart (vol. ii.pp.204–206) supposes that these “thunders” refer to the destruction of the city and temple of God, and that they were a sublime introduction to the last catastrophe, and that the meaning is not that he should keep “entiresilence,” but only that he should state the circumstances in a general manner, without going into detail. Mede supposes that John was commanded to keep silence because it was designed that the meaning should not then be known, but should be disclosed in future times; Forerius, because it was the design that the wise should be able to understand them, but that they were not to be disclosed to the wicked and profane. Without attempting to examine these and other solutions which have been proposed, the question which, from the course of the exposition, is properly before us is, whether, on the supposition that the voice of the seven thunders referred to the Papal anathemas, a rational and satisfactory solution of the reasons of this silence can be given. Without pretending toknowthe reasons which existed, the following may be referred to as not improbable, and as those which would meet the case:—(1) In these Papal anathemas there was nothing that wasworthyof record; there was nothing that was important as history; there was nothing that communicatedtruth; there was nothing that really indicatedprogressin human affairs. In themselves there was nothing more that deservedrecordthan the acts and doings of wicked men at any time; nothing that fell in with the main design of this book. (2) Such a record would have retarded the progress of the main statements of what was to occur, and would have turned off the attention from these to less important matters. (3) All that was necessary in the case was simply to state that such thunders wereheard: that is, on the supposition that this refers to the Reformation, that that great change in human affairs would not be permitted to occur without opposition and noise—as ifthe thunders of wrath should follow those who were engaged in it. (4) John evidentlymistookthis for a real revelation, or for something that was to be recorded as connected with the divine will in reference to the progress of human affairs. He was naturally about to record this as he did what was uttered by the other voices which he heard; and if he had made the record, it would have been with this mistaken view. There was nothing in the voices, or in what was uttered, that wouldmanifestlymark it as distinct from what had been uttered as coming from God, and he was about to record it under this impression. If thiswasa mistake, and if the record would do anything, as it clearly would, to perpetuate the error, it is easy to see a sufficient reason why the record should not be made. (5) It is remarkable that there was an entire correspondence with this in what occurred in the Reformation; in the fact that Luther and his fellow-labourers were, at first, and for a long time—such was the force of education, and of the habits of reverence for the Papal authority in which they had been reared—disposed to receive the announcements of the Papacy as the oracles of God, and to show to them the deference which was due to divine communications. The language of Luther himself, if the general view here taken is correct, will be the best commentary on the expressions here used. “When I began the affairs of the Indulgences,” says he, “I was a monk, and a most mad Papist. So intoxicated was I, and drenched in Papal dogmas, that I would have been most ready to murder, or assist others in murdering, any person who should have uttered a syllable against the duty of obedience to the pope.” And again: “Certainly at that time I adored him in earnest.” He adds, “How distressed my heart was in that year 1517—how submissive to the hierarchy, not feignedly but really—those little knew who at this day insult the majesty of the pope with so much pride and arrogance. I was ignorant of many things which now, by the grace of God, I understand. I disputed; I was open to conviction; not finding satisfaction in the works of theologians, I wished to consult the living members of the church itself. There were some godly souls that entirely approved my propositions. But I did not consider their authority of weight with me in spiritual concerns. The popes, bishops, cardinals, monks, priests, were the objects of my confidence. After being enabled to answer every objection that could be brought against me from sacred Scripture, one difficulty alone remained, thatthe Church ought to be obeyed. If I had then braved the pope as I now do, I should have expected every hour that the earth would have opened to swallow me up alive, like Korah and Abiram.” It was in this frame of mind that, in the summer of 1518, a few months after the affair with Tetzel, he wrote that memorable letter to the pope, the tenor of which can be judged of by the following sentences: and what could more admirably illustrate the passage before us, on the interpretation suggested, than this language? “Most blessed Father! Prostrate at the feet of thy blessedness I offer myself to thee, with all that I am, and that I have. Kill me, or make me live; call or recall; approve or reprove, as shall please thee. I will acknowledgethy voice as the voice of Christpresiding and speaking in thee.” See the authorities for these quotations in Elliott,vol. ii.pp.116, 117. (6) The commandnotto record what the seven thunders uttered was of the nature of acautionnot to regard what was said in this manner; that is, not to be deceived by these utterances as if they were the voice of God. Thus understood, if this is the proper explanation and application of the passage, it should be regarded as an injunctionnotto regard the decrees and decisions of the Papacy as containing any intimation of the divine will, or as of authority in the church. That this is to be so regarded is the opinion of all Protestants; and if this is so, it is not a forced suppositionthat this might have been intimated by such a symbol as that before us.
4 And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me,321Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.
4.And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices.After he had listened to those thunders; or when they had passed by. ¶I was about to write.That is, he was about to record what was uttered, supposing that that was the design for which he had been made to hear them. From this it would seem that it was not mere thunder—brutum fulmen—but that the utterance had a distinct and intelligible enunciation, or thatwordswere employed that could be recorded. It may be observed, by the way, as Professor Stuart has remarked, that this proves that John wrote down what he saw and heard as soon as practicable, and in the place where he was; and that the supposition of many modern critics, that the Apocalyptic visions were written at Ephesus a considerable time after the visions took place, has no good foundation. ¶And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me.Evidently the voice of God: at all events it came with the clear force of command. ¶Seal up those things.On the wordseal, see Notes onch. v.1. The meaning here is, that he was not to record those things, but what he heard he was to keep to himselfas ifit was placed under a seal which was not to be broken. ¶And write them not.Make no record of them. No reason is mentionedwhythis was not to be done, and none can now be given that can be proved to be the true reason. Vitringa, who regards the seven thunders as referring to the Crusades, supposes the reason to have been that a more full statement would have diverted the mind from the course of the prophetic narrative, and from more important events which pertained to the church, and that nothing occurred in the Crusades which was worthy to be recorded at length:Nec dignæ erant quæ prolixius exponerentur—“for,” he adds, “these expeditions were undertaken with a foolish purpose, and resulted in real detriment to the church,”pp.431, 432. Professor Stuart (vol. ii.pp.204–206) supposes that these “thunders” refer to the destruction of the city and temple of God, and that they were a sublime introduction to the last catastrophe, and that the meaning is not that he should keep “entiresilence,” but only that he should state the circumstances in a general manner, without going into detail. Mede supposes that John was commanded to keep silence because it was designed that the meaning should not then be known, but should be disclosed in future times; Forerius, because it was the design that the wise should be able to understand them, but that they were not to be disclosed to the wicked and profane. Without attempting to examine these and other solutions which have been proposed, the question which, from the course of the exposition, is properly before us is, whether, on the supposition that the voice of the seven thunders referred to the Papal anathemas, a rational and satisfactory solution of the reasons of this silence can be given. Without pretending toknowthe reasons which existed, the following may be referred to as not improbable, and as those which would meet the case:—(1) In these Papal anathemas there was nothing that wasworthyof record; there was nothing that was important as history; there was nothing that communicatedtruth; there was nothing that really indicatedprogressin human affairs. In themselves there was nothing more that deservedrecordthan the acts and doings of wicked men at any time; nothing that fell in with the main design of this book. (2) Such a record would have retarded the progress of the main statements of what was to occur, and would have turned off the attention from these to less important matters. (3) All that was necessary in the case was simply to state that such thunders wereheard: that is, on the supposition that this refers to the Reformation, that that great change in human affairs would not be permitted to occur without opposition and noise—as ifthe thunders of wrath should follow those who were engaged in it. (4) John evidentlymistookthis for a real revelation, or for something that was to be recorded as connected with the divine will in reference to the progress of human affairs. He was naturally about to record this as he did what was uttered by the other voices which he heard; and if he had made the record, it would have been with this mistaken view. There was nothing in the voices, or in what was uttered, that wouldmanifestlymark it as distinct from what had been uttered as coming from God, and he was about to record it under this impression. If thiswasa mistake, and if the record would do anything, as it clearly would, to perpetuate the error, it is easy to see a sufficient reason why the record should not be made. (5) It is remarkable that there was an entire correspondence with this in what occurred in the Reformation; in the fact that Luther and his fellow-labourers were, at first, and for a long time—such was the force of education, and of the habits of reverence for the Papal authority in which they had been reared—disposed to receive the announcements of the Papacy as the oracles of God, and to show to them the deference which was due to divine communications. The language of Luther himself, if the general view here taken is correct, will be the best commentary on the expressions here used. “When I began the affairs of the Indulgences,” says he, “I was a monk, and a most mad Papist. So intoxicated was I, and drenched in Papal dogmas, that I would have been most ready to murder, or assist others in murdering, any person who should have uttered a syllable against the duty of obedience to the pope.” And again: “Certainly at that time I adored him in earnest.” He adds, “How distressed my heart was in that year 1517—how submissive to the hierarchy, not feignedly but really—those little knew who at this day insult the majesty of the pope with so much pride and arrogance. I was ignorant of many things which now, by the grace of God, I understand. I disputed; I was open to conviction; not finding satisfaction in the works of theologians, I wished to consult the living members of the church itself. There were some godly souls that entirely approved my propositions. But I did not consider their authority of weight with me in spiritual concerns. The popes, bishops, cardinals, monks, priests, were the objects of my confidence. After being enabled to answer every objection that could be brought against me from sacred Scripture, one difficulty alone remained, thatthe Church ought to be obeyed. If I had then braved the pope as I now do, I should have expected every hour that the earth would have opened to swallow me up alive, like Korah and Abiram.” It was in this frame of mind that, in the summer of 1518, a few months after the affair with Tetzel, he wrote that memorable letter to the pope, the tenor of which can be judged of by the following sentences: and what could more admirably illustrate the passage before us, on the interpretation suggested, than this language? “Most blessed Father! Prostrate at the feet of thy blessedness I offer myself to thee, with all that I am, and that I have. Kill me, or make me live; call or recall; approve or reprove, as shall please thee. I will acknowledgethy voice as the voice of Christpresiding and speaking in thee.” See the authorities for these quotations in Elliott,vol. ii.pp.116, 117. (6) The commandnotto record what the seven thunders uttered was of the nature of acautionnot to regard what was said in this manner; that is, not to be deceived by these utterances as if they were the voice of God. Thus understood, if this is the proper explanation and application of the passage, it should be regarded as an injunctionnotto regard the decrees and decisions of the Papacy as containing any intimation of the divine will, or as of authority in the church. That this is to be so regarded is the opinion of all Protestants; and if this is so, it is not a forced suppositionthat this might have been intimated by such a symbol as that before us.
5 And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth322lifted up his hand to heaven,5.And the angel which I saw stand,&c.Ver.2. That is, John saw him standing in this posture when he made the oath which he proceeds to record. ¶Lifted up his hand to heaven.The usual attitude in taking an oath, as if one called heaven to witness. SeeGe.xiv.22;De.xxxii.40;Eze.xx.5, 6.Comp.Notes onDa.xii.7.
5 And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth322lifted up his hand to heaven,
5.And the angel which I saw stand,&c.Ver.2. That is, John saw him standing in this posture when he made the oath which he proceeds to record. ¶Lifted up his hand to heaven.The usual attitude in taking an oath, as if one called heaven to witness. SeeGe.xiv.22;De.xxxii.40;Eze.xx.5, 6.Comp.Notes onDa.xii.7.
6 And sware by323him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein,324that there should be time no longer:6.And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever.By the ever-living God: a form of an oath in extensive use now. The essential idea in such an oath is an appeal to God; a solemn reference to Him as a witness; an utterance in the presence of Him who is acquainted with the truth or falsehood of what is said, and who will punish him who appeals to him falsely. It is usual, in such an oath, in order to give to it greater solemnity, to refer to someattributeof God, or something in the divine character on which the mind would rest at the time, as tending to make it more impressive. Thus, in the passage before us, the reference is to God as “ever-living;” that is, he is now a witness, and he ever will be; he has now the power to detect and punish, and he ever will have the same power. ¶Who created heaven and the things that therein are,&c.Who is the Maker of all things in heaven, on the earth, and in the sea; that is, throughout the universe. The design of referring to these things here is that which is just specified—to give increased solemnity to the oath by a particular reference to some one of the attributes of God. With this view nothing could be more appropriate than to refer to him as the Creator of the universe—denoting his infinite power, his right to rule and control all things. ¶That there should be time no longer.This is a very important expression, as it is the substance of what the angel affirmed in so solemn a manner; and as the interpretation of the whole passage depends on it. It seems now to be generally agreed among critics that our translation does not give the true sense, inasmuch (a) as that was not the close of human affairs, and (b) as he proceeds to state whatwouldoccurafterthat. Accordingly, different versions of the passage have been proposed. Professor Stuart renders it, “that delay shall be no longer.”Mr.Elliott, “that the time shall not yet be; but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, whensoever he may be about to sound, then the mystery of God shall be finished.”Mr.Lord, “that the time shall not be yet, but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel,”&c.Andrew Fuller (Works,vol. vi.p.113), “there should be no delay.” SoDr.Gill.Mr.Daubuz, “the time shall not be yet.” Vitringa (p.432),tempus non fore amplius, “time shall be no more.” He explains it (p.433) as meaning, “not that this is to be takenabsolutely, as if at the sounding of the seventh trumpet all things were then to terminate, and the glorious epiphany—ἐπιφάνεια(or manifestation of Jesus Christ)—was then to occur, who would put an end to all the afflictions of his church; but in a limited sense—restricte—as meaning that there would be nodelaybetween the sounding of the seventh trumpet and the fulfilment of the prophecies.” The sense of this passage is to be determined by the meaning of the words and the connection. (a) The wordtime—χρόνος—is the common Greek word to denotetime, and may be applied to time in general, or to any specified time or period. See Robinson,Lex.sub voce, (a,b). In the word itself there is nothing to determine its particular signification here. It might refer either to time in general, or to the time under consideration, and which was the subject of the prophecy. Which of these is the true idea is to be ascertained by the other circumstances referred to. It should be added, however, that theworddoes not of itself denotedelay, and is never used to denote that directly. It can onlydenotethat becausedelayoccupies or consumestime, but this sense of the noun is not found in the New Testament. It isfound, however, in the verbχρονίζω, to linger, to delay, to be long in coming,Mat.xxv.5;Lu.i.21. (b) The absence of the article—“time,” not “thetime”—would naturally give it a general signification, unless there was something in the connection to limit it to some well-known period under consideration. See Notes onch. viii.2;x.3. In this latter view, if the time referred to would be sufficiently definitewithoutthe article, the article need not be inserted. This is such a case, and comes under the rule for the omission of the article as laid down by Bishop Middleton, parti.ch. iii.The principle is, that when the copula, or verb connecting the subject and predicate, is the verb substantive, then the article is omitted. “To affirm the existence,” says he, “of that of which the existence is already assumed, would be superfluous; to deny it, would be contradictory and absurd.” As applicable to the case before us, the meaning of this rule would be, that the nature of the time here referred to is implied in the use of the substantive verb (ἔσται), and that consequently it is not necessary to specify it. All that needs to be said on this point is, that, on the supposition that John referred to a specified time, instead of time in general, it would not be necessary, under this rule, to insert the article. The reference would be understood without it, and the insertion would be unnecessary. This is substantially the reasoning ofMr.Elliott (vol. ii.p.123), and it is submitted for what it is worth. My own knowledge of the usages of the Greek article is too limited to justify me in pronouncing an opinion on the subject, but the authorities are such as to authorize the assertion that, on the supposition that a particular well-known period were here referred to, the insertion of the article would not be necessary. (c) The particle rendered “longer”—ἔτι)—“time shall be nolonger”—means properly, according to Robinson (Lex.),yet,still; implying (1)duration—as spoken of the present time; of the present in allusion to the past, and, with a negative,no more,no longer; (2) implying accession, addition,yet,more,farther,besides. According to Buttmann,Gram.§149,vol. i.p.430, it means, when alone, “yet still, yet farther; and with a negative, no more, no farther.” The particle occurs often in the New Testament, as may be seen in theConcordance. It is more frequently rendered “yet” than by any other word (comp.Mat.xii.46;xvii.5;xix.20;xxvi.47;xxvii.63;Mar.v.35;viii.17;xii.6;xiv.43—and so in the other Gospels, the Acts, and the Epistles); in all, fifty times. In the book of Revelation it is only once rendered “yet,”ch. vi.11, but is rendered “more” inch. iii.12;vii.16;ix.12;xii.8;xviii.21, 22 (three times), 23 (twice);xx.3;xxi.1, 4 (twice); “longer” inch. x.6; “still” inch. xxii.11 (four times). The usage, therefore, will justify the rendering of the word by “yet,” and in connection with the negative, “not yet”—meaning that the thing referred to would not occur immediately, but would be hereafter. In regard to the general meaning, then, of this passage in its connection, we may remark, (a) That it cannot mean, literally, that there would betimeno longer, or that the world would then come to an end absolutely, for the speaker proceeds to disclose events that would occur after that, extending far into the future (ch. x.11), and the detail that follows (ch. xi.) before the sounding of the seventh trumpet is such as to occupy a considerable period, and the seventh trumpet is also yet to sound. No fair construction of the language, therefore, would require us to understand this as meaning that the affairs of the world were then to terminate. (b) The connection, then, apart from the question of grammatical usage, will require some such construction as that above suggested—“that the time,” to wit, some certain, known, or designated time, “would not beyet,” but would be in some future period; that is, as specified,ver.7, “in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound.”Then“the mystery of God would be finished,” and the affairs of the world would be put on their permanent footing. (c) This would imply that, at the time when the angel appeared, or in the time to which he refers, there would be some expectation or general belief that the “mystery” wasthento be finished, and that the affairs of the world were to come to an end. The proper interpretation would lead us to suppose that there would be so general an expectation of this, as to make the solemn affirmation of the angel proper to correct a prevailing opinion, and to show that the right interpretation was not put on whatseemed to be the tendency of things. (d) As a matter of fact, we find that this expectation did actually exist at the time of the Reformation; that such an interpretation was put on the prophecies, and on the events that occurred; and that the impression that the Messiah was about to come, and the reign of saints about to commence, was so strong as to justify some interference, like the solemn oath of the angel, to correct the misapprehension. It is true that this impression had existed in former times, and even in the early ages of the church; but, as a matter of fact, it was true, and eminently true, in the time of the Reformation, and there was, on many accounts, a strong tendency to that form of belief. The Reformers, in interpreting the prophecies, learned to connect the downfall of the Papacy with the coming of Christ, and with his universal reign upon the earth; and as they saw the evidences of the approach of the former, they naturally anticipated the latter as about to occur.Comp.Da.ii.34;xii.11;2 Th.ii.3, 8. The anticipation that the Lord Jesus was about to come; that the affairs of the world, in the present form, were to be wound up; that the reign of the saints would soon commence; and that the permanent kingdom of righteousness would be established, became almost the current belief of the Reformers, and was frequently expressed in their writings. Thus Luther, in the year 1520, in his answer to the pope’s bull of excommunication, expresses his anticipations: “Our Lord Jesus Christ yet liveth and reigneth; who, I firmly trust, will shortly come, and slay with the spirit of his mouth, and destroy with the brightness of his coming, that Man of Sin” (MerleD’Aubig.,vol. ii.p.166). After being summoned before the Diet at Worms, and after condemnation had been pronounced on him by the emperor, he fell back for comfort on the same joyous expectation. “For this once,” he said, “the Jews, as on the crucifixion-day, may sing their pæan; but Easter will come for us, and then we shall sing Hallelujah” (D’Aubig.,vol. ii.p.275). The next year, writing to Staupitz, he made a solemn appeal against his abandoning the Reformation, by reference to the sure and advancing fulfilment of Daniel’s prophecy. “My father,” said he, “the abominations of the pope, with his whole kingdom, must be destroyed; and the Lord does this without hand, by theWordalone. The subject exceeds all human comprehension. I cherish the best hopes” (Milner,p.692). In 1523 he thus, in a similar strain, expresses his hopes: “The kingdom of Antichrist, according to the prophet Daniel, must be brokenwithout hands; that is, the Scriptures will be understood by and by; and every one will preach against Papal tyranny, from the Word of God, until the Man of Sin is deserted of all, and dies of himself” (Milner,p.796). The same sentiments respecting the approach of the end of the world were entertained by Melancthon. In commenting on the passage in Daniel relating to the “little horn,” he thus refers to an argument which has been prevalent: “The words of the prophet Elias should be marked by every one, and inscribed upon our walls, and on the entrances of our houses. Six thousand years shall the world stand, and after that be destroyed; two thousand years without the law; two thousand years under the law of Moses; two thousand years under the Messiah; and if any of these years are not fulfilled, they will be shortened (a shortening intimated by Christ also, on account of our sins).” The following manuscript addition to this argument has been found in Melancthon’s hand, in Luther’s own copy of the German Bible:—“WrittenA.D.1557, and from the creation of the world, 5519; from which number we may see that this aged world is not far from its end.” So also the British Reformers believed. Thus Bishop Latimer: “Let us cry to God day and night—Most merciful Father, let thy kingdom come!St.Paul saith, The Lord will not come till the swerving from the faith cometh (2 Th.ii.3); which thing is already done and past. Antichrist is already known throughout all the world. Wherefore the day is not far off.” Then, reverting to the consideration of the age of the world, as Melancthon had done, he says, “The world was ordained to endure, as all learned ones affirm, 6000 years. Now of that number there be past 5552 years, so that there is no more left but 448 years. Furthermore, those days shall be shortened for the elect’s sake. Therefore, all those excellent and learned men, whom without doubt God hath sent into the world in these last days to give the world warning, do gather out of sacred Scripturethat the last day cannot be far off.” So again, in a sermon on the nearness of the second advent, he says, “So that peradventure it may come in my days, old as I am, or in my children’s days.” Indeed, it is well known that this was a prevalent opinion among the Reformers; and this fact will show with what propriety, if the passage before us wasdesignedto refer to the Reformation, this solemn declaration of the angel was made, that the “time wouldnot be yet”—that those anticipations which would spring up from the nature of the case, and from the interpretations which would be put on whatseemedto be the obvious sense of the prophecies, were unfounded, and that a considerable time must yet intervene before the events would be consummated. (e) The proper sense of this passage, then, according to the above interpretation would be—“And the angel lifted up his hand to heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, That the time should not yet be; but, in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God shall be finished.” Appearances, indeed, would then indicate that the affairs of the world were to be wound up, and that the prophecies respecting the end of the world were about to be fulfilled: but the angel solemnly swears “by Him who lives for ever and ever”—and whose reign therefore extends through all the changes on the earth—“by Him who is the Creator of all things,” and whose purpose alone can determine when the end shall be, that the time would not beyet. Those cherished expectations would not yet be realized, but there was a series of important events to intervene before the end would come. Then—at the time when the seventh angel should sound—would be the consummation of all things.
6 And sware by323him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein,324that there should be time no longer:
6.And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever.By the ever-living God: a form of an oath in extensive use now. The essential idea in such an oath is an appeal to God; a solemn reference to Him as a witness; an utterance in the presence of Him who is acquainted with the truth or falsehood of what is said, and who will punish him who appeals to him falsely. It is usual, in such an oath, in order to give to it greater solemnity, to refer to someattributeof God, or something in the divine character on which the mind would rest at the time, as tending to make it more impressive. Thus, in the passage before us, the reference is to God as “ever-living;” that is, he is now a witness, and he ever will be; he has now the power to detect and punish, and he ever will have the same power. ¶Who created heaven and the things that therein are,&c.Who is the Maker of all things in heaven, on the earth, and in the sea; that is, throughout the universe. The design of referring to these things here is that which is just specified—to give increased solemnity to the oath by a particular reference to some one of the attributes of God. With this view nothing could be more appropriate than to refer to him as the Creator of the universe—denoting his infinite power, his right to rule and control all things. ¶That there should be time no longer.This is a very important expression, as it is the substance of what the angel affirmed in so solemn a manner; and as the interpretation of the whole passage depends on it. It seems now to be generally agreed among critics that our translation does not give the true sense, inasmuch (a) as that was not the close of human affairs, and (b) as he proceeds to state whatwouldoccurafterthat. Accordingly, different versions of the passage have been proposed. Professor Stuart renders it, “that delay shall be no longer.”Mr.Elliott, “that the time shall not yet be; but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, whensoever he may be about to sound, then the mystery of God shall be finished.”Mr.Lord, “that the time shall not be yet, but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel,”&c.Andrew Fuller (Works,vol. vi.p.113), “there should be no delay.” SoDr.Gill.Mr.Daubuz, “the time shall not be yet.” Vitringa (p.432),tempus non fore amplius, “time shall be no more.” He explains it (p.433) as meaning, “not that this is to be takenabsolutely, as if at the sounding of the seventh trumpet all things were then to terminate, and the glorious epiphany—ἐπιφάνεια(or manifestation of Jesus Christ)—was then to occur, who would put an end to all the afflictions of his church; but in a limited sense—restricte—as meaning that there would be nodelaybetween the sounding of the seventh trumpet and the fulfilment of the prophecies.” The sense of this passage is to be determined by the meaning of the words and the connection. (a) The wordtime—χρόνος—is the common Greek word to denotetime, and may be applied to time in general, or to any specified time or period. See Robinson,Lex.sub voce, (a,b). In the word itself there is nothing to determine its particular signification here. It might refer either to time in general, or to the time under consideration, and which was the subject of the prophecy. Which of these is the true idea is to be ascertained by the other circumstances referred to. It should be added, however, that theworddoes not of itself denotedelay, and is never used to denote that directly. It can onlydenotethat becausedelayoccupies or consumestime, but this sense of the noun is not found in the New Testament. It isfound, however, in the verbχρονίζω, to linger, to delay, to be long in coming,Mat.xxv.5;Lu.i.21. (b) The absence of the article—“time,” not “thetime”—would naturally give it a general signification, unless there was something in the connection to limit it to some well-known period under consideration. See Notes onch. viii.2;x.3. In this latter view, if the time referred to would be sufficiently definitewithoutthe article, the article need not be inserted. This is such a case, and comes under the rule for the omission of the article as laid down by Bishop Middleton, parti.ch. iii.The principle is, that when the copula, or verb connecting the subject and predicate, is the verb substantive, then the article is omitted. “To affirm the existence,” says he, “of that of which the existence is already assumed, would be superfluous; to deny it, would be contradictory and absurd.” As applicable to the case before us, the meaning of this rule would be, that the nature of the time here referred to is implied in the use of the substantive verb (ἔσται), and that consequently it is not necessary to specify it. All that needs to be said on this point is, that, on the supposition that John referred to a specified time, instead of time in general, it would not be necessary, under this rule, to insert the article. The reference would be understood without it, and the insertion would be unnecessary. This is substantially the reasoning ofMr.Elliott (vol. ii.p.123), and it is submitted for what it is worth. My own knowledge of the usages of the Greek article is too limited to justify me in pronouncing an opinion on the subject, but the authorities are such as to authorize the assertion that, on the supposition that a particular well-known period were here referred to, the insertion of the article would not be necessary. (c) The particle rendered “longer”—ἔτι)—“time shall be nolonger”—means properly, according to Robinson (Lex.),yet,still; implying (1)duration—as spoken of the present time; of the present in allusion to the past, and, with a negative,no more,no longer; (2) implying accession, addition,yet,more,farther,besides. According to Buttmann,Gram.§149,vol. i.p.430, it means, when alone, “yet still, yet farther; and with a negative, no more, no farther.” The particle occurs often in the New Testament, as may be seen in theConcordance. It is more frequently rendered “yet” than by any other word (comp.Mat.xii.46;xvii.5;xix.20;xxvi.47;xxvii.63;Mar.v.35;viii.17;xii.6;xiv.43—and so in the other Gospels, the Acts, and the Epistles); in all, fifty times. In the book of Revelation it is only once rendered “yet,”ch. vi.11, but is rendered “more” inch. iii.12;vii.16;ix.12;xii.8;xviii.21, 22 (three times), 23 (twice);xx.3;xxi.1, 4 (twice); “longer” inch. x.6; “still” inch. xxii.11 (four times). The usage, therefore, will justify the rendering of the word by “yet,” and in connection with the negative, “not yet”—meaning that the thing referred to would not occur immediately, but would be hereafter. In regard to the general meaning, then, of this passage in its connection, we may remark, (a) That it cannot mean, literally, that there would betimeno longer, or that the world would then come to an end absolutely, for the speaker proceeds to disclose events that would occur after that, extending far into the future (ch. x.11), and the detail that follows (ch. xi.) before the sounding of the seventh trumpet is such as to occupy a considerable period, and the seventh trumpet is also yet to sound. No fair construction of the language, therefore, would require us to understand this as meaning that the affairs of the world were then to terminate. (b) The connection, then, apart from the question of grammatical usage, will require some such construction as that above suggested—“that the time,” to wit, some certain, known, or designated time, “would not beyet,” but would be in some future period; that is, as specified,ver.7, “in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound.”Then“the mystery of God would be finished,” and the affairs of the world would be put on their permanent footing. (c) This would imply that, at the time when the angel appeared, or in the time to which he refers, there would be some expectation or general belief that the “mystery” wasthento be finished, and that the affairs of the world were to come to an end. The proper interpretation would lead us to suppose that there would be so general an expectation of this, as to make the solemn affirmation of the angel proper to correct a prevailing opinion, and to show that the right interpretation was not put on whatseemed to be the tendency of things. (d) As a matter of fact, we find that this expectation did actually exist at the time of the Reformation; that such an interpretation was put on the prophecies, and on the events that occurred; and that the impression that the Messiah was about to come, and the reign of saints about to commence, was so strong as to justify some interference, like the solemn oath of the angel, to correct the misapprehension. It is true that this impression had existed in former times, and even in the early ages of the church; but, as a matter of fact, it was true, and eminently true, in the time of the Reformation, and there was, on many accounts, a strong tendency to that form of belief. The Reformers, in interpreting the prophecies, learned to connect the downfall of the Papacy with the coming of Christ, and with his universal reign upon the earth; and as they saw the evidences of the approach of the former, they naturally anticipated the latter as about to occur.Comp.Da.ii.34;xii.11;2 Th.ii.3, 8. The anticipation that the Lord Jesus was about to come; that the affairs of the world, in the present form, were to be wound up; that the reign of the saints would soon commence; and that the permanent kingdom of righteousness would be established, became almost the current belief of the Reformers, and was frequently expressed in their writings. Thus Luther, in the year 1520, in his answer to the pope’s bull of excommunication, expresses his anticipations: “Our Lord Jesus Christ yet liveth and reigneth; who, I firmly trust, will shortly come, and slay with the spirit of his mouth, and destroy with the brightness of his coming, that Man of Sin” (MerleD’Aubig.,vol. ii.p.166). After being summoned before the Diet at Worms, and after condemnation had been pronounced on him by the emperor, he fell back for comfort on the same joyous expectation. “For this once,” he said, “the Jews, as on the crucifixion-day, may sing their pæan; but Easter will come for us, and then we shall sing Hallelujah” (D’Aubig.,vol. ii.p.275). The next year, writing to Staupitz, he made a solemn appeal against his abandoning the Reformation, by reference to the sure and advancing fulfilment of Daniel’s prophecy. “My father,” said he, “the abominations of the pope, with his whole kingdom, must be destroyed; and the Lord does this without hand, by theWordalone. The subject exceeds all human comprehension. I cherish the best hopes” (Milner,p.692). In 1523 he thus, in a similar strain, expresses his hopes: “The kingdom of Antichrist, according to the prophet Daniel, must be brokenwithout hands; that is, the Scriptures will be understood by and by; and every one will preach against Papal tyranny, from the Word of God, until the Man of Sin is deserted of all, and dies of himself” (Milner,p.796). The same sentiments respecting the approach of the end of the world were entertained by Melancthon. In commenting on the passage in Daniel relating to the “little horn,” he thus refers to an argument which has been prevalent: “The words of the prophet Elias should be marked by every one, and inscribed upon our walls, and on the entrances of our houses. Six thousand years shall the world stand, and after that be destroyed; two thousand years without the law; two thousand years under the law of Moses; two thousand years under the Messiah; and if any of these years are not fulfilled, they will be shortened (a shortening intimated by Christ also, on account of our sins).” The following manuscript addition to this argument has been found in Melancthon’s hand, in Luther’s own copy of the German Bible:—“WrittenA.D.1557, and from the creation of the world, 5519; from which number we may see that this aged world is not far from its end.” So also the British Reformers believed. Thus Bishop Latimer: “Let us cry to God day and night—Most merciful Father, let thy kingdom come!St.Paul saith, The Lord will not come till the swerving from the faith cometh (2 Th.ii.3); which thing is already done and past. Antichrist is already known throughout all the world. Wherefore the day is not far off.” Then, reverting to the consideration of the age of the world, as Melancthon had done, he says, “The world was ordained to endure, as all learned ones affirm, 6000 years. Now of that number there be past 5552 years, so that there is no more left but 448 years. Furthermore, those days shall be shortened for the elect’s sake. Therefore, all those excellent and learned men, whom without doubt God hath sent into the world in these last days to give the world warning, do gather out of sacred Scripturethat the last day cannot be far off.” So again, in a sermon on the nearness of the second advent, he says, “So that peradventure it may come in my days, old as I am, or in my children’s days.” Indeed, it is well known that this was a prevalent opinion among the Reformers; and this fact will show with what propriety, if the passage before us wasdesignedto refer to the Reformation, this solemn declaration of the angel was made, that the “time wouldnot be yet”—that those anticipations which would spring up from the nature of the case, and from the interpretations which would be put on whatseemedto be the obvious sense of the prophecies, were unfounded, and that a considerable time must yet intervene before the events would be consummated. (e) The proper sense of this passage, then, according to the above interpretation would be—“And the angel lifted up his hand to heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, That the time should not yet be; but, in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God shall be finished.” Appearances, indeed, would then indicate that the affairs of the world were to be wound up, and that the prophecies respecting the end of the world were about to be fulfilled: but the angel solemnly swears “by Him who lives for ever and ever”—and whose reign therefore extends through all the changes on the earth—“by Him who is the Creator of all things,” and whose purpose alone can determine when the end shall be, that the time would not beyet. Those cherished expectations would not yet be realized, but there was a series of important events to intervene before the end would come. Then—at the time when the seventh angel should sound—would be the consummation of all things.
7 But in the days of the voice of the325seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the326mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.7.But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel.The days in the period of time embraced by the sounding of the seventh trumpet. That is, the affairs of this world would not be consummated in that period embraced in the sounding of the sixth trumpet, but in that embraced in the sounding of the seventh and last of the trumpets.Comp.ch. xi.15–19. ¶When he shall begin to sound.That is, the events referred to willcommenceat the period when the angel shallbeginto sound. It will not be merelyduringorinthat period, but the sounding of the trumpet, and the beginning of those events, will be contemporaneous. In other words, then would commence the reign of righteousness—the kingdom of the Messiah—the dominion of the saints on the earth. ¶The mystery of God should be finished.On the meaning of the wordmystery, see Notes onEp.i.9. It means here, as elsewhere in the New Testament, the purpose or truth of God which had been concealed, and which had not before been communicated to man. Here the particular reference is to the divine purpose which had been long concealed respecting the destiny of the world, or respecting the setting up of his kingdom, but which had been progressively unfolded by the prophets. That purpose would be “finished,” or consummated, in the time when the seventh angel should begin to sound. Then all the “mystery” would be revealed; the plan would be unfolded; the divine purpose, so long concealed, would be manifested, and the kingdom of the Messiah and of the saints would be set up on the earth. Under that period, the affairs of the world would be ultimately wound up, and the whole work of redemption completed. ¶As he hath declared to his servants the prophets.As he has from time to time disclosed his purposes to mankind through the prophets. The reference here is, doubtless, to the prophets of the Old Testament, thoughthe languagewould include all who at any time had uttered any predictions respecting the final condition of the world. These prophecies had been scattered along through many ages; but the angel says that at that time all that had been said respecting the setting up of the kingdom of God, the reign of the saints, and the dominion of the Redeemer on the earth, would be accomplished. See Notes onch. xi.15. From the passage thus explained, if the interpretation is correct, it will follow that the sounding of the seventh trumpet (ch. xi.15–18) is properly the conclusion ofthis series of visions, and denotes a “catastrophe” in the action, and that what follows is the commencement of a new series of visions. This is clear, because (a) the whole seven seals, comprising the seven trumpets of the seventh seal, must embraceoneview of all coming events—since this embraced all that there was in the volume seen in the hand of him that sat on the throne; (b) this is properly implied in the word here rendered “should be finished”—τελέσθη—the fair meaning of which is, that the “mystery” here referred to—the hitherto unrevealed purpose or plan of God—would, under that trumpet, be consummated or complete (see the conclusive reasoning ofProf.Stuart on the meaning of the word,vol. ii.p.210, foot-note); and (c) it will be found in the course of the exposition that, atch. xi.19, there commences a new series of visions, embracing a view of the world in itsreligiousaspect, orecclesiasticalcharacteristics, reaching down to the same consummation, and stating at the close of that (ch. xx.) more fully what is here (ch. xi.15–18) designated in a more summary way—the final triumph of religion, and the establishment of the kingdom of the saints. The present series of visions (ch. v.–xi.18) relates rather to the outward or secular changes which would occur on the earth, which were to affect the welfare of the church, to the final consummation; the next series (ch. xi.19;xii.–xx.) relates to the church internally, the rise of Antichrist, and the effect of the rise of that formidable power on the internal history of the church, to the time of the overthrow of that power, and the triumphant establishment of the kingdom of God. See the Analysis of the work,Intro.§5. In other words, this series of visions, terminating atch. xi.18, refers, as the leading thing, to what would occur in relation to the Roman empire considered as a secular power, in which the church would be interested; that which follows (ch. xi.19;xii.–xx.) to the Roman power considered as a great apostasy, and setting up a mighty and most oppressive domination over the true church, manifested in deep corruption and bloody persecutions, running on in its disastrous influence on the world, until that power should be destroyed, Babylon fall, and the reign of the saints be introduced.
7 But in the days of the voice of the325seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the326mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.
7.But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel.The days in the period of time embraced by the sounding of the seventh trumpet. That is, the affairs of this world would not be consummated in that period embraced in the sounding of the sixth trumpet, but in that embraced in the sounding of the seventh and last of the trumpets.Comp.ch. xi.15–19. ¶When he shall begin to sound.That is, the events referred to willcommenceat the period when the angel shallbeginto sound. It will not be merelyduringorinthat period, but the sounding of the trumpet, and the beginning of those events, will be contemporaneous. In other words, then would commence the reign of righteousness—the kingdom of the Messiah—the dominion of the saints on the earth. ¶The mystery of God should be finished.On the meaning of the wordmystery, see Notes onEp.i.9. It means here, as elsewhere in the New Testament, the purpose or truth of God which had been concealed, and which had not before been communicated to man. Here the particular reference is to the divine purpose which had been long concealed respecting the destiny of the world, or respecting the setting up of his kingdom, but which had been progressively unfolded by the prophets. That purpose would be “finished,” or consummated, in the time when the seventh angel should begin to sound. Then all the “mystery” would be revealed; the plan would be unfolded; the divine purpose, so long concealed, would be manifested, and the kingdom of the Messiah and of the saints would be set up on the earth. Under that period, the affairs of the world would be ultimately wound up, and the whole work of redemption completed. ¶As he hath declared to his servants the prophets.As he has from time to time disclosed his purposes to mankind through the prophets. The reference here is, doubtless, to the prophets of the Old Testament, thoughthe languagewould include all who at any time had uttered any predictions respecting the final condition of the world. These prophecies had been scattered along through many ages; but the angel says that at that time all that had been said respecting the setting up of the kingdom of God, the reign of the saints, and the dominion of the Redeemer on the earth, would be accomplished. See Notes onch. xi.15. From the passage thus explained, if the interpretation is correct, it will follow that the sounding of the seventh trumpet (ch. xi.15–18) is properly the conclusion ofthis series of visions, and denotes a “catastrophe” in the action, and that what follows is the commencement of a new series of visions. This is clear, because (a) the whole seven seals, comprising the seven trumpets of the seventh seal, must embraceoneview of all coming events—since this embraced all that there was in the volume seen in the hand of him that sat on the throne; (b) this is properly implied in the word here rendered “should be finished”—τελέσθη—the fair meaning of which is, that the “mystery” here referred to—the hitherto unrevealed purpose or plan of God—would, under that trumpet, be consummated or complete (see the conclusive reasoning ofProf.Stuart on the meaning of the word,vol. ii.p.210, foot-note); and (c) it will be found in the course of the exposition that, atch. xi.19, there commences a new series of visions, embracing a view of the world in itsreligiousaspect, orecclesiasticalcharacteristics, reaching down to the same consummation, and stating at the close of that (ch. xx.) more fully what is here (ch. xi.15–18) designated in a more summary way—the final triumph of religion, and the establishment of the kingdom of the saints. The present series of visions (ch. v.–xi.18) relates rather to the outward or secular changes which would occur on the earth, which were to affect the welfare of the church, to the final consummation; the next series (ch. xi.19;xii.–xx.) relates to the church internally, the rise of Antichrist, and the effect of the rise of that formidable power on the internal history of the church, to the time of the overthrow of that power, and the triumphant establishment of the kingdom of God. See the Analysis of the work,Intro.§5. In other words, this series of visions, terminating atch. xi.18, refers, as the leading thing, to what would occur in relation to the Roman empire considered as a secular power, in which the church would be interested; that which follows (ch. xi.19;xii.–xx.) to the Roman power considered as a great apostasy, and setting up a mighty and most oppressive domination over the true church, manifested in deep corruption and bloody persecutions, running on in its disastrous influence on the world, until that power should be destroyed, Babylon fall, and the reign of the saints be introduced.