8 I72am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come,73the Almighty.8.I am Alpha and Omega.These are the first and the last letters of the Greek alphabet, and denote properly the first and the last. So inRe.xxii.13, where the two expressions are united, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.” So inch. i.17, the speaker says of himself, “I am the first and the last.” Among the Jewish Rabbins it was common to use the first and the last letters of the Hebrew alphabet to denote the whole of anything, from beginning to end. Thus it is said, “Adam transgressed the whole law, fromאtoתּ”—from Aleph to Tâv. “Abraham kept the whole law, fromאtoתּ.” The language here is that which would properly denoteeternityin the being to whom it is applied, and could be used in reference to no one but the true God. It means that he is the beginning and the end of all things; that he was at the commencement, and will be at the close; and it is thus equivalent to saying that he has always existed, and that he will always exist.Comp.Is.xli.4, “I the Lord, the first, and with the last;”—xliv.6, “I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God;”—xlviii.12, “I am he; I am the first, I also am the last.” There can be no doubt that the language here would be naturally understood as implying divinity, and it could be properly applied to no one but the true God. The obvious interpretation here would be to apply this to the Lord Jesus; for (a) it is he who is spoken of in the verses preceding, and (b) there can be no doubt that the same language is applied to him inver.11. As there is, however, a difference of reading in this place in the Greek text, and as it cannot be absolutely certain that the writer meant to refer to the Lord Jesus specificallyhere, this cannot be adduced with propriety as a proof-text to demonstrate his divinity. ManyMSS., instead of “Lord,”κύριος, read “God,”θεὸς; and this reading is adopted by Griesbach, Tittman, and Hahn, and is now regarded as the correct reading. There is no real incongruity in supposing, also, that the writer here meant to refer to God as such, since the introduction of a reference to him would not be inappropriate to his manifest design. Besides, a portion of the language here used, “which is, and was, and is to come,” is that which would more naturally suggest a reference to God as such, than to the Lord Jesus Christ. Seever.4. Theobjectfor which this passage referring to the “first and the last—to him who was, and is, and is to come,” is introduced here evidently is, to show that as he was clothed with omnipotence, and would continue to exist through all ages to come as he had existed in all ages past, there could be no doubt about his ability to execute all which it is said he would execute. ¶Saith the Lord.Or, saith God, according to what is now regarded as the correct reading. ¶Which is, and which was,&c.See Notes onver.4. ¶The Almighty.An appellation often applied to God, meaning that he has all power, and used here to denote that he is able to accomplish what is disclosed in this book.
8 I72am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come,73the Almighty.
8.I am Alpha and Omega.These are the first and the last letters of the Greek alphabet, and denote properly the first and the last. So inRe.xxii.13, where the two expressions are united, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.” So inch. i.17, the speaker says of himself, “I am the first and the last.” Among the Jewish Rabbins it was common to use the first and the last letters of the Hebrew alphabet to denote the whole of anything, from beginning to end. Thus it is said, “Adam transgressed the whole law, fromאtoתּ”—from Aleph to Tâv. “Abraham kept the whole law, fromאtoתּ.” The language here is that which would properly denoteeternityin the being to whom it is applied, and could be used in reference to no one but the true God. It means that he is the beginning and the end of all things; that he was at the commencement, and will be at the close; and it is thus equivalent to saying that he has always existed, and that he will always exist.Comp.Is.xli.4, “I the Lord, the first, and with the last;”—xliv.6, “I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God;”—xlviii.12, “I am he; I am the first, I also am the last.” There can be no doubt that the language here would be naturally understood as implying divinity, and it could be properly applied to no one but the true God. The obvious interpretation here would be to apply this to the Lord Jesus; for (a) it is he who is spoken of in the verses preceding, and (b) there can be no doubt that the same language is applied to him inver.11. As there is, however, a difference of reading in this place in the Greek text, and as it cannot be absolutely certain that the writer meant to refer to the Lord Jesus specificallyhere, this cannot be adduced with propriety as a proof-text to demonstrate his divinity. ManyMSS., instead of “Lord,”κύριος, read “God,”θεὸς; and this reading is adopted by Griesbach, Tittman, and Hahn, and is now regarded as the correct reading. There is no real incongruity in supposing, also, that the writer here meant to refer to God as such, since the introduction of a reference to him would not be inappropriate to his manifest design. Besides, a portion of the language here used, “which is, and was, and is to come,” is that which would more naturally suggest a reference to God as such, than to the Lord Jesus Christ. Seever.4. Theobjectfor which this passage referring to the “first and the last—to him who was, and is, and is to come,” is introduced here evidently is, to show that as he was clothed with omnipotence, and would continue to exist through all ages to come as he had existed in all ages past, there could be no doubt about his ability to execute all which it is said he would execute. ¶Saith the Lord.Or, saith God, according to what is now regarded as the correct reading. ¶Which is, and which was,&c.See Notes onver.4. ¶The Almighty.An appellation often applied to God, meaning that he has all power, and used here to denote that he is able to accomplish what is disclosed in this book.
9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.9.I John, who also am your brother.Your Christian brother; who am a fellow-Christian with you. The reference here is doubtless to the members of the seven churches in Asia, to whom the epistles in the following chapters were addressed, and to whom the whole book seems to have been sent. In the previous verse, the writer had closed the salutation, and he here commences a description of the circumstances under which the vision appeared to him. He was in a lonely island, to which he had been banished on account of his attachment to religion; he was in a state of high spiritual enjoyment on the day devoted to the sacred remembrance of the Redeemer; he suddenly heard a voice behind him, and turning saw the Son of man himself, in glorious form, in the midst of seven golden lamps, and fell at his feet as dead. ¶And companion in tribulation.Your partner in affliction. That is, he and they were suffering substantially the same kind of trials on account of their religion. It is evident from this that some form of persecution was then raging, in which they were also sufferers, though in their case it did not lead to banishment. The leader, the apostle, the aged and influential preacher, was banished; but there were many other forms of trial which they might be called to endure who remained at home. What they were we have not the means of knowing with certainty. ¶And in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ.The meaning of this passage is, that he, and those whom he addressed, were not only companions in affliction, but were fellow-partners in the kingdom of the Redeemer; that is, they shared the honour and the privileges pertaining to that kingdom; and that they were fellow-partners in thepatienceof Jesus Christ, that is, in enduring with patience whatever might follow from their being his friends and followers. The general idea is, that alike in privileges and sufferings they were united. They shared alike in the results of their attachment to the Saviour. ¶Was in the isle that is called Patmos.Patmos is one of the cluster of islands in the Ægean Sea anciently called theSporades. It lies between the island of Icaria and the promontory of Miletus. It is merely mentioned by the ancient geographers (Plin.Hist. Nat.iv.23; Strabo,x.488). It is now called Patino or Patmoso. It is some six or eight miles in length, and not more than a mile in breadth, being about fifteen miles in circumference. It has neither trees nor rivers, nor has it any land for cultivation, except some little nooks among the ledges of rocks. On approaching the island, the coast is high, and consists of a succession of capes, which form so many ports, some of which are excellent. The only one in use, however, is a deep bay, sheltered by high mountains on every side but one, where it is protected by a projecting cape. The town attached to this port is situated upon a high rocky mountain, rising immediately from the sea, and this, with the Scala below upon the shore, consisting of some ships and houses, forms the only inhabited site of the island. Though Patmos is deficient in trees, it abounds in flowery plantsand shrubs. Walnuts and other fruit trees are raised in the orchards, and the wine of Patmos is the strongest and the best flavoured in the Greek islands. Maize and barley are cultivated, but not in a quantity sufficient for the use of the inhabitants and for a supply of their own vessels, and others which often put into their good harbour for provisions. The inhabitants now do not exceed four or five thousand; many of whom are emigrants from the neighbouring continent. About half-way up the mountain there is shown a natural grotto in a rock, where John issaidto have seen his visions and to have written this book. Near this is a small church, connected with which is a school or college, where the Greek language is taught; and on the top of the hill, and in the centre of the island, is a monastery, which, from its situation, has a very majestic appearance (Kitto’sCyclopædia ofBib. Lit.). The annexedengravingis supposed to give a good representation of the appearance of the island. It is commonly supposed that John was banished to this island by Domitian, aboutA.D.94. No place could have been selected for banishment which would accord better with such a design than this. Lonely, desolate, barren, uninhabited, seldom visited, it had all the requisites which could be desired for a place of punishment; and banishment to that place would accomplish all that a persecutor could wish in silencing an apostle, without putting him to death. It was no uncommon thing, in ancient times, to banish men from their country; either sending them forth at large, or specifying some particular place to which they were to go. The whole narrative leads us to suppose that this place wasdesignatedas that to which John was to be sent. Banishment to an island was a common mode of punishment; and there was a distinction made by this act in favour of those who were thus banished. The more base, low, and vile of criminals were commonly condemned to work in the mines; the more decent and respectable werebanishedto some lonely island. See the authorities quoted in Wetstein,in loco. ¶For the word of God.On account of the word of God; that is, for holding and preaching the gospel. See Notes onver.2. It cannot mean that he was sent there with a view to hispreachingthe word of God; for it is inconceivable that he should have been sent from Ephesus to preach in such a little, lonely, desolate place, where indeed there is no evidence that there were any inhabitants; nor can it mean that he was sent there by the Spirit of God to receive and record this revelation, for it is clear that the revelation could have been made elsewhere, and such a place afforded no peculiar advantages for this. The fair interpretation is, in accordance with all the testimony of antiquity, that he was sent there in a time of persecution, as a punishment for preaching the gospel. ¶And for the testimony of Jesus Christ.See Notes onver.2. He did not go there to bear testimony to Jesus Christ on that island, either by preaching or recording the visions in this book, but he went because hehadpreached the doctrines which testified of Christ.
9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.
9.I John, who also am your brother.Your Christian brother; who am a fellow-Christian with you. The reference here is doubtless to the members of the seven churches in Asia, to whom the epistles in the following chapters were addressed, and to whom the whole book seems to have been sent. In the previous verse, the writer had closed the salutation, and he here commences a description of the circumstances under which the vision appeared to him. He was in a lonely island, to which he had been banished on account of his attachment to religion; he was in a state of high spiritual enjoyment on the day devoted to the sacred remembrance of the Redeemer; he suddenly heard a voice behind him, and turning saw the Son of man himself, in glorious form, in the midst of seven golden lamps, and fell at his feet as dead. ¶And companion in tribulation.Your partner in affliction. That is, he and they were suffering substantially the same kind of trials on account of their religion. It is evident from this that some form of persecution was then raging, in which they were also sufferers, though in their case it did not lead to banishment. The leader, the apostle, the aged and influential preacher, was banished; but there were many other forms of trial which they might be called to endure who remained at home. What they were we have not the means of knowing with certainty. ¶And in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ.The meaning of this passage is, that he, and those whom he addressed, were not only companions in affliction, but were fellow-partners in the kingdom of the Redeemer; that is, they shared the honour and the privileges pertaining to that kingdom; and that they were fellow-partners in thepatienceof Jesus Christ, that is, in enduring with patience whatever might follow from their being his friends and followers. The general idea is, that alike in privileges and sufferings they were united. They shared alike in the results of their attachment to the Saviour. ¶Was in the isle that is called Patmos.Patmos is one of the cluster of islands in the Ægean Sea anciently called theSporades. It lies between the island of Icaria and the promontory of Miletus. It is merely mentioned by the ancient geographers (Plin.Hist. Nat.iv.23; Strabo,x.488). It is now called Patino or Patmoso. It is some six or eight miles in length, and not more than a mile in breadth, being about fifteen miles in circumference. It has neither trees nor rivers, nor has it any land for cultivation, except some little nooks among the ledges of rocks. On approaching the island, the coast is high, and consists of a succession of capes, which form so many ports, some of which are excellent. The only one in use, however, is a deep bay, sheltered by high mountains on every side but one, where it is protected by a projecting cape. The town attached to this port is situated upon a high rocky mountain, rising immediately from the sea, and this, with the Scala below upon the shore, consisting of some ships and houses, forms the only inhabited site of the island. Though Patmos is deficient in trees, it abounds in flowery plantsand shrubs. Walnuts and other fruit trees are raised in the orchards, and the wine of Patmos is the strongest and the best flavoured in the Greek islands. Maize and barley are cultivated, but not in a quantity sufficient for the use of the inhabitants and for a supply of their own vessels, and others which often put into their good harbour for provisions. The inhabitants now do not exceed four or five thousand; many of whom are emigrants from the neighbouring continent. About half-way up the mountain there is shown a natural grotto in a rock, where John issaidto have seen his visions and to have written this book. Near this is a small church, connected with which is a school or college, where the Greek language is taught; and on the top of the hill, and in the centre of the island, is a monastery, which, from its situation, has a very majestic appearance (Kitto’sCyclopædia ofBib. Lit.). The annexedengravingis supposed to give a good representation of the appearance of the island. It is commonly supposed that John was banished to this island by Domitian, aboutA.D.94. No place could have been selected for banishment which would accord better with such a design than this. Lonely, desolate, barren, uninhabited, seldom visited, it had all the requisites which could be desired for a place of punishment; and banishment to that place would accomplish all that a persecutor could wish in silencing an apostle, without putting him to death. It was no uncommon thing, in ancient times, to banish men from their country; either sending them forth at large, or specifying some particular place to which they were to go. The whole narrative leads us to suppose that this place wasdesignatedas that to which John was to be sent. Banishment to an island was a common mode of punishment; and there was a distinction made by this act in favour of those who were thus banished. The more base, low, and vile of criminals were commonly condemned to work in the mines; the more decent and respectable werebanishedto some lonely island. See the authorities quoted in Wetstein,in loco. ¶For the word of God.On account of the word of God; that is, for holding and preaching the gospel. See Notes onver.2. It cannot mean that he was sent there with a view to hispreachingthe word of God; for it is inconceivable that he should have been sent from Ephesus to preach in such a little, lonely, desolate place, where indeed there is no evidence that there were any inhabitants; nor can it mean that he was sent there by the Spirit of God to receive and record this revelation, for it is clear that the revelation could have been made elsewhere, and such a place afforded no peculiar advantages for this. The fair interpretation is, in accordance with all the testimony of antiquity, that he was sent there in a time of persecution, as a punishment for preaching the gospel. ¶And for the testimony of Jesus Christ.See Notes onver.2. He did not go there to bear testimony to Jesus Christ on that island, either by preaching or recording the visions in this book, but he went because hehadpreached the doctrines which testified of Christ.
10 I was74in the Spirit on the75Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,10.I was in the Spirit.This cannot refer to his own spirit, for such an expression would be unintelligible. The language then must refer to some unusual state, or to some influence that had been brought to bear upon him from without, that was appropriate to such a day. The wordSpiritmay refer either to the Holy Spirit, or to some state of mind such as the Holy Spirit produces—a spirit of elevated devotion, a state of high and uncommon religious enjoyment. It is clear that John does not mean here to say that he was under the influence of the Holy Spirit in such a sense as that he wasinspired, for the command to make a record, as well as the visions, came subsequently to the time referred to. The fair meaning of the passage is, that he was at that time favoured, in a large measure, with the influences of the Holy Spirit—the spirit of true devotion; that he had a high state of religious enjoyment, and was in a condition not inappropriate to the remarkable communications which were made to him on that day. The state of mind in which he was at the time here referred to, is not such as the prophets are often represented to have been in when under the prophetic inspiration (comp.Eze.i.1;viii.3;xl.2;Je.xxiv.1), and which was often accompaniedwith an entire prostration of bodily strength (comp.Nu.xxiv.4;1 Sa.xix.24;Eze.i.28;Da.x.8–10;Re.i.17), but such as any Christian may experience when in a high state of religious enjoyment. He was notyetunder the prophetic ecstasy (comp.Ac.x.10;xi.5;xxii.17), but was, though in a lonely and barren island, and far away from the privileges of the sanctuary, permitted to enjoy, in a high degree, the consolations of religion—an illustration of the great truth that God can meet his people anywhere; that, when in solitude and in circumstances of outward affliction, when persecuted and cast out, when deprived of the public means of grace and the society of religious friends, He can meet them with the abundant consolations of His grace, and pour joy and peace into their souls. This state was not inappropriate to the revelations which were about to be made to John, but this itself was not that state. It was a state which seems to have resulted from the fact, that on that desert island he devoted the day to the worship of God, and, by honouring the day dedicated to the memory of the risen Saviour, found, what all will find, that it was attended with rich spiritual influences on his soul. ¶On the Lord’s day.The word here renderedLord’s(κυριακῇ), occurs only in this place and in1 Co.xi.20, where it is applied to the Lord’s supper. It properly meanspertaining to the Lord; and, so far as thiswordis concerned, it might mean a day pertaining to the Lord, in any sense, or for any reason; either because he claimed it as his own, and had set it apart for his own service, or because it was designed to commemorate some important event pertaining to him, or because it was observed in honour of him. It is clear, (1) That this refers to some day which was distinguished from all other days of the week, and which would be sufficiently designated by the use of this term. (2) That it was a day which was for some reason regarded as peculiarly a day of the Lord, or peculiarly devoted to him. (3) It would further appear that this was a day particularly devoted to the Lord Jesus; for, (a) that is the natural meaning of the wordLordas used in the New Testament (comp.Notes onAc.i.24); and (b) if the Jewish Sabbath were intended to be designated, the wordSabbathwould have been used. The term was used generally by the early Christians to denote the first day of the week. It occurs twice in the Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians (aboutA.D.101), who calls the Lord’s day “the queen and prince of all days.” Chrysostom (onPs. cxix.) says, “It was called the Lord’s day because the Lord rose from the dead on that day.” Later fathers make a marked distinction between theSabbathand theLord’s day; meaning by the former the Jewish Sabbath, or the seventh day of the week, and by the latter the first day of the week, kept holy by Christians. So Theodoret (Fab. Haeret.ii.1), speaking of the Ebionites, says, “They keep theSabbathaccording to the Jewish law, and sanctify theLord’s dayin like manner as we do” (Professor Stuart). The strong probability is, that the name was given to this day in honour of the Lord Jesus, and because he rose on that day from the dead. No one can doubt that it was an appellation given to the first day of the week; and the passage, therefore, proves (1) that that day was thus early distinguished in some peculiar manner, so that the mere mention of it would be sufficient to identify it in the minds of those to whom the apostle wrote; (2) that it was in some sense regarded as devoted to the Lord Jesus, or was designed in some way to commemorate what he had done; and (3) that if this book were written by the apostle John, the observance of that day has the apostolic sanction. He had manifestly, in accordance with a prevailing custom, set apart this day in honour of the Lord Jesus. Though alone, he was engaged on that day in acts of devotion. Though far away from the sanctuary, he enjoyed what all Christianshopeto enjoy on such a day of rest, and what not a fewdoin fact enjoy in its observance. We may remark, in view of this statement, (a) that when away from the sanctuary, and deprived of its privileges, we should nevertheless not fail to observe the Christian Sabbath. If on a bed of sickness, if in a land of strangers, if on the deep, if in a foreign clime, if on a lonely island, as John was, where we have none of the advantages of public worship, we should yet honour the Sabbath. We should worship God alone, if we have none to unite with us; we should show to those around us, if we are with strangers, by our dress and our conversation, by a serious and devout manner, by abstinence from labour,and by a resting from travel, that we devoutly regard this day as set apart for God. (b) We may expect, in such circumstances, and with such a devout observance of the day, that God will meet with us and bless us. It was on a lonely island, far away from the sanctuary and from the society of Christian friends, that the Saviour met “the beloved disciple,” and we may trust it will be so with us. For on such a desert island, in a lonely forest, on the deep, or amid strangers in a foreign land, he can as easily meet us as in the sanctuary where we have been accustomed to worship, and when surrounded by all the privileges of a Christian land. No man, at home or abroad, among friends or strangers, enjoying the privileges of the sanctuary, or deprived of those privileges, ever kept the Christian Sabbath in a devout manner without profit to his own soul; and, when deprived of the privileges of public worship, the visitations of the Saviour to the soul may be more than a compensation for all our privations. Who would not be willing to be banished to a lonely island like Patmos, if he might enjoy such a glorious vision of the Redeemer as John was favoured with there? ¶And heard behind me a great voice.A loud voice. This was of course sudden, and took him by surprise. ¶As of a trumpet.Loud as a trumpet. This is evidently the only point in the comparison. It does not mean that the tones of the voice resembled a trumpet, but only that it was clear, loud, and distinct like a trumpet. A trumpet is a well-known wind-instrument, distinguished for the clearness of its sounds, and was used for calling assemblies together, for marshalling hosts for battle,&c.The Hebrew word employed commonly to denote a trumpet (שׁוֹפָר—shophar) meansbrightandclear, and is supposed to have been given to the instrument on account of its clear and shrill sound, as we now give the name “clarion” to a certain wind-instrument. The Hebrew trumpet is often referred to as employed, on account of its clearness, to summon people together,Ex.xix.13;Nu.x.10;Ju.vii.18,&c.;1 Sa.xiii.3;2 Sa.xv.10.
10 I was74in the Spirit on the75Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
10.I was in the Spirit.This cannot refer to his own spirit, for such an expression would be unintelligible. The language then must refer to some unusual state, or to some influence that had been brought to bear upon him from without, that was appropriate to such a day. The wordSpiritmay refer either to the Holy Spirit, or to some state of mind such as the Holy Spirit produces—a spirit of elevated devotion, a state of high and uncommon religious enjoyment. It is clear that John does not mean here to say that he was under the influence of the Holy Spirit in such a sense as that he wasinspired, for the command to make a record, as well as the visions, came subsequently to the time referred to. The fair meaning of the passage is, that he was at that time favoured, in a large measure, with the influences of the Holy Spirit—the spirit of true devotion; that he had a high state of religious enjoyment, and was in a condition not inappropriate to the remarkable communications which were made to him on that day. The state of mind in which he was at the time here referred to, is not such as the prophets are often represented to have been in when under the prophetic inspiration (comp.Eze.i.1;viii.3;xl.2;Je.xxiv.1), and which was often accompaniedwith an entire prostration of bodily strength (comp.Nu.xxiv.4;1 Sa.xix.24;Eze.i.28;Da.x.8–10;Re.i.17), but such as any Christian may experience when in a high state of religious enjoyment. He was notyetunder the prophetic ecstasy (comp.Ac.x.10;xi.5;xxii.17), but was, though in a lonely and barren island, and far away from the privileges of the sanctuary, permitted to enjoy, in a high degree, the consolations of religion—an illustration of the great truth that God can meet his people anywhere; that, when in solitude and in circumstances of outward affliction, when persecuted and cast out, when deprived of the public means of grace and the society of religious friends, He can meet them with the abundant consolations of His grace, and pour joy and peace into their souls. This state was not inappropriate to the revelations which were about to be made to John, but this itself was not that state. It was a state which seems to have resulted from the fact, that on that desert island he devoted the day to the worship of God, and, by honouring the day dedicated to the memory of the risen Saviour, found, what all will find, that it was attended with rich spiritual influences on his soul. ¶On the Lord’s day.The word here renderedLord’s(κυριακῇ), occurs only in this place and in1 Co.xi.20, where it is applied to the Lord’s supper. It properly meanspertaining to the Lord; and, so far as thiswordis concerned, it might mean a day pertaining to the Lord, in any sense, or for any reason; either because he claimed it as his own, and had set it apart for his own service, or because it was designed to commemorate some important event pertaining to him, or because it was observed in honour of him. It is clear, (1) That this refers to some day which was distinguished from all other days of the week, and which would be sufficiently designated by the use of this term. (2) That it was a day which was for some reason regarded as peculiarly a day of the Lord, or peculiarly devoted to him. (3) It would further appear that this was a day particularly devoted to the Lord Jesus; for, (a) that is the natural meaning of the wordLordas used in the New Testament (comp.Notes onAc.i.24); and (b) if the Jewish Sabbath were intended to be designated, the wordSabbathwould have been used. The term was used generally by the early Christians to denote the first day of the week. It occurs twice in the Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians (aboutA.D.101), who calls the Lord’s day “the queen and prince of all days.” Chrysostom (onPs. cxix.) says, “It was called the Lord’s day because the Lord rose from the dead on that day.” Later fathers make a marked distinction between theSabbathand theLord’s day; meaning by the former the Jewish Sabbath, or the seventh day of the week, and by the latter the first day of the week, kept holy by Christians. So Theodoret (Fab. Haeret.ii.1), speaking of the Ebionites, says, “They keep theSabbathaccording to the Jewish law, and sanctify theLord’s dayin like manner as we do” (Professor Stuart). The strong probability is, that the name was given to this day in honour of the Lord Jesus, and because he rose on that day from the dead. No one can doubt that it was an appellation given to the first day of the week; and the passage, therefore, proves (1) that that day was thus early distinguished in some peculiar manner, so that the mere mention of it would be sufficient to identify it in the minds of those to whom the apostle wrote; (2) that it was in some sense regarded as devoted to the Lord Jesus, or was designed in some way to commemorate what he had done; and (3) that if this book were written by the apostle John, the observance of that day has the apostolic sanction. He had manifestly, in accordance with a prevailing custom, set apart this day in honour of the Lord Jesus. Though alone, he was engaged on that day in acts of devotion. Though far away from the sanctuary, he enjoyed what all Christianshopeto enjoy on such a day of rest, and what not a fewdoin fact enjoy in its observance. We may remark, in view of this statement, (a) that when away from the sanctuary, and deprived of its privileges, we should nevertheless not fail to observe the Christian Sabbath. If on a bed of sickness, if in a land of strangers, if on the deep, if in a foreign clime, if on a lonely island, as John was, where we have none of the advantages of public worship, we should yet honour the Sabbath. We should worship God alone, if we have none to unite with us; we should show to those around us, if we are with strangers, by our dress and our conversation, by a serious and devout manner, by abstinence from labour,and by a resting from travel, that we devoutly regard this day as set apart for God. (b) We may expect, in such circumstances, and with such a devout observance of the day, that God will meet with us and bless us. It was on a lonely island, far away from the sanctuary and from the society of Christian friends, that the Saviour met “the beloved disciple,” and we may trust it will be so with us. For on such a desert island, in a lonely forest, on the deep, or amid strangers in a foreign land, he can as easily meet us as in the sanctuary where we have been accustomed to worship, and when surrounded by all the privileges of a Christian land. No man, at home or abroad, among friends or strangers, enjoying the privileges of the sanctuary, or deprived of those privileges, ever kept the Christian Sabbath in a devout manner without profit to his own soul; and, when deprived of the privileges of public worship, the visitations of the Saviour to the soul may be more than a compensation for all our privations. Who would not be willing to be banished to a lonely island like Patmos, if he might enjoy such a glorious vision of the Redeemer as John was favoured with there? ¶And heard behind me a great voice.A loud voice. This was of course sudden, and took him by surprise. ¶As of a trumpet.Loud as a trumpet. This is evidently the only point in the comparison. It does not mean that the tones of the voice resembled a trumpet, but only that it was clear, loud, and distinct like a trumpet. A trumpet is a well-known wind-instrument, distinguished for the clearness of its sounds, and was used for calling assemblies together, for marshalling hosts for battle,&c.The Hebrew word employed commonly to denote a trumpet (שׁוֹפָר—shophar) meansbrightandclear, and is supposed to have been given to the instrument on account of its clear and shrill sound, as we now give the name “clarion” to a certain wind-instrument. The Hebrew trumpet is often referred to as employed, on account of its clearness, to summon people together,Ex.xix.13;Nu.x.10;Ju.vii.18,&c.;1 Sa.xiii.3;2 Sa.xv.10.
11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and senditunto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto76Ephesus, and unto77Smyrna, and unto78Pergamos, and unto79Thyatira, and unto80Sardis, and unto81Philadelphia, and unto82Laodicea.11.Saying.That is, literally, “the trumpet saying.” It was, however, manifestly thevoicethat addressed these words to John, though theyseemedto come through a trumpet, and hence the trumpet is represented as uttering them. ¶I am Alpha and Omega.Ver.8. ¶The first and the last.An explanation of the terms Alpha and Omega. See Notes onver.8. ¶And, What thou seest.The voice, in addition to the declaration, “I am Alpha and Omega,” gave this direction that he should record what he saw. The phrase, “what thou seest,” refers to what would pass before him in vision, what he there saw, and what he would see in the extraordinary manifestations which were to be made to him. ¶Write in a book.Make a fair record of it all; evidently meaning that he should describe things as they occurred, and implying that the vision would be held so long before the eye of his mind that he would be able to transfer it to the “book.” The fair and obvious interpretation of this is, that he was to make the record in the island of Patmos, and then send it to the churches. Though Patmos was a lonely and barren place, and though probably there were few or no inhabitants there, yet there is no improbability in supposing that John could have found writing materials there, nor even that he may have been permitted to take such materials with him. He seems to have been banished forpreaching, not forwriting; and there is no evidence that the materials for writing would be withheld from him. John Bunyan, in Bedford jail, found materials for writing thePilgrim’s Progress, and there is no evidence that the apostle John was denied the means of recording his thoughts when in the island of Patmos. The wordbookhere (βιβλίον), would more properly meana rollorscroll, that being the form in which books were anciently made. See Notes onLu.iv.17. ¶And send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia.The churches which are immediately designated, not implying that there were no other churches in Asia, but that there were particular reasons for sending it to these. He was to sendallthat he should “see;” to wit, all that is recorded in this volume or book of “Revelation.” Part of this (ch. ii., iii.) would appertain particularly to them; the remainder (ch. iv.–xxii.) would appertain to them no more than to others, but still they would have the common interest in it which all the church would have, and, in their circumstances of trial, there might be important reasons whytheyshould see the assurance that the church would ultimately triumph over all its enemies. They were to derive from it themselves the consolation which it was fitted to impart in time of trial, and to transmit it to future times, for the welfare of the church at large. ¶Unto Ephesus.Perhaps mentioned first as being the capital of that portion of Asia Minor; the most important city of the seven; the place where John had preached, and whence he had been banished. For a particular description of these seven churches, see the Notes on the epistles addressed to them inch. ii., iii.
11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and senditunto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto76Ephesus, and unto77Smyrna, and unto78Pergamos, and unto79Thyatira, and unto80Sardis, and unto81Philadelphia, and unto82Laodicea.
11.Saying.That is, literally, “the trumpet saying.” It was, however, manifestly thevoicethat addressed these words to John, though theyseemedto come through a trumpet, and hence the trumpet is represented as uttering them. ¶I am Alpha and Omega.Ver.8. ¶The first and the last.An explanation of the terms Alpha and Omega. See Notes onver.8. ¶And, What thou seest.The voice, in addition to the declaration, “I am Alpha and Omega,” gave this direction that he should record what he saw. The phrase, “what thou seest,” refers to what would pass before him in vision, what he there saw, and what he would see in the extraordinary manifestations which were to be made to him. ¶Write in a book.Make a fair record of it all; evidently meaning that he should describe things as they occurred, and implying that the vision would be held so long before the eye of his mind that he would be able to transfer it to the “book.” The fair and obvious interpretation of this is, that he was to make the record in the island of Patmos, and then send it to the churches. Though Patmos was a lonely and barren place, and though probably there were few or no inhabitants there, yet there is no improbability in supposing that John could have found writing materials there, nor even that he may have been permitted to take such materials with him. He seems to have been banished forpreaching, not forwriting; and there is no evidence that the materials for writing would be withheld from him. John Bunyan, in Bedford jail, found materials for writing thePilgrim’s Progress, and there is no evidence that the apostle John was denied the means of recording his thoughts when in the island of Patmos. The wordbookhere (βιβλίον), would more properly meana rollorscroll, that being the form in which books were anciently made. See Notes onLu.iv.17. ¶And send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia.The churches which are immediately designated, not implying that there were no other churches in Asia, but that there were particular reasons for sending it to these. He was to sendallthat he should “see;” to wit, all that is recorded in this volume or book of “Revelation.” Part of this (ch. ii., iii.) would appertain particularly to them; the remainder (ch. iv.–xxii.) would appertain to them no more than to others, but still they would have the common interest in it which all the church would have, and, in their circumstances of trial, there might be important reasons whytheyshould see the assurance that the church would ultimately triumph over all its enemies. They were to derive from it themselves the consolation which it was fitted to impart in time of trial, and to transmit it to future times, for the welfare of the church at large. ¶Unto Ephesus.Perhaps mentioned first as being the capital of that portion of Asia Minor; the most important city of the seven; the place where John had preached, and whence he had been banished. For a particular description of these seven churches, see the Notes on the epistles addressed to them inch. ii., iii.
12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw83seven golden candlesticks;12.And I turned to see the voice that spake with me.He naturally turned round to see who it was that spake to him in this solitary and desolate place, where he thought himself to be alone. To seethe voicehere means to seethe personwho spake. ¶And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks.These were thefirstthings that met his eye. This must have been invision, of course, and the meaning is, that thereseemedto be there seven such lamps or candelabras. The word renderedcandlesticks(λυχνία) means properly a light-stand, lamp-stand—something to bear up a light. It would be applied to anything that was used for this purpose; and nothing is intimated, in the use of the word, in regard to the form or dimensions of the light-bearers. Lamps were more commonly used at that time than candles, and it is rather to be supposed that these were designed to be lamp-bearers, or lamp-sustainers, thancandlesticks. They were seven in number; not one branching into seven, but seven standing apart, and so far from each other that he who appeared to John could stand among them. The lamp-bearers evidently sustained each a light, and these gave a peculiar brilliancy to the scene. It is not improbable that, as they were designed to represent the seven churches of Asia, they were arranged in an order resembling these churches. The scene is not laid in the temple, as many suppose, for there is nothing that resembles the arrangements in the temple except the mere fact of thelights. The scene as yet is in Patmos, and there is no evidence that John did not regard himself as there, or that he fancied for a moment that he was translated to the temple in Jerusalem. There can be no doubt as to thedesignof this representation, for it is expressly declared (ver.20) that the seven lamp-bearers were intended to represent the seven churches. Light is often used in the Scriptures as an emblem of true religion; Christians are represented as “the light of the world” (Mat.v.14;comp.Phi.ii.15;Jn.viii.12), and a Christian church may be represented as a light standing in the midst of surrounding darkness.
12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw83seven golden candlesticks;
12.And I turned to see the voice that spake with me.He naturally turned round to see who it was that spake to him in this solitary and desolate place, where he thought himself to be alone. To seethe voicehere means to seethe personwho spake. ¶And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks.These were thefirstthings that met his eye. This must have been invision, of course, and the meaning is, that thereseemedto be there seven such lamps or candelabras. The word renderedcandlesticks(λυχνία) means properly a light-stand, lamp-stand—something to bear up a light. It would be applied to anything that was used for this purpose; and nothing is intimated, in the use of the word, in regard to the form or dimensions of the light-bearers. Lamps were more commonly used at that time than candles, and it is rather to be supposed that these were designed to be lamp-bearers, or lamp-sustainers, thancandlesticks. They were seven in number; not one branching into seven, but seven standing apart, and so far from each other that he who appeared to John could stand among them. The lamp-bearers evidently sustained each a light, and these gave a peculiar brilliancy to the scene. It is not improbable that, as they were designed to represent the seven churches of Asia, they were arranged in an order resembling these churches. The scene is not laid in the temple, as many suppose, for there is nothing that resembles the arrangements in the temple except the mere fact of thelights. The scene as yet is in Patmos, and there is no evidence that John did not regard himself as there, or that he fancied for a moment that he was translated to the temple in Jerusalem. There can be no doubt as to thedesignof this representation, for it is expressly declared (ver.20) that the seven lamp-bearers were intended to represent the seven churches. Light is often used in the Scriptures as an emblem of true religion; Christians are represented as “the light of the world” (Mat.v.14;comp.Phi.ii.15;Jn.viii.12), and a Christian church may be represented as a light standing in the midst of surrounding darkness.
13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks84onelike unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.13.And in the midst of the seven candlesticks.Standing among them, so as to be encircled with them. This shows that the representation could not have been like that of the vision of Zechariah (Zec.iv.2), where the prophet sees “a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and his seven lamps thereon.” In the vision as it appeared to John, there was notonelamp-bearer, with seven lamps or branches, but there weresevenlamp-bearers, so arranged that one in the likeness of the Son of man could stand in the midst of them. ¶Onelike unto the Son of man.This was evidently the Lord Jesus Christ himself, elsewhere so often called “the Son of man.” That it was the Saviour himself is apparent fromver.18. The expression rendered “like untotheSon of man,” should have been “like untoason of man;” that is, like a man, a human being, or in a human form. The reasons for so interpreting it are, (a) that the Greek is without the article, and (b) that, as it is rendered in our version, it seems to make the writer say that he waslike himself, since the expression “theSon of man” is in the New Testament but another name for the Lord Jesus. The phrase is often applied to him in the New Testament, and always, except in three instances (Ac.vii.56;Re.i.13;xiv.14), by the Saviour himself, evidently to denote his warm interestinman, or his relationship to man; to signify that he was a man, and wished to designate himself eminently as such. See Notes onMat.viii.20. In the use of this phrase in the New Testament, there is probably an allusion toDa.vii.13. The idea would seem to be, that he whom he saw resembled “the Son of man”—the Lord Jesus, as he had seen him in the days of his flesh—though it would appear that he did notknowthat it was he until he was informed of it,ver.18. Indeed, the costume in which he appeared was so unlike that in which John had been accustomed to see the Lord Jesus in the days of his flesh, that it cannot be well supposed that he would at once recognize him as the same. ¶Clothed with a garment down to the foot.A robe reaching down to the feet, or to the ankles, yet so as to leave the feet themselves visible. The allusion here, doubtless, is to a long, loose, flowing robe, such as was worn by kings.Comp.Notes onIs.vi.1. ¶And girt about the paps.About the breast. It was common, and is still, in the East, to wear a girdle to confine the robe, as well as to form a beautiful ornament. This was commonly worn about the middle of the person, or “the loins,” but it would seem also that it was sometimes worn around the breast. See Notes onMat.v.38–41. ¶With a golden girdle.Either wholly made of gold, or, more probably, richly ornamented with gold. This would naturally suggest the idea of one of rank, probably one of princely rank. The raiment here assumed was not that of apriest, but that of aking. It was very far from being that in which the Redeemer appeared when he dwelt upon the earth, and was rather designed to denote his royal state as he is exalted in heaven. He is not indeed represented with a crown and sceptre here, and perhaps the leading idea is that of one of exalted rank, of unusual dignity, of one fitted to inspire awe and respect. In other circumstances, in this book, this same Redeemer is represented as wearing a crown, and going forth to conquest. Seech. xix.12–16. Here the representation seems to have been designed to impress the mind with a sense of the greatness and glory of the personage who thus suddenly made his appearance.
13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks84onelike unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.
13.And in the midst of the seven candlesticks.Standing among them, so as to be encircled with them. This shows that the representation could not have been like that of the vision of Zechariah (Zec.iv.2), where the prophet sees “a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and his seven lamps thereon.” In the vision as it appeared to John, there was notonelamp-bearer, with seven lamps or branches, but there weresevenlamp-bearers, so arranged that one in the likeness of the Son of man could stand in the midst of them. ¶Onelike unto the Son of man.This was evidently the Lord Jesus Christ himself, elsewhere so often called “the Son of man.” That it was the Saviour himself is apparent fromver.18. The expression rendered “like untotheSon of man,” should have been “like untoason of man;” that is, like a man, a human being, or in a human form. The reasons for so interpreting it are, (a) that the Greek is without the article, and (b) that, as it is rendered in our version, it seems to make the writer say that he waslike himself, since the expression “theSon of man” is in the New Testament but another name for the Lord Jesus. The phrase is often applied to him in the New Testament, and always, except in three instances (Ac.vii.56;Re.i.13;xiv.14), by the Saviour himself, evidently to denote his warm interestinman, or his relationship to man; to signify that he was a man, and wished to designate himself eminently as such. See Notes onMat.viii.20. In the use of this phrase in the New Testament, there is probably an allusion toDa.vii.13. The idea would seem to be, that he whom he saw resembled “the Son of man”—the Lord Jesus, as he had seen him in the days of his flesh—though it would appear that he did notknowthat it was he until he was informed of it,ver.18. Indeed, the costume in which he appeared was so unlike that in which John had been accustomed to see the Lord Jesus in the days of his flesh, that it cannot be well supposed that he would at once recognize him as the same. ¶Clothed with a garment down to the foot.A robe reaching down to the feet, or to the ankles, yet so as to leave the feet themselves visible. The allusion here, doubtless, is to a long, loose, flowing robe, such as was worn by kings.Comp.Notes onIs.vi.1. ¶And girt about the paps.About the breast. It was common, and is still, in the East, to wear a girdle to confine the robe, as well as to form a beautiful ornament. This was commonly worn about the middle of the person, or “the loins,” but it would seem also that it was sometimes worn around the breast. See Notes onMat.v.38–41. ¶With a golden girdle.Either wholly made of gold, or, more probably, richly ornamented with gold. This would naturally suggest the idea of one of rank, probably one of princely rank. The raiment here assumed was not that of apriest, but that of aking. It was very far from being that in which the Redeemer appeared when he dwelt upon the earth, and was rather designed to denote his royal state as he is exalted in heaven. He is not indeed represented with a crown and sceptre here, and perhaps the leading idea is that of one of exalted rank, of unusual dignity, of one fitted to inspire awe and respect. In other circumstances, in this book, this same Redeemer is represented as wearing a crown, and going forth to conquest. Seech. xix.12–16. Here the representation seems to have been designed to impress the mind with a sense of the greatness and glory of the personage who thus suddenly made his appearance.
14 His head andhishairswerewhite like wool, as white as snow; and85his eyeswereas a flame of fire;14.His head andhishairswerewhite like wool, as white as snow.Exceedingly or perfectly white—the first suggestion to the mind of the apostle being that of wool, and then the thought occurring of itsextremewhiteness resembling snow—the purest white of which the mind conceives. The comparison with wool and snow to denote anything peculiarlywhiteis not uncommon. SeeIs.i.18. Professor Stuart supposes that this means, not that his hairs were literally white, as if with age, which he says would be incongruous to one just risen from the dead, clothed with immortal youth and vigour, but that it means radiant, bright, resplendent—similar to what occurred on the transfiguration of the Saviour,Mat.xvii.2. But to this it may be replied, (a) That this would not accord well with that with which his hair is compared—snowandwool, particularly the latter. (b) The usual meaning of the word is more obvious here, and not at all inappropriate. The representation was fitted to signify majesty and authority; and this would be best accomplished by the image of one who was venerable in years. Thus, in the vision that appeared to Daniel (ch. vii.9), it is said of him who is there called the “Ancient of Days,” that “his garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool.” It is not improbable that John had that representation in his eye, and that therefore he would be impressed with the conviction that this was a manifestation of a divine person. We are not necessarily to suppose that this is the form in which the Saviour always appears now in heaven, any more than we are to suppose that God appears always in the form in which he was manifestedto Isaiah (ch. vi.1), to Daniel (ch. vii.9), or to Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu in the mount,Ex.xxiv.10, 11. The representation is, that this form was assumed for the purpose of impressing the mind of the apostle with a sense of his majesty and glory. ¶And his eyeswereas a flame of fire.Bright, sharp, penetrating; as if everything was light before them, or they would penetrate into the thoughts of men. Such a representation is not uncommon. We speak of a lightning glance, a fiery look,&c.InDa.x.6, it is said of the man who appeared to the prophet on the banks of the river Hiddekel, that his eyes were “as lamps of fire.” Numerous instances of this comparison from the Greek and Latin classics may be seen in Wetstein,in loco.
14 His head andhishairswerewhite like wool, as white as snow; and85his eyeswereas a flame of fire;
14.His head andhishairswerewhite like wool, as white as snow.Exceedingly or perfectly white—the first suggestion to the mind of the apostle being that of wool, and then the thought occurring of itsextremewhiteness resembling snow—the purest white of which the mind conceives. The comparison with wool and snow to denote anything peculiarlywhiteis not uncommon. SeeIs.i.18. Professor Stuart supposes that this means, not that his hairs were literally white, as if with age, which he says would be incongruous to one just risen from the dead, clothed with immortal youth and vigour, but that it means radiant, bright, resplendent—similar to what occurred on the transfiguration of the Saviour,Mat.xvii.2. But to this it may be replied, (a) That this would not accord well with that with which his hair is compared—snowandwool, particularly the latter. (b) The usual meaning of the word is more obvious here, and not at all inappropriate. The representation was fitted to signify majesty and authority; and this would be best accomplished by the image of one who was venerable in years. Thus, in the vision that appeared to Daniel (ch. vii.9), it is said of him who is there called the “Ancient of Days,” that “his garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool.” It is not improbable that John had that representation in his eye, and that therefore he would be impressed with the conviction that this was a manifestation of a divine person. We are not necessarily to suppose that this is the form in which the Saviour always appears now in heaven, any more than we are to suppose that God appears always in the form in which he was manifestedto Isaiah (ch. vi.1), to Daniel (ch. vii.9), or to Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu in the mount,Ex.xxiv.10, 11. The representation is, that this form was assumed for the purpose of impressing the mind of the apostle with a sense of his majesty and glory. ¶And his eyeswereas a flame of fire.Bright, sharp, penetrating; as if everything was light before them, or they would penetrate into the thoughts of men. Such a representation is not uncommon. We speak of a lightning glance, a fiery look,&c.InDa.x.6, it is said of the man who appeared to the prophet on the banks of the river Hiddekel, that his eyes were “as lamps of fire.” Numerous instances of this comparison from the Greek and Latin classics may be seen in Wetstein,in loco.
15 And86his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and87his voice as the sound of many waters.15.And his feet like unto fine brass.Comp.Da.x.6, “And his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass.” See alsoEze.i.7, “and they” [the feet of the living creatures] “sparkled like the colour of burnished brass.” The word here used—χαλκολιβάνῳ—occurs in the New Testament only here and inch. ii.18. It is not found in the Septuagint. The word properly meanswhite brass(probably compounded ofχαλκός,brass, andλιβανός,whiteness, from the Hebrewלָבָן,white). Others regard it as fromχαλκός,brass, andλιπαρόν,clear. Themetalreferred to was undoubtedly a species of brass distinguished for its clearness or whiteness. Brass is a compound metal, composed of copper and zinc. The colour varies much according to the different proportions of the various ingredients. The Vulgate here renders the wordaurichalcum, a mixture of gold and of brass—perhaps the same as theἤλεκτρον—theelectrumof the ancients, composed of gold and of silver, usually in the proportion of four parts gold and one part silver, and distinguished for its brilliancy. See Robinson,Lex., and Wetstein,in loco. The kind of metal here referred to, however, would seem to be some compound of brass—of a whitish and brilliant colour. The exact proportion of the ingredients in the metal here referred to cannot now be determined. ¶As if they burned in a furnace.That is, his feet were so bright that they seemed to be like a beautiful metal glowing intensely in the midst of a furnace. Anyone who has looked upon the dazzling and almost insupportable brilliancy of metal in a furnace, can form an idea of the image here presented. ¶And his voice as the sound of many waters.As the roar of the ocean, or of a cataract. Nothing could be a more sublime description of majesty and authority than to compare the voice of a speaker with the roar of the ocean. This comparison often occurs in the Scriptures. SeeEze.xliii.2, “And behold the glory of the God of Israel came from the east: and his voice was like the sound of many waters: and the earth shined with his glory.” SoRe.xiv.2;xix.6.Comp.Eze.i.24;Da.x.6.
15 And86his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and87his voice as the sound of many waters.
15.And his feet like unto fine brass.Comp.Da.x.6, “And his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass.” See alsoEze.i.7, “and they” [the feet of the living creatures] “sparkled like the colour of burnished brass.” The word here used—χαλκολιβάνῳ—occurs in the New Testament only here and inch. ii.18. It is not found in the Septuagint. The word properly meanswhite brass(probably compounded ofχαλκός,brass, andλιβανός,whiteness, from the Hebrewלָבָן,white). Others regard it as fromχαλκός,brass, andλιπαρόν,clear. Themetalreferred to was undoubtedly a species of brass distinguished for its clearness or whiteness. Brass is a compound metal, composed of copper and zinc. The colour varies much according to the different proportions of the various ingredients. The Vulgate here renders the wordaurichalcum, a mixture of gold and of brass—perhaps the same as theἤλεκτρον—theelectrumof the ancients, composed of gold and of silver, usually in the proportion of four parts gold and one part silver, and distinguished for its brilliancy. See Robinson,Lex., and Wetstein,in loco. The kind of metal here referred to, however, would seem to be some compound of brass—of a whitish and brilliant colour. The exact proportion of the ingredients in the metal here referred to cannot now be determined. ¶As if they burned in a furnace.That is, his feet were so bright that they seemed to be like a beautiful metal glowing intensely in the midst of a furnace. Anyone who has looked upon the dazzling and almost insupportable brilliancy of metal in a furnace, can form an idea of the image here presented. ¶And his voice as the sound of many waters.As the roar of the ocean, or of a cataract. Nothing could be a more sublime description of majesty and authority than to compare the voice of a speaker with the roar of the ocean. This comparison often occurs in the Scriptures. SeeEze.xliii.2, “And behold the glory of the God of Israel came from the east: and his voice was like the sound of many waters: and the earth shined with his glory.” SoRe.xiv.2;xix.6.Comp.Eze.i.24;Da.x.6.
16 And he had in his right hand seven stars; and out of his mouth went88a sharp two-edged sword: and his countenancewasas89the sun shineth in his strength.16.And he had in his right hand seven stars.Emblematic of the angels of the seven churches.Howhe held them is not said. It may be that they seemed to rest on his open palm; or it may be that he seemed to hold them as if they were arranged in a certain order, and with some sort of attachment, so that they could be grasped. It is not improbable that, as in the case of the seven lamp-bearers (Notes,ver.13), they were so arranged as to represent the relative position of the seven churches. ¶And out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword.On the form of the ancient two-edged sword, see Notes onEp.vi.17. The two edges were designed to cut both ways; and such a sword is a striking emblem of the penetrating power oftruth, or of words that proceed from the mouth; and this is designed undoubtedly to be the representation here—that there was some symbol which showed that his words, or his truth, had the power of cutting deep, or penetrating the soul. So inIs.xlix.2, it is said of the same personage, “And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword.”See Notes on that verse. So inHe.iv.12, “The word of God is quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword,”&c.So it is said of Pericles by Aristophanes:“His powerful speechPierced the hearer’s soul, and left behindDeep in his bosom its keen point infixt.”A similar figure often occurs in Arabic poetry. “As arrows his words enter into the heart.” See Gesenius,Comm. zu,Is.xlix.2. The only difficulty here is in regard to the apparently incongruous representation of aswordseeming to proceed from the mouth; but it is not perhaps necessary to suppose that John means to say that hesawsuch an image. He heard him speak; he felt the penetrating power of his words; and they wereas ifa sharp sword proceeded from his mouth. They penetrated deep into the soul, and as he looked on him it seemed as if a sword came from his mouth. Perhaps it is not necessary to suppose that there was evenanyvisible representation of this—either of a sword or of the breath proceeding from his mouth appearing to take this form, as Professor Stuart supposes. It may be wholly a figurative representation, as Heinrichs and Ewald suppose. Though there were visible and impressive symbols of his majesty and glory presented to the eyes, it is not necessary to suppose that there were visible symbols of hiswords. ¶And his countenance.His face. There had been before particular descriptions of some parts of his face—as of his eyes—but this is a representation of his whole aspect; of the general splendour and brightness of his countenance. ¶Wasas the sun shineth in his strength.In his full splendour when unobscured by clouds; where his rays are in no way intercepted.Comp.Ju.v.31: “But let them that love him [the Lord] be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might;”2 Sa.xxiii.4, “And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun ariseth, even a morning without clouds;”Ps. xix.5, “Which [the sun] is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.” There could be no more striking description of the majesty and glory of the countenance than to compare it with the over-powering splendour of the sun.—This closes the description of the personage that appeared to John. The design was evidently to impress him with a sense of his majesty and glory, and to prepare the way for the authoritative nature of the communications which he was to make. It is obvious that this appearance must have beenassumed. The representation is not that of the Redeemer as he rose from the dead—a middle-aged man; nor is it clear that it was the same as on the mount of transfiguration—where, for anything that appears, he retained his usual aspect and form though temporarily invested with extraordinary brilliancy; nor is it the form in which we may suppose he ascended to heaven—for there is no evidence that he was thus transformed when he ascended; nor is it that of a priest—for all the peculiar habiliments of a Jewish priest are wanting in this description. The appearance assumed is, evidently, in accordance with various representations of God as he appeared to Ezekiel, to Isaiah, and to Daniel—that which was asuitablemanifestation of a divine being—of one clothed in the majesty and power of God. We are not to infer from this, that this is in fact the appearance of the Redeemer now in heaven, or that this is the form in which he will appear when he comes to judge the world. Of his appearance in heaven we have no knowledge; of the aspect which he will assume when he comes to judge men we have no certain information. We are necessarily quite as ignorant of this as we are of what will beour ownform and appearance after the resurrection from the dead.
16 And he had in his right hand seven stars; and out of his mouth went88a sharp two-edged sword: and his countenancewasas89the sun shineth in his strength.
16.And he had in his right hand seven stars.Emblematic of the angels of the seven churches.Howhe held them is not said. It may be that they seemed to rest on his open palm; or it may be that he seemed to hold them as if they were arranged in a certain order, and with some sort of attachment, so that they could be grasped. It is not improbable that, as in the case of the seven lamp-bearers (Notes,ver.13), they were so arranged as to represent the relative position of the seven churches. ¶And out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword.On the form of the ancient two-edged sword, see Notes onEp.vi.17. The two edges were designed to cut both ways; and such a sword is a striking emblem of the penetrating power oftruth, or of words that proceed from the mouth; and this is designed undoubtedly to be the representation here—that there was some symbol which showed that his words, or his truth, had the power of cutting deep, or penetrating the soul. So inIs.xlix.2, it is said of the same personage, “And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword.”See Notes on that verse. So inHe.iv.12, “The word of God is quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword,”&c.So it is said of Pericles by Aristophanes:
“His powerful speechPierced the hearer’s soul, and left behindDeep in his bosom its keen point infixt.”
“His powerful speechPierced the hearer’s soul, and left behindDeep in his bosom its keen point infixt.”
“His powerful speech
Pierced the hearer’s soul, and left behind
Deep in his bosom its keen point infixt.”
A similar figure often occurs in Arabic poetry. “As arrows his words enter into the heart.” See Gesenius,Comm. zu,Is.xlix.2. The only difficulty here is in regard to the apparently incongruous representation of aswordseeming to proceed from the mouth; but it is not perhaps necessary to suppose that John means to say that hesawsuch an image. He heard him speak; he felt the penetrating power of his words; and they wereas ifa sharp sword proceeded from his mouth. They penetrated deep into the soul, and as he looked on him it seemed as if a sword came from his mouth. Perhaps it is not necessary to suppose that there was evenanyvisible representation of this—either of a sword or of the breath proceeding from his mouth appearing to take this form, as Professor Stuart supposes. It may be wholly a figurative representation, as Heinrichs and Ewald suppose. Though there were visible and impressive symbols of his majesty and glory presented to the eyes, it is not necessary to suppose that there were visible symbols of hiswords. ¶And his countenance.His face. There had been before particular descriptions of some parts of his face—as of his eyes—but this is a representation of his whole aspect; of the general splendour and brightness of his countenance. ¶Wasas the sun shineth in his strength.In his full splendour when unobscured by clouds; where his rays are in no way intercepted.Comp.Ju.v.31: “But let them that love him [the Lord] be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might;”2 Sa.xxiii.4, “And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun ariseth, even a morning without clouds;”Ps. xix.5, “Which [the sun] is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.” There could be no more striking description of the majesty and glory of the countenance than to compare it with the over-powering splendour of the sun.—This closes the description of the personage that appeared to John. The design was evidently to impress him with a sense of his majesty and glory, and to prepare the way for the authoritative nature of the communications which he was to make. It is obvious that this appearance must have beenassumed. The representation is not that of the Redeemer as he rose from the dead—a middle-aged man; nor is it clear that it was the same as on the mount of transfiguration—where, for anything that appears, he retained his usual aspect and form though temporarily invested with extraordinary brilliancy; nor is it the form in which we may suppose he ascended to heaven—for there is no evidence that he was thus transformed when he ascended; nor is it that of a priest—for all the peculiar habiliments of a Jewish priest are wanting in this description. The appearance assumed is, evidently, in accordance with various representations of God as he appeared to Ezekiel, to Isaiah, and to Daniel—that which was asuitablemanifestation of a divine being—of one clothed in the majesty and power of God. We are not to infer from this, that this is in fact the appearance of the Redeemer now in heaven, or that this is the form in which he will appear when he comes to judge the world. Of his appearance in heaven we have no knowledge; of the aspect which he will assume when he comes to judge men we have no certain information. We are necessarily quite as ignorant of this as we are of what will beour ownform and appearance after the resurrection from the dead.