The New Interpreters Bible [12] 0687278252

Citation preview

SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY AT CLAREMONT

HOMO

an a

—t

a oe

fed

3

=

|x

Vy\}

FATT

= iat

&

2T

AS

=

ms SS a.

DT

ALI

— vis

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S’ BIBLE IN TWELVE VOLUMES VOLUME I

General Articles on the Bible; General Articles on the Old Testament; Genesis; Exodus; Leviticus

VOLUME II

Numbers; Deuteronomy; Introduction to Narrative Literature; Joshua; Judges; Ruth; 1 & 2 Samuel

VOLUME Ill

1 & 2 Kings; 1 & 2 Chronicles; Ezra; Nehemiah; Esther; Additions to Esther; Tobit; Judith

VOLUME IV

1 & 2 Maccabees; Introduction to Hebrew Poetry; Job; Psalms

VOLUME V

Introduction to Wisdom Literature; Proverbs; Ecclesiastes; Song of Songs; Book of Wisdom; Sirach

VOLUME VI

Introduction to Prophetic Literature; Isaiah; Jeremiah; Baruch; Letter of Jeremiah; Lamentations; Ezekiel

VOLUME VII

Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature; Daniel; Additions to Daniel; Hosea; Joel; Amos; Obadiah; Jonah; Micah; Nahum; Habakkuk; Zephaniah; Haggai; Zechariah; Malachi

VOLUME VIII

General Articles on the New Testament; Matthew; Mark

VOLUME 1X

Luke; John

VOLUME X

Acts; Introduction to Epistolary Literature; Romans; 1 Corinthians

VOLUME XI

2 Corinthians; Galatians; Ephesians; Philippians; Colossians; 1 & 2 Thessalonians; 1 & 2 Timothy; Titus; Philemon

VOLUME XII

Hebrews; James; 1 & 2 Peter; 1, 2, & 3 John; Jude; Revelation

VOLUME TWELVE THE LETTER TO THE HEBREWS THE LETTER OF JAMES THE FIRSE AND'SECOND'LEPTERS

OF PETER:

THE FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD LETTERS OF JOHN PEPE a PER-OP JUDE THE BOOK OF REVELATION

EDITORIAL BOARD

LEANDER E. KecK Convener and Senior New Testament Editor

Winkley Professor of Biblical Theology, Emeritus The Divinity School Yale University Tuomas G. LonG Senior Homiletics Editor Bandy Professor of Preaching Candler School of Theology Emory University

Davip L. PETERSEN Senior Old Testament Editor

Bruce C. BircH Old Testament Editor Dean and Woodrow W. and Mildred B. Miller

Joun J. Couns Old Testament Editor Professor of Hebrew Bible

Professor of Biblical Theology Wesley Theological Seminary KATHERYN PFISTERER DARR Old Testament Editor Associate Professor of Hebrew Bible

The School of Theology Boston University

WiuiaM L. Lanet New Testament Editor Paul T. Walls Professor of Wesleyan and Biblical Studies Department of Religion Seattle Pacific University Ga R. O’Day Homiletics Editor Almar H. Shatford Associate Professor of Homiletics

Candler School of Theology Emory University

* deceased

Clifford E. Baldridge Professor of Biblical Studies

The Iliff School of Theology

The Divinity School University of Chicago Jack A. Keer,

Jp.

Project Director The New Interpreter’s Bible Director of Bible & Reference/ Academic & Professional Resources Abingdon Press James EArt Massey

Homiletics Editor Dean Emeritus and Distinguished Professor-at-Large The School of Theology Anderson University Marion L. Soarps New Testament Editor Professor of New Testament Studies

Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary

aoe N484 494

Fed 2

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S:- BIBLE GENERAL ARTICLES & INTRODUCTION, COMMENTARY, & REFLECTIONS FOR EACH BOOK OF THE BIBLE INCLUDING

THE APOCRYPHAL / DEUTEROCANONICAL BOOKS IN

TWELVE VOLUMES

VOLUME

All

ABINGDON PRESS Nashville

Theology MOee N

LARE LOGY SCHOOL OF THEO Claremont,

CA

THE Bey NE

| Tee S BIBLE

Copyright © 1998 by Abingdon Press

All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to Abingdon Press, 201 Eighth Avenue South, Nashville, TN 37203.

This book is printed on recycled, acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

The New Interpreter’s Bible: general articles & introduction, commentary, & reflections for each book of the Bible, including the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books. Dance: Full texts and critical notes of the New International Version and the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible in parallel columns. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-687-27825-2 (v. 12: alk. paper) 1. Bible—Commentaries. 2. Abingdon Press. I. Bible. English. New International. 1994. II. Bible. English. New Revised : Standard. 1994. BS491.2.N484 1994 220.7’7—dc20

94-21092 CIP

Quotations from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®. NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Publishing House. All rights reserved. Quotations from the NEW REVISED STANDARD VERSION OF THE BIBLE. Copyright © 1989 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Quotations from the following are used by permission: 7he Good News Bible—Old Testmanet: copyright © American Bible Society 1976; New Testament: copyright © American Bible Society 1966, 1971, 1976. The New English Bible, © The Delegates of the Oxford University Press and The Syndics of the Cambridge University Press 1961, 1970. The Revised English Bible, copyright © 1989 Oxford University Press and Cambridge University Press. The Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright © 1946, 1952, 1971 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA. The TANAKH: The New JPS Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text. Copyright 1985 by the Jewish Publication Society. All used by permission. Quotations from The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vols. 1 and 2, by James H. Charlesworth, copyright © 1983, 1985 by James H. Charlesworth. Used by permission of Doubleday, a division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.

The Hebraicall® and Graecall® fonts used to print this work are available from Linguist’s Software, Inc., PO Box 580, Edmonds, WA 98020-0580. Tel (425) 775-1130. Web www.linguistsoftware.com

PUBLICATION STAFF President and Publisher: Neil M. Alexander Editorial Director: Harriett Jane Olson Project Director: Jack A. Keller, Jr. Production Editor: Linda S. Allen Assistant Editors: Deborah A. Appler Joan M. Shoup Production and Design Manager: Walter E. Wynne Designer: J. S. Laughbaum Copy Processing Manager: Sylvia S. Marlow Composition Specialist: Kathy M. Harding Publishing Systems Analyst: Glenn R. Hinton Prepress Manager: Billy W. Murphy Prepress Systems Technician: Thomas E. Mullins J. Calvin Buckner

Phillip D. Elliott Director of Production Processes: James E. Leath Scheduling: Laurene M. Brazzell Tracey D. Evans Print Procurement Coordinator: Teresa S. Alspaugh

02 03 04 05 06 07 — 109876543 MANUFACTURED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

CONSULTANTS

Nancy C. MiILLER-HERRON

New M. ALEXANDER President and Publisher

Attorney and clergy member of the Tennessee Conference The United Methodist Church

The United Methodist Publishing House Nashville, Tennessee

Dresden, Tennessee Owen E CAMPION Associate Publisher

Ropert C. SCHNASE

Our Sunday Visitor

Pastor

Huntington, Indiana

First United Methodist Church McAllen, Texas

Minerva G. CaRcANO Director

Bit SHERMAN Pastor Emeritus

Mexican American Program Perkins School of Theology Southern Methodist University Dallas, Texas

Woodmont Baptist Church Nashville, Tennessee

Ropney T. SMOTHERS Pastor Ousley United Methodist Church Lithonia, Georgia

V. L. Daucutery, JR. Retired Pastor

Southern Georgia Conference The United Methodist Church

WiLuAM D. WATLEY Pastor

SHARON NEUFER EMSWILER Pastor First United Methodist Church Rock Island, Illinois

St. James African Methodist Episcopal Church Newark, New Jersey

TALLULAH FISHER WILLIAMS! Superintendent Chicago Northwestern District The United Methodist Church Chicago, Illinois

Juan G. FEuUCIANO VALERA Director Development Office Evangelical Seminary of Puerto Rico San Juan, Puerto Rico

SUK-CHONG YU Superintendent Nevada-Sierra District The United Methodist Church Reno, Nevada

CELIA BREWER MARSHALL Lecturer

University of North Carolina at Charlotte Charlotte, North Carolina

+ deceased vii

CONTRIBUTORS EUIZABETH ACHTEMEIER Adjunct Professor of Bible and Homiletics Union Theological Seminary in Virginia Richmond, Virginia (Presbyterian Church

Bruce C. Bircu Dean and Woodrow W. and Mildred B. Miller

Professor of Biblical Theology Wesley Theological Seminary

[U.S.A.])

Washington, DC

(The United Methodist Church) I &2 Samuel

Joel

Lesugz C. ALLEN Professor of Old Testament Fuller Theological Seminary

PxHyuus A: Birp Professor of Old Testament

Pasadena, California (Baptist) I &2 Chronicles

Interpretation Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary Evanston, Illinois

(The United Methodist Church) The Authority of the Bible

Gary A. ANDERSON Associate Professor of Religious Studies University of Virginia Charlottesville, Virginia (The Roman Catholic Church) Introduction to Israelite Religion

C. Curtron BLack Otto A. Piper Professor of Biblical Theology Princeton Theological Seminary Princeton, New Jersey (The United Methodist Church) I, 2, & 3 John

Davin L. BARTLETT

Lantz Professor of Preaching and Communication The Divinity School Yale University New Haven, Connecticut (American Baptist Churches in the U.S.A.)

JOSEPH BLENKINSOPP John A. O’Brien Professor of Biblical Studies

Department of Theology University of Notre Dame

I Peter

Notre Dame, Indiana (The Roman Catholic Church) Introduction to the Pentateuch

Ropert A. BENNETT, Pu.D. Cambridge, Massachusetts (The Episcopal Church) Zephaniah

M. EuGENE BORING I. Wylie and Elizabeth M. Briscoe Professor of New Testament Brite Divinity School Texas Christian University

ADELE BERLIN Robert H. Smith Professor of Hebrew Bible Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs University of Maryland College Park, Maryland Introduction to Hebrew Poetry

Fort Worth, Texas

(Christian Church [Disciples of Christ)) Matthew iD

CONTRIBUTORS WALTER BRUEGGEMANN William Marcellus McPheeters Professor of Old Testament

Columbia Theological Seminary Decatur, Georgia (United Church of Christ) Exodus

Davip G. BuTTRIck Professor of Homiletics and Liturgics The Divinity School Vanderbilt University Nashville, Tennessee (United Church of Christ) The Use of the Bible in Preaching RONALD E. CLEMENTS Samuel Davidson Professor of Old Testament King’s College

University of London London, England (Baptist Union of Great Britain and Ireland) Deuteronomy RicHarD J. Currorp, S.J. Professor of Old Testament Weston Jesuit School of Theology Cambridge, Massachusetts (The Roman Catholic Church) Introduction to Wisdom Literature

Joun J. Couuns Professor of Hebrew Bible The Divinity School University of Chicago Chicago, Illinois

(The Roman Catholic Church) Introduction to Early Jewish Religion Ropert B. Coote Professor of Old Testament

San Francisco Theological Seminary San Anselmo, California

(Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) Joshua

Frep B. CRADDOCK Bandy Distinguished Professor of Preaching and New Testament, Emeritus

Candler School of Theology Emory University Atlanta, Georgia (Christian Church [Disciples of Christ]) Hebrews

SIDNIE WHITE CRAWFORD Associate Professor of Hebrew Bible

and Chair of the Department of Classics University of Nebraska—Lincoln Lincoln, Nebraska

(The Episcopal Church) Esther; Additions to Esther JAMES L. CRENSHAW

Robert L. Howers Professor of Old Testament The Divinity School Duke University Durham, North Carolina (Baptist) Sirach

KeirH _R. Crm Pastor New Concord Presbyterian Church Concord, Virginia (Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) Modem English Versions of the Bible

R. ALAN CULPEPPER Dean The School of Theology Mercer University Atlanta, Georgia (Southern Baptist Convention) Luke KATHERYN PFISTERER DARR

Associate Professor of Hebrew Bible The School of Theology

Boston University Boston, Massachusetts

(The United Methodist Church) Ezekiel ROBERT DORAN

Professor of Religion Amherst College Amherst, Massachusetts

I &2 Maccabees THoMAS B. DozEMAN

Professor of Old Testament United Theological Seminary Dayton, Ohio (Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) Numbers

CONTRIBUTORS JAMES D. G. DUNN Lightfoot Professor of Divinity Department of Theology University of Durham Durham, England (The Methodist Church [Great Britain]) 1 & 2 Timothy; Titus ELDON Jay Epp

Harkness Professor of Biblical Literature and Chairman of the Department of Religion Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio (The Episcopal Church) Ancient Texts and Versions of the New Testament KATHLEEN A, ROBERTSON FARMER Professor of Old Testament

United Theological Seminary Dayton, Ohio . (The United Methodist Church) Ruth

CaIN HopE FELDER Professor of New Testament Language and Literature The School of Divinity Howard University Washington, DC (The United Methodist Church) Philemon TERENCE E. FRETHEIM Professor of Old Testament

Luther Seminary Saint Paul, Minnesota (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) Genesis

FRANCISCO O. GARC{A-TRETO Professor of Religion and Chair of the Department of Religion Trinity University San Antonio, Texas (Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) Nahum

CATHERINE GUNSALUS GONZALEZ Professor of Church History Columbia Theological Seminary Decatur, Georgia (Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) The Use of the Bible in Hymns, Liturgy, and Education

Justo L. GONZALEZ Adjunct Professor of Church History Columbia Theological Seminary Decatur, Georgia (The United Methodist Church) How the Bible Has Been Interpreted in Christian Tradition DONALD E. GOWAN Robert Cleveland Holland Professor of Old Testament Pittsburgh Theological Seminary Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

(Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) Amos

DANIEL J. HARRINGTON, S.J. Professor of New Testament Weston School of Theology Cambridge, Massachusetts (The Roman Catholic Church) Introduction to the Canon

RICHARD B. Hays Professor of New Testament The Divinity School Duke University Durham, North Carolina (The United Methodist Church) Galatians THEODORE HIEBERT Professor of Old Testament McCormick Theological Seminary Chicago, Illinois (Mennonite Church) Habakkuk CARL R. HOLLADAY Professor of New Testament Candler School of Theology Emory University Atlanta, Georgia Contemporary Methods of Reading the Bible Morna D. HOOKER Lady Margaret’s Professor of Divinity, Emeritu The Divinity School University of Cambridge Cambridge, England (The Methodist Church [Great Britain]) Philippians

CONTRIBUTORS Davip C. HOPKINS Professor of Old Testament Wesley Theological Seminary Washington, DC (United Church of Christ) Life in Ancient Palestine

ANDREW T. LINCOLN Professor of New Testament

Wycliffe College University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario Canada

(The Church of England) Colossians

LUKE T. JOHNSON Robert W. Woodruff Professor of New Testament and Christian Origins Candler School of Theology Emory University Atlanta, Georgia (The Roman Catholic Church) James

J. CLINTON McCANN, Jr. Evangelical Associate Professor of Biblical Interpretation Eden Theological Seminary St. Louis, Missouri (Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) Psalms

WALTER C. KAISER, JR. President and Colman M. Mockler Distinguished Professor of Old Testament Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary South Hamilton, Massachusetts (The Evangelical Free Church of America) Leviticus

ABRAHAM J. MALHERBE Buckingham Professor of New Testament Criticism and Interpretation, Emeritus The Divinity School Yale University New Haven, Connecticut (Church of Christ) The Cultural Context of the New Testament: The Greco-Roman World

LEANDER E. KECK Winkley Professor of Biblical Theology, Emeritus Yale University Divinity School New Haven, Connecticut (Christian Church [Disciples of Christ) Introduction to The New Interpreter’s Bible

W. EUGENE MarcH Dean and Arnold Black Rhodes Professor of Old Testament Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary Louisville, Kentucky (Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) Haggai

CHAN-HIE Kim Professor of New Testament and Director of Korean Studies The School of Theology at Claremont Claremont, California (The United Methodist Church) Reading the Bible as Asian Americans

JAMES EARL Massey Dean Emeritus and Distinguished Professor-at-Large The School of Theology Anderson University (Church of God [Anderson, Ind.]}) Reading the Bible from Particular Social Locations: An Introduction; Reading the Bible as African Americans

RALPH W. KLEIN Dean and Christ Seminary-Seminex Professor of Old Testament Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago Chicago, Illinois (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) Ezra; Nehemiah

J. MAXWELL MILLER Professor of Old Testament Candler School of Theology Emory University Atlanta, Georgia (The United Methodist Church) Introduction to the History of Ancient Israel

MICHAEL KOLarcik, S.J. Assistant Professor Regis College Toronto, Ontario Canada

(The Roman Catholic Church) Book of Wisdom xii

CONTRIBUTORS PATRICK D. MILLER Charles T. Haley Professor of Old Testament Theology Princeton Theological Seminary Princeton, New Jersey

(Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) Jeremiah

GAIL R. O’Day Almar H. Shatford Professor of Homiletics Candler School of Theology Emory University Atlanta, Georgia (United Church of Christ) John

PETER D. MISCALL Adjunct Faculty ; The Iliff School of Theology Denver, Colorado (The Episcopal Church) Introduction to Narrative Literature

BEN C. OLLENBURGER Professor of Biblical Theology Associated Mennonite Biblical Seminary Elkhart, Indiana (Mennonite Church) Zechariah

FREDERICK J. MURPHY Professor Department of Religious Studies College of the Holy Cross Worcester, Massachusetts (The Roman Catholic Church) Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature

DENNIS T. OLSON Associate Professor of Old Testament Princeton Theological Seminary Princeton, New Jersey (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) Judges

CaroL A. NEWsoM Associate Professor of Old Testament Candler School of Theology Emory University Atlanta, Georgia (The Episcopal Church)

CAROLYN OSIEK Professor of New Testament Department of Biblical Languages and Literature Catholic Theological Union Chicago, Illinois (The Roman Catholic Church) Reading the Bible as Women

Job GEORGE W. E. NICKELSBURG Professor of Christian Origins and Early Judaism School of Religion University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) The Jewish Context of the New Testament IRENE NOWELL, O.S.B. Community Formation Director Mount St. Scholasticas Atchison, Kansas (The Roman Catholic Church) Tobit

KATHLEEN M. O’CONNOR Professor of Old Testament Language, Literature, and Exegesis Columbia Theological Seminary Decatur, Georgia (The Roman Catholic Church) Lamentations

SAMUEL PAGAN President Evangelical Seminary of Puerto Rico San Juan, Puerto Rico (Christian Church [Disciples of Christ]) Obadiah

SIMON B. PARKER Associate Professor of Hebrew Bible and Harrell E Beck Scholar in Hebrew Scripture The School of Theology Boston University Boston, Massachusetts (The United Methodist Church) The Ancient Near Eastern Literary Background of the Old Testament

PHEME PERKINS Professor of New Testament Boston College Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts (The Roman Catholic Church) Mark; Ephesians

CONTRIBUTORS DaviD L. PETERSEN Clifford E. Baldridge Professor of Biblical Studies The Iliff School of Theology Denver, Colorado (Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) Introduction to Prophetic Literature CHRISTOPHER C. ROWLAND Dean Ireland’s Professor of the Exegesis of Holy Scripture The Queen’s College Oxford, England (The Church of England) Revelation ANTHONY J. SALDARINI Professor of Biblical Studies Boston College Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts (The Roman Catholic Church) Baruch; Letter of Jeremiah J. PAUL SAMPLEY Professor of New Testament and Christian Origins The School of Theology and The Graduate Division Boston University Boston, Massachusetts (The United Methodist Church) 1 Corinthians; 2 Corinthians JUDITH E. SANDERSON Assistant Professor of Hebrew Bible Department of Theology and Religious Studies Seattle University Seattle, Washington Ancient Texts and Versions of the Old Testament EILEEN M. SCHULLER, O.S.U. Professor Department of Religious Studies McMaster University Hamilton, Ontario Canada (The Roman Catholic Church) Malachi

FERNANDO FE SEGOVIA Associate Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity The Divinity School Vanderbilt University Nashville, Tennessee (The Roman Catholic Church) Reading the Bible as Hispanic Americans CHRISTOPHER R, SEITZ Professor of Old Testament and Theological Studies St Mary’s College University of St. Andrews Fife, Scotland (The Episcopal Church) Isaiah 40-66

CHOON-LEONG SEOW Henry Snyder Gehman Professor of Old Testament Language and Literature Princeton Theological Seminary Princeton, New Jersey (Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) 1 & 2 Kings

MICHAEL A. SIGNER Abrams Professor of Jewish Thought and Culture Department of Theology University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, Indiana How the Bible Has Been Interpreted in Jewish Tradition

MolsEs SILVA Professor of New Testament Westminster Theological Seminary Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (The Orthodox Presbyterian Church) Contemporary Theories of Biblical Interpretation

DANIEL J. SIMUNDSON Professor of Old Testament Luther Seminary Saint Paul, Minnesota (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) Micah

CONTRIBUTORS ABRAHAM SMITH Associate Professor of New Testament Andover Newton Theological School Newton Centre, Massachusetts (The National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc.) 1 & 2 Thessalonians DANIEL L. SMITH-CHRISTOPHER Associate Professor of Theological Studies

Department of Theology — Loyola Marymount University Los Angeles, California (The Society of Friends [Quaker]) Daniel; Bel and the Dragon; Prayer of Azariah; Susannah ROBERT C. TANNEHILL Academic Dean and Harold B. Williams Professor of Biblical Studies Methodist Theological School in Ohio Delaware, Ohio . (The United Methodist Church) The Gospels and Narrative Literature

GEORGE E. TINKER Associate Professor of Cross-Cultural Ministries The Iliff School of Theology Denver, Colorado (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) Reading the Bible as Native Americans

W. SIBLEY TOWNER The Reverend Archibald McFadyen Professor of Biblical Interpretation Union Theological Seminary in Virginia Richmond, Virginia (Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.]) Ecclesiastes PHYLLIS TRIBLE Professor of Biblical Studies

The Divinity School Wake Forest University Winston-Salem, North Carolina Jonah

CHRISTOPHER M. TUCKETT Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis Faculty of Theology University of Manchester Manchester, England (The Church of England) Jesus and the Gospels RAYMOND C. VAN LEEUWEN Professor of Religion and Theology Eastern College Saint Davids, Pennsylvania (Christian Reformed Church in North America) Proverbs RoserT W. WALL Professor of Biblical Studies Department of Religion Seattle Pacific University Seattle, Washington (Free Methodist Church of North America) Acts; Introduction to Epistolary Literature DUANE E. WaTSON Associate Professor of New Testament Studies Department of Religion and Philosophy Malone College Canton, Ohio (The United Methodist Church) 2 Peter; Jude

RENITA J. WEEMS Associate Professor of Hebrew Bible The Divinity School Vanderbilt University Nashville, Tennessee (African Methodist Episcopal Church) Song of Songs

LAWRENCE M. WILLS Associate Professor of Biblical Studies The Episcopal Divinity School Cambridge, Massachusetts (The Episcopal Church) Judith VINCENT L. WIMBUSH

GENE M. TUCKER Professor of Old Testament, Emeritus Candler School of Theology Emory University Atlanta, Georgia (The United Methodist Church) Isaiah 1-39

Professor of New Testament and Christian Origins Union Theological Seminary New York, New York (Progressive National Baptist Convention, Inc.) The Ecclesiastical Context of the New Testament

CONTRIBUTORS N. THOMAS WRIGHT Dean of Lichfield Lichfield Cathedral Staffordshire, England (The Church of England) Romans

GALE A. YEE Associate Professor of Old Testament Department of Theology University of Saint Thomas Saint Paul, Minnesota (The Roman Catholic Church)

_

Hosea

FEATURES OF THE NEW INTERPRETER’S’ BIBLE _ he general aim of 7he New I/nterpreter’s

“=

in The New Interpreter’s Bible. Dealing with Scripture in terms of these primary units allows discussion of important issues that are overlooked in a verseby-verse treatment. Each scriptural unit is identified by text citation and a short title. The full texts and critical notes of the New International Version and the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible are presented in parallel columns for quick reference. (For the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical works, the NIV is replaced by The New American Bible.) Since every translation is to some extent an interpretation as well, the inclusion of these widely known and influential modern translations provides an easy comparison that in many cases will lead to a better understanding of a passage. Biblical passages are set in a two-column format and placed in green tint-blocks to make it easy to recognize them at a glance. The NAB, NIV, and NRSV material is clearly identified on each page on which the text appears. Immediately following each biblical text is a section marked “Commentary,” which provides an exegetical analysis informed by linguistic, textcritical, historical-critical, literary, social-scientific, and theological methods. The Commentary serves as a reliable, judicious guide through the text, pointing out the critical problems as well as key interpretive issues. The exegetical approach is “text-centered.” That is, the commentators focus primarily on the text in its final form rather than on (a) a meticulous rehearsal of problems of scholarship associated with a text, (b) a thorough reconstruction of the pre-history of the text, or (c) an exhaustive rehearsal of the text’s interpretive history. Of course, some attention to scholarly problems, to the pre-history of a text, and to historic interpretations that have shaped streams of tradition is important in particular cases: precisely in order to

Bible is to bring the best in contemporary

biblical scholarship into the service of the church to enhance preaching, teaching, and study of the Scriptures. To accomplish that general aim, the design of Zhe New Interpreter’s Bible has been shaped by two controlling principles: (1) form serves function, and (2) maximize ease of use. General articles provide the reader with concise, up-to-date, balanced introductions and assessments of selected topics. In most cases, a brief bibliography points the way to further exploration of a topic. Many of the general articles are placed in volumes | and 8, at the beginning of the coverage of the Old and New Testaments, respectively. Others have been inserted in those volumes where the reader will encounter the corresponding type of literature (e.g., “Introduction to Prophetic Literature” appears in Volume 6 alongside several of the prophetic books). Coverage of each biblical book begins with an “Introduction” that acquaints the reader with the essential historical, sociocultural, literary, and theological issues necessary to understand the biblical book. A short bibliography and an outline of the biblical book are found at the end of each Introduction. The introductory sections are the only material in The New Interpreter’s Bible printed in a single wide-column format. The biblical text is divided into coherent and manageable primary units, which are located within larger sections of Scripture. At the opening discussion of any large section of Scripture, readers will often find material identified as “Overview,” which includes remarks applicable to the large section of text. The primary unit of text may be as short as a few verses or as long as a chapter or more. This is the point at which the biblical text itself is reprinted XVI

FEATURES OF THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE illumine the several levels of meaning in the final form of the text. But the primary focus is on the canonical text itself. Moreover, the Commentary not only describes pertinent aspects of the text, but also teaches the reader what to look for in the text so as to develop the reader’s own capacity to analyze and interpret the text. Commentary material runs serially for a few paragraphs or a few pages, depending on what is required by the biblical passage under discussion. Commentary material is set in a two-column format. Occasional subheads appear in a bold green font. The next level of subdivisions appears as bold black fonts and a third level as black italic fonts. Footnotes are placed at the bottom of the column in which the superscripts appear. Key words in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek are printed in the original-language font, accompanied by a transliteration and a translation or explanation. Immediately following the Commentary, in most cases, is the section called “Reflections.” A detailed exposition growing directly out of the discussion and issues dealt with in the Commentary, the Reflections are geared specifically toward helping those who interpret Scripture in the life of the church by providing “handles” for grasping the significance of Scripture for faith and life today. Recognizing that the text has the capacity to shape the life of the Christian community, this

XVill

section presents multiple possibilities for preaching and teaching in light of each biblical text. That is, instead of providing the preacher or teacher full illustrations, poems, outlines, and the like, the Reflections offer several trajectories of possible interpretation that connect with the situation of the contemporary listeners. Recognizing the power of Scripture to speak anew to diverse situations, not all of the suggested trajectories could be appropriated on any one occasion. Preachers and teachers want some specificity about the implications of the text, but not so much specificity that the work is done for them. The ideas in the Reflections are meant to stimulate the thought of preachers and teachers, not to replace it. Three-quarter width columns distinguish Reflections materials from biblical text and Commentary. Occasional excursuses have been inserted in some volumes to address topics of special importance that are best treated apart from the flow of Commentary and Reflections on specific passages. Set in three-quarter width columns, excursuses are identified graphically by a green color bar that runs down the outside margin of the page. Occasional maps, charts, and illustrations appear throughout the volumes at points where they are most likely to be immediately useful to the reader.

CONTENTS VOLUME XII The Letter to the Hebrews Fred B. Craddock

The Letter of James Luke Timothy Johnson A

an

BE

ie ae LO eee A EE

ee YL

The First Letter of Peter

David L. Bartlett

227

The Second Letter of Peter Duane F. Watson

321

The First, Second, and Third Letters of John C. Clifton Black

363

The Letter of Jude Duane FE. Watson

47]

The Book of Revelation Christopher C. Rowland

501

Transliteration Schema

Index of Excursuses, Maps, Charts, and Illustrations Abbreviations

744 745 746

THE CE TTERSE@ LEE GIEBREWS INTRODUCTION, COMMENTARY, AND REFLECTIONS

BY FRED B. CRADDOCK

ft

a

i = stne AS Va ed

THE LETTER TO THE “HEBREWS

INTRODUCTION Te Christian faith grows out of and is sustained by the conversation between the church and its Bible. From this engagement, generation after generation, come the beliefs, the ethics, the liturgy, the purposes, and the relationships that define the Christian faith. To be sure, other voices enter the conversation, invited and uninvited, affecting the language used and the conclusions reached; but the primary and most influential partners are the community and the book. Of course, not all persons in the community are equally engaged in the conversation; some prefer to be silent, and some are silenced. Neither do all the books of the Bible participate equally. The reasons for this unevenness usually lie in the contents of the writings themselves, but not always. Sometimes there is quite a distance between what a document has to say and the church’s willingness or ability to hear it. The Letter to the Hebrews is a case in point. Why has Hebrews not had a stronger and more influential voice in the conversation between the church and the Bible? This is not to imply that this letter has been silent or silenced. On the contrary, Hebrews has been called on to say a few words at quite a few assemblies of the church. Most commonly it is to offer the benediction: Now may the God of peace, who brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, make you complete in everything good so that you may do his will, working among us that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen. (13:20-21 NRSV)

However, there are other, and some would say more important, moments in the worship service at which Hebrews is invited to speak. Among churches that use the ecumenical

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

lectionary, Hebrews provides the epistle reading every year on Good Friday as well as on Monday and Wednesday of Holy Week. Likewise, during the Christmas season, the prologue to Hebrews (Heb 1:1-4) always sings the praise of Christ in tandem voice with the prologue to the Gospel of John (John 1:1-14). Congregations that observe the Annunciation to Mary (March 25) and the Presentation of Jesus in the Temple (February 2) hear every year brief passages from Hebrews. For two brief periods between Pentecost and Advent semi-continuous readings from this epistle give preachers and listeners opportunities for a bit more extended engagement with Hebrews. Interestingly, this letter, which speaks every year on Good Friday, never says a word during the Easter season or on Pentecost. Does this seasonal silence reveal something about the message of the book or merely the preferences of the conversation partner, the church? We may discover an answer as we engage the text. The ecumenical lectionary reflects what is broadly true of the conversation between the church and the Bible; namely, that while Hebrews is invited to speak on occasion, the church is not as attentive to this voice as it is to others, such as Romans or 1 Corinthians. Scholars have intervened on behalf of Hebrews: The author demonstrates greater skill in the use of the Greek language than does any other New Testament writer, including Luke; Hebrews is the finest example of homiletical rhetoric available to us from the first century

CE; this letter offers the most elaborate Christian reading of the Old Testament to be found in the New Testament; as a theologian, the writer of Hebrews is not inferior to Paul or John. These witnesses have been heard with appreciation, but the distance between the church and Hebrews remains. Why? Before the search for reasons takes us inside the letter itself, a partial explanation may

lie in the location of Hebrews within the canon. Ina New Testament of 251 pages, Hebrews begins on page 208. Justified or not, a position near the end is read as a value judgment. The reader of the New Testament moves through the Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s writings as a traveler on a well-lighted street, not quite familiar but providing enough names and addresses so as to remove the sense of one’s being a stranger. However, once past Paul, the traveler finds the road uncertain, the houses dimly lit, and no familiar landmarks. The temptation is to stop and turn back to the Gospels, Acts, and Paul. After all, for these areas there are excellent maps. In addition to its location in the canon, this letter suffers from a title that has a distancing effect on the reader. Granted, the title is a later scribal addition (more later), but still it is the first word the reader sees—large bold print over the entrance to whatever may await the one who enters. Other titles temporarily distance us—after all, we are not Galatians, Corinthians, or Philippians—but these are geographical designations. All of us have traveled enough to know that initial strangeness soon dissolves, and, once inside, we find ourselves more alike than different. But “Hebrews” is not a geographical term; it is ethnic, and ethnic distances are more complex, more difficult to negotiate, requiring more energy than some people are willing to expend.

HEBREWS—INTRODUCTION Once inside, the reader never relaxes, never quite feels at home. The paragraphs are not written in such a way that they can easily be extracted for devotional or sermonic use; rather, they are carefully linked in one long sustained argument. The furniture seems permanently in place. As for the message of the argument, it is offered in an idiom strange to most readers. The writer is certainly not estranged from the Christian tradition that we meet elsewhere in the New Testament, nor is there any attempt to contradict it. Rather, that tradition is recast in Categories and images that make vivid and vital what other writers were content to handle by allusion and implication. As a framework for understanding the redemptive work of Christ, the writer takes us inside the cultus of the tabernacle of Israel’s wilderness journey. Priest, altar, sacrifice, atoning blood, and cleansing rituals— these are not the ancient and remote trappings of a people past but the stuff of the writer’s presentation of what Christ has done and is doing for us now. Most other New Testament writers, in making christological affirmations, use Ps 110:1: “The LORD says to my lord,/ ‘Sit at my right hand/ until 1 make your enemies your footstool’ ” (NRSV). Only Hebrews compels us to look at v. 4 of that psalm: “The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind,/ ‘You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek’ ” (NRSV). Suddenly a shadowy figure, hardly holding a place in the margin of our memories, moves center stage in the explication of christology. Most readers are not in familiar country. The author assumes an audience familiar enough with the Old Testament to make detailed exegesis of its texts convincing, word studies delightful, and swift allusions powerful. Most congregations will acknowledge, “We are not that audience.” Then can one argue that the theological and practical yield from the extra work required of the reader will make the effort well worth it? Without qualification, yes. In this brief survey of reasons for the church’s relative inattention to Hebrews, one other matter needs to be mentioned: the very stern nature of its imperatives. Even though the writer does not think the readers have reached the point of no return (Heb 6:9), that grim possibility is held up before them in very sharp language. Those who receive all the blessings of salvation and then fall away are beyond restoration (Heb 6:4-6). Those who willfully continue in sin face the fearful prospect of certain judgment (Heb 10:26-29): “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31 NRSV). Be warned by Esau, says the writer, who sold his birthright, then later sought to regain it but “found no chance to repent, even though he sought the blessing with tears” (Heb 12:17 NRSV). A letter containing such sentences is usually attractive only to those groups who deal easily in judgments and ultimatums. Certainly those churches that not only do not believe they are anywhere near such dangerous spiritual brinks but also do not believe that such brinks even exist will look to other writings for words more gentle and gracious. Especially for those who have luxuriated in a world of grace without ethical demand, who regard all

moral urgings as quaint echoes of a puritan past, Hebrews is not welcome reading. Investigation into the situation of the letter’s recipients will not dull these sharp warnings, but will very likely increase empathy and understanding for both the writer and the readers. 5

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

Perhaps this is the moment to caution all who read Hebrews, especially those who read With a view to teaching or preaching to others, to be patient. Be in no hurry to collapse the distance between the church and the text. Restrain the appetite for immediacy, for a “lesson for today.” Trust that that will come in due season. Recall the reminder of Clement of Alexandria that the Bible does not yield its hard-won truths to every casual passerby. It is in the service of that needed patience that the following introductory considerations are offered.

HISTORICAL CONSIDERATIONS Author, The King James Version answers the question of authorship quite clearly: “The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews.” That heading does not simply reflect the opinion of English translators in 1611; that opinion has a long history. In a papyrus from the third century CE, designated P*° in the Chester Beatty collection, Hebrews follows Romans among the letters of Paul. Both Clement and Origen, leaders in the great Christian intellectual center of Alexandria, judged the content of Hebrews to be from Paul. However, the style of the letter was so different from the remainder of the Pauline corpus that they concluded the actual writing to have been done by another, perhaps Luke or Clement of Rome. This uncertainty, growing out of the language and style of the letter, is preserved in a note at the end of Hebrews in the KJV: “Written to the Hebrews from Italy by Timothy.” In the Western church, early writers and lists do not include Hebrews among the letters of Paul. Tertullian, for example, suggested Barnabas, a candidate supported by three arguments: his close association with Paul (Acts 9:27; 13:2-15:39); his name, which Luke interprets as “son of encouragement” (Acts 4:36); Hebrews is called a “word of exhortation” (Heb 13:22; “encouragement” and “exhortation” translate the same Greek word [TapdkAnots paraklesis|; and the fact that Barnabas was a Levite (Acts 4:36). Hebrews exhibits a detailed knowledge of the Levitical priesthood. However, by the fifth century CE, under the strong influence of Augustine and Jerome, the Western church had accepted Pauline authorship, a position dominant until the Reformation. The debate would not die. Students of both Paul and Hebrews found difficulty attributing to Paul the language and literary style of this epistle (if, indeed, itis an epistle), the centrality of the cultus, a priestly christology, and the admitted second-generation position of the writer. Would Paul, who insisted his gospel was not from any human source but from a revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal 1:11-12), have written: “It was declared at first through the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him” (Heb 2:3 NRSV)? There has been no lack of other candidates, Silas, Priscilla, and Apollos among them. Luther’s choice was Apollos, the Jewish Christian from Alexandria, eloquent and well versed in the Scriptures (Acts 18:24). Among recent scholars who have been interested to pursue the question of authorship, the most extended arguments have been in support of Apollos as well.! 1. Anyone wishing to follow this matter further will be well informed by H. W. Montefiore, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (London: A and C Black, 1964) 9-16; and Luke T. Johnson, The Writings of the New Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 215-16.

HEBREWS—INTRODUCTION There was a time when establishing the authorship of a book was vital in arguing for its canonicity. Today, concerns about authorship are almost totally related to the larger issue of interpreting the text. Knowing the author would be of some help, but neither canonical authority nor theological merit depends on having that knowledge. In the case of Hebrews, although the name is lacking, the writer does have some visibility. The author was a Christian who lived and thought within the apostolic tradition (Heb 2:3). Timothy had been a companion in ministry and might be again (Heb 13:23). The writer was temporarily distanced from the readers but expects to return to them soon (Heb 13:19, 23). Their situation is known in great detail, either through their leaders (Heb 13:7, 17, 24) or by direct association. The writer joined strong pastoral concern with the authority of either person or office. Both the instructions and the exhortations of the letter reveal a person well educated in Greek rhetoric as well as in Judaism, especially Hellenistic Judaism formed in part by the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Old Testament. The Greek translation and not the Hebrew text provides the major lines and the subtler nuances of the writer’s argument and appeal. Date. As with most documents of the New Testament, establishing the time of writing of Hebrews cannot be done with precision or certainty. However, with the external and internal evidence available, a chronological frame can be ascertained. The primary external _ evidence is the letter of Clement of Rome to the church in Corinth. In chapter 36 of that letter, Clement quotes and paraphrases key passages from Hebrews 1-3. Clement’s letter is generally, though not unanimously, dated 95-96 CE. Thus Hebrews must be dated earlier, but how much earlier? For an answer, we look for internal evidence. It must be pointed out that three arguments for dating based on internal evidence that once held favor among commentators are now considered seriously flawed. First, the high christology of Hebrews (the pre-existence, incarnation, and exaltation of the Son of God) demands as late a date as possible. This evolutionary view of christology cannot be supported by the New Testament. For example, high christology can be found in Paul’s writing (1 Cor 8:6; 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:5-11), and he quite possibly quoted from earlier sources. Second, since Hebrews describes the priestly activity and culture of Israel using the present tense (e.g., Heb 7:27-28; 8:3-5; 9:7-8), then the letter must be dated prior to the fall of the Temple in the year 70 CE. However, it is not the temple cultus but that of the wilderness tabernacle that is presented for comparison and contrast with the sacrificial work of Christ. As for the use of the present tense, this literary device is commonly used in the service of persuasion, and as we shall see, the writer was a skilled rhetorician. And finally, if the Temple no longer existed at the time of writing, the writer would have used that fact as a strong argument against the validity of Judaism’s claims. The fault of this argument is not only that it is based on silence but also that it fails to understand the author’s perspective toward Judaism and the Old Testament. The writer appeals to the Old Testament as a living Word of God and presents his case for the Christian faith as i

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

being in continuity with that Word. To read Hebrews as an attack on Judaism is to misread Hebrews. What, then, can we say about internal evidence for dating? Concerning his message, the writer says: “It was declared at first through the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him” (Heb 2:3 NRSV). This statement seems to place the author in the generation following the apostles. In addition, we are told that Timothy was still active in ministry (Heb 13:23). If this is the same Timothy who was a young companion to Paul, a date between 60 and 90 CE would likely be appropriate. Since Clement knew the letter by the year 95, then we may consider the years 60-95 CE as the chronological frame for Hebrews. Obviously, we lack precision, but fortunately, precision in fixing the date of writing is not essential for understanding the message of the letter. Intended Audience. For interpreters of this letter, more helpful than knowledge of author or date would be the identification of the intended readers. Who were they? Where were they? Quite early the addressees were identified as “Hebrews” in a scribal conjecture that gave to the document the heading “To Hebrews.” It is with this “title” that the writing appears in the earliest manuscript evidence of its existence, a papyrus (P*°) from the beginning of the third century CE. But the heading raises more questions than it answers. Quite likely the scribe who made the designation did so on the basis of the content of the letter itself. Let us do the same: Allow the letter to characterize its recipients, and then determine if we can give them a name and an address. It must be said at the outset that the intended readers are Christian (Heb 3:6, 14; 4:14; 10:23), lest the heading to the letter lead someone to think the writing was addressed to Jews in order to convert them. The work is not polemical but a strong pastoral exhortation to a church in crisis. The writer knew the readers, having been with them earlier and now hopeful of a return soon (Heb 13:19, 22-23). The relationship between the author and the addressees is not clear. Urging the church to obey their leaders (Heb 13:17) implies that the writer is one in a position of even greater authority, either by reason of office or long relationship. The entire letter carries a tone of authority, of one who has the right and the obligation to remind, to instruct, to warn, and to encourage. The readers along with the writer were second-generation believers (Heb 2:3-4), having been baptized (Heb 6:4-5; 10:22) and fully instructed (Heb 6:1-2). In fact, they had been believers long enough to have become teachers (Heb 5:12), but had been stunted in their growth. In a vigorous pastoral move, the writer on the one hand chastises them for their infantile spiritual state (Heb 5:11-14) and on the other hand assumes that they are capable of following a lengthy and complex christological argument (6:9-10:39). Their earlier instruction not only focused on their “confession” (Heb 3:1; 4:14; 10:23), perhaps a digest of the faith (is Heb 1:1-4 that confession?), but also included extended engagement with the text of the Greek Old Testament. The author’s freedom to argue from nuances of the Greek translation of the Hebrew text and to make allusions to persons and events in Israel’s history certainly implies a familiarity with that material on the part of the addressees. 8

HEBREWS—INTRODUCTION But the readers are a faith community in crisis. Some members have grown lax in attendance at their assemblies (Heb 10:25), and commitment is waning. If the writer’s urgings are problem specific, then we have in the letter a painfully clear image of their condition. Listen: Let us hold fast to our confession. (Heb 4:14 NRSV) Therefore lift your drooping hands and strengthen your weak knees, and make straight paths for your feet, so that what is lame may not be put out of joint, but rather be healed. (Heb 12:12-13 NRSV) See that you do not refuse the one who is speaking; for if they did not escape when they refused the one who warned them on earth, how much less will we escape if we reject the one who warns from heaven! (Heb 12:25 NRSV) Anyone who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy “on the testimony of two or three witnesses.” How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by those who have spurned the Son of God, profaned the blood of the covenant by which they were sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace? (Heb 10:28-29 NRSV)

The writer does not think the addressees have already fallen away (Heb 6:4-8) or are yet in the condition of Esau, who “found no chance to repent, even though he sought the blessing with tears” (Heb 12:17 NRSV). In fact, better things are expected of these believers in view of their past record of love and good works, a record that has not totally come to an end (Heb 6:9-10). The author recalls that past during which they were cheerful, generous, and caring under most difficult circumstances and asks them not to abandon what they possessed as dearer than life itself (Heb 10:32-29). What is the root cause of this crisis in the church? The text of Hebrews reflects not one but a number of factors. The delay of the final return of Christ may have had a demoralizing effectin the community (10:25, 35-39). Ithas been speculated bysome that all the attention on the cultus in this letter implies a felt need among the readers for a more adequate liturgical and ritual life. The long-held theory that Hebrews addresses the problem of Jewish Christians returning to Judaism has been argued in terms of a more attractive cultus or of the security of a long and established tradition or of government protection from persecution, a privilege enjoyed within Judaism at various times and places. There is no doubt that the addressees had been under extreme external pressure. Some members had been imprisoned, and others suffered the confiscation of their property (Heb 10:34). They had not yet shed blood for their faith (Heb 12:4), but the writer does use the words “persecution” (Heb 10:33), “hostility” (Heb 12:3), and “torture” (Heb 13:3 NRSV). By no means the least painful form of pressure was public abuse and ridicule (Heb 10:33). More recent cultural and sociological studies of the New Testament have opened our eyes 9

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

to social, political, and economic values that governed life in the Mediterranean world. Chief among those values were honor and shame. It is difficult to imagine that the Christians addressed in Hebrews were not facing daily the problem of suffering dishonor as followers of one who endured the shame of the cross (Heb 12:2).? Whatever may have been the external factors contributing to the crisis of the community of readers, the fact that the writer responds to them with a lengthy and carefully argued christological presentation strongly implies that at the heart of the crisis was a christology inadequate for their social context. Perhaps they had a christology that was long on divinity but short on humanity, providing no way to fit the flesh and blood, lower than angels, tempted, crying and praying, suffering and dying Jesus into the larger scheme of God’s redemption. Or perhaps their christology ended with the exaltation and enthronement of the Son and offered no good news of his continuing ministry of intercession for the saints. At least in the writer’s view, the crisis can best be met not with improved structures or social strategies but with a more complete christology. Can we, from the text of Hebrews, name and locate the addressees? Not with any confidence. Focus on the cultus does not necessarily place the readers in Jerusalem, nor does an assumption of the readers’ knowledge of the Greek Old Testament argue conclusively for a Jewish past. Paul made heavy use of the Old Testament in exhorting the Corinthians, who were presumably of Gentile background. Jewish and Hellenistic thought had been long blended as evident in such writings as the Wisdom of Solomon and the vast religious-philosophical works of Philo of Alexandria. The clues in the text have been too many and too few, prompting theories of identification ranging from Christian Zionists on their way to Jerusalem to Gnostic spiritualists, pilgrims moving through this alien world to the eternal realms from which they came.* If we broadly identify the readers as Hellenistic Jewish Christians, perhaps the best guess for their location is Rome. When the writer says, “those from Italy send you greetings” (Heb 13:24 NRSV), it is not clear whether the expression locates the writer or the readers

in Italy. Similarities to 1 Peter, a letter written from Rome (1 Pet 5:13), argue fora Roman origin. However, early knowledge of Hebrews by Clement of Rome indicates a Roman destination, and what we know of the house churches in Rome makes that city a likely candidate as the location of the addressees.*

THEOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS Any overview of the theology of Hebrews must be prefaced with two observations: (1) The theology of the epistle is woven into a lengthy argument and can be extracted only at the risk of the loss of its vitality, and (2) the theology of the epistle is rhetorically 2. Astrong case has been made for understanding Hebrews in these categories by David DeSilva, Despising Shame: A Cultural-Anthropological Investigation of the Epistle to the Hebrews, SBLDS 152 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995). 3. For anyone wishing to pursue further these various views, W. L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, WBC 47A (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1991) li-lx, provides a brief but clear discussion along with a thorough bibliography. 4. Ibid., lviii-lx.

10

HEBREWS—INTRODUCTION

presented in the service of urgent pastoral exhortations and can be extracted only at the risk of the loss of its purpose. With these cautions in mind, the reader of Hebrews might

benefit from a brief sketch of its major theological tenets, most of which the writer and readers have in common, and some of which represents the writer’s imaginative elaboration of elements within that common tradition of belief. God. This is not a Christian writing so preoccupied with the person of Jesus or the work of the Holy Spirit that God is pushed into the background as a silent assumption. On the contrary, God is the subject of the opening sentence, the closing benediction, and the narrative of redemption in between. God created and maintains the world through the Son (Heb 1:2-3, 10; 2:10;.3:3-4; 11:3). The entire redemptive career of Jesus, from incarnation to exaltation, was according to God’s will (Heb 10:7). It is God who offered the promise of rest to Israel (Heb 3:7-11) and continues to hold out that promise today (Heb 4:1-11). God enters into covenants with those who trust (Heb 8:8-12) and holds always before us not only the prospect of judgment (Heb 9:27; 10:30-31; 12:23) but also the promise of a better home, an abiding place, a heavenly city of God’s own building (Heb 11:10, 13-16; 13:4). To describe God’s work of love toward believers, the writer uses categories of cosmic proportions. The category of time stretches from creation to consummation; the category of space reaches from the real and abiding world above (Heb 8:4-6; 10:1) to this temporary world of shadows, not substance. The single most recurring characteristic of God as portrayed in this letter is that God speaks. God spoke through the prophets (Heb 1:1), speaks through a Son (Heb 1:2), speaks through the Old Testament (Heb 1:5-12; 4:3, 7; 7:21; 8:8-12) and through the Holy Spirit (Heb 10:15-17). Important to notice is the frequent use of the present tense; God’s voice is a living voice, whatever the medium through which it comes. Jesus Christ. No New Testament writer presents a more human Jesus than does the author of Hebrews. In fact, among all the titles used to refer to the Christ, the writer’s preference seems to be “Jesus.” That Jesus was one of us (Heb 2:11), tempted as we are (Heb 4:15), that he submitted to God in tearful and prayerful obedience (Heb 5:7-8), and was subject to death (Heb 2:14) constituted for some within and without the church a flaw in the Christian faith, an offense to the human quest for honor and place. But the writer of Hebrews, rather than denying or subordinating such a portrayal of Jesus, accents it as essential in the larger scheme of redemption. As a priest, Jesus had to be chosen from among the people (Heb 5:1) in order to be able to sympathize with their weakness (Heb 4:15) and to “deal gently with the ignorant and wayward” (Heb 5:2 NRSV). As we shall see, establishing that Jesus was a priest, even though not a Levite, is the extraordinary theological achievement at the heart of the letter. Being one of us not only qualified Jesus to be a merciful priest, but also equipped him to be the model to whom believers look. He is the pioneer and perfecter of the faith pilgrimage, showing his followers how to bear suffering, endure hostility, and disregard shame (Heb 12:1-3). Believers could not be expected to walk in the steps of one who had not walked in theirs. 11

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

However, this is not the total picture; Hebrews rivals the Gospel of John in moving beyond the historical evidence to declare who Jesus really is in the grand sweep of God’s saving purpose. Anyone who charges that the writer of Hebrews has reduced christology in order to portray Jesus as a model and guide to a church in crisis has not read the entire book.° Jesus was lower than the angels “for a little while” (Heb 2:9), incarnate (Heb 1:6; 2:14-18; 10:5-7) to make purification for sins (Heb 1:3), but is now seated at God’s right hand (Heb 1:3), a high priest forever, making intercession for the saints (Heb 4:14-5:10; 7:23-25; 8:1-2). In a related but slightly different line of reasoning, the writer presents Jesus as the mediator of a new and better covenant (Heb 9:15—10:18). At the end of the age, Christ will return “to save those who are eagerly waiting for him” (Heb 9:28 NRSV; 10:37). These can be the achievements only of one who was not only of the people but also of God, and that he was of God the writer leaves no doubt. Jesus’ divinity is anchored in his pre-existence as God’s Son, heir of all things, agent of creation, sustainer of all things, the very mirror image of God’s glory and character (Heb 1:2-3). In their assemblies the readers most likely recited as a confession this inclusive, embracing Christ’s pre-existence, incarnation, and exaltation.

Holy Spirit. Hebrews does not contain any trinitarian formulas. God is the primary character in the narrative, and the person and work of Jesus Christ occupy the central place in the argument developed. However, the role of the Holy Spirit is of such significance as to merit our attention. The Holy Spirit is a revealer, with words of the Old Testament being attributed to the Spirit (Heb 3:7-11; 10:15-17), although some of the same words are also attributed to God (Heb 4:3). The Spirit is also an interpreter of the Scriptures (Heb 9:8). In relation to Christ, it was through the Spirit that he offered himself as a sacrifice without blemish to God (Heb 9:14). In relation to the church, the Holy Spirit comes as gifts to the members, distributed according to the will of God (Heb 2:4; 6:4). Because Christians share in the Holy Spirit, any willful persistence in sin constitutes a grave sin against the Spirit, called by the writer an “outrage” (Heb 10:29). It may also be said of the Spirit in Hebrews that along with God and Christ, the Holy Spirit provides continuity in revelation and in redemptive activity between Israel and the church. Church. Even though the word usually translated “church” (Exxdnota ekklésia) occurs only twice in Hebrews (Heb 2:12; 12:23), it is quite clear that the writer is addressing a congregation, a group identified by a confession of faith (Heb 4:14), having been called together as a fellowship of brothers and sisters, of each other and of Christ (Heb 2:11-17). They assemble regularly to offer the sacrifice of praise to God (Heb 13:13), to provoke one another to love and good deeds (Heb 10:24), and to identify through compassion and sharing with those members who are imprisoned and tortured (Heb 13:3). In addition to love for one another, they are obliged to love strangers, showing hospitality (Heb 13:1-2), and to make every effort to be at peace with everyone (Heb 12:4). In the two modes of 5. E. Kasemann almost makes such a charge against Hebrews in Jesus Means Freedom (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1970) 101-16.

12

HEBREWS—INTRODUCTION

the Christian life, tenacious faithfulness and continuous pilgrimage toward the city that is to come—that is, possessing both stability and flexibility—Christ is the model. He was unwavering in faithfulness to God and undeterred as the pioneer leading his people to glory. Scripture. The Scripture for the writer of Hebrews is the Old Testament in Greek translation, hereafter referred to as the Septuagint (LXX), even though points at which the writer varies from the LXX as we have it will be noted. Even though the author holds in common with the readers a Christian tradition, no writings from that tradition known to us are quoted as Scripture. The only words ofJesus that appear in Hebrews are at 2:12-13 and 10:5-7, where words from Psalms and Isaiah are attributed not to the writers of those passages but to Christ. The Old Testament comes to the reader in direct quotations, paraphrases, and allusions. Sometimes the original historical context is preserved; sometimes a passage is set in a new context. Interestingly, the writer’s appropriation of the life and faith of Israel is drawn from an earlier appropriation by the psalmist. Why does the author draw so heavily on the retelling of Israel’s narrative in the psalms? Is the reason hermeneutical? That is to say, is the writer’s use of Scripture simply a continuation of what the psalmist had done, putting an old story in a new setting? Or is the reason liturgical, using Israel’s worship materials to interpret and enrich the culture and liturgy of the church? Of course, the reason may be more practical: the psalms best provide the grounds for the author’s own theological and christological construction. In any case, in this rich and imaginative engagement with Scripture, the Old Testament never ceases to be the living voice of God. In fact, the authority of the Old Testament is enhanced for the readers by the writer’s practice of introducing quotations from it with the phrases “God says,” “Christ says,” and “the Holy Spirit says.” As we shall see, the writer of the epistle does not, in an act of interpretive tyranny, simply make irresponsible raids on the Old Testament to construct his own theological house, leaving among his scriptural sources not one stone upon another. Hebrews is not only the most extended treatment of the Old Testament in the New, but is also, along with Luke, the most respectful of continuity. The Bible tells one story, not two, and itis the story of God’s saving initiative toward humankind. This metanarrative is carried forward through many subnarratives.

LITERARY CONSIDERATIONS Those who teach and preach the Bible are increasingly aware that literary factors no less than historical and theological ones demand attention in an honest and fruitful hearing of the texts. Every writer wants both to say something and to do something, and therefore employs available literary devices and rhetorical strategies in order to be clear and to be effective. The careful reader of Hebrews will, therefore, want to attend to the manner as well as the matter of this work. To alert us to the literary and rhetorical skills of this writer 13

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

and to prepare us for a fuller experience of reading and hearing, we here attend briefly to three matters: integrity, genre, and structure. Integrity. Keep in mind that the word integrity used in a literary discussion refers only to the unity of a writing and not to the merits of its content. In other words, is any part of the text from a different hand or from the same hand but not intended by the writer to be a part of this document? The question arises with Hebrews only with reference to chapter 13. Doubts as to whether chapter 13 was originally a part of Hebrews have been prompted by two observations, one minor and one major. The minor observation is that there is a noticeable shift in both mood and content between chapters 12 and 13. Such a break, however, is not uncommon at that point where a writer concludes an argument and then moves to a list of practical admonitions, usually rather standard, along with words of a personal nature (note Gal 6:11; Rom 15:14; 16:1). There is no Greek manuscript of Hebrews that concludes at chapter 12. The major observation concerns the contrast between the epistolary ending (Heb 13:18-25) and the non-epistolary beginning. In its Opening Hebrews is similar to 1 John alone among New Testament epistles, the others having the customary address, signature, and greeting. This seeming discrepancy has prompted, among other theories, speculation that chapter 13 was added by another person, perhaps a secretary or a disciple or someone imitating Pauline conclusions in an effort to get Hebrews accepted into the Pauline corpus. Analyses of vocabulary and themes in chapter 13 have not supported such theories. In fact, the unity between this chapter and the main body of the letter has been so convincingly argued that very few voices are raised

to the contrary.° Genre. Accepting chapter 13 as integral to the entire writing does, however, pose another question: What does one call a document that ends as a letter but begins as an oration? I have in these introductory comments continued to use the traditional designation “epistle,” and there are some students of Hebrews who do not find sufficient reasons to abandon it. After all, in the ancient Mediterranean world, “epistle” (Etotodr_ epistole) could be used to refer to writings ranging from private correspondence to public statements sometimes posted on bulletin boards. As for the difference between the beginning and the ending, Hebrews is not alone in that feature. For example, James is like Hebrews, but in reverse: It begins as a letter but ends as an oration. Nor can one argue conclusively that the content of Hebrews is not epistolary. Writings indisputably epistolary contain expositions of Scripture with application (1 Cor 10:1-14), moral instruction (Gal 5:13-6:10), and even strong exhortations that seem to interrupt the context (2 Cor 6:14-7:1). Even so, there is no major gain or loss to the interpreter in proving Hebrews is or is not a letter in any formal sense. 6. See Floyd V. Filson, “Yesterday”: AStudy ofHebrews in the Light of Chapter 13 (Naperville, Ill.: Alec R. Allenson, 1967).

14

HEBREWS—INTRODUCTION

However, when a writing bears a self-designation the author has provided a category that helps the reader to understand both the purpose of the communication and the literary strategies employed to achieve it. Hebrews is, says the writer, a “word of exhortation” (Heb 13:22 NRSV). This expression occurs at Acts 13:15 to refer to Paul’s speech in Acts 13:16-41, a speech noticeably similar to Hebrews. Harold Attridge thinks “word of exhortation” is “probably a technical literary designation for a certain kind of oratorical performance.”’ Whether or not there is sufficient evidence to support such a claim, the term does alert the reader to what the writer is doing. For example, every reader of Hebrews observes the alternation between exposition and application throughout the work. But to the question of whether applications are simply postscripts to a major expository argument or exposition of Scripture serves the application, the writer gives an answer: This is not a word of exposition but a word of exhortation. Even the most elaborate expository sections serve as fuel to keep alive a fire that seems to be flickering out. The writer rushes forward after each phase of the argument, eager to press home the lessons from every Old Testament text cited. In the expression “word of exhortation” a host of literary devices and rhetorical strategies find their reason. Notice the force of an argument expressed in double negatives (Heb 4:15; 6:10; 7:20); the energy of words joined without the homogenizing effect of conjunctions (Heb 7:3, 26; 11:32-34, 37; 12:25); the sharp edges of vivid contrasts (Heb 7:18-20, 23-24, 28; 10:11-12); the cumulative effect of repeated phrases, such as “by faith” in chapter 11; and the pleasant attention-getting sounds of alliteration (Heb 1:1; 2:1-4; 4:16; 10:11). Metaphors abound, drawn from athletics, agriculture, education, architecture, seafaring, courts of law, and more. Verbs are noticeably in the present tense, and the language of speaking prevails over that of writing (Heb 2:5; 5:11; 6:9). Greek and Latin rhetoricians had long urged these and other strategies in the service of persuasion. There is no question that the writer is preaching. However, simply to call Hebrews a homily seems not sufficiently to acknowledge its magnitude and complexity. After all, a homily, at least in the early days of the church, was an informal discussion or conversation about a topic (Luke uses the word in his Gospel at 24:14-15), and Hebrews exhibits the formal qualities of a carefully constructed piece of rhetoric. And a homily lacks the complexity of Hebrews, which is not solely a sermon but a sermon containing sermons (e.g., Heb 1:5—2:4; 2:5-3:1; 8:1-10:25). In this respect, Hebrews resembles Deuteronomy, which is Moses’ final sermon to Israel but also is a collection of sermons within the sermon. If, then, in the commentary to follow Hebrews is sometimes called a letter and sometimes a sermon, the reader will understand why both are true but neither is fully true. Structure. While there is broad agreement about the rhetorical skills of the writer of Hebrews, there is no consensus about the structure of this sermon. Some analyses fail because they try to fit Hebrews into one of the three major types of ancient rhetoric: Is it 7. Harold Attridge, “Paraenesis in a Homily,” Semeia 50 (1990) 217.

tS

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

forensic, persuasion concerning the truth of a past event; or deliberative, persuasion concerning a future decision or course of action; or epideictic (ceremonial), persuasion concerning the virtues of one whose life is worthy of emulation? The fact is that Hebrews contains some of all three. Other analyses prove inadequate because they locate focal points in the expositions or doctrinal portions and merely attach the exhortations as subordinate to the argumentation. The location and extent of hortatory materials make it clear that for the writer these sections are of equal if not greater importance for the purpose of the sermon. At the risk of making oversimplified divisions, the following broad outline may give some perspective:

Exposition 1:1-14 Exhortation 2:1-4 Exposition 2:5-3:6 Exhortation 3:7—4:16 Exposition 5:1-10 Exhortation 5:11-6:20 Exposition 7:1-10:18 Exhortation 10:19-13:25

Such a flat list does not register the cumulative effect of sections tumbling one upon the other. No analysis focusing on exposition alone can be fair to the whole. Perhaps all structural displays fail to the extent that they lose sight of the extremely urgent pastoral situation that prompted Hebrews. A concerned leader seeks to persuade a church from its path of decline in faith and communal love before it is too late. Every communication skill must be called into service because the end is to save a church, not to please an instructor in a rhetoric class. Perhaps this accounts for there being too many rather than too few clues to the structure of Hebrews within the composition; the writer speaks to a crisis. All recent attempts to discern the structure of Hebrews have had to respond to the lifelong studies of A. Vanhoye.® He was impressed by the remarkable symmetry of the work and came to the conclusion that it was structured concentrically, moving toward and away from the central argument. This literary form is called a chiasmus, fairly common in briefer units in the New Testament. In this case, the chiasmus consisted of five parts: 1:12:18; 3:15:10; 5:11—10:39; 1T:1—1 2:13; 12:14—13:25, on the pattern of ABCB A’. This means that parts one and five are parallel, parts two and four are parallel, and part three is the centerpiece. Support for Vanhoye’s analysis has been only partial; but reading Hebrews in this pattern has been stimulating, and modifications of his conclusions have found their way into much of the literature on Hebrews.’ 8. Vanhoye’s literary analyses of Hebrews began in the early 1960s, and his publications have been in French. However, the fruit of his work is available in English in A. Vanhoye, Structure and Message of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1989). 9. Fora review of various structural analyses and their justifications, see W. L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, WBC 47A (Dallas: Word, 1991) lxxv-ciii.

16

HEBREWS—INTRODUCTION A major problem with Vanhoye’s and other similar analyses, however, is a practical one. Granted, Heb 7:1—-10:18 isa major and complex section for which the writer gradually prepares the reader, but is it the climax? If so, one would expect that after Heb 10:18 the arguments and exhortations would draw heavily from the theological achievement of that central section; otherwise, why have the climax in the center of the composition? But such is not the case. Chapters 11-13 make only minimal use of the lengthy argument about Christ’s priesthood. The final three chapters move the reader to a climax of intellectual, emotional, and volitional energy at the point where homiletically it belongs: at the end. Therefore, the outline offered below as a framework for the commentary is not concentric but rather cumulative. The final exhortation in Heb 12:12-13:19 is the end toward which the writer moves from the very beginning, where the faith held in common with the readers is recited.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Commentaries:

Attridge, H. W. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989. Detailed and scholarly treatment of the text with citations of pertinent primary sources and in conversation with other students of Hebrews. Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Hebrews. NICNT. Rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990. Solid evangelical scholarship made available to serious students of the Bible, both lay and clergy. Buchanan, G. W. Hebrews. AB 36. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1972. An unusual interpretation of Hebrews as a document of early Christian Zionism. Ellingworth, P. 7he Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text. NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993. Studies of words and phrases of the original language of the text, helpful to persons unfamiliar with Greek.

Jewett, R. Letter to Pilgrims. New York: Pilgrim, 1981. An interpretation of Hebrews in the light of the heresy addressed in Colossians. Lane, W. L. Hebrews 1-8; Hebrews 9-13. WBC 47A and 47B. Dallas: Word, 1991. Detailed treatment of ’ the text accompanied by a full bibliography and strong theological reflections. Montefiore, H. W. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Harper’s NT Commentary. New York: Harpers, 1964. Sound scholarship available to non-specialists, often differing from traditional views. Williamson, R. Zhe Epistle to the Hebrews. London: Epworth, 1965. An interpretation of Hebrews in the light of Greek philosophy mediated through Judaism.

Wilson, R. M. Hebrews. NCBC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987. Results of scholarship offered to nonspecialists with brevity and clarity.

The following special studies in Hebrews will enrich one’s understanding of the letter, its theology, literary form, interpretive method, and use of the OT.

Hay, David M. Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity. SBLMS. Nashville: Abingdon, 1973. An examination of the uses of Psalm 110 in the NT and other early Christian literature. 17

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE Hughes, Graham. Hebrews and Hermeneutics. SNTSMS. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. An analysis of Hebrews as a Christian interpretation of OT texts.

Hurst, L. D. The Epistle to the Hebrews: Its Background of Thought. SNTSMS. Cambridge: Cambridge - University Press, 1990. An interpretation of Hebrews in the philosophical and religious contexts of the first century. Kasemann, E. The Wandering People of God. Translated by R. Harresville and I. Sandberg. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984. A commentary on the major sections of Hebrews in relation to the religious syncretism called Gnosticism. Lindars, Barnabas. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. An exploration of the major theological themes in Hebrews. In addition, the reader’s attention is called to articles cited in the Commentary that may offer further help in preaching and teaching Hebrews.

OUTLINE OF HEBREWS I. Hebrews 1:1-4, Introductory Statement of Faith

Il. Hebrews 1:5-2:18, The Son and the Angels A. 1:5-14, The Son Superior to Angels B. 2:1-4, Therefore Listen Carefully C. 2:5-18, The Son Lower Than Angels 2:5-9, He Became as We Are 2:10-18, A Faithful and Merciful High Priest

Ill. Hebrews 3:1-5:10, Christ, the Faithful and Merciful High Priest A. 3:1-4:13, Christ the Faithful 3:1-6, Christ and Moses Compared 3:7-11, The Faithless People 3:12-19, Failure to Enter God’s Rest 4:1-11, God’s Rest Still Available 4:12-13, God’s Word Still Active

B. 4:14-5:10, Christ the Merciful 4:14-16, Hold Fast; Draw Near 5:1-10, Christ Qualified as High Priest

IV. Hebrews 5:11-6:20, Preparation for the Difficult Discussion

A. 5:11-6:3, A Call for Maturity B. 6:4-12, Stern Warning with Hope C. 6:13-20, The Ground for Hope 18

HEBREWS—INTRODUCTION

V. Hebrews 7:1—10:39, The Difficult Discussion A. 7:1-28, Christ and Melchizedek 7:1-3, Melchizedek, King and Priest 7:4-10, Melchizedek Is Superior to Levites 7:11-19, A New Priesthood 7:20-25, Confirmed by God’s Oath

7:26-28, Christ, Our Eternal High Priest B. 8:1-10:18, The High Priestly Ministry of Christ 8:1-5, Christ’s Sanctuary 8:6-13, Christ’s Covenant 9:1-10:18, Christ’s Sacrifice 9:1-14, The Old and the New Sacrifice 9:15-22, Sacrifice and the New Covenant 9:23-10:18, The New and Final Sacrifice

C. 10:19-39, Life in Response to This Ministry of Christ 10:19-25, A Threefold Admonition 10:26-31, Warning About the Future 10:32-39, Encouragement from the Past

VI. Hebrews 11:1—12:17, A Call to Fidelity and Mutuality

A. 11:1-40, Learning from Our Forebears in Faith ‘

11:1-2, The Meaning of Faith 11:3-7, Faith: From Creation to Noah 11:8-22, Faith: From Sarah and Abraham to Joseph 11:23-31, Faith: Moses and Israel 11:32-38, Faith: Prophets and Martyrs 11:39-40, Faith: Fulfilled in Christians

B. 12:1-17, A Call to Continue in Faith 12:1-3, Look to Jesus 12:4-11, Regard Suffering as Discipline 12:12-13, Regain Your Strength 12:14-17, Again, Be Warned

VII. Hebrews 12:18-13:19, Final Exhortations

A. 12:18-29, Zion, the Unshakable Kingdom B. 13:1-19, Life in the Faith Community 13:1-6, Mutual Duties 13:7-8, Examples to Follow 13:9-16, Christ’s Sacrifice Revisited

13:17-19, Concerning Your Leaders 19

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

VIII. Hebrews 13:20-25, Benediction and Greetings

A. 13:20-21, Benediction with Doxology B. 13:22-25, Greetings and Farewell

20

HEBREWS 1:1-4 INTRODUCTORY

STATEMENT OF FAITH

NIV

NRSV

In the past God spoketo our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, “but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. *The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.

]

Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son,? whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also created the worlds. °He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being, and he sustains? all things by his powerful word. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, “having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. aOr the Son

6 Or bears along

(COMMENTARY 40,7 ith a literary artistry unmatched in the NT, “© the writer of Hebrews begins addressing the readers. Verses 1-4 consist of one carefully composed sentence called a “period”—that is, a sentence that makes a complete circle around the track (teptoSo0s periodos). So rich and full is this sentence that it is understandable why English translations would aid the reader by making of it three (NRSV) or four (NIV) more manageable statements. Before attending to its details, let us appreciate the author’s remarkable achievement in this one sentence. The reader’s attention is captured and held by a number of rhetorical devices: alliteration (five words in verse 1 begin with the letter 7 (p); contrast (long ago/in these last days; to our ancestors/to us; by the prophets/by a son); repetition (of relative pronouns and participles); and temporal sequence (pre-existence, incarnation, exaltation). But artistry also serves substance; the sentence expresses the faith held in common with the readers. The passage is not at all polemic, seeking to correct errant views, or pedagogical, pressing new and additional ideas on the recipients. In fact, the writer may be quoting,

in entirety or in part, from the liturgy of the church addressed. Whether these verses contain the “confession” often mentioned (3:1; 4:14; 10:23) cannot be determined. We can, however, appreciate the strategic importance of creating an atmosphere of trust by beginning on common ground. And finally, the writer accomplishes several practical ends in the opening sentence: (1) With a theocentric beginning, arguments of both continuity and discontinuity between Judaism and Christianity have room. God is the subject of both testaments. (2) The categories of speaking and hearing are appropriate to a “word of exhortation” (13:22) and anticipate the oral quality of the entire discourse. (3) The opening sentence is also programmatic in that it introduces most of the major themes to be developed in the “sermon,” even using the language of two OT texts very central to all that follows, Psalm 2 and Psalm 110. And (4) the final clause (v. 4) allows the author to introduce the subject of the first major unit (1:5-2:18), Christ and the angels. Many commentators divide vv. 1-4 into two parts: vv. 1-2, in which God is the actor, and vv.

Za

HEBREWS 1:1-4 COMMENTARY absence of the definite article seems quite purposeful. As a general rule, in Greek the presence of the definite article serves to identify, and its absence serves to qualify. In other words, what is the quality or nature of God’s speaking? It is through the person of a Son and through the relationship of that Son to God. Past segments and forms of revelation are neither minimized nor negated, but the writer’s conviction is clear: In a Son God has spoken the culminating Word. Although God continues to be the subject of the verbs in v. 2 (“appointed,” “created”), the reader’s attention is now being drawn to the Son. In two strong assertions the writer presents the credentials qualifying the Son to be the speech of God. In the first, Psalm 2, which provided the title “Son,” is drawn upon again for the title “heir of all things.”

3-4, in which the Son is the actor. However, this discussion will separate v. 3 and v. 4, reasons for which should be apparent. 1:1-2. The sermon that we call Hebrews is predicated on the affirmation that God speaks (125-133 3:7; 4:3; 5:5-6; 7:21; 8:8-13) and on the injunction, “See that you do not refuse the one who is speaking” (12:25 NRSV). This foundational conviction is broadly framed in wv. 1-2 in a balanced statement. God: spoke in the past

has spoken in these last days

to our ancestors by the prophets

to us by a Son

God’s speaking in the past was “in many parts or segments” and “in many forms.” Such sweeping introductory statements characterizing the past were fairly common among Greek rhetoricians.!° Here the writer describes God’s past revelation in three ways. First, it was in segments or episodes, not continuous. Second, God’s speaking took many forms, and the OT bears witness to these forms: voices, events, visions, dreams, stories, and theophanies, among others. Third, revelation came through the prophets. There is no reason to understand prophets here in a restrictive sense, as distinct from the Law and the Writings. In the broader sense, the term “prophets” was used to refer to those who spoke for God, and for the writer of Hebrews certainly included Moses and David. God’s speaking begins in Genesis (Heb LES) Continuous with and yet distinctly different from past revelation is that which is “to us.” God’s speaking is here presented with two strong qualifying phrases. First, it comes “in these last days.” The expression is not so much chronological as it is eschatological. Such was the accepted meaning among the prophets (Isa 2:2; Dan 10:14; Hos 3:5; Mic 4:1), and for early Christians, the eschaton was inaugurated by the advent of Jesus Christ. Second, God has spoken “by a Son.” There is no need to add “the” Son or “his” Son as some translations do, as though there were a need to specify to whom the writer refers. About that there is no doubt. In the present instance, the 10. For examples, see H. W. Attridge,

“You are my Son; today I have begotten you”? Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession. (Ps 2:7-8 NRSV)

This psalm will be one of the major sources for developing the christology of Hebrews. In good rhetorical style, the author introduces early texts and themes that will be addressed fully at a later point. The same is true of the metaphor of inheriting; it will be a favorite term to speak not only of the Son but also of the promised future of the faithful (1:14; 6:12, 17; 9:15; 11:7, 8; 12:17). As for the Son, “heir of all things” describes his pre-existent life with God. Perhaps it is not too soon to become alert to a tension in the christology of Hebrews (which the author does not attempt to resolve) between what the Son has in pre-existence and what the Son gains by reason of his work of redemption and exaltation to God’s right hand. In other words, is his last state a return to the first or is the last greater than the first? As for the “all things,” the writer likely includes, but is not limited to, the inheritance granted the Son-King of Psalm 2. It is enough to say that nothing of

God’s is withheld from The second assertion the Son’s qualifications Word of God: The Son

A Commentary on the Epistle

to the Hebrews, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989) 37nn. 17-18.

22

the Son. in v. 2 adds further to to be the eschatological was God’s agent of crea-

HEBREWS 1:1-4 COMMENTARY tion. That God worked through an intermediary in creating is an idea that developed in Jewish theology (Prov 8:22-31; Wis 7:22), the intermediary being called Sophia (“Wisdom” [codia sophia|) or Logos (“Word” [\éyos logos]). The church appropriated these terms in developing its understanding of the relation of Christ to God, and praise of Christ as agent of creation entered quite early into hymn and creed (John 1:3, 10; Rom 11:36; 1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:16). The “worlds” (NRSV) and “universe” (NIV) translate aidvas (aionas), “aeons” or “ages.” The word came to have both a temporal and a spatial meaning. As will be noted later, categories of time and movement toward the future are more important for this writer than are categories of space and distance. 1:3. Here the opening statement takes a noticeable turn, as registered by the translators’ decision to begin a new sentence. Verse 2 spoke of God’s relation to the Son; v. 3 speaks of the Son’s relation to God. Some scholars account for the shift by seeing this verse as all or part of an early christological hymn that has been skillfully incorporated by the writer.'' Certainly elements found in passages widely accepted as hymns (Phil 2:0-112-Col. 1215-20; 1 Tim3:16)_ are. here: the relative pronoun os (hos, “who,” translated here as “he”), balanced phrasing (being, sustaining, having made), and a full display of the Son’s sojourn (pre-existence, humiliation, exaltation). If the author is quoting a hymn, he has woven it well into the larger affirmation. The last two affirmations about the Son move

away from the wisdom source and into the christological theme that will be the major burden of the letter. It is not enough to summarize these two final clauses of v. 3 as the humiliation and exaltation of the Son. The humiliation is cast in sacerdotal and priestly terms: He made purification for sins (cleansing of sins, here and at 2 Pet 1:9). The whole of the Son’s earthly career is gathered up in one image: a priest at the altar making purification for sins. The brief depiction anticipates and begs for the elaboration soon forthcoming. And then in the only finite verb in v. 3 the writer sums up both the completion of the Son’s work on earth and his elevation to the highest station: He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty (a reverential substitute for God). The Son-Priest is enthroned. The source of this portrayal of the Son is Psalm 110, the most significent psalm in the development of New Testament christology'? and the key text for Hebrews. Peculiar to Hebrews, however, is the use of both v. 1 and v. 4 of Psalm 110 to join king and priest in the presentation of Jesus Christ. Son-Priest-King— already the writer has set out the themes of his sermon and the burden of his argumentation. 1:4. This final affirmation about the Son in the introductory statement of faith serves as a transition to the first major unit of the text, 1:5—2:16, in which the subject is the Son’s relationship to angels. The declaration of the superiority of the Son over the angels seems abrupt and polemic in a way that the difference between God’s speaking through the prophets and through a Son did not. Until v. 4 one feels no debate, but rather a confession held in common between the writer and the readers. But now to say that the Son is greater than the angels is to give the impression that some persons of a contrary view are in the audience or are known to the audience. The phrase “superior to” or “greater than” will occur thirteen times in the writer’s presentation of his christology. It can be argued, therefore, that v. 4 was not a part of the confession of faith but has been added by the author to introduce the first major theme. But not necessarily. The statement of faith in 1:1-4 may have been framed in its entirety in a community of faith where angels

11. See J. T. Sanders, New Testament Christological Hymns (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971) 19-20, who follows suggestions of earlier scholars. The writer of Hebrews is indebted to Jewish wisdom theology for the first two of the four statements concerning the Son. As noted earlier, wisdom was God’s agent in relating to the world in creation, providence, revelation, and reconciliation. According to Wisd Sol 7:24-27, Sophia is the mirrored reflection (radiance) and exact imprint (representation) of God’s being. These two terms are found nowhere else in the NT. God’s being is here tmdéotaots (hypostasis), “essence” or “substance.” An interesting use of the word occurs at Heb 11:1: Faith is the hypostasis of things hoped for. At Heb 1:3 the writer is saying that what God is, the Son is (cf. John 1:1). The author also appropriates for the Son wisdom’s providential and sustaining relation to the created order. The Son’s word, which will also be in Hebrews God’s word and the Holy Spirit’s word, not only speaks life into being but also sustains it continually. As Paul puts it, “one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist” (1 Cor 8:6 NRSV); and again, “in him all things hold together” (Col 1:17 NRSV). The term “all things” (Ta tava ta panta) was in Hellenistic philosophy a technical term for the universe, the totality, visible and invisible. Christian writers, and especially Paul, adopted the expression to announce the cosmic dimensions of Christ’s work. Nothing and no one lies beyond the reach of God’s activity through the Son.

12. The subtitle of David Hay’s Glory at the Right Hand (Nashville: Abingdon, 1973) is Psalm 110 in Early Christianity. He traces the role of the psalm in the christologies of the NT and non-canonical writers.

1)

HEBREWS 1:1-4 COMMENTARY name is most likely “Son” whether the inheriting was in pre-existence (v. 2) or after his humiliation and exaltation. For Paul the name given above every other name was “Lord,” bestowed on Christ after God had exalted him (Phil 2:9-11). Thus far, the writer has not used the designations “Christ” or “Lord,” or the name “Jesus.”

functioned in their theology either as a threat to the superior place of Christ or simply as a foil against which the lofty status of Christ was played. The reader will have to devote attention in the next unit to this question, Why introduce angels into the discussion? As for the “more excellent name” the Son inherited (again, a favorite expression of the writer’s; see Commentary on 1:2), that

REFLECTIONS

;

1. From the outset the reader is reminded that the subject of the Christian faith is God. It is a regrettable fact that theocentricity is absent from much Christian teaching and preaching. To be sure, writing and speaking about Jesus Christ in a community already firm in its faith in God as Creator, Sustainer, and Redeemer is appropriate. Such is the case with early Christian documents written from within or addressing Judaism in which faith in God lay at the heart of a long history. But when those writings are taught or preached in cultures for whom faith in God may not already be present, beginning with christology is beginning too late. The appropriate starting point is “In the beginning, God...” even if the discussion will eventually focus on Christ or the Holy Spirit or the church. The writer of Hebrews does not forget this, and by stating rather than assuming the centerpiece of Christian faith reminds the church to be discerning in what it can and cannot assume about the culture to which it speaks. It could be calamitous to get people attached to Jesus without any faith in God. 2. God speaks—never so loudly that every casual passerby hears, but God theless. God’s self-revelation is the cornerstone of both Judaism and Christianity. is a medium of revelation is affirmed in both Testaments, especially in wisdom the weightier freight of revelation is carried by persons, by relationships, and by did not speak to us, we would be left with a painfully vague yearning for God, unsatisfied after a feast of sunsets and songbirds.

speaks neverThat creation literature, but events. If God a hunger still

3. This introductory statement of faith is so worded as to lead the reader to anticipate either a discussion or a demonstration of the continuity and discontinuity between Christianity and Judaism. Every major New Testament writer struggled in some way with this issue, but none opted for discontinuity alone. Later there were voices such as Marcion’s, who called for a Bible stripped of all Jewish writings; but those voices did not prevail. The composition of the Christian Bible testifies to that and calls upon every generation of Christians to deal with the problems of continuity and discontinuity in the formation of its own faith. How will the author of Hebrews deal with this important matter? That it will be dealt with is announced ines

4. The old sentimental image of the early church as at the margins of society is shattered by the artistry and a creedal formula, perhaps framed for the liturgy of the it became official dogma, in which is distilled the heart

a huddle of the poor and unlettered sophistication of Heb 1:1-4. Here is congregation to be sung long before of the Christian faith. Within it is a

christological hymn not unlike others in the New Testament (v. 3).'° 13. See J. T. Sanders, New Testament Christological Hymns (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971).

24

HEBREWS 1:5-2:18 THE SON AND THE ANGELS é

OVERVIEW

he confession of faith in 1:1-4, which con-

@=

surprising, given the portrayal of God at the outset as having spoken and continuing to speak (1:1-2). Nor is this way of introducing Scripture passages unique to Hebrews; the writer of Matthew (Matt 122: SD 27 eS 1e037y'So 45) and pPatils (Rom: 10:11-13; 15:10; 1 Cor 6:16), among others, do the same. However, both Matthew and Paul easily alternate between “speaking” and “writing,” while in Hebrews the introductory formula, “it is written,” occurs only once in a direct citation (10:7) and the noun form (ypadat graphai, “writings” or “scripture”) not at all. While the speaker of the biblical citations may vary (God, the Son, the Spirit, or “someone somewhere”) the author’s preference for this method of penne Scripture is abundantly clear. What does this eee mean for the reader? Hearing the OT being “said” to them has significance at two levels for the reader. On one level is the rhetorical impact. After all, Hebrews is a sermon (13:22), and, therefore, we should expect the author to employ rhetorical strategies. Fundamental to the art of persuasion is the task of making what is absent, by time or by space, present to the hearer or reader. A direct quotation accomplishes that far more effectively than does a paraphrase or a summary, and if that quotation is presented as the speech of God, presence is achieved most dramatically. In addition, if such formulations are kept relatively free of the writer’s comments, they are regarded by the reader as far more reliable. As a case in point, notice how minimal is the author’s involvement in 1:5-14— only brief phrases joining seven OT quotations. On the theological level, the implications of the author’s rhetorical style are unmistakable: The OT is the very speech of God. The words of Scripture are not past speech being dragged into the present by means of hermeneutical maneuvers on the part of the writer; they are God’s words to the present.

tains in digest the major affirmations of the

entire letter, concludes with the declaration that the Son is superior to the angels. Most modern readers would have been content with a reference to the exaltation and enthronement of the Son, with no mention of angels. Angels seldom if ever appear in the theologies and christologies of Christian communities today. In Hebrews, however, the author not only introduces them in 1:4 but also discusses them at length in 1:5-2:16. Undoubtedly there are strong reasons for doing so, the discovery of which is a primary task of the investigation of this unit. And it must be done here; angels appear elsewhere in Hebrews only at

12:22 and 13:2 in brief references to the assumed world of the readers and not as factors in any substantive discussion. Before moving to the subject of angels, however, it would be helpful to note the ways this unit contributes to an understanding of the method and the content of the epistle as a whole. First, the reader is immediately immersed in citations from the OT. Scriptural allusions appeared earlier (Ps 110:1 and Wis 7:25-26 at 1:3), but beginning at 1:5 direct quotations begin and continue with great frequency until the end of the letter. Between thirty and thirty-five (depending on whether one counts verse fragments) OT passages are explicitly cited, most of them from the psalms. Some are repeated, bearing the weight of lengthy argumentation; others appear only once but are no less vital to the unfolding message of the writer. No generalizations can be drawn about the author’s principles of interpretation until specific uses of Scripture are examined. Second, in this early unit the reader meets the writer’s habit of introducing biblical quotations with verbs of speaking (“God says”) rather than of writing (“it is written”). This pattern is not

us

HEBREWS 1:5—2:18 OVERVIEW the gradual unfolding of one-half of the affirmation, and then the ever so gradual unfolding of the other. Such movement of ideas is not only artistic but is pedagogically and rhetorically sound as well. We return now to the central subject of 1:5— 2:16, Christ and the angels, and to the question prompted by that subject: Why all this attention to angels? We have to assume that asserting Christ’s superiority over angels is important for both the writer and his readers. It is not a matter of debating the existence or non-existence of angels; these beings were common to the assumed worlds of late Judaism, Christianity, and other religions of the Near East. Angels (the word ayyeAou [angeloi| means “messengers”) were commonly portrayed as God’s intermediaries in all the ways God relates to creation and to humanity in particular. In some quarters angelologies were very complex, even including angels who revolted against God and devoted themselves to thwarting God’s purposes (Matt 25:41; Rom 8:38; Gal 4:3).!> Are we to assume such a backdrop to Hebrews? Judgment as to why the writer of Hebrews develops a christology over against angels in 1:52:16 should be reserved until investigation of the passage is complete. However, it might be helpful to place the best options before us as we proceed. One option maintains that the writer felt the need to elaborate on the reference to angels in the creedal formula in 1:1-4. All items in the opening confession are developed in the letter, but this one, that the Son is superior to angels, is the least important to the writer and readers and, therefore, is treated first and dismissed. The procedure might be compared to dealing early with “he descended into hell” in a discussion of the Apostles’ Creed in order to give primary attention to its other affirmations. A second view holds that the nature and role of angels was not a live issue for the readers and, therefore, provided a perfect foil for a recital of the greatness of Christ. No debate, no polemic, is involved here. A third position takes the subject of angels more seriously. Two issues are engaged. First, since it was believed that the law was given through angels (2:2), any adequate defense of the superiority of Christianity to an

The modern reader is, of course, nervous. What appears to be an uncritical transfer of content from past to present seems too easy a purchase of continuity between the OT and the NT. The questions are many, but at this point it is enough that we observe the writer’s method and sense something of the rhetorical and theological force.'4 A third and final observation prompted by this unit and helpful toward understanding the entire epistle concerns the structure of 1:5—2:18. Notice two features, the form and the movement. The form is quite clear: exposition (1:5-14); exhortation (2:1-4); exposition (2:5-18). This pattern of alternating exposition and exhortation will be sustained until the writer’s closing remarks. However, that the exposition serves the exhortation will be increasingly clear as the reader moves to the later chapters. At 13:22 all debate ceases; the writer identifies his work as “my word of exhortation.” The movement of the unit, and of the epistle, however, is less obvious but certainly discernible and no less impressive. One example of the way the author moves a subject or theme into the reader’s thinking is 1:3. In a most concise way, the Son is presented as priest and king; he makes purification for sins and is seated at God’s right hand. The scriptural allusion is to Psalm 110, but that text is neither quoted nor discussed further—that is, until 1:13. At that point only v. 1 of Psalm 110 is quoted, apparently solely in the service of the immediate issue, the superiority of the Son over the angels. The reader remembers 1:3, the kingly enthronement of the Son at God’s right hand, but what about the other half of the affirmation of 1:3, the Son as priest? That reappears at 2:17 in a fuller statement: The Son is “a merciful and faithful high priest.” This statement anticipates, but does not yet make use of, v. 4 of Psalm 110. The writer plants the seed and further cultivates the idea at 4:14, but then only gradually. Finally, Ps 110:4 is quoted at 5:6, the reader being reminded of its affirmation at 5:10, again at 6:20, and then finally its full exposition beginning at 7:1. And so the author has led the reader to the very difficult central argument of the epistle, and by what path? First an allusion to the priest-king of Psalm 110, 14. For anyone interested in further study of this form of argumenta-

15. Anyone wishing to review the whole subject of angels will find quite thorough and fair the article “Angel,” Theodor Gaster, /nterpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 6 vols. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962) 1:128-34.

tion, | recommend G. W. Savran, Telling and Re-telling, Quotation in Biblical Narrative (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988).

26

HEBREWS

1:5—2:18 OVERVIEW

audience steeped in or attracted to Judaism must establish that Christ is superior to angels. Second, since Christ suffered and died, how can he be superior to angels? That apparent contradiction must be addressed. Some commentators have conjectured that some of the readers may have resolved the problem by holding to an angel christology in which Christ only seemed to suffer and die but in reality was an angel on a mission for our salvation. A fourth and final position on the question of

why the writer argues that Christ is superior to angels insists that the writer is confronting the problem of angel worship in the church of his

readers. The most recent advocate of this view, Robert Jewett, interprets Hebrews by means of Colossians.'° To be sure, within the complex and somewhat obscure heresy at Colossae was the practice of the adoration of angels (Col 2:8-19),!” but to find in Colossians the key to understanding Hebrews is a questionable hermeneutical move. It will be the interpretive task of this commentary to make a judgment as to whether the text best supports this or one of the other options on the subject of Christ and the angels. 16. Robert Jewett, Letters to Pilgrims (New York: Pilgrim, 1981). 17. Revelation also seems to carry evidence of a problem of angel worship (19:9-10; 22:8-9).

HEBREWS 1:5sl4,.LHE SON.sUPERIOR | TO ANGELS NIV

NRSV

5For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father?”?? Or again,

5For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you”? Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”? “And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship him.” 7Of the angels he says, “He makes his angels winds, and his servants flames of fire.” 8But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is* forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of your? kingdom. ° You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”

“T will be his Father, and he will be my Son”? °And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship him.”¢ In speaking of the angels he says, “He makes his angels winds, his servants flames of fire.”¢ 8But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.

°You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions

by anointing you with the oil of joy.”/ '0He also says, “In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. a5 Or have begotten you 65 Psalm 2:7 c5 2Samuel 7:14; 1 d6 Deut. 32:43 (see Dead Sea Scrolls and Septuagint) Chron. 17:13

e7 Psalm104:4

9 Psalm 45:6, 7

-

10And,

“In the beginning, Lord, you founded the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands; ' they will perish, but you remain, aOr God is your throne

o Other ancient authorities read his

HEBREWS 1:5-14 NRSV

NIV

they will all wear out like clothing;

"They will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will roll them up like a robe; like a garment they will be changed. But you remain the same,

'2 like a cloak you will roll them up, and like clothing? they will be changed.

'STo which of the angels did God ever say, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet”? '4Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?

But you are the same, and your years will never end.” '3But to which of the angels has he ever said, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a a for your feet”? '4Are not all angels? spirits in the divine service, sent to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?

212 Psalm 102:25-27

a Other ancient authorities lack like clothing

and your years will never end.”?

673 Psalm 110:1

© Gk all of them

COMMENTARY NT writers, Pss 2:7 and 110:1 being prominent among them. But whether an original arrangement or borrowed, it is the writer of Hebrews who makes 1:5-13 an inclusio (a passage that ends as it begins) by beginning and ending with the rhetorical question, “To which of the angels did God ever say?” 1:5. This verse flows directly from two affirmations in the opening confession of faith: God has spoken through a Son (v. 2), and the name “Son” excels that of the angels (v. 4). It is the name “Son” that joins the two quotations, the one from a royal psalm idealizing the king as God’s Son (Ps 2:7), the other from Nathan’s prophecy, not only establishing David’s house forever but also announcing that David’s son would be God’s Son (2 Sam 7:14). The joining of these two texts was not unique to the early church, in which they were important foundation texts in developing christology; they were also linked in messianic

Except for the writer’s connecting comments and closing remark in v. 14, this unit consists of seven quotations from the OT: five from the psalms, one from Deuteronomy, and one from 2 Samuel. All citations are from the LXX; where slight variations occur, it is not always possible to determine whether the differences are the author’s own work or whether they existed in the particular text of the Greek translation being used. Such a pattern of joining a number of quotations is sometimes called a catena (a chain of related expressions or ideas) and sometimes a florilegium (a gathering of expressions on the analogy of a bunch of flowers). One can find parallel arrangements of texts in the mashalim (narratives formed by joining a number of texts) of the rabbis and in writings from Qumran. This particular catena may have been in a Christian tradition prior to Hebrews and was employed here by the writer to address the relation of Christ and angels. The scarcity of commentary by the author and the absence of polemic elaboration may indicate that the readers were already familiar with the catena from another context. Whether the early church had a collection of OT texts suitable for Christian preaching (called “Testimonia”) has been debated since the work of J. Rendell Harris on this sub-

thinking at Qumran.!? Elsewhere in the NT, Ps 2:7 is used in accounts of Jesus’ baptism (Mark 1:10-11 and par.) and as a prophecy fulfilled in God’s raising of Jesus from the dead (Acts 13:3334). That Ps 2:7 would be used by Christians as appropriate at Jesus’ baptism and at his resurrection raised for some the question, When did Jesus

ject.'® Certainly some texts were used widely by

19. Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 53n. 39. 2 Sam 7:11-14 is cited in 4Q Flor 1.10-11; Ps 2:1-2 is cited in 4Q Flor 1.18-19.

18. J. Rendell Harris, Testimonies, 2 vols . (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1916, 1920).

28

HEBREWS 1:5-14 COMMENTARY become Son of God? At birth, at baptism, or at resurrection? John and Paul would join the Hebrews writer in adding, Or in pre-existence? New Testament writers show no interest in the question; rather, they employ a number of available categories and images to affirm the unique relation between Christ and God. For example, the writer of Hebrews has just declared the Son pre-existent, the one through whom God created the worlds (v. 2), and now he uses a text portraying the Son as begotten. We may feel christological discontinuity here, but apparently the writer did not. Perhaps it should be said here that of the several ways to express Christ’s sonship, the one most recurring in Hebrews is pre-existence, the essential first phase of the formula: pre-existence, humiliation, exaltation (2:8-13; 7:3; 10:5; 11:26). Two general observations about this verse need now to be made. First, any discussion of the christology expressed here needs to be subordinated to the primary assertion of Hebrews—namely, God is the initiator of all that follows. God speaks, and the king is “Son”; God speaks, and David’s son is God’s own Son. Christology must flow out of theology. Second, if there is among the readers any serious angel worship, then the writer missed an excellent opportunity to counter it with Psalm 2. The context for Ps 2:7 is inter-monarchical rivalry in which kings and rulers conspired against God’s anointed, but to no avail. Israel’s king is God’s Son, and all other rulers will be subordinated to him. This context of the quoted Ps 2:7 would have been a sure weapon against any angels pretending rivalry with God’s Son, were such thinking a problem among the readers. 1:6. This verse consists of two parts: the writer’s introductory comment and the quotation of Deut 32:43, each full of ambiguities. For the author to speak of the Son as “firstborn” is not awkward here; he has already spoken of him as begotten (1:5) and as heir (1:2). The term “firstborn” (tpwtdtoKos prototokos), implying authority, privilege, and inheritance, had been used of David (Ps 89:27), of Israel (Num 11:12; Hos 2:1), and elsewhere of Christ (Rom 8:29; Col 1:15,

verb, hence “bring again” could refer to the parousia, the Second Coming. Some interpreters prefer this reading, but it is more likely that “again” is simply a connective (as at 1:5; 2:13; 4:5; 10:30). Thus understood, the bringing of the firstborn into the world is without chronological clues and, therefore, may refer to the incarnation, to the parousia, to the world to come (2:5), or to the exaltation into the “world” of the angels, who are commanded to worship him. The quotation itself speaks directly to the subject of the unit: Christ and the angels. Although the citation is very similar to Ps 97:7 (“all gods bow down before him” [“angels,” LXX]), most likely the writer has in mind Deut 32:43. Originally the text called for all the sons of God to worship God. A version of the LXX changed “sons” to “angels,” obviously preferred by the writer. The other alteration, directing angelic praise to the Son rather than to God, is the writer’s own modification. However, the author may be citing Deut 32:43 not directly but from the odes attached to the psalter in some manuscripts of the LXX or from a Christian liturgy that made use of the Song of Moses in its own worship (Rev 15:3). 1:7. The fourth of the seven quotations is Ps 104:4, and again the writer uses the LXX translation. The Hebrew reads, “who makes winds to be his messengers and fire and flame his servants,” while the LXX reverses the expressions: “who makes his messengers [angels] to be winds and his servants to be fire and flame.” The writer’s point about angels is clear only when read in conjunction with vv. 8-9. The point is not that God harnesses the forces of nature to serve the Creator’s purpose (Heb. text) but that angels are as transient and temporary as wind and fire (LXX text). This will be abundantly clear momentarily. As to the identity of the “who” (“he” in Eng. text) in the phrase “who makes” (0 to.dv ho poion), it is not necessary to assume the writer has Christ, and not God, in mind. Even though the Son is agent of creation (1:2), the contrast between Christ and the angels is not that of creator/creature but of permanent/transient. 1:8-9. The writer introduces Ps 45:6-7 by saying that what follows applies to the Son. Psalm 45 is a marriage song praising the king as bridegroom and calling on the bride, a princess from

18). But to what event or christological moment does the writer refer with the expression “when he [God] brings the firstborn into the world”? Technically the adverb “again” may modify the

29

HEBREWS

1:5-14 COMMENTARY angels? Several themes are underscored. The role of the Son as creator and sustainer of the universe (1:2-3) is here elaborated to highlight the contrast between Christ as creator and angels as creatures. This leads to a second contrast between the Son, who never changes, and creation, which perishes. In vivid imagery the psalmist pictures creation as old clothes that wear out, as a cloak rolled up and put away. In addition, Ps 102:25-27 contributes beyond this unit to discussions yet to be developed. One observes here the writer’s practice of anticipating future ideas by dropping words and phrases that will receive fuller attention later. For example, just as creation grows old and wears out like clothing, so also the old covenant grows old, soon to disappear (8:13). Again, just as the Son remains the same forever, so also will this unchanging quality characterize Christ’s priesthood::(5:6; 6:20347:35°17)eOr vagain, just: -as creation perishes, so also will there be a shaking and an end to all things in the eschaton, leaving only the kingdom that cannot be shaken (12:2628). Telegraphing ahead themes yet to be developed is sound rhetoric and effective pedagogy. 1:13. The catena in vv. 5-13 ends as it began, with a rhetorical question: “To which of the angels has God ever said?” The writer now quotes the text to which he alluded in v. 3, Ps 110:1. Only its contribution to this immediate context will be considered here. To do more would be to discuss the remainder of the epistle, because not only are portions of this psalm quoted later (5:6; 7:17, 21) but it also provides the scriptural authorization for the unique christology of Hebrews. George Buchanan’s commentary is based on the view that Hebrews is an extended

Tyre, to abandon all former loyalties in recognition of the superior status of the groom. The Hebrews writer does not develop the marriage theme, which would have served well in another context (e.g., Christ and the church). Rather, Psalm 45 yields other themes appropriate to the Christ/angels discussion. First, as the adversative “but” indicates, there is a sharp contrast with the portrayal of the angels in the preceding verse. The angels are changing and transient; the throne of the Son is forever and ever (13:8). Second, because the Son is a king whose reign is marked by righteousness, the writer anticipates the discussion of Melchizedek, king of righteousness, beginning at 7:1. Third, that God “has set you above your companions” has clear implications for the issue of Christ’s relation to the angels. It is striking that the writer gives no special attention to the most shocking feature of the quotation: the king, and hence the Son, is called God. Although many interpreters have devised ways to avoid the direct address, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever” seems to be the unavoidable sense. As awkward as it is to many Christians, references to the Son as God can be found in early liturgical texts John 1:1; 20:28; Rom sd; Titus 2:13; 52) Pet del): The second apparent reference to the king (Son) as God is not so persuasive: “therefore God, your God, has anointed you” could be read as a nominative, not a vocative. This is to say, it could be read, “God; that is, your God has anointed you.” But, as stated above, referring to the Son as God seems not to have been the reason for the author’s attraction to this psalm. And so, almost incidentally and from a text not listed among the messianic psalms, comes the strongest attribution of divinity to the Son, even stronger than 1:1-4. If any doubt remained of the Son’s superiority to angels, that doubt has surely been removed. 1:10-12. Psalm 102 is a lament of a person ill and dying, reflecting on the brevity of life, mortality, and vulnerability. The psalmist then contrasts his own condition with the abiding nature of a never-changing God. The Hebrews writer presents this description of God as God’s words concerning the Son. There is no doubt, therefore, that the one addressed as Lord is the Son. What, then, does the quotation of Ps 102:25-27 contribute to the discussion concerning Christ and the

homiletical midrash on Psalm 110.7° This psalm is also frequently employed elsewhere in the NT; in quotation and clear allusion it appears in christological debate, in proofs of the resurrection and exaltation of Christ, and in prophecies of the parousia (e.g., Mark 12:35-37; 14:62; Acts 2:34; 1 Cor 15:25). Psalm 110 is God’s address to the king, and it contains two oracles: the offer of a place of power at God’s right hand (Ps 110:1) and the declaration 20. George W. Buchanan, Hebrews, AB 36 (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1972) xix. For a detailed study of early Christian uses of Psalm 110, see Hay, Glory at the Right Hand.

30

HEBREWS

1:5-14 COMMENTARY

of the king’s priestly office after the order of Melchizedek (Ps 110:4). Only Hebrews in the NT develops Ps 110:4 as a christological text. In fact, later in the epistle the writer drew upon more of the psalm than these two verses. In the present context, only Ps 110:1 is quoted, and it is presented as the words of God to the Son. For what immediate purpose? In addition to the affirmation of the supremacy of the Son, the psalm predicts the final subordination of all enemies of the Son. Later in the epistle the writer will discuss the Son’s victory over the two great enemies, sin and death (2:14-15; 10:27). But within 1:5-2:18 are the enemies the angels? This is very strong language, much stronger than that of Ps 45:7 in 1:9: God “has set you above your companions” (NIV). If angels are Christ’s enemies, then the language here is reminiscent of Paul, who regarded angels among the principalities and powers finally to be brought under subjection to Christ (1 Cor 15:2428; Phil 2:9-11). Apparently, however, the writer realized that the quotation, while serving his purpose, said more than he wanted to say. Therefore, in his own words, without further quotation, he softens, in fact alters, the impact of Ps 110:1 by appending a concluding statement.

the angels, especially in view of the implication that they are enemies of Christ (v. 13). This statement is in the form of a question, but the syntax of the Greek text makes it clear that an affirmative answer is expected: “The angels are ministering spirits, are they not?” For this conclusion, the writer returns to Ps 104:4 (quoted in v. 7), not only for the idea that angels are ministers or servants but also for the language, “minister” (A\etToupyos Jleitourgos) and “spirit” or “wind” (TvedLa pneuma). The word translated “minister,” which gives us the word “liturgy,” prompted the NRSV to translate the expression “in the divine service.” The author’s meaning is very clear: Angels are spirits who minister in God’s service. Unlike the Son, who sits at God’s right hand, angels are sent out on mission, and the beneficiaries of their service are those soon to inherit salvation. Who these persons are and of what their salvation consists are questions yet to be answered by the writer. Verse 14 serves, then, as an important transition. It speaks positively of the work of angels, providing an opening for a statement about one of the significant tasks of angels, the giving of the law (2:2). In addition, it announces salvation, a Subject soon to be developed (2:3-4). And finally, v. 14 introduces those who will inherit salvation, the group to be strongly admonished in 2:1-4.

1:14. No further word needs to be said at this point concerning the Son; his position has been adequately presented. However, the writer feels the need for one more clarifying statement about

REFLECTIONS 1. It may first appear to teachers and preachers that a text preoccupied with angels bears little yield to nourish the church. Angels have, it is true, always lain at the edge of Christian faith, and not at its center; the creeds do not include them. Very likely they were not vital to the faith of the writer of Hebrews; they disappear when he moves to the central substance of his christology. However, for some of the readers angels have moved from the edge toward the center. We do not know how important they were, in what ways they functioned for the believers, or if the Christians addressed sought to worship them, appease them, or simply talk about them a great deal. We cannot borrow from Paul’s churches to clarify Hebrews. What we do know is that the writer was a Christian leader and as such did not confine his interests to the items in his own personal faith. If angels concern the church, they concern him. Moving angels from the margins to a more prominent place demands attention; after all, faith is often a matter of proportion. What does it say about the health of a believing community if it begins to give large attention to angels or, for that matter, to demons, to the Second Coming, to the millennium, to the rapture, or to the pre-resurrection state of the dead? Has curiosity replaced faith? Has the gospel become boring and in need of some new mystery? Maybe the gospel or christology suffers from inattention and so items from the edge are drawn

31

HEBREWS 1:5-14 REFLECTIONS into the vacuum. It may be that faith in Christ is so weak that the church is looking for supplements, for backup. Add a few angels. Whatever the condition in the church addressed by Hebrews, the writer responds with a strong christology, the fully adequate and final word from the God who has always spoken. Having said that, it should be noted that the author is not hesitant to remind the readers of the positive role of angels in their salvation (1:14). 2. The writer’s use of the Old Testament will be a continuing part of the investigation of Hebrews. However, it is already clear that for the writer and the readers the Old Testament is God’s Word. The author does not dismiss the ancient texts with some dispensational argument so that he may construct Christianity with entirely new material. The continuity between old and new is real because it is one God who speaks, who sustains, who redeems. To be sure, the Old Testament is a book of promise and anticipation, looking beyond itself—but so is the New. Both Israel and the church are self-declared pilgrims, looking for the city that has foundations. Of course, the author affirms Christ as God’s Son whose person and work fulfills hope, but his case is not made by dancing on the graves of the prophets. The writer’s methods of interpretation are not ours; they belong to him and to the teachers of his time and place. But at the heart of his hermeneutics are two principles of abiding value. One is respect for the text as revelatory. The other is the sense that the text belongs to the entire believing community. Hebrews does not present a private interpreter playing with biblical texts to persuade an uninformed church to his view. Rather, it is abundantly clear by the writer’s lack of argumentation that the readers are informed and in agreement with the affirmations expressed in the quoted texts. The writer will soon lead them into difficult and unfamiliar exegetical territory, but at the end of this chapter the readers are responding with both understanding and agreement.

HEBREWS 2:1-4, THEREFORE LISTEN CAREFULLY NIV

NRSV

oy

2

We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. *For if the message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, “how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. “God also testified to it by signs, wonders

Therefore we must pay greater attention to

_

what we have heard, so that we do not

drift away from it. *For if the message declared through angels was valid, and every transgression or disobedience received a just penalty, *how can we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? It

was declared at first through the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, ‘while God added his testimony by signs and wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, distributed according to his will.

and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

(COMMENTARY The writer has not finished with the subject of Christ and the angels. That matter will be resumed at 2:5 with the exegesis of a critical text. He pauses here, however, to drive home the vital

importance of what has been said and will be said. The entire epistle is called a “word of encouragement” or a “word of exhortation” (13:22); either translation is acceptable, and the content of the

32

HEBREWS 2:1-4 COMMENTARY letter supports both. At 2:1-4 the hortatory portion begins and will reappear from time to time (3:124:13; 5:11-6:12; 10:19-39; 12:14-29). The balance between 1:1-4 and 2:1-4 is apparent. Having begun with the one who speaks, the writer now turns to those who hear what has been spoken. The author does not separate himself from the

lessness, a loss of attention. This warning comes early, and appropriately so, lest it also fall on indifferent ears.

2:2-3. Verse 2 begins a rather lengthy and complex sentence concluding at v. 4, which, in the service of clarity of translation, has been divided into two (NRSV) or three (NIV) concise statements. The sentence is a conditional clause consisting of an “if” (protasis) and a “then” (apodosis). The “if” here does not express an uncertainty but a certainty and, therefore, could be translated “since” (cf. Phil 2:1). The “then” is rather unusual, consisting of a rhetorical question, the answer to which is already known to both speaker and hearer, and it is inescapably clear. The argument is from the lesser (“If the word spoken through angels”) to the greater (“spoken through the Lord”). This form of argumentation (a fortiori) is a favorite of the writer (7:20-22; 9:13-15; 10:28-29). The sentence continues the language of speaking begun at 1:1, and since both angels and the Lord are referred to as agents, the assumed speaker is God. This assures that even though lesser and greater describe the revelations, in both the word is from God. Even though Exod 20:1 gives no indication of the presence of mediating angels at Sinai, later on the belief came to be held among both Jews and Christians. For example, in the book of Jubilees (Jub. 1:27, 29) an angel dictated the Torah to Moses, and among Christians the belief that the law came through angels is expressed here, at Acts 7:38, 53, and at Gal 3:19. The theological process by which angels made their way into the narrative is not clear. Since wind and fire were spoken of as angels (Ps 104:4), perhaps the meteorological elements at Sinai came to be viewed as angelic agents. In the LXX, angels are present in the final blessing of Moses: “The Lorp came from Sinai/... With him were myriads of holy ones;/ at his right, a host of his own” (Deut 33:2 NRSV; “At his right hand angels were with him,” LXX). Some have suggested that angels became a theological necessity as the distance between a transcendent God and frail humanity came increasingly to be accented. Whatever the origin, angels as mediators of Torah are not portrayed here as rebels against God or as harbingers of what is antithetical to the gospel. On the contrary, the word through angels was “binding” or “valid”

readers in an accusing tone but uses the inclusive “we” throughout. Moving through the lines, one will notice how tightly woven the argument, how vivid the imagery, and how rhetorically skilled the writer is.

2:1. It is understandable that one might regard 2:1-4 as an interpolation into the text.?! The argument at 1:14 seems to resume at 2:5, as though 2:1-4 were not there; there are no quotations from the LXX; and the vocabulary seems different, consisting of several rare words. But exhortations often are literarily and substantively different from exposition; such is their nature, and this is but the first of many alternations between exposition and exhortation. It must also be observed that the subject of angels does not resume at 2:5; it is central to 2:1-4 as well. In addition, 2:1 recalls 1:1 phonetically. Both display the rhetorician’s use of alliteration, in each case the repetition of m (Eng. p), an explosive consonant that, when repeated, impresses an audience. Further, the “Therefore” of 2:1 clearly links the exhortation to what precedes it, not to 1:14 specifically but to the entire presentation of the Son’s superiority to angels. The injunction to “pay greatest [the comparative probably carries the force of the superlative here] attention” uses a word rare in Hebrews (tpoo€éxw prosecho; used elsewhere only at 7:13) but rather common in other NT texts. Matthew uses it repeatedly (e.g., Matt 6:1; 7:15; 10:17; 16:6) as a term of strong warning: “Beware, watch out!” The danger is not that of willful engagement in ethical or doctrinal error but that of drifting or slipping past one’s mooring. This second key word may be a nautical term, appearing nowhere else in the NT and only twice in the LXX (Prov 3:21; Isa 44:4). The condition addressed is a serious one. Toward the message they have heard (its content is not specified; its certainty is the present focus), the readers are displaying a laxity, a care21. As does F. C. Synge, Hebrews and the Scriptures (London: SPCK,

1959) 44-52.

33

HEBREWS 2:1-4 COMMENTARY sage was confirmed (attested, validated) to us by those who heard him implies more likely a historical occasion rather than an announcement from the heavenly throne. But the question, “When?” is more ours than the writer’s. Neither is the author seeking to argue for a particular tradition by the formula: from God, through the Lord, to those who heard, to us. It could be that the author is anticipating 13:7: “your leaders, those who spoke the word of God to you” (NRSV). For one who admittedly was not among the Lord’s hearers, it was important, of course, to state the unbroken continuity of the word (cf. 2 Pet 3:2), but one does not sense that the affirmation is intended to counter another tradition. Rather, the strength of the statement depends on the writer and the readers having had common access and common agreement as to the great salvation about which they had heard. 2:4. The conditional sentence begun at v. 2 concludes with a phrase called an absolute, a grammatical construction important to the sentence but having its own subject and verb and, therefore, making its own statement. God, the sometimes stated, sometimes implied speaker from 1:1 through 2:3 now becomes the actor, the one who through signs, wonders, powerful deeds, and distributions of the Holy Spirit offers supporting testimony to the word spoken (see also 6:5). Signs and wonders had long been joined (Exod 7:3; Deut 4:34; 6:22; Ps 135:9; Jer 32:20-21; Neh 9:10), and early Christians often added “deeds of power” (Acts 2:22; Rom 15:19; 2 Cor 12:12). These expressions, along with “distributions of the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor 12:11; Gal 3:5), clearly set the church of both writer and reader within the mainstream of the Christian community portrayed in the NT. It is too easy, because of the unique presentation of Christ as high priest, to think of the church of Hebrews as peripheral or isolated and, therefore, less significant than in Acts or the Pauline epistles as a witness to early Christianity. The signs, wonders, miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit are set between two modifiers of major importance. First, these acts of God in confirming support of the spoken word are described as testimony or witness. The fact that they are acts of God does not mean that these acts are overwhelming and incontrovertible proof. God does not coerce faith but joins the rest of us in wit-

(BEBatos bebaios), very likely intended here as a legal term (as at 9:17), given the use of other such vocabulary in the sentence. The compound “transgression [violation, NIV] and disobedience” (not or disobedience, NRSV) serves to underscore the seriousness of any breach of Torah, and the word “disobedience” (“refusal to listen” [Tapakon parakoeé|) Keeps intact the language of speaking and hearing. Every act of disobedience had as a sure consequence a “just EvdiKos [(endikos), a rare word in the NT; cf. Rom 3:8] recompense” (utoSatrosoata misthapodosia; only in Hebrews in the NT). The translation “penalty” or “punishment” is justified here, given the context, but in a positive setting the word can mean “reward”

(HOS8S:51 1226): It is the backdrop of a Torah without legal uncertainties and with careful administration that gives the question, “How shall we escape?” much of its gravity. The greater seriousness, however, is carried by the phrase “spoken through the Lord.” Since. the Son is greater than angels, the word of the Son is greater than the message delivered through angels. At this point, exactly what will not be escaped is not spelled out, but it will soon be clear that the writer has in mind eschatological punishment (6:8; 10:27, 31; see also Luke 21:36; Rom 2:3; 1 Thess 5:3). Again the writer is specific: The danger among the readers is neglect (2:1) or indifference. Jeremiah had warned that such behavior could result in God’s neglecting (8:9; “no concern,” NRSV; “turned away,” NIV) Israel. At stake is a “great salvation” (1:14), which, interestingly enough, is portrayed as something spoken. Its reality and certainty are secured in God’s having said so. That is enough. As a minimum this salvation means exemption from eschatological punishment (9:28; 10:25), but the epistle will also detail present benefits (4:16; 6:5; 8:7-12; 9:13-14, 26-28; 10:2, 15-18, 22). That this salvation was first spoken through the Lord raises the question, “When?” Since the writer uses “Lord” and not “Son,” this influence from Ps 110:1 may imply that the announcement occurred at the exaltation. However, since much attention is also given the incarnation (2:5-18; 5:7-8; 10:1-10), the author could well have had in mind a recital such as is found in Acts 10:36-39 or Luke 4:16-21 or Mark 1:14-15. That the mes-

34

HEBREWS 2:1-4 COMMENTARY nessing. This means that the signs and wonders may be interpreted as other than acts of God. In the biblical world the question was not simply whether these wonders really occurred but, Who did them? In both the ministry of Jesus (Mark 3:21-27) and the churches of Paul (2 Thess 2:9), deeds of power were also attributed to Satan.

Faith always involves making a decision. Second, all these acts of testimony are according to God’s will. Signs, wonders, and gifts of the Spirit are received from God, precluding all human possession of these powers for purposes of control, manipulation, or persuasion.

rd

REFLECTIONS 1. The many-splendored portrayal of the superiority of the Son in 1:5-14 is a clear reminder that Christian life and thought begin in doxology. But following the liturgy comes the “Therefore,” and 2:1-4 supplies the first of many in Hebrews. In this regard the writer is not unlike Paul, who, having concluded Romans 1-11 with a burst of praise (Rom 11:33-36), begins chap. 12 with “Therefore.” There is always a “Therefore.”

2. One has to be impressed by the strength of the writer’s case for the message of the “great salvation.” Note the source of the message (God); the superiority of the messenger (Christ); the unbroken tradition of the word (God-Christ-his hearers-us); and the corroborating testimony from God (signs, wonders, miracles, gifts of the Holy Spirit). And in view of this forceful reminder of what was theirs as inheritors of salvation (1:14), one has to be a bit surprised that the condition addressed was that of inattention, neglect, indifference, drifting. That there could be apathy toward the gospel may seem unbelievable to the newly baptized, but the fact is that this condition has plagued the church from the first century. Among the seven deadly sins, the ancients saw fit to list d«ndia akedia, usually translated “sloth.” The word means “unconcerned,” “uncaring,” “disinterested.” The writer will mount repeated campaigns against this passivity; with what success, we do not know.

HEBREWS 2:5-18, THE SON LOWER THAN ANGELS OVERVIEW By means of a tapestry of biblical texts the case for the superiority of the Son over angels has moved along beautifully. The catena of 1:5-14 has been haunted by the line “When he had made purification for sins” (1:3 NRSV), but until now its implications have been unaddressed. The writer turns now to do just that, to face the fact that may have prompted interest in angels: The Son became incarnate, subject to all the conditions flesh is heir to, including death. The writer, then, returns to exposition and to the interpretation of biblical texts. The thought of 1:13 (Ps 110:1) is resumed, but the line of reasoning takes a signifi-

cant turn. Instead of continuing the comparison of the Son and angels, the author now argues that just as angels were not the means of redemption, so also they are not the recipients, the beneficiaries of it. With this new orientation toward humanity, toward those “who are to inherit salvation” (1:14), the primary consideration of the epistle will have been established. After 2:16 angels will no longer be a factor in either exposition or exhortation. This unit falls easily into two parts: 2:5-9, which consists primarily of a christological exegesis of Ps 8:4-6[8:5-7 LXX], and 2:10-18, which

HEBREWS 2:5-18 OVERVIEW priesthood of Christ. Portions of Psalm 22 and Isaiah 8 support the argumentation.

elaborates on that exegesis soteriologically and anticipates the fuller development of the high

Hebrews 2:5-9, He Became as We Are NRSV

NIV

5Now God? did not subject the coming world,

It is not to angels that he has’ subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. But there is a place where someone has testified: “What is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him? 7You made him a little? lower than the angels; you crowned him with glory and honor 8 and put everything under his feet.”? In putting everything under him, God left nothing that is not subject to him. Yet at present we do not see everything subject to him. °But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. a7 Or him for a little while; also in verse 9

about which we are speaking, to angels. “But someone has testified somewhere, “What are human beings that you are mindful of them,? or mortals, that you care for them?* 7 You have made them for a little while lower? than the angels; you have crowned them with glory and honor,’ 8 — subjecting all things under their feet.” Now in subjecting all things to them, God? left nothing outside their control. As it is, we do not yet see everything in subjection to them, *but we do see Jesus, who for a little while was made

lower’ than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so

68 Psalm 8:4-6

that by the grace of God’ he might taste death for everyone. 2 Gk he 6 Gk What is man that you are mindful of him? ¢ Gk or the son of man that you care for him? In the Hebrew of Psalm 8.4-6 both man and son of man refer to all humankind aOr them only a little lower e Other ancient authorities add and set them over the works of your hands fOr who was made a little lower g Other ancient authorities read apart from God

(COMMENTARY clear at 1:13, it must be clear now, because what follows is an interpretation of Psalm 8 in which the future and final reign of Christ is central. From the statement that the world to come was not subjected to angels it may be implied that angels do have some governance in this present age. Such a view was at least available to the author (e.g., Deut 32:8; Dan 10:13; Sir 17:17; 1 Enoch

The discussion beginning at v. 5 seems so loosely connected to what precedes it that the conjunction “for” (yap gar) in the Greek text is dropped in the NIV and translated with the rather noncommittal “now” in the NRSV. However, v. 5 does continue an earlier line of thinking, not in the exhortation of 2:1-4 but in 1:13. In fact, v. 5 looks in two directions: back to 1:13, which declares through Ps 110:1 the ultimate sovereignty of the Son, and ahead to 2:8, where Psalm 8 provides the vocabulary of “subjection.” But first the writer wants it clear: The subject about which he is speaking is the world to come, the eschatological age of messianic rule (6:5). If that was not

60:15-21; 89:70-76). Psalm 8:4-6, the centerpiece of Heb 2:5-9, is introduced as speech of indefinite citation: “someone has testified somewhere” (cf. 4:4; 7:17; 12:56). Attridge has found parallels in Philo and concludes that it may have been a common homi-

36

HEBREWS 2:5-9 COMMENTARY letic practice.2? Sometimes specific citations are unhelpful, sometimes awkward, and sometimes they complicate the discussion. Public speakers know that undivided attention on content can often best be served by indefinite referencing. Certainly in Hebrews this practice does not justify the view that the writer was cavalier in his attitude toward the OT; too many quotations are

God and to the rest of creation (Gen 1:26-28). That the psalm is anthropological in original intent is fully clear. What is not clear is the point in the author’s exegesis of it (beginning at v. 80) at which the reader’s attention is shifted from man(kind) to Christ. Jesus is not specifically mentioned until v. 9, but is the author already thinking of him in v. 80: “In putting everything under him, God left nothing that is not subject to him. Yet at present we do not see everything subject to him”? The question is interesting but not crucial. If at this point the writer is thinking of man(kind), then it is obvious that humanity has not succeeded in holding dominion over all else in creation. Nor is the author moving toward the point that in some future time humanity will complete that assignment from God. If it was not to angels that God subjected the world to come, neither is it to humanity. If the writer is already thinking of Christ, then it is likewise clear that the full subjection of the world to come is not yet. The “until” of Ps 110:1 is still in effect: “until I make your enemies your footstool” (NRSV)— even though, as at 2:3, there are ample present benefits of the eschatological age. Perhaps we can safely regard v. 80 as a swing statement, a point at which the writer turns the reader away from any lingering thoughts of the original intent of the psalm toward its present use as a proclamation of the humiliation and coronation of Christ. It does not seem appropriate here to elaborate on possible second Adam or Son of man christologies embedded in the text.”* Neither is developed in Hebrews and, therefore, would require heavy borrowings from the Gospels and Paul. The author concludes his exegesis of Ps 8:4-6 with a bold statement. Having spoken of what we do not see (v. 80) he now announces what we do see (v. 9). The Greek construction is especially impressive. Between two expressions from the psalm (“the one made for a little while lower than the angels” and “the one with honor and glory crowned”) is placed the principal clause, “we see Jesus.” It was important that the two expressions that had been joined as a description of the station of humanity now be separated as two phases of

introduced as the speech of God or of Christ or of the Holy Spirit. As for the quotation itself, several features should be noted. First, the Hebrews text (vv. 6-84) follows Ps 8:4-6 closely except for the omission of one line: “You have given them dominion over the works of your hands” (Ps 8:62 NRSV). This expression apparently was not useful to the writer in the christological interpretation of the psalm. However, we must use terms such as “omitted,” “added,” or “modified” with some caution, since we are not always sure which recension of the OT text lay before the writer.2° Second, the author uses the Greek text (LXX) of the psalm, which had rendered the Hebrew “a little lower than gods ” as “a little lower than angels.” Third, the expression “a little [Boaxt Ti brachy ti]” may have a temporal meaning, “a little while.” This seems to be the writer’s sense in the exegesis (v. 9), and so the NRSV translates it (vv. 7, 9). The NIV keeps the qualitative meaning in its rendering, “a little lower.” On the matter of translation, the NRSV has honored its commitment to more inclusive language by translating “man” and “son of man” (synonymous parallels) as “human beings” and “mortals.” The meaning of the psalm in its own context is not violated by this translation, but the shift from plural to singular in the application of the psalm to Christ is made awkward. Similarly, the phrase “son of man” is lost, and it is possible that this phrase first attracted christological interpretations of the psalm by the early church. The psalm offers praise to God and contrasts the power and majesty of God with the relative insignificance of human beings. It ponders why God would think of or care for humans. The psalmist does not lament human frailty but reaffirms the unique place of humanity in relation to 22. H. W. Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989) 70-71. 23. J. C. McCullough, “The Old Testament Quotations in Hebrews,”

24. Anyone wishing to pursue these christologies further or wishing to be further persuaded that such pursuits are not justified here is referred to Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 73-75.

NTS 26 (1980) 263-79.

Si.

HEBREWS 2:5-9 COMMENTARY One final word on the text. In some early versions and in some Greek mss of Hebrews (beginning in the third century), instead of “by the grace of God” (v. 9) is the reading “apart from God.” Careless copying may account for the difference (xwpis 900 choris theou instead of xapitt 8€00 chariti theou). Or perhaps a scribe wanted to follow 1 Cor 15:27 and assure the reader that Christ’s subjection of “all” or his death for “all” did not include God. And, of course, the phrase “apart from God” might have been motivated by a view of the atonement; that is, for Christ to die, God had to abandon him. This alternate reading, however prompted, hardly fits the immediate context of Hebrews or the affirmations made thus far concerning the relation of God to the Son. (See Reflections at 2:10-18.)

the temporal journey of the Son: lower than angels for a little while, crowned with glory and honor forever. There is no shrinking back from or minimizing what happened to Jesus during that “little while.” In fact, at this point, where the author first mentions the name “Jesus,” two strong assertions are made: (1) It was because he suffered death that Jesus was crowned with glory and honor (the exaltation). (2) In his dying, Jesus “tasted death” (Matt 16:28; John 8:52) for everyone. This statement anticipates the theological elaboration of 2:10-18 in which the author will take what may have been for some a theological embarrassment, the suffering and death of Jesus, and demonstrate its central importance for the priestly ministry of Christ. If any preferred passionless angels over a suffering Jesus, they will now hear strong reasons to reconsider.

Hebrews 2:10-18, A Faithful and Merciful High Priest NIV

NRSV

‘In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering. ''Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers. '2He says, “I will declare your name to my brothers; in the presence of the congregation I will sing your praises.” And again, “] will put my trust in him.”? And again he says, “Here am I, and the children God has given mie.© '4Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— '°and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. '°For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. '’For this reason he

10It was fitting that God,? for whom and through whom all things exist, in bringing many children to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through sufferings. ''For the one who sanctifies and those who are sanctified all have one Father.’ For this reason Jesus? is not ashamed to call them brothers and sisters,° !say-

ing,

in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he

“I will proclaim your name to my brothers and sisters,° in the midst of the congregation I will praise you.” 'SAnd again, “I will put my trust in him.” And again, “Here am-I and the children whom God has given me.” 14Since, therefore, the children share flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared the same things, so that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 'Sand free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death. '°For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of Abraham. !’Therefore he had to become

4/2 Psalm 22:22

aGk he

had to be made like his brothers in every way,

673 Isaiah 8:17

c/3 Isaiah 8:18

38

6 Gk are all of one

¢ Gk brothers

HEBREWS 2:10-18 NIV

NRSV

might make atonement for? the sins of the people.

like his brothers and sisters? in every respect, so

Because he Himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being

that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the people. '*Because he himself was tested by what he suffered, he is able to help those who are being tested.

tempted. a17 Or and that he might turn aside God’s wrath, taking away

#

a Gk brothers

(COMMENTARY 2:10. It quickly becomes clear that the writer’s use of Psalm.8 to acknowledge that “for a little while” Christ was lower than the angels is in no way a concession, a willingness to lose a point in the process of winning an argument. On the contrary, during that “little while” the drama of redemption was played out. The essential vocabulary of that drama has already been introduced: suffering, death, grace of God, for everyone (v. 9); now, consistent with a literary pattern already employed, the writer will elaborate on that vocabulary. Before stating what is achieved by the suffering and death of Jesus, two affirmations are underscored for the reader. First, what occurred during the “little while” of Christ’s incarnation was at the initiative of God. The use of an omnipotence formula (for whom and through whom all things exist, v. 10) removes even a hint of accident, coincidence, or historical contingency. This formula is like Rom 11:36 in its theocentricity; any mention of agency (through the Son) as at 1:2-3 would here be awkward, because in what follows the Son is the object of God’s activity. Second, this activity of God is totally appropriate to the character of God and to God’s relationship to humankind. Speaking of what is proper behavior for God is unique to Hebrews in the NT. Other writers refer to what is proper conduct for John the Baptist (Matt 3:15), for women in the church (1 Cor 11:13), for believers in general (Eph 5:3), or for a young minister (Titus 2:1), but not for God. For this writer to be so audacious clearly indicates how crucial the point is. And what is it that God is doing? According to v. 10, God’s purpose is to lead many children (the word is “sons” (viot Auioi), but is unquestionably inclusive) to glory. Honor and glory belong to

Jesus (v. 9), but now many others will share in that glory (cf. John 12:28-32). The glory with which Jesus is crowned is “because of the suffering of death”; that same suffering will be the means by which Jesus becomes the leader of salvation for many. By his suffering and death, Christ gains glory not only for himself but also for “many children.” In this service he is called “pioneer” (NRSV) or “author” (NIV). The word apxnyos (archegos) is rare in the NT (Acts 3:15; 5:31; Heb 12:2) but very important in Hebrews. While the word can be translated as “founder,” “author,” or “leader,” here and at 12:2 Jesus is portrayed as the one who in himself creates the path for his followers. For that work he is made “perfect” (tedeLdw teleioo) through suffering. Perfection is not a term for moral flawlessness; that quality of blamelessness is otherwise stated in 4:15; 7:26; and 9:14. Rather, it refers to the completeness of Jesus’ preparation for his priestly ministry. Any life short of suffering and death would have been less than an identification with humankind and, therefore, less than a full understanding of the human condition. In the LXX, “to perfect” is used to describe the consecration of the priest (Exod 29:9; Lev 16:32; Num 3:3), and in view of the movement of Hebrews 2 toward the presentation of Jesus as high priest, the cultic use of the term in the LXX must lie close to the writer’s intention. Two of the key words in 2:10, “pioneer” and “perfect,” will again be joined in a summary description of Jesus at 12:2. 2:11.If “to perfect” implies sacerdotal activity, the language of sanctifying or making holy clearly brings the reader to the altar of priestly service. In the OT, God is the one who sanctifies (Exod

39

HEBREWS 2:10-18 COMMENTARY (Isa 8:17) feed into v. 17 with the themes of brothers and sisters and of faithfulness. 2:14-15. The transition at v. 14, “Since, therefore,” announces the gathering up of what has been said thus far and the projection of lines of thought stated here but to be developed later. The summary: Since all human beings share (kexo.vavnkev kekoinoneken; perfect tense, indicating an abiding condition) blood and flesh, Jesus in every way participated (wetéoxev meteschen; aorist tense, indicating a completed act in the past) in the same things. The language is clear: He was as we are, no pretensions, no appearances, no exemptions. “Flesh and blood” (here “blood and flesh”; see John 1:13) was a common way to summarize the human condition (Matt 16:17; 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16). The first projected implication of that summary: Through his death, Jesus destroys the one having the power of death; that is, the devil. To say that Jesus “destroys” (katapyéw katargeo) the devil very likely means “to break the power of.” Paul uses the same word in the same way to speak of Christ’s victory over the principalities and powers (1 Cor 15:24); they are not destroyed but subdued and put in subjection to Christ. So here the devil, who holds death’s power (John 8:44; 1 Cor 5:5; 10:10), is defeated. And what is the power of death? To hold people in bondage to the fear of it. By his death Christ has broken the chains of that fear. How that victory is actually accomplished is not stated. Perhaps the idea was commonplace among the readers and needed no elaboration. Myths of heroes and champions who faced death and through dying set the people free abounded in that culture,”° perhaps providing the church a way of understanding one of the benefits of Christ’s death. Later the writer will present Jesus as a model for those facing suffering and death, and thereby may indicate one way Jesus liberates us from bondage to fear of death (12:2-3). And, of course, his resurrection and exaltation, opening access to God, grant confidence and freedom to the believer (10:19-20; 13:20-21). 2:16. Before continuing to state the benefits of Christ’s incarnation and death, the author

31:13; Lev 20:8; Ezek 20:12), but here the reference is to Jesus. Later the writer will associate sanctifying with the shedding of blood (9:13; 10:10; 13:12), but at this point the unity of the sanctifier and the sanctified is the message. The expression that they are “from one” is variously understood, the “one” being interpreted as Adam or humanity or God. This could be a reference to a common humanity (v. 14), but “the children God has given me” of v. 13 makes it more likely that the writer has in mind one family (NIV) in the sense of both the sanctifier and the sanctified being children of God (NRSV). Since, therefore, the incarnation and its conditions of suffering and death are appropriate to God’s purpose, and that purpose is to lead many to glory, Jesus is not ashamed to be identified with us. His “for a little while” is not an embarrassment to God, to Jesus, or to the church. 2:12-13. In support of the closing affirmation

of v. 11, the writer quotes the OT three times, but all three citations are presented as words of Jesus. Because the Scripture is the living Word of God, for the Hebrews writer any passage may be spoken of as words of God, or as words of the Son through whom God speaks. A pre-existent christology makes it possible to move across chronological and historical distinctions. The citations are Ps 22:22 and Isa 8:17-18, treated as separate quotations. They are joined by the familiar literary link “again” (1:5-6). Psalm 22 is much employed by NT writers (more than twenty times) in portrayals of the crucifixion, but the Hebrews writer dips into the latter portion of the psalm after the radical shift of mood (Ps 22:21). The psalmist proposes a banquet for all the beneficiaries of God’s deliverance: himself, the poor, the sick, the deceased, foreigners, and future generations. They are all brothers and sisters by virtue of both affliction and deliverance. Isaiah 8 is a message of hope in a time of despair. Isaiah expresses hope by his own affirmation of trust or faithfulness (Isa 8:17) and through his children, who are symbols of God’s faithfulness (Isa 8:18). If these three citations strike the reader as saying more than is needed to support v. 110, a closer look will show how vital all three are to the writer’s developing discussion. The third (Isa 8:18), with the theme of children, moves immediately into v. 14. The first (Ps 22:22) and second

25, For example, see Seneca Hercules Furens 858-92; 2 Enoch 22:810. Variations on this theme occur at Eph 4:8-10 and 1 Pet 3:18-22. For a detailed investigation, see Ragnar Leivestad, Christ the Conquerer: Ideas of Conflict and Victory in the NT (New York: Macmillan, 1954).

40

HEBREWS 2:10-18 COMMENTARY pauses to discuss the angels, who have thus far remained on stage since 1:4. This verse is almost parenthetical, but yet essential for the progress of the argument. With a construction found only here in the NT, meaning “of course not” or “certainly not,” the reader is reminded of the obvious: that the discussion here concerns believ-_ ers, those who by faith are children of Abraham, and not angels. The drama of salvation, which hinges on incarnation, suffering, and death, is not an angel story. While angels are in divine service for the benefit of those who inherit salvation (1:14), they are neither the agents nor the beneficiaries of that salvation. With this sentence angels leave the stage of Hebrews, but they leave honorably. They have their place in God’s work (2:2), but it is not the central place. They enjoy God’s presence, but they do not sit at God’s right hand. Nor are they portrayed as competitors and enemies of Christ, as apparently angels were at Colossae. While we do not know how firmly they were fixed, if at all, in the church addressed by Hebrews, it hardly seems justified to borrow from Colossians and from heterodox Judaism in order to fill in the blanks. They leave as they entered, suddenly and mysteriously, as the writer turns to his principal subject: the high priesthood of Christ. 2:17-18. These verses continue the writer’s presentation of the purpose and benefits of Christ’s incarnation and death. The imagery shifts from that of vv. 14-15, where Christ defeats the devil and breaks the bondage of fear of death, to that of a high priest in God’s service. We should remind ourselves, however, that the difference between a champion who destroys the devil for our sakes and a high priest who ministers in our behalf may be greater for us than it was for the first readers. Lane has located the following passage in the pseudepigraphal 7estament of Levi (18:10-12), which joins the two images: Then shall the Lord raise up a new priest... And he shall execute a righteous judgment earth. And he shall open the gates of paradise and shall remove the threatening sword Adam. And Beliar shall be bound by him, and he shall give power to his children

In addition, the priest-kings of the Hasmonean dynasty (142-63 sce) provide a historical antecedent for this double portrait of Christ in Hebrews. And, of course, there is Psalm 110, the writer’s primary text for developing the priesthood of Christ. While Ps 110:1, 4 is the direct citation, the remainder of the psalm speaks of the conquering power of the priest at God’s right hand. Although priestly language was implicit at 1:3 and explicit at 2:11, here at 2:17 the first application of the title “high priest” to Jesus occurs, and to speak of Jesus as high priest is unique to Hebrews in the NT. There will be occasion in discussing the statement “You are a priest forever,/ according to the order of Melchizedek” (5:6 NRSV) to explore the questions of possible sources for this image of Christ and of its possible uniqueness to the Hebrews community. In this almost abrupt introduction of the title, the author distills into four compact statements the matters for exposition in chaps. 3-10. First, it was necessary that Jesus be in every respect like his brothers and sisters. Note the strong language. Full and complete identification with us was an essential precondition for his ministry. In fact, says the author in the second statement, Christ’s being totally like us was for the purpose of (in order that) being a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of (concerning the things of) God. The two adjectives describing the high priest are deliberately chosen and important. That he is faithful will be presented in 3:1—4:14; that he is merciful, in 4:15-5:10. And no less important, these two qualities will be urged on the readers as essential for all who benefit from Christ’s priesthood. The third statement about Jesus as high priest continues the purposive language: He became a priest in order to make atonement (NIV)/to make a sacrifice of atonement (NRSV)/to make expiation (REB) for the sins of the people. The word translated “atone” or “expiate” (\Adokoyat Ailaskomai) is rare in the NT. A form of the word in Luke 18:13 can be translated “be merciful,” and at 1 John 2:2 and 4:10 the usage is the same as found here in v. 17. At Heb 9:5 the word occurs as a noun of place in a description of the “mercy seat,” an altar in the Temple’s holy of holies on which blood was sprinkled on the Day of Atonement. In Rom 3:25 it is used in a reference to Christ as our “mercy seat.” In the LXX, the

. upon the

against to tread

upon evil spirits. 26. W.L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, WBC 47A (Dallas: Word, 1991) 65.

Al

HEBREWS 2:10-18 COMMENTARY tested. A priest not only offers sacrifice for sins but also makes intercession for those in need. No doubt the readers share the common human lot of multiple temptations, but the writer is not speaking generally but rather specifically. Those being addressed have endured suffering, public abuse, persecution, imprisonment, and the confiscation of property (10:32-34). Although none of them has yet been killed for the faith (12:4), that does not seem too distant a prospect. To them Jesus ministers not only as the pioneer and model who “endured the cross, disregarding its shame” (12:2 NRSV), but also as the high priest making intercession for them from his place at the right hand of God (4:15-16). On these four statements the author will begin to elaborate in the next section, 3:1-5:10.

primary uses express the mercy of God in the provisions for the removal of human sin in order to restore divine-human relations.’” This removal or covering of sin, usually by blood sacrifice, is often called “expiation,” a term no longer familiar to most believers. Neither in the LXX nor in the NT does the word mean “propitiate” in the sense of placating or appeasing God, since it is not human but divine initiative that effects mercy and atonement. Human beings do not act or speak so as to make God gracious; we have already been alerted that the drama unfolding is “by the grace of God” (2:9). The fourth and final statement concerning the priestly ministry of Jesus has to do with his capacity and willingness to help those being 27. See the articles on ikews and derivative terms by H. Biichsel and J. Herrmann in Kittel, ZDNT, 3:300-323.

REFLECTIONS 1. The author of Hebrews reminded us quite early that the beginning and ending of all Christian thinking and living is God. God is the subject of the New Testament as well as of the Old. Having said that, the writer moves us to the primary consideration within theology, and that is christology. Christology is not bragging on Jesus in public; it is thinking about who Jesus is in relation to God and to us. Some pursue this study through the titles used of Jesus; this is important and can be fruitful. The Hebrews writer certainly chooses such terms carefully and introduces them appropriately: Son, Jesus, high priest. But this letter teaches us how important it is to understand the shape of the christology of a given writing. The shape of the christology of Hebrews is clear: pre-existence with God, existence on earth, post-existence in exaltation to God’s right hand. All that is said about Jesus Christ in the letter, and, therefore, all that can be said in lessons and sermons on Hebrews, is conscious of this framework. This pattern, sometimes called descent-ascent christology, is found in the writings of Paul and John, but with major differences. For example, in John the “existence on earth” phase is presented as a full ministry with crucifixion and resurrection, whereas in Paul, Christ’s existence on earth is almost totally condensed into crucifixion and resurrection. As we shall see, Hebrews lies somewhere between the two, but clearly with the focus on suffering, death, and exaltation. Contrast the shape of this christology with that of the synoptic gospels, which frame their christologies on a horizontal line—birth, life and work, death, and resurrection—without any presentation of his pre- and post-existent activities. Preaching and teaching on biblical texts should honor the shapes of the christologies of those texts lest listeners be confused by messages that pour everything every writer says about Christ into every passage. 2. Hebrews interprets Psalm 8 christologically, but not in such a way as to rob it of its original meaning. Rather, it affirms it. The psalm sings of human life as but little lower than angels, crowned with glory and honor, holding dominion over all other creatures. It is this expression of the human estate that attracts the writer of Hebrews to say, “Yes, this is who Jesus is: lower than angels for a little while, crowned with glory and honor with all things subjected to him.” The christological use of the psalm blesses it rather than consuming it;

42

HEBREWS 2:10-18 REFLECTIONS Psalm 8 retains its own message. It is not necessary, then, to assume that one honors Christ by having the truth of the psalm apply to him alone, underscoring this opinion by lamenting the human condition after the fall with long paragraphs on sin, degradation, and death. Christ does not shine brighter by casting him against the dark background of Genesis 3. Sin and death have entered the world, to be sure, and God’s high aspirations for humankind still await fulfillment; else why God’s gracious act in Jesus? But if nothing of Genesis 1 survived the crash of Genesis 3, then why God’s gracious act in Jesus? The psalmist sang his song in a world much like ours, full of sin and death. Was he softened into sentimentality on a beautiful starry night? Perhaps, but the stars did not amaze him so much as did human beings. Let us not be guilty of the charge that Christians steal Old Testament texts and use them up for their own purposes. These texts are not used up; they still carry their own truth.

3. The church has always struggled with the insistence of Hebrews that Jesus “had to become like his brothers and sisters in every respect.” We know what we are like, and we hesitate to admit him into our ranks. We feel the need to add lengthy footnotes (the writer himself will drop one at 4:15) to explain what “in every respect” does not mean. Some early Christians fell into the heresy of denying Jesus’ humanity, saying he only “seemed” to be fully human. He did not really die, some said; on the cross he was given a strong potion in a sponge, fell into a death-like sleep, and awakened three days later, some said. And on and on. It was against such theories, spun to protect Jesus from our common life, that the Apostles’ Creed declared: born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, crucified, dead, and buried. No New Testament writer takes the humanity of Jesus Christ more seriously or more purposefully than does the author of Hebrews. 4. It is evident, after only two chapters, that the writer of Hebrews is a pastor, writing a word of encouragement (13:22). For example, in 2:5-18, Christ is presented to the readers as a pioneer, the one who goes before them not only showing the way but also creating a path. Christ is also our champion, defeating the devil and setting us free from the fear of death. In addition, Christ is our high priest, offering a sacrifice of atonement for our sins. And finally, Christ is our representative before God, our advocate, intercessor for all who are being put to the test. “For us and our salvation” runs through the passage like a refrain. But E. Kasemann says that perhaps the writer has gone too far.” So strong are the pastoral concerns, so pressing are the needs that the author bends christology to fit the crisis of the church. By subsuming christology under pastoral preaching, the offense and integrity of christology are consumed without remainder. Christology made to be so functional ceases to be christology and becomes another item in one’s homiletical arsenal. This is a tough one. If christology is not functional, of what value is it? If it is too functional, of what value is it? Before we finish Hebrews, we probably will discover Kasemann overstated his case. In the meantime, the church would do well to ponder the difference, if any, between “Christ” and “Christ for us.” 28. E. Kasernann, Jesus Means Freedom (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1970) 101-16.

43

HEBREWS 3:1—5:10

(CHRIST, THE FAITHFUL AND MERCIFUL HIGH PRIEST OVERVIEW S we have come to expect of the writer of ® Hebrews, the essential content of the next section is announced in the preceding one by means of a phrase or concise statement. So at 2:17, “so that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God” (NRSV), introduces the primary subject matter of 3:1-5:10. The modifiers “merciful” and “faithful” will now be developed, but in reverse order, the last one mentioned being the first for consideration. In method of development, this unit will parallel 1:5-2:18 in three important respects. First, at the base of the argument lies a comparison: Christ and the angels, and now Christ and Moses. However, in the first section, the comparison of Christ with angels was sustained throughout, whereas the comparison with Moses quickly recedes (3:16a) in favor of a rather lengthy treatment of faithfulness (3:60-4:13). Second, like 1:5-2:18, this section will consist of alternating exposition and exhortation. Again, however, there is a noticeable difference. In the first section, a brief hortatory unit (2:1-4) divided two rather lengthy expository units (1:5-14; 2:5-18). Here, exhortation occupies a much larger place: exhortation, 3:1-2a; exposition, 3:26-64; exhortation, 3:66-

4:16; exposition, 5:1-10. Whether this increase of exhortation signals the presence of a larger pastoral problem remains to be seen. Finally, the two sections are parallel in the use of quoted Scripture to ground the argument.”? Both Gen 2:2 and Ps 95:7-11 supply proof for the writer’s argument in 3:1-4:13, but especially Ps 95:7-11, which is not only quoted (3:7-11) but also reappears in part at 3:153-4:33:5).7 «Inv4:1 4-510, Ps 2:7:and Ps 110:4 are quoted for use in an argument delayed until Pik, Within this section, therefore, we will follow two major considerations: Christ the faithful high priest (3:1-4:13) and Christ the merciful high priest (4:14-5:10). Each line of thought will begin with exhortation, move to exposition, and return to exhortation (although the closing exhortation of part two lies outside this section, 5:11-6:20).

‘~

29. There are allusions to certain OT texts in 3:1-6, but allusions function quite differently from direct quotations. Allusions to earlier texts are woven into the argument or narrative they serve in an indirect manner, sometimes seemingly casual, even unconscious on the part of the writer. The reader’s familiarity with texts so employed is assumed, whether or not that assumption is correct. This indirection is effective, avoiding as it does the delays and obstacles often encountered in direct citation and argument.

HEBREWS 3:1—4:13, CHRIST THE FAITHFUL OVERVIEW Notice that the expected “high priest” has been omitted from the heading above, just as it has been from the heading to 4:14-10. This is not to deny or to obscure the author’s clear use of the

term at the beginning of each unit (3:1; 4:14). That Christ is our high priest will be developed in great detail later. The immediate concern is to present to the reader these two qualities of the

44

HEBREWS 3:1—4:13 OVERVIEW high priest, faithfulness and mercy, and the wording of the two headings is intended to underscore that fact. In 3:1-4:13, the reader will be impressed with the dominating and pervasive use of

vocabulary developed from the stem word “faith” — (miotis_ pistis): “faithful,” “faithfulness,” “obedience,” “unfaithful,” “faithlessness,” “disobedience.”

Hebrews 3:1-6, Christ and Moses Compared NIV

:

¥

:

NRSV _

Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess.

3

Therefore, brothers and sisters,? holy partners in a heavenly calling, consider that Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confes-

*He was faithful to the one who appointed him,

sion, 2was faithful to the one who appointed him,

just as Moses was faithful in all God’s house.

just as Moses also “was faithful in all? God’s¢

Jesus has been found worthy of greater honor

house.” 3Yet Jesus? is worthy of more glory than

than Moses, just as the builder of a house has greater honor than the house itself. “For every

Moses, just as the builder of a house has more honor than the house itself. “(For every house is

house is built by someone, but God is the builder

built by someone, but the builder of all things is

God.) SNow Moses was faithful in all God’s* house

of everything. “Moses was faithful as a servant in

all God’s house, testifying to what would be said

—_as a servant, to testify to the things that would

in the future. ‘But Christ is faithful as a son over

be spoken later. °Christ, however, was faithful

God’s house. And we are his house, if we hold —_over God’s* house as a son, and we are his house on to our courage and the hope of which we __ if we hold firm’ the confidence and the pride that boast.

belong to hope. 4 Gk brothers 4Gk this one

>Other ancient authorities lack al/ ¢ Gk his e Other ancient authorities add to the end

(COMMENTARY 3:1. In an “epistle” lacking the characteristic Opening salutation, the writer directly addresses the readers for the first time. The rhetorical flourish, “brothers and sisters, holy partners in a heavenly calling,” is more than oratory; the terms are appropriate to what has been and will be said. The readers have already been called brothers and sisters (2:11-12, 17), those who are sanctified (2:11), and partners with Christ in the human condition (2:14); but now they are called part-

(2:1-4). The role of Jesus is captured in two terms: “apostle” (atmdéoTodos apostolos) and “high priest” (apxtepevs archiereus), both of which gather up _ previous discussions. That Jesus is high priest has _— been stated (2:17) and will be discussed. That Jesus is apostle has been stated in function, as he _is the envoy of God’s Word (1:2) and work (1:3; 2:12, 16). The title “apostle” is applied to Jesus only here in the NT, but that he was “sent” of | God is the testimony of many (e.g., Matt 10:40;

ners (3:1; also 3:14; 6:4) in a heavenly calling. That the calling is heavenly points not only to its source but also to its goal (2:10). The readers are addressed directly in order to urge them to think carefully, to “give attention to” (Luke 12:24, 27; Acts 7:31-32) Jesus in his unique role

| Mark 9:37; Luke 10:16; Gal 4:4; John 3:17, 34; 5:36). God had many messengers and intermediaries, but Jesus alone is apostle and high priest of “our confession.” Confession may refer to both the act of confessing and the content of the | community’s faith (cf. also 4:14; 10:23). We can-

in their salvation. This insistence on focused attention is understandable, given the tendency among them to drift, to neglect, to be distracted

not know with certainty the content of the con_fession (1:1-4 is a possibility) or the occasions on | which the community confessed its faith, although

45

HEBREWS 3:1-6 COMMENTARY complicates the exposition by adding yet another meaning to the metaphor “house.” The word olxia (oikia), used six times in this brief passage, means “Israel” (vv. 2, 5), a “building” in the ordinary sense (vv. 30, 4), and “the universe” (v. 4). The author of Hebrews, however, draws once more on the metaphor and makes specific its meaning for both exposition and exhortation: “we are his house” (v. 6). There is no attempt here to argue that the Christian community and not Moses’ Israel is the true house of God. In fact, the writer will later include in God’s house Moses and many in Israel who were faithful (esp. 11:40). Rather, “we are his house” is intended to hold the attention of the readers on what they have been urged to consider (v. 1). In other words, “I am talking to you.” This is evident in the conditional clause, “if we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast” (v. 60). Courage or boldness is common in descriptions of early Christian witnessing (Mark 8:32; John 7:13; Acts 2:29; Phil 1:20), and in Hebrews it applies both to prayer (4:16; 10:19) and to public statements of faith (10:35). So also is the admonition to “hold on” or to “hold firm” (cf. Luke 8:15; 1 Cor 15:2; 1 Thess 5:21). The expression “the hope of which we boast” (lit., “the boast of hope”) has parallels in Paul (Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 3:12) and probably refers not only to the exaltation of the crucified Jesus but also to the final victory of the saints. As for the comparison between Jesus and Moses, it was almost inevitable that it be addressed; the writer could hardly deal with any aspect of Judaism, its law, its covenants, or its cult, without dealing with Moses. Of all the greats of the OT, Moses alone talked with God face to face. However, since Jesus is presented as a priest, is he being compared to Moses as priest? Not explicitly. Moses was a Levite (Exod 2:1-10), on occasion served at an altar (Exod 24:4-8), and, in fact, was called a priest in the OT (Ps 99:6) and in certain traditions of Judaism.** But here the comparison is not of an old and a new priesthood; that discussion is yet to come, and it will compare Christ and Aaron, not Moses. Moses in 3:1-6 is a servant in God’s house whose greatness lay in his faithfulness and in his witness to God’s Word,

the priestly language of Hebrews favors liturgical settings such as baptism or the eucharist.%° 3:2-6. The single quality of Jesus as apostle and high priest underscored here is fidelity to God (v. 2), and it is this fidelity that joins Jesus and Moses. Notice that there is no putdown of Moses in this comparison, as though Jesus were faithful but Moses unfaithful. On the contrary, the author twice alludes to Num 12:7: “my servant Moses; in all my house he is faithful” (LXX). Very likely “house” here refers to the people of Israel, but it is not yet clear how the author of Hebrews is using the term.*! Even though Moses and Jesus were both faithful, they differ in station: Moses is a servant (the word for “servant” [bepdtwv therapon| occurs only here in the NT, but is taken from Num 12:7 LXX), while Jesus is a “son” (1:2, and frequently thereafter). They differ also in function: Moses serves in God’s house, while Jesus as Son is over God’s house (vv. 5-6). That Moses is a servant in God’s house does not diminish him; Num 12:7-8 makes that clear. Having declared that prophets receive God’s Word in visions and dreams, God says: Not so with my servant Moses; he is entrusted with all my house. With him I speak face to face— clearly, not in riddles; and he beholds the form of the Lorp. (NRSV)

This otherwise clear comparison between Christ (used for the first time in Heb at 3:6) and Moses is complicated by two somewhat parenthetical statements, obviously intended to clarify. First, Jesus has more glory than Moses did, just as a builder has more glory than the building. It is not necessary to press this analogy to say that Moses is the building or that Jesus is the builder in the sense of being the one through whom God made the worlds (1:2). Like any good analogy, this one’s service is completed in the clarity of its own appropriateness. Second, the reader is reminded that while every house has a builder, the builder of the universe is God (v. 4). This unusual note serves to set in perspective both servant and son. However, it 30. E. Kasemann, The Wandering People of God, trans. R. Harresville and I. Sandberg (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984) 167-73. 31. The range of possibilities for the meaning of oik(a (oikia) in Hebrews is immense: “temple,” “Israel,” “family,” “community,” “heaven,” “Davidic dynasty,” or “creation,” with variations on some of these.

32. Philo The Life of Moses 2:66-186.

46

HEBREWS 3:1-6 COMMENTARY which continues to be spoken (3:5). And the discussion of Moses is here too brief and too embracing to support claims that the writer is engaged in a polemic with readers who hold a Moses christology.** There are reflections of a

Moses christology in the NT (John 6:14; Acts 3:22; 7:37), but not in Hebrews; at least no more than there is an angel christology or a Joshua christology or an Aaron christology. (See Reflections at 4:12-13.)

33. G.W. Buchanan, Hebrews, AB 36 (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1972) 54, 255. For a quite different view, see M. R. D’Angelo, Moses in the Letter to the Hebrews, SBLDS 42 (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1979) 65-199. 4

Hebrews 3:7-11, The Faithless People NIV

NRSV

7So, as the Holy Spirit says: _ “Today, if you hear his voice,

8

do not harden your hearts

as you did in the rebellion, during the time of testing in the desert, °where your fathers tested and tried me _ and for forty years saw what | did.

‘That is why I was angry with that generation, - and I said, ‘Their hearts are always going astray, and they have not known my ways.’

"So I declaredon oath in my anger, ‘They shall never enter my rest.’”? 211 Psalm 95:7-11

7Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says, “Today, if you hear his voice, 8 do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, as on the day of testing in the wilderness,

° where your ancestors put me to the test, though they had seen my works '°for forty > Years. Therefore I was angry with that generation, and I said, “They always go astray in their hearts, and they have not known my ways.’ " As in my anger I swore, ‘They will not enter my rest.’”

(COMMENTARY This unit consists entirely of a quotation of Ps 95:70-11 LXX. The writer provides commentary in 3:12-4:11, and therefore further commentary at this point would be premature and inappropriate. However, a number of observations about the quotation may be helpful preparation for the commentary. First, the introductory “therefore” joins the quotation to the conditional clause in v. 60, “if we hold firm.” The writer thus telegraphs ahead that the quotation from Psalm 95 will be in the service of paraenesis (exhortation to Christian living), and specifically the matter of holding firm, or fidelity. Second, the quotation is introduced as the words of the Holy Spirit (v. 7). Earlier, scriptural citations were presented as speeches of God (1:5-9, 13) or of Christ (2:12-13). The effect of such attribution is to allow no

discontinuity between past and present people of God. The application of Psalm 95 to the present readers assumes the correspondence between the situations of Israel and the church as the pilgrim people of God, and the phrase “the Holy Spirit says” rather than “the psalmist says” or “the Scripture says” removes the distance between past and present. The verb “says” (kéyw lego) continues the use of verbs of speaking, which began at 1:1 and is appropriate to the homiletical nature of Hebrews. As for the quotation itself, the LXX is followed rather closely, with a few variations. We do not know whether these variations are the work of the writer of Hebrews or due to the carelessness of scribes or whether they are to be accounted for by the writer’s use of a different recension of

HEBREWS 3:7-11 COMMENTARY never see the land of promise. Rather, the author uses the memory of those events as preserved in Ps 95:7-11, returning later (3:16-18) to Numbers 14 to use the fate of Israel at Kadesh as a stern warning to the readers. To what benefit is the psalmist’s account employed? There are at least three. First, the psalmist has provided a model for appropriating the past for present purposes. In other words, the psalmist did for his generation what the Hebrews writer is doing for the readers addressed: making a past word a present word. Second, the account of Israel’s failure as presented in Psalm 95 begins with the word “today.” With that word the writer can transfer the entire exhortation of Ps 95:7-11 to the congregation as direct and immediate address: “This is what the Holy Spirit is saying to you here and now.” And finally, by using the psalmist’s account and not that of the historical books themselves, the author has appropriated a piece of liturgy for a homily that is liturgical in nature. Psalm 95 is a call to enter God’s presence with praise, and in that setting it urges the people to fidelity, avoiding Israel’s ancient failure. The sermon we call Hebrews is a call to come into God’s presence (e.g., 4:16; 10:22), and within that setting is this exhortation to fidelity, likewise avoiding Israel’s ancient failure. If Hebrews was read in a worship assembly of the church, and if some of the members recalled the frequent use of Psalm 95 in synagogue services, the words heard and the words remembered would have compounded effect. (See Reflections at 4:12-13.)

the LXX text. Only two textual notes need to be made here, one having to do with a difference between the LXX and the Hebrew original, and the other with a difference between the LXX and its use by the author of Hebrews. The Hebrew text of Ps 95:8 refers to Meribah and Massah as geographical places where Israel quarreled and tested God (cf. Exod 17:7; Num 20:13). In the LXX, the place names have become experiences: rebellion and testing. One will see the difference by reading Ps 95:8 as quoted here and as it appears in the OT. The second textual note has to do with Ps 95:9-10. In the LXX, the forty years refers to God’s anger: “For forty years I was angry with that generation.” The writer of Hebrews has inserted a “therefore” before the expression “I was angry with that generation,” leaving the forty years to be attached to the preceding statement, “though they had seen my works for forty years.” One might think that this alteration had been motivated by a desire to portray God as acting providentially and graciously for forty years and then becoming angry. However, at 3:17 the author reads the LXX correctly: God is angry for forty years. Apparently both statements stand: The ancestors observed God’s providential activity forty years; God was angry forty years, doubtless the same forty years. One final observation: It is significant that the writer of Hebrews did not return immediately to the historical books (Exod 17:1-17; Num 14:2023, 28-35; 20:2-13) to recall Israel’s rebellion and testing of God, and God’s oath that they would

Hebrews 3:12-19, Failure to Enter God’s Rest NIV

NRSV

'2See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. '*But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness. '*We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first. '*As has just been said: “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion.”?

'’Take care, brothers and sisters,? that none of you may have an evil, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. '’But exhort one an-

other every day, as long as it is called “today,” so that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. '4For we have become partners of Christ, if only we hold our first confidence firm to the end. !°As it is said, “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion.”

415 Psalm 95:7, 8

2 Gk brothers

48

HEBREWS 3:12-19 NIV

NRSV

'CWho were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt?

'CNow who were they who heard and yet were rebellious? Was it not all those who left Egypt under the leadership of Moses? !’But with whom was he angry forty years? Was it not those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? '8And to whom did he swear that they would not enter his rest, if not to those who were disobedient? 19So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief.

'’And with whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the desert? '*And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his Test if not to those

who disobeyed?? !°So we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief. 218 Or disbelieved

_

(COMMENTARY At 3:12 the author begins the commentary on Ps 95:7-11 in the form of a homiletical midrash; that is, an interpretation of a passage of Scripture for a particular audience in a situation sufficiently similar to that of the text so as to make the application reasonable. Key words and phrases of the text (“today,” “turn away,” “rebel,” “unbelief,” “listen,” “harden,” “disobey,” “rest”) are brought directly to bear on the reader’s spiritual condition. Of course, back of Psalm 95 stands Numbers 14, the account of Israel’s unbelief and disobedience at Kadesh. Poised to enter the promised land, the Israelites were discouraged by the report of the spies, refused to move forward, and threatened to choose new leaders and return to Egypt. Angered by their rebellion, God swore that Israel would not enter “my rest.” The commentary on the quoted psalm assumes that the readers of Hebrews are now at their own spiritual Kadesh and must learn from Israel’s failure. There are three units in the commentary (3:12-19; 4:1-5; 4:6-11), each unit being built around a quoted portion of the psalm. The first unit (3:12-19) is an inclusio, a rather common rhetorical form that concludes with words, phrases, and ideas with which it began. In both v. 12 and v. 19 are the key words BAétrw (blepo, “see,” “see to it,” “take care”) and dmortia (apistia, “unbelief”), which occurs only here in Hebrews.

and present (cf. Col 2:8). The community of believers is to be so alert as to see that not a single one of their number turns away from God. The “evil heart” is characterized by faithlessness and turning away from God; that is, disobedience. The words are taken from Num 14:22, 29, 32; Ps 95:7; and Jer 16:12; 18:12, and, therefore, do not refer to agnosticism or atheism but rebellion against God. What is involved in turning away (apostasy) the writer spells out in 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:15-17, 25. It is quite clear from v. 13 that abandoning God involves abandoning the community of faith. 3:13. Such a grim prospect can be avoided by daily exhorting (encouraging) each other, an activity that may imply preaching (Luke 3:18; Acts 14:22; 2 Cor 1:4) as well as admonitions on specific matters (Rom 12:1; 16:17; 1 Cor 16:15; Phil 4:2). The “today” of this verse and Ps 95:7 remains open, and the invitation to hear God’s word still stands; but the implication is that the door of salvation could close. God’s offer is available, but so is the deceptive sin that hardens the heart toward God. The language is borrowed from Ps 95:8 and seems rather general and widely used (Rom 7:11; 2 Cor 11:3; 2 Thess 2:10). Again, sin here seems to refer to faithlessness and apostasy and not to particular moral disorders that often follow turning away from God. 3:14. The epistle here repeats what has been said earlier in chap. 3 but with new emphasis. For example, the affirmation that we have become partners of Christ (v. 1) is followed by a strong conditional conjunction, “if indeed.” Or again, the “confidence” of v. 60 is here expressed with a

3:12. This verse repeats v. 1 in addressing the brothers and sisters, but strengthens the verb from “consider” to the word of warning, “Be alert to the danger” (cf. Matt 24:4; Acts 13:40; 1 Cor 10:18). The danger is presented in a grammatical construction that indicates a possibility very real

49

HEBREWS 3:12-19 COMMENTARY stronger and more unusual term. The word utdoTtaots (Aypostasis) may be translated “resolution,” “standing firm,” or “the very essence of a matter.”*4 It appears in 1:3 as the “very being” of God and in 11:1 as the very “reality” of what is hoped for. The word must not get lost in subjectivity here. Apparently the author is saying that the fundamental core of one’s faith commitment must be as securely held at the end as at the beginning. By “the end” reference is being made not so much to one’s own death as to the final consummation of the Christian hope. 3:15. The direct address to the readers in straightforward exhortation ends temporarily at v. 14 as the writer again quotes the opening lines of Ps 95:7b-11. There seems to be a shift from exhortation to exposition through v. 19, but this only appears to be the case. Both the quotation and the comments that follow are clearly hortatory; the move is simply from direct to indirect. The writer is speaking about Israel but in so doing is speaking to the readers. Rhetoricians understood that relief from a confrontational style was often more effective than continuous confrontation. As was said of some in Jesus’ audience, “They perceived he was talking to them.” There is, however, some grammatical awkwardness in the shift at this verse. Some commentators find it helpful to link this verse with what precedes it. Attridge suggests that this quotation provides the actual words with which the members are daily to exhort one another (v. 13).% Others join v. 15 to what follows, noting the connection between “rebellion” (v. 15) and “rebellious” (v. 16). The real structural difficulty occurs at the beginning of v. 16 with the conjunction “for,” which seems to continue a line of thought that, in fact, is just being introduced. The NRSV smoothes the sentence by translating the conjunction as “now”; the NIV just omits it altogether.

3:16-19. The quotation is inescapably appropriate to the readers; after all, it is the word of the Holy Spirit (v. 7), and it is a word for “today.” But the situation of the believers being addressed is too critical to allow them to assimilate Ps 95:768a on their own; the writer drives it home with three rhetorical questions and answers (vv. 16-18). The questions draw upon the language of Psalm 95, the answers from what happened to Israel at Kadesh according to Numbers 14. In pressing his point, the writer inserts no exemptions or qualifiers. For example, in v. 16, “all” rebelled. Numbers 14:22 does so state the case, but later exempts Joshua and Caleb (Num 14:30, 38).°° Or again, in v. 17, the forty years is the period of God’s wrath (as in Ps 95:10), whereas the writer had earlier (vv. 9-10) referred to it as the time of God’s gracious providence. The OT views the forty years both ways (cf. Ps 95:10 with Deut 2:7), but mercy and judgment are never far from each other. God made clothes for the guilty pair exiled from Eden and protected the fugitive Cain east of Eden. When the writer concludes with “So we see that they were unable to enter” (v. 19), it is likely that the sad ending to Numbers 14 is in mind. When the Israelites realized their sin, they sought to prove their repentance by attempting to enter the land in spite of warnings that God was not with them. The result was tragic defeat at the hands of the occupants of the land (Num 14:39-45). Perhaps the preacher of Hebrews is preparing the readers for the strong language concerning second chances in 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:16-17. As for the shift from “disobedient” in v. 18 to “unbelief” in v. 19, the awkwardness exists in the English and not in the Greek text. The two words are derived from the same root (amioTéw apisteo) and so will often be used interchangeably. (See Reflections at 4:1213.)

34. H. Koester, TDNT, 8:572-89. 35. H. W. Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989) 119-20.

36. In 1 Corinthians 10, Paul exhorts and warns the church using Numbers 14, but he repeatedly uses a qualifier, “as did some of them” (see 1 Cor 10:7-10).

50

HEBREWS 4:1-11

Hebrews 4:1-11, God’s Rest Still Available NIV

arnegarnts

NRSV

Therefore, since the promise of entering

Therefore, while the promise of entering

his rest still stands, let us be careful that

his rest is still open, let us take care that none of you should seem to have failed to reach

none of you be found to have fallen short of it. *For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was

it. 7For indeed the good news came to us just as to them; but the message they heard did not of no value to them, because those who heard © _ benefit them, because they were not united by did not combine it with faith.2 >Now we who faith with those who listened.? 7For we who have have believed enter that rest, just as God has said, believed enter that rest, just as God? has said, “So I declared on oath in my anger, “As in my anger I swore, — ‘They shall never enter my rest.’”? ‘They shall not enter my rest, 29% And yet his work has been finished since the though his works were finished at the foundation creation of the world. “For somewhere he has of the world. “For in one place it speaks about spoken about the seventh day in these words: the seventh day as follows, “And God rested on “And on the seventh day God rested from all his the seventh day from all his works.” °And again work.”° °And again in the passage above he says, in this place it says, “They shall not enter my “They shall never enter my rest.” test.” °Since therefore it remains open for some It still remains that some will enter that rest, to enter it, and those who formerly received the and those who formerly had the gospel preached good news failed to enter because of disobedience, to them did not go in, because of their disobedi7again he sets a certain day—“today”—-saying ence. 7Therefore God again set a certain day, through David much later, in the words already calling it Today, when a long time later he spoke quoted, through David, as was said before: “Today, if you hear his voice, “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts.” do not harden your hearts.”? For if Joshua had given them rest, God? would ’For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later about another day. °So then, a not have spoken later about another day. *There sabbath rest still remains for the people of God; remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of ‘for those who enter God’s rest also cease from God; !for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests their labors as God did from his. ''Let us therefore from his own work, just as God did from his. make every effort to enter that rest, so that no ‘Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that one may fall through such disobedience as theirs. rest, so that no one will fall by following their @Other ancient authorities read it did not meet with faith in those example of disobedience. who listened © Gk he a2 Many manuscripts because they did not share in the faith of those who obeyed 63 Psalm 95:11; also in verse 5 c4 Gen. 2:2 a7 Psalm 95:7, 8

(COMMENTARY is itself transitional, the text shifts from exhorting by means of talking about Israel (3:15-19) to exhorting by means of direct address to the hearers. In addition, v. 1 begins an inclusio, which ends at v. 11. In other words, 4:1-11 is a unit, beginning and ending with strong imperatives (“let us be careful”; “let us make every effort”)

The author continues and concludes the exposition-exhortation begun at 3:7, which consists almost entirely of an interpretation of Ps 95:76, with Israel’s failure at Kadesh and God’s oath as recorded in Numbers 14 always near the surface. However, in several ways 4:1 does mark a transition. Besides the conjunction “therefore,” which

51

HEBREWS 4:1-11 COMMENTARY and strong warnings (“that none of you should seem to have failed to reach it”; “that no one may fall”). Within the unit can be discerned two subunits, vv. 1-5 and wv. 6-11. Psalm 95:70, 11 is fundamental to this passage, and through it all runs the often-repeated word “rest” (katdtravots katapausis). In 3:7-19 the writer assumed the propriety of applying Psalm 95 to the church of the readers, an assumption perhaps based on the introductory assertion, “as the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). In other words, the words of Scripture are the living voice of the Spirit addressed to us. In 4:1-11, however, it is as though the author realized that some might not be persuaded by this uncritical transfer of a text (Psalm 95) from one time and place to another, and, therefore, the distance between Israel’s history and the Hebrews congregation needs to be negotiated more deliberately. The distance is of two kinds: geographical, in that entering Canaan and entering rest cannot be synonymous, and chronological, in that the rest promised to ancient Israel cannot be assumed as being available to readers centuries later. The author handles the first by recourse to Gen 2:2, the second by a final return to Psalm 95. Overall, the line of thought is clear. Since the promised rest of God is still available (keep in mind the “today” of the offer, Ps 95:70), we must take care (lit., “let us be afraid,” v. 1) that no one fail to enter. Our situation and Israel’s are parallel in that all of us heard the good news (lit., “were evangelized,” v. 2), but we differ from Israel in that we received the good news in faith and are entering that rest. Notice the present tense (v. 3); rest is not only an eschatological future but also a present favorable state, as the sermon will unfold later. But what is this rest? For Israel it was initially a place, a land of their own, but the writer here (vv. 3-5) finds quite a different meaning to “rest.”°” By interpreting the noun “rest” in Ps 95:11 and by citing the verb form of the same word in Gen 2:2 (LXX), “God rested,” the author moves beyond the idea of a land to that of a condition in that we participate with God. The

author made this same kind of interpretive move in treating the word “house” in 3:1-6. “Rest” now becomes a synonym for salvation, the presence of God now and in the future. To the matter of sabbath rest, we shall return shortly. As for the writer’s indefinite reference to Gen 2:2, “For somewhere he has spoken” (v. 4, NIV preferred over NRSV here; see Commentary on 2:6). Having dealt with the shift from Canaan to sabbath rest in vv. 1-5, the author turns in vv. 6-11 to the chronological problem: How can an ancient offer to Israel be understood as an offer to believers in the present? The writer’s reasoning is as follows: God’s offer of rest was not accepted because of disobedience, and, therefore, it remains open to those of faithful obedience. This is underscored by the use of the word “today.” This “today,” says the author, was spoken by God through David in Psalm 95, and David lived much later than the wilderness generation led by Joshua. This clearly means that the offer in Joshua’s day, having been rejected, was at a later day still open. And the offer is to rest from labor, the sabbath rest in which God also participates. Therefore, while the readers are like the Israelites in that they are on a journey and are invited to enter God’s rest, they must be diligent to be unlike the Israelites in the matter of falling short due to disobedience. Such is the general flow of thought in 4:1-11, but we must now return to the passage and face three thorny problems in the text itself. The first appears in v. 1. What is it about which the readers are to “take care,” or more literally, “be afraid”? The word translated “seem” (NRSV) can also mean “judged to be” or “reckoned as” (cf. Prov 17:28; 27:14, where the same word appears), and this stronger meaning fits well with the warning, “Be afraid that.” To seem to be or to appear to be is too weak. The infinitive translated “failed to reach” (NRSV) or “fall short of” (NIV) can also have the meaning “to arrive too late.” With this translation the warning would be “not to think you have arrived too late” to enter God’s rest; that is, the past offer is now closed, and Christians cannot enter. So some commentators prefer,** but there is nothing in this passage or elsewhere in the letter to suggest that this was a fear of the writer or the reader. On the contrary, they are the heirs of salvation (1:14).

37. Buchanan has argued that “rest” does not have a different meaning for Hebrews, but that “the author expected the promised heritage of the land of Canaan under the rule of the Messiah to be fulfilled for Jesus and his followers.” See G. W. Buchanan, Hebrews, AB 36 (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1972) 65. The writer of Hebrews understands “rest” differently.

38. E.g., H. W. Montefiore, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, HNTC (New York: Harper, 1964) 80-81.

a2

HEBREWS 4:1-11 COMMENTARY The second problem occurs in v. 2 and is rooted in the variations among Greek manuscripts. According to some texts, the sense would be, “the word heard did not benefit them because it met with no faith in those who heard it.” This is perfectly clear and appropriate to the argument, but the best attested manuscripts have the more difficult reading: “the word heard did not benefit them because they were not united by faith with those who listened.” Who were those who listened? Historically Joshua and Caleb, but it is possible the writer refers to himself and his readers. This is the view that will be expressed later (11:40). The third and final problem is not one of text or translation, but of interpretation: What is the rest of God, the sabbath rest? Just as we noted earlier that the political understanding—that is, the conquest of the land by the new Israel (Jesus and his disciples)—is inappropriate to Hebrews, so also is the gnostic.*° That the soul, pre-existent and eternal, enters a body, journeys homeless in the world, and returns to its home is a cyclical view of life that does not blend easily with the biblical view of creation and history. This is not to say that echoes and fragments of such views do not exist in some Jewish and early Christian groups. Philo of Alexandria had allegorized Israel’s history into a narrative of the soul’s wandering toward a spiritual rest. The Gospel of Thomas psychologizes “rest,” making it a subjective possession.*°? And in the canonical NT apart from

Hebrews, rest is spoken of quite apart from notions of the land or the seventh day (Matt 11:2830). All this is to say that the writer of Hebrews is not creating de novo the view that rest transcends place and history, while being experienced here and now (vv. 3, 10). It is an eschatological reality in the sense of being grounded in the ultimate purpose of God for God’s people. It neither began nor ended at Kadesh (Numbers 14). Rest is a primordial reality, existing from “the foundation of the world” (v. 3). This fairly common expression for designating true and non-contingent things of God (Matt 13:35; 25:34; John 17:24; Eph 1:4; Rev 13:8) does not refer to pre-creation activity of God, but to post-creation. God “rested on the seventh day from all the work that he had done” (Gen 2:2 NRSV), just as those who enter God’s rest will do (4:10). While the sabbath was later justified on humanitarian grounds (rest for all creation), for historical reasons (remember the exodus), and for liturgical purposes (the praise of God), Gen 2:2 is its birthplace. The sabbath but institutionalized a central truth: God rested and invites others into that rest with all the blessings attendant to the presence of God. The book of Jubilees, a second-century sce Jewish writing, sings of God’s invitation to the angels to join God’s people on earth in a festive day of rest, a celebration in heaven and on earth of God’s rest

from work.*! The church of Hebrews must have been aware of such traditions about “rest.” (See Reflections at 4:12-13.)

39. E. Kasemann, Zhe Wandering People of God, trans. R. Harresville and I. Sandberg (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984) 74-75. 40. Cf. Philo Sayings 51, 52, 60.

Al. Jub. 2:18-21.

Hebrews 4:12-13, God’s Word Still Active

NIV

NRSV

‘12For the word of God is living and active.

12Indeed, the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul from spirit, joints from marrow; it is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. '*And before him no creature is hidden, but all are naked and laid bare to the eyes of the one to whom we must render an account.

Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. '*Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give SS account.

53

HEBREWS 4:12-13 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY The writer-preacher concludes the section begun at 3:1, and especially the exhortation of 3:7-4:11, with a rhetorical flourish on the Word of God. Although 4:12-13 contains the marks of conscious literary artistry, and is in a sense a self-contained unit (an inclusio, beginning and ending with Logos, the Word), it is not necessary to conclude that the passage was borrowed or was composed for another setting. It forms a perfect conclusion to the argument based on Ps 95:70-11, which was introduced as the message of the Holy Spirit (3:7). This forceful reminder of the nature and work of God’s Word is a fitting underscoring of the strong imperatives of the preceding section: “See to it” (3:12); “let us be afraid” (4:1); “let us be eagerly diligent” (4:11). One can find a rhetorical context for 4:12-13 in the larger world of Hellenistic Judaism, with its descriptive phrases concerning Word, Wisdom, and Torah, which are at times used interchangeably. And since this was most likely the thought world of the writer of Hebrews, echoes and allusions may well join these verses to that culture. For example, Wisdom “pervades and penetrates all things” (Wis 7:24 NRSV); or the Word of God has the power “to cut”;*? or Torah was created before the world was made and was God’s instrument in making all things, including humankind.* But one can find resources aplenty in the OT for all the affirmations made here about the Word of God. In fact, the writer is primarily gathering up and reasserting what has been said already in 42. Philo Who Is the Heir of Divine Things? 130. 43. For a concise treatment of Jewish speculations on Torah, Word, and Wisdom, see Fred Craddock, Zhe Pre-existence of Christ in the NT (Nashville: Abingdon, 1968) 31-53.

Hebrews: The God who spoke still speaks, and that word is inescapably valid (2:2-4). In the writer’s theology, words of Scripture are words of God to us today. Hence, the Word is living and active (cf. Isa 55:11), sharper than any two-edged sword (cf. Isa 49:2; Eph 6:17; Rev 19:15). The word that creates is also able to discern and judge (Ps 51:6; Amos 1:2). One should not tarry too long over “soul and spirit, bone and marrow”; these terms, drawn from the anthropology of the day, are simply a forceful way of saying that no part of the human life is beyond the knowing gaze of God. The Word of God serves as the eyes of God, seeing everything the heart devises and feels. These two verses could be read as a digest of Psalm 139: “O Lorp, you have searched me and known me./ You Know when I sit down and when I rise up. .. . Even before a word is on my tongue, / O LorbD, you know it completely. ... Where can I go from your spirit?” Or where can | flee from your presence? ... For it was you who formed my inward parts;/ you knit me together in my mother’s womb” (Ps 139:1-3, 7, 13 NRSV). As the Hebrews writer puts it: “all are naked and laid bare to the eyes of the one to whom we must render an account” (v. 13; see also Rom 8:27; 1 Cor 4:5). The passage ends as it began, with Logos, but here it is not God’s Word but ours, hence the translation “account” (as in 13:17; see also Luke 16:2; 1 Pet 4:5). It is as though the writer were a liturgist who concludes the reading of Scripture with, “This is the word of God,” with the expectation that the readers will respond, not with “Amen” but with their lives.

REFLECTIONS 1. It is somewhat surprising that the author of Hebrews does not introduce the word “faith” until 4:2, a word that will later serve as the key to understanding salvation history from creation to the eschaton (chap. 11). Faith, the writer will say, is the means of apprehending as present that for which we hope, the ability to see as real that which to human eyes is invisible (11:1). The delay until 4:2 cannot be taken, therefore, as a kind of indifference toward the word. On the contrary, the readers have been prepared to hear the word by the writer’s frequent use of terms drawn from the same root, words such as “faithful,” “faithless,” “obedient,” and “disobedient.” By such preparation the readers are helped to see how muscular

HEBREWS 4:12-13 REFLECTIONS and active faith is. Faith is tough and tenacious; it holds fast. It stands firm. It is a “to the end” (3:14) quality. Faith generates companion words: “courage,” “boldness,” and “confidence,” all of which are used in this epistle-sermon. Faith is not mentioned at quiet times, accompanied by sonnets, but in the story of a people struggling in the desert, accompanied by grumbling and rebellion. And faith has content, as the text makes clear by reference to our confession (3:1). In other words, faith is more than an orientation of the heart toward God, although it is that. Faith has something to say about God, and it does so with boldness (3:6) and confidence (3:14). 2. Hebrews speaks about a community (Israel) and to a community (the church). In reciting the story of Israel in the wilderness, the writer clearly understands that the desert journey was a group experience, the behavior of some affecting the behavior of all. There was no subjective captivity of the good news of God’s promise; they heard it together (4:2). Likewise, the message of this letter-sermon is addressed to the whole congregation, and most likely was read at an assembly of the church, a fact we may forget now that we all have our own Bibles. The preacher says repeatedly “us,” “we,” and “you” (plural). There is concern for the individual, but it is a community concern: “that none of you may be hardened” (3:13 NRSV); “let us take care that none of you should seem to have failed to reach it” (4:1 NRSV). Shepherding was a congregational responsibility. And so was preaching: “But exhort [encourage] one another every day” (3:13 NRSV). It is very difficult to reclaim ministries once surrendered, but it can be done if those few who now own those ministries are willing to share them again. 3. Since teachers and preachers always struggle with the hermeneutical issues related to the meaning of texts of one time and place for persons of another time and place, it might be instructive to compare the methods in Heb 3:7—4:11 and 1 Cor 10:1-13. A comparison is possible because of a number of remarkable similarities: Both draw on the failure of Israel in the desert, with Numbers 14 being central to the story; both characterize the life of faith as a pilgrimage, beset with tests and struggles; both speak of God’s providence on the way to the promised future; both draw lessons and warnings from Israel’s fall in the desert. It is important also that neither writer evaporates Israel’s history in some grand allegory of the pilgrimage of the soul. History remains history; neither past nor present is consumed by the other. However, the writers move into the present differently. Paul more directly makes the past serve the present by referring to Israel’s experiences as examples (types): “These things happened to them to serve as an example, and they were written down to instruct us” (1 Cor 10:11 NRSV). Paul thus robs the past of some of its own integrity by viewing it as “for us.” The writer of Hebrews negotiates the distance between past and present without making yesterday the servant of today. This is achieved by mediating Israel’s desert history through Psalm 95. Two interpretive advantages are thus taken: The psalmist stands chronologically between Numbers 14 and the present and hence is able to move the story forward toward the readers; and the introductory “Today” of Ps 95:7b sets the ancient record directly before the Hebrews church as a word spoken to them. As the writer puts it: “The Holy Spirit says” (3:7 NRSV). In other words, every time and place is the “present” of God’s Word. Neither method need be imitated by today’s preacher but should serve to instruct and to urge thoughtful intentionality in one’s own interpretive methods. 4. The introduction of the theme of “rest” into the presentation of the Christian life as that of a pilgrimage provides a striking image of the rhythm of faith: movement and rest. Psychologists and counselors have long understood this rhythm as basic to a healthy life, and leaders of organizations, including churches, are using it to design programming. But Hebrews can be additionally helpful in the reminder that the life of faith is not simply scheduled as periods of movement and periods of rest. Rest, says the text, does not just follow pilgrimage

oO

HEBREWS 4:12-13 REFLECTIONS but occurs during pilgrimage as well (4:3). The rest of God is both present and future. Therefore, just as the Near Eastern proverb says, “There is going in my staying and staying in my going,” so also does the preacher in Hebrews say, “There is rest in movement and movement in rest.” 5. Every now and then we should pause to appreciate the rhetorical skill of the writer-preacher of Hebrews and reflect on its significance. Rhetoric is the art of persuasion, and that primary purpose undoubtedly fuels all that is being done here. The interplay of exposition and exhortation; alliteration; repetition of words and sounds; perfectly rounded inclusios; the rhythm of direct and indirect discourse; anticipation and restraint—these and other techniques are in the service of persuasion. But rhetoric is an art, and like all art it gives pleasure to the reader or hearer. The skillful writer or speaker, no matter how weighty the issue, how noble the cause, gives pleasure, and that pleasure is not for the purpose of sedating or seducing, or simply to curry the favor of an audience. Pleasure is a fundamental force in human history. Biological continuity, cultural continuity, intellectual continuity—all are indebted more to pleasure than to logic. The ancient Greeks understood that, and so do many African American preachers today. And the Word of God continues in the world, thanks to those who delight in the law of the Lord and to the enjoyment of Scripture by those who speak and those who listen. 6. One can assume that when the Hebrews preacher speaks of the living and active Word of God, probing, penetrating, and revealing, the expectation is that the readers/hearers will associate that word with what has been said (esp. 3:7—4:11). But the Word of God is not being defined; that is, the writer is not saying that Scripture is the Word of God, or Scripture contains the word of God, or Scripture becomes the word of God. Rather, the Word of God is being characterized as to what it does. No claim is being made for the message presented, as if to say, “My sermon is the word of God.” From the beginning at 1:1 it has been abundantly clear that the word is God’s word and any attempts to locate it or define it would be inappropriate. What the author does is appeal to Scripture in such a way as to assume that the readers accept that tradition as normative, and then interpret that Scripture so as to address the readers in their own circumstance. This, too, is done in such a way as to assume that the readers accept interpretation of Scripture as the regular activity of the community. The book and the community are brought face to face by the preacher with the expectation that the community will hear God’s voice speaking to them. As both promise and warning, what they are told is that when God speaks, the word is incisive, revealing what is hidden and giving its hearers the experience of being exposed before God with full accounts to be rendered. To be more precise than that would be to violate God’s freedom to speak or to be silent and the listeners’ freedom to hear or not to hear.

HEBREWS 4:14-5:10, CHRIST THE MERCIFUL OVERVIEW That 4:14-5:10 is a distinct unit is widely recognized, although it has been argued that 4:14 should be joined with what precedes it, returning as it does to the theme expressed in 3:1.44 However, such an arrangement must account for the

abrupt shift from 4:12-13 and for the fact that 4:14 does not so much return to 3:1 as it does to 2:17-18, the very vocabulary of which is repeated in 4:14-16. This unit is a transition passage, concluding what has been said and introducing what is yet to be said. The reader will recognize in the elaborated themes here the hints,

44. Among those favoring this view, W. L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, WBC 474A (Dallas: Word, 1991) 96, provides the strongest support.

56

HEBREWS 4:14-5:10 OVERVIEW intimations, and brief references in 1:3, 13; 2:1718; and 3:1. But it was the description of Christ as a merciful and faithful high priest at 2:17 that provided the structure for 3:1-5:10. Taking the two characteristics in reverse order, as is the writer’s custom, 3:1-4:12 developed Christ’s (and our) faithfulness; 4:14-5:10 will focus on his mercy. As in previous units in which Christ was presented in a contrast, first with angels and then with Moses, so here he is portrayed as being like and yet very unlike Aaron. The twin credentials

of a priest, to be of the people and to be of God—dqualities already and repeatedly claimed for Christ—are now treated more extensively. Notice the flow of thought: of the people (4:14—-5:3); of God (5:4-6); of the people (5:7-9); of God (5:10). Of key interest in this unit are two moves by the writer: the joining of Ps 2:7 and Ps 110:4 and the introduction of the scriptural ground for presenting Jesus as a priest when genealogically and liturgically he was not. The exposition of “according to the order of Melchizedek” will, however, be delayed until 7:1.

Hebrews 4:14-16, Hold Fast; Draw Near NIV

NRSV

“Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens,? Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. 'SFor we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. '°Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.

14Since, then, we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of

God, let us hold fast to our confession. !*For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who in every respect has been tested? as we are, yet without sin. '°Let us therefore approach the throne of grace with boldness, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.

214 Or gone into heaven

2 Or tempted

(COMMENTARY Just as the preceding unit was framed on movement and rest, so also here the message joins holding fast and drawing near. These three verses hang on the two exhortations: to get a firm grip (stronger than 3:6) on our confession (cf. Commentary on 3:1) and to approach (as in prayer) the throne of grace. The ground for both appeals is the nature of our high priest. By joining “Jesus” and “Son of God” the writer may be drawing on the language of the confession; we do not know. But we do know that the two terms join the two qualifications of a priest: to be made like his brothers and sisters (Jesus), and to be appointed

of God before as one special

tant, for two reasons. First, it is essential as a basis for assurance that our approach to God will be met with sympathy and understanding; he has been tested as we are tested. That Jesus experienced completely the human condition gives confidence to a prayer life that fully expects both mercy and help. Not forgiveness alone, but forgiveness and help for the improvement of one’s lot. And since Jesus, having been as we are in every respect, passed through the heavens—that

is, entered into God’s presence—access to God has been opened for us, with Jesus already there interceding on our behalf (7:25; 9:24). Second, this presentation of Jesus as being both of the people and of God is a clear anticipation of 5:1-10, where the writer begins the difficult task of establishing that Jesus was and is a priest. Several

(Son of God). The writer has stated this (2:9-18), but now the presentation of Jesus who shares our lot and who also bears a relation to God is made especially impor-

Si

HEBREWS 4:14-16 COMMENTARY In saying that Jesus is able “to sympathize with our weaknesses” (v. 15), the writer surely does not refer to physical weakness or illness, although the word often carries that meaning and may be translated “diseases” (Luke 5:15; 8:2; John 5:5). Paul used the word to describe the general inclination of the flesh (Rom 6:19; 1 Cor 15:43), and the moral force of “weakness” is undoubtedly present here as well as at 5:2 and 7:28. This is made evident in the description of Jesus as being sympathetic and yet “without sin.” That Jesus was without sin was variously expressed by early Christian writers John 7:18; 8:46; 1 Pet 1:19; 2:22; 1 John 3:5), in each case with a particular understanding of sin. It is not necessary here to flood the mind with a lengthy catalog of sins and then excuse Jesus from all of them. In the context of 4:14-16, being without sin refers to Jesus’ unwavering firmness in his faithfulness to God. Neither is it necessary to argue that his being without sin somehow lessens his capacity to sympathize with us. It is not by sinning that one is made sympathetic but by being tested as we are tested. As the ancients expressed it, he was as we are, and therefore he will help; he was not as we are, and therefore he can. A closing note on the rhetorical form of 4:15: Notice the use of the double negative and the adversative conjunction. To say that “we do not have a high priest who is not able” is much more forceful than “we have a high priest who is able.” In addition, the negative statement of the positive sets up the conjunction “but,” sharpening even further the affirmation about the priestly ministry of Jesus. Both double negatives and contrasts were rhetorical devices used by skilled communicators of the time. (See Reflections at 5:1-10.)

times now the author has referred to Jesus as high priest, but early Christian documents do not reveal this characterization of Jesus as widespread or well known. By the time the readers reach 5:1, their hands are in the air with a question: How could Jesus be a high priest, given his genealogy, the geographical location of his ministry, and the adversarial nature of his relationship with temple authorities? It is time to establish credentials. Before moving to 5:1-10, however, we need to attend to several significant phrases in 4:14-16. That our high priest “has passed through the heavens” (v. 14) evokes the image of the Jewish high priest on the Day of Atonement, passing through the veil of the Temple and entering the holy of holies, the place of God’s presence as symbolized by the ark of the covenant, which rested in the inner chamber of the tabernacle. That Jesus has entered God’s presence was implied at 1:3, 13, but is now stated with the obvious intention of recalling the imagery of the wilderness tent of meeting as well as of anticipating more detailed discussion of Jesus’ passing beyond the veil (6:19-20; 8:1-2; 9:11; 10:20). As for the source of the idea of passing through the heavens, antecedents are available in the ancient figures of Enoch (Gen 5:24) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), with ascension stories becoming more elaborate in apocalyptic texts of late Judaism.* In gnostic redeemer myths, the savior of human souls had to pass from God through a succession of heavens filled with hostile powers to reach the earth and then return the same way. However, there is nothing here to suggest that hostile angelic forces sought to impede Jesus in his journey to God.*° 45. As held by R. Jewett, Letter to Pilgrims (New York: Pilgrim, 1981) 81. 46. E.g., Ascension of Isaiah 6-7; 1 Enoch 14-19; 70-71.

Hebrews 5:1-10, Christ Qualified as High Priest NIV

NRSV

5

5

Every high priest is selected from among men and is appointed to represent them in matters related to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. @He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray, since he himself is subject to weakness. *This is why he has to

Every high priest chosen from among mortals is put in charge of things pertaining to God on their behalf, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. *He is able to deal gently with the ignorant and wayward, since he himself is subject to weakness; °and because of this he must offer

58

HEBREWS 5:1-10

NIV

NRSV

offer sacrifices for his own sins, as well as for the

sacrifice for his own sins as well as for those of the people. “And one does not presume to take this honor, but takes it only when called by God, just as Aaron was. 5So also Christ did not glorify himself in becoming a high priest, but was appointed by the one who said to him, “You are my Son, today | have begotten you”; Cas he says also in another place, “You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.”

sins of the people. _ 4No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God, just as Aaron was. °So Christ also did not take upon himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, ‘ “You are my Son; today I have become your Father.a And he says in another place,

“You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”¢ "During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard becauseof his reverent submission. ®Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered °and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation

7In the days of his flesh, Jesus? offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to the one who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. "Although he was a Son, he learned obedience through what he suffered; °and having been made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him, ‘having been designated by God a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

for all who obey him '°and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek. a5 Or have begotten you

65 Psalm 2:7

co Psalm 110:4

4Gk he

(COMMENTARY It is difficult to explore the concept of Christ as high priest without engaging the question of the source or sources. Answers, however, are not quickly forthcoming, because lines of influence are not clearly discernible. Fragments of related ideas are found in the New Testament outside Hebrews: the tearing of the temple veil at the death of Jesus (Mark 15:38), Jesus’ words, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19 NRSV); Jesus gave his life as a sacrifice and, therefore, functioned as a priest; Jesus is the place of atonement (mercy seat) for our sins (Rom 3:25); and other hints and intimations. But the sum of these hardly adds up to a satisfactory answer. The concept may have developed out of the church’s wide use of Psalm 110. Although it is Ps 110:1 that is so much employed, Ps 110:4, which declares “You are a priest forever,” lies close at hand. Other possible influences have been found in the Logos-Priest of Philo of Alexandria, the Messiah-Priest of Qumran, or the priest of late

Jewish apocalyptic visions.*” Of course, it is quite possible that a church that re-read and reappropriated its own sacred texts and heritage in Judaism created a liturgy out of a Christian interpretation of the Day of Atonement. If the exodus and wilderness experiences of Israel were so instructive for the church’s self-understanding, why not also find in the rituals of the wilderness tabernacle precursors of its own view of Christ and the liturgies that enshrine and proclaim his saving activity? We have in common with the congregation of Hebrews the need to follow the writer carefully in the treatment of this concept, which admittedly is “difficult to explain” (5:11). In vv. 1-4 the writer presents the essential qualities of any high priest before moving to the consideration of Christ as high priest in vv. 5-10. 47. Kasemann, The Wandering People of God, 195-217, reviews a range of possibilities arriving at his own view of a gnostic redeemer myth as the source.

59

HEBREWS 5:1-10 COMMENTARY Of course, not just any high priest is in the writer’s mind; the Aaronic priesthood will lead to the portrayal of Christ’s priesthood. At least logically this is the movement of thought, but theologically, the movement is from Christ to Aaron. This is to say, the writer is very selective in sketching the qualities of a priest, choosing to discuss only those features appropriate to the comparison with Christ. In this sense the writer begins with Christ. Of any priest it must be the case that the person be chosen from among persons whom the priest will represent before God. But the priest must also be chosen of God, to represent God to the people. When the discussion turns to Christ, these two qualifications will be discussed, but in reverse order. 5:1-4. The first qualification, that the high priest be one of the people, enables the one so serving to minister in two ways: to “offer gifts and sacrifices for sins” (v. 1) and to “deal gently” (v. 2). One should not try to be careful in distinguishing gifts and sacrifices; the expression came to be something of a stock phrase (8:3; 1 Kgs 8:64) to refer to the whole sacerdotal activity of the high priest. It will become clear that the writer has in mind the blood sacrifice of the Day of Atonement (9:12). As for “dealing gently” with the people, this was not in the list of credentials for Aaronic priests, but can be inferred from their duties. Forbearance and humility were evident in both Aaron and Moses (Num 12:3; 14:5), but very likely the author is reading backward from qualities of Christ to qualities of the Aaronic high priest. The word translated “deal gently” (ueTptoTrabew metriopatheo ) occurs only here in the New Testament and means “to moderate” or “control” emotion. In extracanonical literature the word was used most often in relation to anger. This is not a quality synonymous with sympathy, the capacity to be one with others, attributed to Christ at 4:15. Here the high priest is to behave with restraint toward the ignorant and wayward, a restraint born of the priest’s awareness of his own weakness. Sacrifices for sin were efficacious under circumstances of unwilling or unintentional errors and breaches of God’s law due to ignorance (Lev 4:13; Ezek 45:20). Luke likewise extends God’s offer of forgiveness to those who acted in ignorance

(Luke 23:34; Acts 3:17; 17:30), and according to 1 Tim 1:13, Paul received mercy “because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief’ (NRSV). Such sins, according to the Hebrews author, are viewed quite differently from those committed willfully (6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:17). The high priest behaved with moderation toward ignorantly erring people because he was himself subject to weakness (lit., “clothed with weakness”). In fact, his own sins made it necessary for him to offer first a sacrifice

for himself and then a sacrifice on behalf of the people (v. 3), as it is written: “Aaron shall present the bull as a sin offering for himself, and shall make atonement for himself and for his house,” then he shall make atonement “for all the assembly of Israel” (Lev 16:11, 17 NRSV). This difference between the Aaronic high priest and Christ will be noted later. The second qualification, that the high priest be chosen of God, is to the writer so self-evident that the writer feels no need to elaborate beyond the simplest statement of it (v. 4). That Aaron was so qualified has triple attestation in Scripture: at his call (Exod 28:1); at his public ordination (Lev 8:1-36); and at God’s reaffirmation of Aaron’s priesthood following the rebellion of Korah (Numbers 16-18). Notice that there is no putdown or criticism of Aaron. As the writer did not find it necessary, in the development of christology, to speak disparagingly of angels or Moses or Joshua, so here the flaws of Aaron’s person or ministry are not exhibited, as though Christ would shine brighter by comparison. It is enough to say that a priest ministers only when called of God, “as Aaron was.” 5:5-10. In these verses the writer turns to Christ as high priest, addressing the same two considerations: that he was of the people and of God. Now, however, the two themes are treated in reverse order, forming with vv. 1-4 a small chiasm (a literary form of inverted parallels; that is, ABB’A’) The Aaronic priesthood is: of the people (vv. 1-3) of God (v. 4)

A B

Christ’s priesthood is:

of God (vv. 5-6) of the people (vv. 7-9)

B’ A’

HEBREWS 5:1-10 COMMENTARY Verse 10 paraphrases v. 6, reaffirming that Christ is a priest of God. 5:5-6. Christ’s priesthood is by divine appointment. Just as the Aaronic priesthood was not by human initiative but by the call of God (v. 4), so also Christ did not glorify himself. On the contrary, glory and honor were bestowed on him by God (2:9). In support of this affirmation the writer does not argue but rather quotes Psalms 2 and 110. These citations are not introduced here but are repeated from the catena of biblical quotations in 1:5-13. At that point, Psalm 2 opened the catena and Psalm 110 closed it. However, while Ps 2:7 is repeated, from Psalm 110, not v. 1 but v. 4 is here cited, and for the first time. The NT bears abundant testimony to the early church’s use of Ps 110:1 in christological formulations, but only in Hebrews is Ps 110:4 used. This appropriation of the psalm may be original with this author; in fact, the gradual and detailed introduction and development of this theme (5:6; 5:10; 6:20; 7:1) indicates that it is not familiar to the readers. More familiar is the application of Ps 2:7 to Christ; “You are my son;/ today I have begotten you” (NRSV) needs only to be quoted, without supporting argument. The title “Son,” introduced at 1:2, is the constant term for referring to Jesus Christ in chapters 1—4. It would be to deviate from the writer’s point to let the word “begotten” lead to discussion of Jesus’ birth. Here the term is from the language of appointment, not parentage, just as it is in the psalm’s original sense: God appointed or designated Israel’s king as God’s son. Being “God’s son” has roots in royal ideology. Interestingly, neither Matthew nor Luke uses Ps 2:7 in the nativity story. Equally unfruitful would be efforts to define “today” with precision. Adoptionist christologies found support in the use of a portion of Ps 2:7 in the stories of Jesus’ baptism (Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22), but this verse is also used to argue the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 13:33). And Hebrews places “today” in eternity, prior to creation (1:2). So when is “today”? Pre-existence? Baptism? Resurrection? Exaltation? Precision here is limiting. It is-better to be guided by the psalm’s own meaning: God grants to the king a place above all other monarchs and princes. Let the attention be given to God, whose appointment is sure and final.

Of greater significance is the joining of these two psalms, which offer in support of God’s appointment two apparently quite different proclamations: “You are my son” and “You are a priest forever.” These texts, united by “as” or “likewise” (v. 6; the NIV inexplicably omits the word and thus loses the direct comparison), join two christological motifs: kingship and priesthood. This is not an original conjunction; the figure of Melchizedek unites in himself both king and priest (7:1-3). Nor is there any inherent tension between the two. The misuses of power during the reign of the Hasmoneans were not the inevitable result of combining in one person both political and religious authority. According to 5:5-6, Son, King, and High Priest are joined in Jesus Christ in ways to be explicated later (beginning at 7:1). Some interpreters, however, find more meaning in the union of these two psalm citations. For example, it has been argued that Ps 2:7 and Ps 110:4 serve to present Christ as both pre-existent (Son) and post-existent (Priest). But that affirmation has been well made more than once in chapters 1-2. In addition, it presumes that Christ’s priesthood is a post-incarnation activity. It is that, of course, in that he is continually in God’s presence, making intercession for us (2:18; 4:14-16; 6:20; 7:23-26; 8:1-2); but prior to entering God’s presence beyond the veil, the high priest makes sacrifice for sin. This Jesus did in the offering of himself (2:17; 9:14, 26; 10:10). His priestly service, therefore, cannot be confined to his post-exaltation ministry. F. F. Bruce, in his search to explain the union of the two psalm citations, suggests that it may be a response to messianic expectations at Qumran. In that community, two messiahs were anticipated, the one royal, from the house of David, the other priestly, from the house of Aaron. According to Bruce, the writer is saying that there are not two messiahs but one, and it is Jesus Christ who is both King and High Priest. However, it would seem that such an important apologetic would be more fully argued rather than so subtly presented. Perhaps it is enough here to say that vv. 5-6 have a double function: to recall what has been said (1:5, 13) and to prepare the reader for an argument yet to be made (7:1ff.). We have come to expect of the writer such rhetorical moves. 48. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, rev. ed., NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 94-97. See especially notes 26, 27.

61

HEBREWS 5:1-10 COMMENTARY 5:7. Having dealt with the qualification that Jesus is of God, the writer now turns to the second essential for being a high priest: Jesus is one of the people. That he shares the common human condition is not introduced here; that characteristic has been stated in 2:9-18 and 4:15, but in 5:7-9 the reader is given an elaboration of those statements. The “for a little while was made lower than the angels” (2:9 NRSV) is elongated into a vivid description of life “in the days of his flesh.” This portrait of Jesus’ earthly life is not, of course, as extended as that of the Gospels, but then it is not so abbreviated as that of Paul. Paul’s gospel concerned a Christ who died for our sins according to the Scriptures, was buried, was raised on the third day according to the scriptures, and made appearances to his followers (1 Cor 15:3-8). There is no presentation of Jesus’ words and work, just as there is not in the Apostles’ Creed: conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary, and then immediately “suffered under Pontius Pilate,” without a single reference to the years between birth and death. Such silence about Jesus’ life cannot serve the present writer, whose task it is to show that Jesus was a high priest “chosen from among mortals” (v. 1) and “able to deal gently with the ignorant and wayward” (v. 2). The literary form of vv. 7-10 is striking. The similarity between the structure of christology in Hebrews and that of Phil 2:6-11 (pre-existence, humiliation, exaltation) is evident, but there may be other resemblances. Like Phil 2:6-11, Heb 5:7-10 contains hymnic qualities. For example, v. 7 begins not with the name “Jesus” or even with the personal pronoun “he” but rather with the relative pronoun “who” (ds hos): “who in the days of his flesh.” Hymnic or poetic expressions in praise of a person or god in Greek literature of the time often opened with the relative pronoun.” Note, as examples, Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-20; and 1 Tim 3:16. In addition, the sentence (translators divide vv. 7-10 for purposes of clarity) is carefully balanced with a series of participles leading to and away from the finite verbs that control the passage: “learned,” “suffered,” “became.” These verses also give the impression of being a summary or a digest of a larger body of material, another characteristic of early Christian hymns

and faith formulae. And finally, the phrases, especially in v. 7, are unique in Hebrews, and may be so because they are quoted from a source familiar to the writer and perhaps to the reader. However, nothing substantive to the discourse hinges on proving or disproving the hymnic nature of the passage, even though curiosity is raised about the nature of Christian sources available to the writer. Whether hymn or not, statements about “the days of his flesh” have been so woven into the broader movement of thought that they do not at all distract or divert attention. The image of Jesus in fervent prayer, with loud cries and tears appealing to the One able to save him from death, brings to mind Jesus in Gethsemane (Matt 26:36-46; Mark 14:32-42; Luke 22:40-46). However, the writer’s familiarity with the synoptic accounts, as some have argued, is not easily established. The author may be drawing on another tradition, or possibly summarizing the entire passion experience. The language of v. 7 carries echoes of Psalms 22; 39; 116; Isaiah 65; and Job 40, but clearly fits the context. For example, Jesus “offered up” prayers, a term used to describe the sacrificial activity of a priest (5:1, 3). That Jesus’ prayers were heard and yet he still suffered poses no theological problem; rather, it locates Jesus more firmly among his brothers and sisters whose experiences are precisely the same. The posture of Jesus is that of one facing death. Even though the expression “from death” (v. 7) can be translated “out of” death, making his prayer a petition for resurrection, there is no reason not to take it in its plainest sense; like the rest of us, he cries out to God in the face of the immediate prospect of death. That he was heard because of “reverent submission” (v. 7) has generated many questions, not so much translational as christological. What is being said about Christ? That he was worshipful, filled with awe, reverent, devout, in fear of God? When the word is an adjective describing a virtue in a person, it can be translated “devout” (as in Luke 2:25; Acts 2:5; 8:2; 22:12). However, here at 5:7 and at 12:28, the author’s only other use of the word, it is in a context of priestly service before God and, therefore, describes the attitude or behavior appropriate to that service: bowing in reverence.

49. An observation developed at length, with many examples, by E. Norden, Agnostos Theos (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1913) 253, 383-87.

Moffatt, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (New York: Scribner’s, 1964) 66.

50. H. W. Montefiore, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, HNTC (New York: Harper, 1964) 97-8; Bruce, Hebrews, 98-100; J.

62

HEBREWS 5:1-10 COMMENTARY 5:8. While the adversative phrase “although he was a Son,” which opens this verse may be read as the conclusion of v. 7, it seems to serve best as the introduction to the statements that follow. This is to say, being God’s Son did not exempt Jesus from learning, from obedience, from suffering, so complete was his identification with all who share flesh and blood. ,And strikingly, learning is joined to obedience and obedience to suffering. “Learning” (uaSetv mathein) and “suffering” (ta8eiv pathein) were joined in popular wordplays, and the usual sense was, “we learn from our mistakes.” That meaning is foreign here. The writer clearly has in mind the readers who must learn that old proverbs that join obedience with bliss and disobedience with suffering are broken both by the experience of Christ and their own. That the obedient suffer is a lesson difficult to learn, as the author will point out later (12:411). The writer cannot discuss Christ without thinking of the church, nor can he discuss the church without thinking of Christ. By learning obedience through suffering, Jesus is qualified as both intercessor and model. 5:9. This verse gathers up in summary fashion what has been said thus far about Christ’s preparation for and fulfillment of his ministry as our high priest. This statement is, however, little more than what was said at 2:10, and the reader is urged to review comments at that point. One matter deserves repeating: The perfection of Christ is not a reference to moral achievement but to the “completion” or to the “finishing” of his preparation as high priest, and that was through testing, suffering, and death. No doubt the author is using the word “make perfect” in its cultic sense, borrowing the term from its use in the LXX to describe the priest of Israel’s tabernacle. There the word is translated “consecrated”

or “ordained” (Lev 4:5; 8:33; 16:32; 21:10; Num 3:3). In 2:10 Christ is the “pioneer” of our salvation; here he is the “source.” It is not necessary to attempt to be specific as to a particular aspect of Christ’s salvific work; his being a model of obedient suffering, his role as the one offering sacrifice for sin, and his interceding for us in God’s presence are all involved. The expression “eternal salvation” occurs only here in the NT (it is found in the OT at Isa 45:17). The writer shows a fondness for the adjective “eternal” (6:2; 9:12, 14-15; 13:20), perhaps as a way of asserting the once-and-for-all finality of Christ’s work and of assuring pilgrims who otherwise might be discouraged by the transient nature of life. As for the phrase “for all who obey him,” the writer assumes by now that obedience as an ingredient to faith has been amply established in the portraits of Moses, Joshua, Israel, Christ, and Christ’s followers. It is helpful to notice that the word for “obey” is here (and widely in both testaments) a form of the word “to hear,” recalling the repeated references to speaking and hearing so characteristic of Hebrews. 5:10. This verse does not advance the discussion but holds it in place until it is resumed in 7:1. In other words, the writer knows that the quotation of Ps 110:4 at v. 6 is the key to the difficult discussion upcoming in 7:1—10:25, and it is important that what is said in vv. 7-9 not erase from the reader’s mind the affirmation that God has designated Christ a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. So the statement is repeated, as if to say, “I must now make preparatory comments of a serious nature before continuing, but hold this thought.” From a rhetorical point of view, this strategy both builds anticipation and prepares the soil of the reader’s mind for what is to come.

REFLECTIONS 1. Hebrews takes very seriously the historical career of Jesus. Nowhere in the sermon is this more evident than in 4:14-5:10. Whether or not the writer was familiar with the gospel narratives is a question prompted by historical curiosity, but it is not the primary issue. The more significant question has to do with the function of the life of Jesus of Nazareth for the life of the church and for Christian faith. Hebrews has thus far drawn from the life of Jesus two central meanings: As one in every respect like us, his brothers and sisters, he is able to

HEBREWS 5:1-10 REFLECTIONS serve as our priest with sympathy and patience; and as one who experienced life as we know it with faithfulness and full obedience, he is the pioneer and model for the Christian pilgrimage. As priest, his sympathy flows out of his being tested, not out of failing the test; therefore, his being without sin is not erosive of his capacity to be touched by our weaknesses. As model, his faithful obedience through suffering qualifies him. This is to say, he lived his own life and faced his own struggles, and hence can be a model. But to say that he acted and spoke as he did in order to be a model is to rob his life of meaning in itself and, therefore, to remove him as a good model. For example, if he prayed in order to be a model of prayer life, then he is not a model of prayer life. This is not to imply that the writer of Hebrews thus evacuates meaning from Jesus’ life. On the contrary, his Jesus prayed with loud cries and tears, was heard for his reverence, and learned obedience through suffering, but the church’s Jesus has sometimes been portrayed as moving through his life as a self-conscious example for-others. Why was he baptized? As an example. Why was he tempted? As an example. Why did he pray? As an example. This is a gross misunderstanding of Jesus and a mishandling of the biblical texts. One finds meaning in Jesus’ life only if that meaning is already there. The two interpretations of Jesus’ life offered by Hebrews do not, of course, exhaust the interpretive potential, but they do prompt the church to understand that life in ways appropriate to its time and place. From Advent through Easter, lectionaries place gospel narratives about Jesus at the center of the worship and preaching of the church, but these texts can be used week by week without dealing with the overarching question: What does the life of Jesus mean for the life of faith? If the gospel is the death and resurrection of Jesus, as Paul insists, is all that precedes his death not gospel but preface to the gospel? Or are Jesus’ healing, feeding, receiving, forgiving, loving, and caring also gospel? The author of Hebrews not only offers a way of reading texts about Jesus but by so doing also presses us to think through again this vital question. 2. Assuming that the writer of Hebrews had access to oral or written traditions about Jesus, then it is safe also to assume that there were choices available for locating within Jesus’ life that event or those events that would present both who he was and his significance for the readers. It is striking that, while several summary statements are made about his learning, his being tested, his suffering, and his faithfulness, the strong governing image is that of Jesus in fervent and agonizing prayer. That portrait in 5:7-8 is inescapably gripping, and one can expect that from it the writer will, in the chapters to follow, draw energy and exhortation. The readers will likely be led to see themselves before God in the posture of prayer, offering supplications in submissive reverence. This is the task of the writer as pastor, to join the life of Jesus to the lives of the readers at a point of crucial relevance. This does not mean that subsequent readers of Hebrews must make the same choice, and make the same connections to the church. What it does mean is that subsequent readers must (1) be honest in identifying the writer’s choice with as much justifying support as the text will yield, and (2) be so bold as to identify from the life of Jesus that which most relevantly addresses the church of their own time and place, with as much justifying support as biblical text and congregational context will yield. All interpreters of the Jesus traditions pass a magnet over the texts to draw out the message most needed for the hour, but not all interpreters admit to doing so, claiming instead a disinterested objectivity. Even if such neutral readings were possible, they are never an option for such a

pastor as one meets in Hebrews. 3. Even though extensive commentary on the relationship between Judaism and Christianity waits on further reading in Hebrews, the occasion of the writer’s brief discussion of the priesthood of Aaron and of Christ (5:1-6) provides opportunity for some reflection on the issue. It is distressing how much secondary literature and how many sermons on Hebrews underscore only the discontinuity between Judaism and Christianity with little attention to the lines of

64

HEBREWS 5:1-10 REFLECTIONS continuity. Certainly there is discontinuity. Claims about Jesus Christ, even in low christologies, state or imply that God has done a new thing in Jesus of Nazareth, but something new has little meaning unless it rests on a broad base of the familiar and the commonly accepted. The writer of Hebrews knows this and develops its themes accordingly, never trashing the history, the institutions, or the rituals of Judaism. It is regrettable, therefore, that the word “antithesis” is used to characterize the entire relationship, producing a kind of dispensationalism that honors neither Judaism nor Christianity and portrays God in trial-and-error activity. Much of such a reading of Hebrews, and indeed of much of the New Testament, very likely proceeds from conversionist theology. Such thedlogy thinks in terms of “old” and “new” separated decisively and totally by the event of Jesus Christ, much as a watermelon responds to a knife. When one’s personal experience is so understood, it often follows that Scripture is so understood. This perspective looks unfavorably on continuities, in life and in Scripture, as though they represented something less than a clean and full break with the past. Such thinking needs assurance that neither personal faith nor christology is compromised by the discovery of continuities in the story of God’s active love from creation to eschaton. Hebrews offers such

assurance.

65

HEBREWS 5:11-6:20 PREPARATION FOR THE DIFFICULT DISCUSSION OVERVIEW hat 5:11-6:20 is a discrete unit is clear both by reason of its content and by the literary signals that mark the beginning and ending of the passage. The expression “a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek” at 5:10 and 6:20 alerts the reader to the distinct nature of the material between those markers. In fact, one can read the text smoothly moving from 5:10 directly to 7:1. This is not to imply that 5:11-6:20

39 (exhortation, stern warning, and encouragement), and the two passages together shed most of the little light we have on the pastoral situation of the church to which the Hebrews sermon was addressed. The writer of Hebrews, along with other writers of New Testament documents, was moved by two strong impulses. The first impulse was to be inclusive, to invite all persons into the fellowship, to extend hospitality to strangers (13:2), and to implement in every way the “whosoever will” of Jesus’ life and work. This impulse had its opponents, as Acts and the letters of Paul testify, and it may have been that the conditions of persecution and public abuse were persuading some in the Hebrews church to pull back from this opendoor policy (10:39; 13:2, 13). The second impulse might be called “quality control”—that is, holding before the membership the standards of conduct and of relationships appropriate to a community of Jesus’ followers. Inattention to quality of life together brought strong words from Matthew (Matt 18:6-35; 22:1-14), from Paul (Rom 14:115:7; 1 Cor 5:1-6:11; Gal 6:1-5), and from others, but none more sobering and stern than from the author of Hebrews. We have already heard from the writer rather strong admonitions (2:1-4; 3:12-15; 4:1-11), but the passage before us now will introduce a question that disturbed the early church for generations: the question of post-baptismal sins and the possibility of a second repentance.

is an insertion, either by the author or a later scribe; no manuscript evidence supports such an opinion. Neither is it totally correct to label this unit a hortatory digression as some have done. A portion of this unit (6:13-20) consists primarily of exposition of Gen 22:17 as a sure ground for exhortation and encouragement. And “digression” is too disjunctive to describe this passage. Lane is on target with the characterization “appropriate

preamble,”°! since, unlike most exhortations that follow exposition, 5:11-6:20 precedes and anticipates exposition. The readers need to be forewarned and prepared for the very difficult discussion to follow (7:1-10:25) in which the preacher will seek to establish what retrievable history does not establish: that Jesus was and is a priest. The unit before us falls naturally into three sub-units: 5:11-6:3, A Call for Maturity; 6:4-12, A Stern Warning with Hope; 6:13-20, The Ground for Hope. In terms of the movement of its thought, 5:11-6:20 will be paralleled at 10:1951. W.L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, WBC 47A (Dallas: Word, 1991) 134.

66

HEBREWS 5:11-6:3 _

HEBREWS 5:11-6:3,

A CALL FOR MATURITY

NIV

NRSV

"We have much to say about this, but it is hard to explain because you are slow to learn. "In fact, though by this time you ought to be

teachers, you need someone to teach you the

11About this? we have much to say that is hard to explain, since you have become dull in understanding. '*For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again

elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 'sAnyone who lives

milk, not solid food; '*for everyone who lives on

the basic elements of the oracles of God. You need milk, being still an infant, is unskilled in the word of righteousness. 'But solid food is for the mature, for those whose faculties have been trained by practice to distinguish good from evil. 6 Therefore let us go on toward perfection,’ leaving behind the basic teaching about Christ, and not laying again the foundation: repentance from dead works and faith toward God, “instruction about baptisms, laying on of hands, resurrection of the dead, and eternal Hees *And we will do* this, if God permits.

on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 'But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. 6 Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repen-

tance from acts that lead to death,? and of faith in God, “instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. *And God paying, wewill do so.

aOr him

2] Or from useless rituals

© Or toward maturity

read let us do

¢ Other ancient authorities: oe

(COMMENTARY It is clear to the writer of Hebrews that further discussion of the high priesthood of Christ will not only contribute to the maturity of the readers (6:1) but also require a degree of maturity for its progress (5:14). Therein lies the tension in 5:116:3. Are the readers capable of moving on with the difficult subject matter? According to 6:1-3, apparently they are. Are the readers too dull, too immature, too unskilled in the word to continue? According to 5:11-14, apparently they are. It is obvious that before we can accept the writer’s invitation to move beyond the basics to more profound reflection (6:1-3), we must come to some clarity about the apparent indictment in 5:11-14.

or to Melchizedek. In either case, the subject is hard to explain (more literally, “hermeneutically difficult”). The expression “we have much to say,” while an acceptable translation, gives the impression that the communication problem lies between the preacher and the readers and thus obscures the word-centered nature of v. 11. If we would tolerate for a moment the awkwardness of a literal rendering, an important point might come clear: “the word |[Adyos logos] has much to say to us difficult to interpret.” It is with “the word” that both writer and reader must struggle, for, as Clement of Alexandria has reminded us, the Word of God does not yield its message easily to every casual passerby. By keeping the term “the word” before us, the passage, far from being a hortatory digression, joins the remainder of the letter at many points. The accent on God’s speaking, from 1:1 onward, is recalled, as is the lyrical prose in praise of the living, active Word of God in 4:1213. In addition, the phrase “dull in understanding” (NRSV; “slow to learn,” NIV) is

5:11-14. In v. 11, the subject soon to be presented is identified: It is “about this.” Since

the pronoun ov (hou) may be neuter (“this”) or masculine (“him”), the writer may be referring to the whole matter introduced in v. 10 (Christ’s high priesthood after the order of Melchizedek) or more specifically to “him”—that is, to Christ

67

HEBREWS 5:1 1—6:3 COMMENTARY educational development.*? Here milk is an image for “the basic elements of the oracles of God,” while solid food is “the word of righteousness,” which is the capacity in the believer “to distinguish good from evil.” Much more is likely involved in the phrase “word of righteousness,” but here the writer focuses only on moral and ethical discernment. Not necessary for purposes of clarity but rhetorically effective is the further multiplication of contrasts: infant and mature; unskilled (inexperienced) and trained by habitual practice. Having one’s faculties (senses) trained by practice is athletic imagery and is common in the NT (1 Tim 4:7; Heb 12:11; 2 Pet 2:14), although some of the vocabulary here is unique in the NT (“faculties” and “practice” or “habit”). The writer will soon provide the readers with some of this exercise by leading them through a larger and deeper understanding of Christ’s person and his salvific work. Perhaps this is the place to pause and note the importance of the word “perfect” (TeAeLdw teleioo ) for the writer of Hebrews and to observe in a preliminary way the variety of uses of the word. The term was used earlier in descriptions of Christ as one who was made perfect through full identification with humankind, including suffering and death (2:10; 5:9). In our theological vocabulary, his incarnation, humiliation, and exaltation perfected or completed his redemptive work, and hence he is “perfect forever” (7:28). There was no reason to translate the word as “mature,” since nothing of moral growth or achievement was involved in these characterizations of Christ as perfect. However, in these verses, at 5:14, and again at 6:1, the term is used to describe the moral, ethical, intellectual, and spiritual goal of the believer’s life—a goal achieved by learning, practice, and teaching others, a goal expected of all who submit themselves to the resources for Christian growth. In the discussion of 5:11-6:20, it is, therefore, appropriate to translate the word as “mature” or, in its noun form at 6:1, “maturity.” Both the NIV and the REB are consistent in the translation at 5:14 and 6:1. For some reason the NRSV reverts to “perfec-

clarified. Literally, the readers are accused of being “dull or sluggish of hearing.” This has been the charge all along (note especially 2:1; 3:7-8, 15; 4:2, 7). And what is not being heard clearly is not the preacher’s sermon but the Word. To think that the issue here is simply a case of an inattentive congregation’s not being able to follow substantive sermons is to miss the gravity of the indictment. It is toward the word already preached and the word now to be further explored that the readers have become dull or sluggish (vw8pds nothros; a word used only here and at 6:12 in all the NT). In vv. 12-14, the statement in v. 11 receives elaboration by means of vocabulary and analogies drawn from educational circles of the Hellenistic world. Anyone moving normally through the stages of education available would be expected to progress from the basic elements to the point of being able to communicate with others in discourses of some complexity. The term “teachers” (8t8doKahou didaskaloi) need not be taken as being addressed solely to the leaders of the church; this was an expectation of the congregation generally, an expectation based on time spent in the faith and in the fellowship. In other words, “You have been Christians long enough to be informed and bold witnesses.” Instead, says the author, “You need to be enrolled in a class on the most rudimentary elements of the oracles of God.” In v. 12 may be an allusion to formal catechetical instruction that later was institutionalized as lengthy (1-3 years) preparation for baptism. We do not know how structured such education was at this time and place, or whether it preceded or followed baptism. The content of such instruction is “the oracles of God,” a familiar designation for the Jewish Scriptures (Num 24:16;*Ps10721I Acts? 7:38: Rom 3:2); but given the author’s Christian reading of those texts, very likely specific content about God and Christ was included. For example, 1:1-4 might be found among such “oracles.” Continuing with the educational vocabulary of the day, the writer says, “You need milk, not solid food” (v. 12). That this language appears in 1 Cor 3:1-3 does not prove a literary relationship between Paul and Hebrews; “milk” and “solid food” were common terms for referring to levels of

52. H. W. Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989) 159n. 59, gives examples of such use in Philo and in Epictetus.

68

HEBREWS 5:11—6:3 COMMENTARY tion” at 6:1, blurring the distinction between Christ’s being perfected and believers’ becoming mature. Perhaps- the NRSV is anticipating yet a third use of the word in Hebrews, and that is the sense in which Christ perfects his followers (10:14; 12:2, 23). In other words, the Christian life is not completely a matter of spiritual and intellectual growth and ethical-achievement, as vital as that is. Christ’s redemptive act and his continual intercession perfect his followers in that it is he who brings the believers into his own perfection in the presence of God, a foretaste of which is even now experienced by those who trust his grace. Hence, three uses of “perfection” already impress themselves on us: the perfection of Christ through suffering, death, and exaltation; the maturing of believers through the disciplines of growth; and the perfecting of believers through the redeeming grace of Christ. The reader should remain open to even further nuances of this word as we move through Hebrews.°? In all fairness it should be pointed out that a radically different reading of “perfection” in Hebrews has been offered by Kaésemann.°* He regards Hebrews as an interpretation of Christianity on the philosophical framework of what we broadly call Gnosticism, by which we designate a number of systems of speculation about how eternal spirits fell into this world of matter and by what means they can be extricated from this world and return to the eternal realm of the spirit. Basically, salvation comes by possessing the secret knowledge of who we are, whence we came, and whither we go. Not all have or can have this knowledge. Those who are carnal cannot; those who are intellectual may with effort attain it; the spiritual ones can receive it and be saved, gathered to the gnostic redeemer, Christ. Kasemann identifies the perfect or mature ones in 5:14 and 6:1 as those who are spiritual, capable of receiving the secret knowledge. That the concepts and vocabulary of such philosophies were known to some early Christian communities and were here and there embraced in varying degrees is clear. The epistle to the Colossians, the Gospel

of Thomas, the Gospel of Truth, the Epistle of Barnabas, the writings of Clement of Alexandria and of Origen, among others, make this evident. But one is hard pressed to identify the kind of Gnosticism Kaésemann describes as existing in the time and place of Hebrews and to find in the letter evidence that the spiritually elite possessed the secrets to a heavenly return. That the resources for Christian maturity were available to all and that all were expected to “grow up” account quite adequately for the discussion in 5:11-6:20. We return now to the question raised earlier: Is the indictment of the readers as immature milk drinkers a serious one? It would seem so, given the repetition of it in 5:11-14, using a number of sharp images and analogies. And yet it seems not to be so, given the call to move on to maturity (6:1), the complimentary and encouraging words in 6:9-12, and the writer’s reason for speaking in this manner, “so that you may not become sluggish” (6:12 NRSV), even though the readers have already been accused of being “sluggish in understanding” (5:11). Several things are clear. Given earlier warnings about neglect, drifting, inattention, hardening, and falling short, 5:11-14 must be taken as reflecting a real malaise among some if not all the members of the church being addressed. A lethargy has overtaken a community once healthy, active, and courageous (6:9-11; 10:32-36). But the readers are not infants; 1:1— 5:10 is not addressed to the immature. And it is clear that the writer intends to proceed in serving solid food, demanding more and more of them in digesting the profound message of Christ’s high priestly work. Apparently the recipients have been receding, slipping, or perhaps shrinking back from earlier service and witness, for reasons that may come clearer as we proceed. How does a preacher get through to them and halt the regression? Irony? Perhaps. Exaggeration? Perhaps. We can recognize a rhetorical strategy in shocking confrontation followed by softer words of encouragement «(S¢h1-14 “and 621-3; 16:4-8 and: 9-12; 10:26-31 and 32-39). The writer will later urge the readers to “provoke” (tapoEvoyds paroxusmos; “irritate,” “distress,” “pester,” “cut”) each other back to life and faithfulness again (10:24). Because the situation is critical, the preacher has done just that in 5:11-14.

53. These uses of the term will be noted as they appear in the text, but for anyone seeking to engage in a thematic study of “perfection” in Hebrews, David Peterson’s Hebrews and Perfection (London: Cambridge University Press, 1982), will be helpful. 54. E. Kasemann, The Wandering People of God, trans. R. Harresville and I. Sandberg (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984) esp. 187-92.

69

HEBREWS 5:11—6:3 COMMENTARY however, “Christ” is read as objective, then the instruction here referred to was about Christ and may well have included material such as is found in 1:1-5:10. We prefer precision of reference, but in its absence there is no reason not to accept both interpretations of “the basic teaching of Christ.” When the canon of the NT was determined, both teachings by Christ and about Christ were included. Whether the author intended “the basic teaching of Christ” (6:1) to be synonymous with “the basic elements of the oracles of God” (5:12) is not clear. What follows in vv. 16-2 may be read in either of two ways. One reading elaborates on “the foundation” with three paired expressions:

6:1-3. When the author issues the call to maturity at v. 1, it is important to notice that the connection with what precedes is not “however,” as if to say, “Even though you are immature and cannot grasp what follows, I must continue even if it falls on dull ears.” Rather, the conjunction is “therefore”or “so then” as if to say, “Of course, you can follow this complex discussion, and | expect you to do so.” The preacher has upbraided the readers but still does not anticipate that the sermon will fall to the ground unheard. In the discussion of the several meanings of “perfection” in the commentary on 5:11-14, the expressed preference was for the translation “maturity” at 6:1, continuing the sense of the adjective “mature” at 5:14. However, in the pilgrimage language of 6:1 (“leaving behind... going on”), the eschatological flavor of the word should be kept in mind. This is to say, believers not only practice the disciplines of Christian living that lead to maturity, but also receive a completeness or perfection granted by the perfection of Christ. The serious and sometimes difficult exercises of the Christian life are always performed under the benediction of grace. This awareness may be implied in the writer’s choice of the passive “let us be carried” (bepwe8a pherometha, trans. “let us go on”). We not only move on toward maturity; we are carried along toward perfection. Such a pilgrimage requires “leaving behind” the elementary teachings, but not in the sense of rejecting. After all, such instruction constitutes the “foundation,” says the author, shifting momentarily to an architectural metaphor to underscore the fundamental importance of their primary education in the faith. The phrase translated “the basic [elementary, NIV] teaching about Christ” is problematic both in translation and in reference. Literally, the expression is “the teaching of the beginning of Christ.” If “Christ” is read as subjective, then the writer has in mind Christ’s own basic or primary teaching. The following phrase, “repentance from dead works and faith toward God,” seems to support this interpretation, since, according to the Gospels, Jesus came preaching, “Repent, and believe in the good news” (Mark 1:15 NRSV). In addition, the author assumes a knowledge of the historical Jesus (5:7-8), further supporting the view that the basic instruction of Christians involved teaching what Christ himself taught. If,

repentance from dead works — faith toward God instruction about baptisms — laying on of hands resurrection of the dead — eternal judgment The other reading makes two segments of the passage: “the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God,” followed by an elaboration in two paired expressions. One could translate this portion: “that is [referring to the foundation], instruction.” about baptisms — laying on of hands resurrection of the dead — eternal judgment In the second reading, the foundation is one of repentance and faith, further defined as teaching in four subject areas. The difference lies in textual variants among the Greek manuscripts concerning the word “instruction”—if in the genitive case, it belongs on the list of six items (first reading); if in the accusative, “instruction” is simply a repetition of “foundation” (second reading). Commentators are divided, and there would be no reason to pause over the difference except for interest in the elements constituting catechetical instruction of believers in the time and place of Hebrews. There seems to be here a formula or portion of a formula for the catechizing of new members. The choice of reading in these comments is the second. This is to say, the foundation laid in the lives of the readers is characterized broadly as consisting of “repentance from dead

70

HEBREWS 5:11—6:3 COMMENTARY works and faith toward God.” This expression summarizes the entire movement from the former life to the present life. The “dead works” from which the readers have turned need not evoke Paul’s treatments of works versus grace. The writer uses the phrase here and at 9:14 as a general characterization of the activities and rituals of the reader’s former life, whether in Judaism or some Hellenistic religion. If anyone expected “faith toward Christ” rather than “faith toward God,” that expectation can be corrected by the letter to Hebrews itself. God is the source of revelation and of salvation; God is the one who sends Jesus (1:1-5:10). For Christianity to distance itself so far from Judaism that this primary tenet of faith, commonly held, is overlooked, is to allow the effort to be unique to cripple both tradition and faith. The four items of instruction listed as constituents of the foundational instruction may be only a selection from a longer list that provided a catechetical curriculum. If so, these four may be mentioned because they were either unusually significant or problematic for this particular congregation. In any case, the writer has only to mention them without comment, both because they were already familiar to the readers and because to tarry with explanations would contradict the exhortation to leave these matters behind and move on. The modern reader is, of course, curious to know more. As for “baptisms,” the word Battioudv (baptismon) is better rendered “washings”; another form of the word is used regularly in the NT to speak of Christian baptism. Just as Paul had to distinguish between the eucharistic meal and pagan ritual meals (1 Corinthians 10-11), so also perhaps new Christians

needed to understand differences between ritual washings of other groups (Traditional Judaism? Qumran? The movement following John the Baptist? Pagan ablutions?) and the baptism of the church. The same is true of the “laying on of hands,” associated with commissioning, healing, ordination, confirmation, and the gift of the Holy Spirit. The twin teachings of resurrection and judgment were certainly basic to the community’s faith, being firmly fixed in Pharisaic Judaism, the teaching of Jesus, and apostolic preaching in the church after Jesus. Some students of Hebrews have noted that the items in the curriculum cited here could as easily have been used in a synagogue of the time. Quite true. But the search for differences between synagogue and church should not be pursued too diligently; to find a practice

or beliefin one is not automatically to remove it from the other. Similarities provided both the ground and the necessity of instruction in order that new believers understand the “of Christ” dimension of basic Christian teaching, especially if that teaching grew out of Judaism. This first of three sub-units within 5:11-6:20 concludes with a common (Acts 18:21; 1 Cor 4:19; 16:7; Jas 4:15), but not empty expression of the need for God’s blessing: “if God permits.” What the author says “we will do” refers to the earlier expression using the first-person plural: “Let us go on.” What “we will do” is to move on toward maturity (perfection), engaging in the rigorous exercise of discussing the person and the work of Jesus as a high priest after the order of Melchizedek. Thus the author positions the reader on the edge of what will prove both demanding and rewarding.

REFLECTIONS 1. Some may raise questions about the appropriateness or the effectiveness of the writer’s rhetorical strategy: stern charges and warnings followed by words of encouragement and hope. And, of course, we have no way of knowing how this sermon was received or to what effect. We can appreciate, however, the concentration of knowledge and skill in response to one clear and undeniable fact: Hearing is difficult, not only for this audience but also for any audience. The Scriptures honor hearing: “Hear, O Israel; The Lorp is our God, the Lorp alone. You shall love the Lorp your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Deut 6:4-5 NRSV). Or again, “So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes through the word of Christ” (Rom 10:17 NRSV). The verb “to hear” (axovw akouo) provides

HEBREWS 5:11—6:3 REFLECTIONS the root for the verb “to obey” (imaxovw hypakouo). But the Scriptures also understand the difficulty of hearing: “Morning by morning God wakens—/ wakens my ear/ to listen as those who are taught./ The Lord Gop has opened [lit., “dug out”) my ear” (Isa 50:4-5 NRSV). We know some reasons for this difficulty, hardly overcome except by an act of God: distractions, pre-occupations, physical problems, no confidence in the speaker, old memories awakened, and refusal to listen to that which may alter one’s life. But the Hebrews preacher knows another: a dullness or sluggishness brought on by lack of exercise in communication. The readers have apparently pulled back from bold witness to outsiders and from exhorting and encouraging one another. The loss of a congregational conversation means a loss of hearing. Through lack of use faculties grow dull and the members regress to a former condition of immaturity. Persons who do not contribute to a group’s discussion often say, “But | am listening.” Perhaps so, but not as well. 2. One is impressed by the fact that the preacher of Hebrews shares with the readers difficult and demanding material. The message, deep and complex as it is, belongs to the whole church, and they are trusted with it. From the beginning of their faith pilgrimage this has been so, as evidenced by the foundational instruction previously received. Had the writer chosen to do so, dozens of reasons could have been found in the condition of the readers to justify withholding from them all but the simplest and most easily digested elements of the faith, saying privately, “The weightier matters are to be reserved for discussions among the clergy.” The writer understood, however, that to have done so would have further contributed to the weakened and sluggish condition of the readers. Many pastors have yet to appreciate the levels of maturity that laity can attain when the resources for growth are shared patiently and pastorally, and when the withholding of matters theological, christological, and ethical, no matter how complex or controversial, is recognized for what it is: a means of control. 3. According to 5:14, a mark of Christian maturity is the capacity “to distinguish good from evil.” As much as most of us enjoy an informed theological conversation, maturity for the writer of Hebrews is something much more practical: a discerning spirit able to make its way among the paths that seem right, paths often made more attractive by the apparent support of selected biblical texts, without becoming lost. Being able to distinguish between good and evil implies at least three things. First, the Christian faith, like its parent Judaism, is morally and ethically serious. All relationships and patterns of behavior in daily situations are the subject matter of discipleship and are to be informed by one’s theology. Second, distinctions between good and evil are not always easily made. It is one thing to urge that we do God’s will; it is quite another to discern what that is. To think that between vice and virtue is a line clear and unmistakable is to embrace an illusion. And finally, as the writer says, this capacity to discern comes only by practice and exercise. As everyone knows, practice and exercise often involve falling, being hurt, trying again. The room where this takes place with support and encouragement is the church, where beginners and long-time practitioners are given both resources and opportunity to “move on toward maturity.”

HEBREWS 6:4-12, STERN WARNING WITH HOPE NIV

NRSV

“It is impossible for those who have once been _— “For it is impossible to restore again to repentance enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, those who have once been enlightened, and have who have shared in the Holy Spirit, >who have _ tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the

72

HEBREWS 6:4-12

NIV

NRSV

tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, ‘if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because? to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 7Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to’ those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. *But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned. *Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your case— things that accompany salvation. '°God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them. ''We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure. !*We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.

Holy Spirit, °and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, Cand then have fallen away, since on their own they are crucifying again the Son of God and are holding him up to contempt. ’Ground that drinks up the rain falling on it repeatedly, and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. *But if it produces thorns and thistles, it is worthless and on the verge of being cursed; its end is to be

a6 Or repentance while

4Gk for his name

burned over. 9Even though we speak in this way, beloved, we are confident of better things in your case, things that belong to salvation. '!°For God is not unjust; he will not overlook your work and the love that you showed for his sake? in serving the saints, as you still do. ''And we want each one of you to show the same diligence so as to realize the full assurance of hope to the very end, !2so that you may not become sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises.

(COMMENTARY effect, “We will move on to maturity because the alternative condition is that of falling away, without the possibility of renewal.” At v. 9, the adversative conjunction “but” (5¢ de, trans. “even though”) says, in effect, “But having been persuaded otherwise in your case.” In other words, the harsh warning of vv. 4-8 is not being spoken to persons to whom it presently applies. It looms on their horizon, to be sure, but were it descriptive of their current condition, the message would be wasted on persons unable any longer to hear it. A third and final preliminary comment is a reminder to ourselves to resist letting 6:4-8 become a magnet drawing into its interpretive orbit all the NT passages with dire words about certain sins among believers or about post-baptismal sins in general. In other words, the expression “it is impossible to restore again to repentance,” both in its internal meaning and its application to “those who,” must be understood in its context

Several preliminary comments need to be made before investigating the details of this most sobering passage. First, it is important to notice that 6:4-12 fits a rhetorical pattern now familiar in Hebrews: a stern warning (vv. 4-8), followed by words of encouragement and hope (vv. 9-12; cf. 2:1-9; 4:1-16). In fact, since the strong words of 6:4-8 follow immediately the encouragement portion of the preceding unit (6:1-3), the net effect is that the sober warning of 6:4-8 is surrounded by positive and affirming words. This observation is not intended to soften the blow of vv. 4-8; on the contrary, the context of pastoral encouragement makes these verses seem even more stark by contrast. This observation leads to a second comment. The writer clearly wants the reader to hear the words about the impossibility of restoring certain persons to a second repentance as part of the larger message of pastoral encouragement. At v. 4, the conjunction “for” or “because” says, in

73

HEBREWS 6:4-12 COMMENTARY in Hebrews and not as one among many rigorous statements concerning sin within the Christian community. It is easy to see why some commentators°> subsume 6:4-6 under the general topic of post-baptismal sin; in one way or another, most NT as well as extra-canonical Christian writings had to deal with the reality of continuing sin in the church. In spite of the ideal that those born of God do not sin (1 John 5:18) or, in Paul’s image, are dead to sin (Rom 6:1-11), the fact is that not only did sin in many forms among the believers need to be addressed but also instructions needed to be given for punishment (1 Cor 5:1-8), or resolution (Matt 18:15-20), or restoration (Gal 6:1-2; Jas 5:19-20). At least one writer dealt with the problem by classifying sins according to seriousness, placing the sin that is mortal (“unto death”) beyond the reach of any restoration (1 John 5:16-17). The Gospel writers report from the lips of Jesus one sin more serious than all others: “But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin” (Mark 3:29 NRSV; see also Matt 12:32; Luke 12:10)—a statement so dramatically final that the church has long sought to identify that sin lest some member be guilty of iy This brief rehearsal is enough to show that matching texts that are similar in rigor can lead one away from the issue of substance: What is the condition of those who are, in the mind of the writer of Hebrews, beyond the possibility of restoring again to repentance? What is meant by “falling away” (v. 6)? One senses, in advance of further examination of the text, that moral irregularities such as fornication, anger, or sloth, no matter how gravely regarded, do not at all identify the issue of Heb 6:4-8. The unit falls naturally into three parts: vv. 4-6, the warning; vv. 7-8, the analogy from agriculture; vv. 9-12, the words of encouragement. 6:4-6. The warning itself is framed to achieve maximum rhetorical force. The first word is “impossible” (asvvatos adynatos), which is completed with the infinitive “to renew” (dvakatviCw

anakainizo},which does not appear until v. 6. The descriptions of “those who” in wv. 4-5 come between these two anchoring words. The NRSV obscures this dramatic word order, while the NIV preserves it. There is no finite verb in vv. 4-6; “it is” is supplied by translators to make a complete sentence of the stark, verbless warning. The emphatic “impossible” governs the three verses, but the writer does not specify with whom the impossibility lies: God cannot? The preacher cannot? The listener cannot? One hesitates to say that God cannot, since with God all things are possible. Likewise, it seems inappropriate to lay such a critical burden on the skills or lack of skills of the preacher. As for the listener, here as elsewhere in Scripture psychological probing is an uncertain business and should be kept to a minimum. One can cite case after case in support of the proverb, “The heated iron, once cooled, is difficult to heat again,” but the text is not about what is “difficult.”°”? Nor is it about how anyone feels concerning the gospel. The impossibility lies in the writer’s understanding of the once-for-all act of God in Jesus Christ. The author repeatedly finds the expression “impossible” useful in clearing away from the christology of the letter any modifiers, any alternatives, any exceptions. Note: “through two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible that God would prove false” (6:18 NRSV); “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (10:4 NRSV); “gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper” (9:9 NRSV); “the law ...can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered year after year, make perfect those who approach” (10:1 NRSV); “offering again and again the same sacrifices that can never take away sins” (10:11 NRSV); “without faith it is impossible to please God” (11:6 NRSV). For Hebrews, impossibilities are implied in the writer’s affirmation: “And it is by God’s will that we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (10:10 NRSV, italics added). At 6:4-6 the impossibility is in restoring (renewing) again to repentance—that is, one does not lay again the foundation that begins with repentance (6:1), an act that would contradict the once-for-all christology.

55. E.g., H. W. Montefiore, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, HNTC (New York: Harper, 1964) 107-9. 56. Variously identified as adultery, or any one of the seven deadly sins, or cowardly hiding from persecutors of Christians. A very early interpretation of this sin was testing or questioning a Christian prophet who “speaks in a spirit” (Did. XI. 7.).

57. A translation, softening the text and preferred by Erasmus and a few others, lacks mss support.

74

HEBREWS 6:4-12 COMMENTARY The persons addressed by the warning are simply identified as “those who” (v. 4). However, they are described in a series of participles that depict with an extraordinary flourish the experience of entering and participating in the life of the Christian community. 6:4a, “Having once been enlightened.” The adverb “once” (ata€ hapax) commonly refers to that which occurs only once, that which is thus unique, “once and for all.” It occurs in Hebrews in references to the salvific act of Christ (7:27; 9:12, 26; 10:12, 14), and quite likely the writer hopes the connection between their experience and the saving act of Christ will not be lost on the readers. Being “enlightened,” moving out of darkness into light, was a widely used metaphor for the trustful reception of the message about Christ (John 1:9; 2 Cor 4:4-6; Eph 1:18; 2 Tim 1:10; 1 Pet 2:9). The author uses the expression again at 10:32 in recalling the readers’ firm stand in their confession. Whether the enlightenment was related to the rite of baptism is not certain at the time and place of Hebrews.*® 6:4b, “Having tasted the heavenly gift.” The vivid metaphor “to taste” has already been used by the author (Christ tasted death for everyone, 2:9), and it will be repeated in v. 5. It refers to direct personal experience (Ps 34:8; 1 Pet 2:3). The heavenly gift is most likely a reference to God’s grace. That which is “heavenly” is for Hebrews that which is ultimate, true, and from God Sets" 8:5%:.9:2355 112165.412:22); ‘Those who argue that “having tasted the heavenly gift” refers to the eucharist usually do so on two grounds: (1) the verb “taste” and (2) the experiential sequence of baptism (enlightened) and then sharing at the table (tasting the heavenly gift). The persuasiveness of the case depends very much on drawing from sources (e.g., the bread from heaven of John 6) with which we have no knowledge that the writer of Hebrews was familiar.°° 6:4c, “Having become sharers of the Holy Spirit.” The language of partnership has already been used in relation to the heavenly calling (3:1) and to Christ himself (3:14). Like-

wise, God’s distribution of the Holy Spirit in the community was assumed by the author as both the understanding and the experience of the readers (2:4). Hebrews thus confirms what is clear from other NT writers, that the presence and activity of the Holy Spirit are the hallmark of the early church and clearly identify the audience as Christians. 6:5, “Having tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come.” The first four chapters have repeatedly asserted not only the power and certainty of God’s speech but also its goodness; that is, God is for us and our salvation. No provision necessary for the believers to enter God’s rest is lacking. In confirmation of this promise, the qualities of that age to come break in upon the present as “signs and wonders and various miracles” (2:4 NRSV), providing what Paul would call an earnest or foretaste of what is yet to be (2 Cor 1:22; Eph 1:14). In this and the three preceding participles, the writer withholds nothing in reminding the addressees of the abundance of God’s investment in them. Upon them God has poured out more than they could ever have asked for or imagined. 6:6. It is against this flourish of God’s favor, which has been in the community’s experience both pleasure and power, that the fifth participle tosses an almost incomprehensible response: “and then have fallen away.” The author has here chosen a verb (Tapatittw parapipto) that appears nowhere else in the NT. In the Septuagint the word occurs, being variously translated: “acting faithlessly” (Ezek 14:13 NRSV; “breaking faith,” REB); “dealing treacherously” (Ezek 20:27 NRSV). Although the root of the verb means “to fall,” the usage here by no means is to be taken as “carelessly slipping”; the sense is that of rejection, violation of a relationship, breach of faith, abandonment. At 3:12 a similar word was used (attootfvat apostenai, “to turn away,” “abandon”) to express a turning away from God. Neither at 3:12 nor at 6:6 is the issue simply doctrinal, as though someone were rejecting a tenet of the creed. The act of falling away is not so much against a dogma as against a person, at 3:12 against God, at 6:6 against the Son of God. The remainder of v. 6, crucifying again the Son of God and holding him up to ridicule, makes this abundantly clear. Apostasy, yes, but not as a

58. E. Kasemann, The Wandering People of God, trans. R. Harresville and I. Sandberg (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984) 187-88, thinks the adverb “once” implies that the writer has in mind the specific act of baptism. 59. Fora full presentation of the case for and against the eucharist, see R. Williamson, “The Eucharist and the Epistle to the Hebrews,® N7S 21 (Jan. 1975) 300-312.

79

HEBREWS 6:4-12 COMMENTARY and the images of the gods in the same way as the others, and reviled the name of Christ.” Pliny’s description of those who turn away from Christ, embrace the imperial gods, acknowledge the emperor as lord, and revile the name of Christ is not unlike that of v. 6: “They are crucifying again the Son of God and are holding him up to contempt.” This is to say, the apostates take it upon themselves to join in the shameful rejection of Christ expressed in the crucifixion and voluntarily join in heaping upon him the ridicule and verbal abuse frequently heard at public executions. The contrast with the life they had experienced within the community of grace could not be more stark. The church has heard this harsh and painful warning, and yet has never ceased to struggle with it in the light of its central proclamation of the unceasing and unrelenting grace of God. 6:7-8. This second of the three sub-units of 6:4-12 continues the discussion as evidenced by the conjunction “for,” the same word beginning v. 4. These verses consist entirely of an illustration from agriculture, a common source for both Jewish and Christian preaching (Isa 5:1-7; Ezek 19:10-14; Matt 3:10; 7:16; Mark 4:3-9; Luke 13:6-9). Like any good illustration, the analogy does not draw attention to itself with distracting internal complexities, but in its simplicity serves to drive home with unfailing clarity the point being made. It does carry echoes of OT texts doubtless familiar to the readers: thorns and thistles of Gen 3:17-18, blessing and curse of Deut 11:26-28, and perhaps the fruitless vineyard of Isa 5:1-7. These echoes serve to support the message: Ground cultivated and receiving rain that produces a crop is blessed by God; ground cultivated and receiving rain that produces thorns and thistles is under a curse and destined for burning. The burning is not for the purpose of restoring and renewing the soil but is clearly the deserved “end,” the final punishment (10:27). The illustration looks back to vv. 4-6: the fruitful ground recalling vv. 4-5, the fruitless ground recalling v. 6. But the illustration also looks ahead. The “blessing” anticipates the discussion about Abraham in vv. 13-20, and the “fire” prophesies the severity of the final judgment for apostates (10:27). The

charge of one side of a debate against the other; rather, it is the sin of abandoning God, Christ, and the fellowship of believers (cf. 10:25). This act is far too grave and all-encompassing to be handled adequately by Tertullian’s use of this text to declare that there is no second repentance for the adulterer and fornicator.© Tertullian is writing in response to Hermas, a Christian of the midsecond century, whose apocalyptic work, 7he Shepherd of Hermas, was very influential. In The Shepherd, Hermas agrees with the teaching that there is no second repentance after baptism. However, he claims that through a revelation God had granted him the ministry of announcing one repentance after baptism. This offer, he said, was not for all time and thus to be calculated by believers, but was a dispensation for his own time. Hermas makes these statements in the context of discussing marriage, remarriage, and adultery.°! It is clear, therefore, that while Hermas is generally regarded as the earliest interpreter of Heb 6:4-6, he has moved the issue from falling away or abandoning Christ to that of committing particular sins after baptism. The difference is major. As stated above in comments on v. 4, the “those who” of this warning are not the readers, except in a potential sense. Is the entirety of 6:4-6 merely theoretical, a grim prospect sketched out to frighten the believers into more acceptable behavior? We cannot know, of course, if the writer was thinking of particular persons somewhere when this warning was framed, but it would be a mistake to call it theoretical in the sense of being less serious or less real. The sin portrayed so vividly here was not only a possibility but a documented actuality as well. The Emperor Trajan sent Pliny to the provinces of Bithynia and Pontus to investigate suspected irregularities in the handling of government funds and to bring to justice persons and groups guilty of treason or sedition. In the years 111-113 ck, letters between the two were exchanged. The subject in some of this correspondence was the Christians, a group heretofore unknown to Pliny. In his investigations, Pliny interrogated some who “said that they had ceased to be Christians two or more years previously, and some of them even twenty years ago. They all did reverence to your [Trajan’s] statue 60. Tertullian On Modesty 20. 61. The Shepherd of Hermas Mandate IV.1-4.

62. Pliny The Letters of Pliny, LCL ed., Bk X, 96.

76

HEBREWS 6:4-12 COMMENTARY illustration functions well; the reader is not allowed to forget the rigorous warning about the impossibility of a second repentance.

but also the fact that they continue to do so. The word for “serve” here (Staxovéw diakonedo) appears nowhere else in Hebrews but was used widely in the early church to refer to a wide range of ministries (Matt 20:28; Rom 15:25; Acts 6:1-3; 2 Cor 9:1; 1 Pet 1:12). Here the writer probably

6:9-12. This third and final sub-unit returns the reader to a positive mode with a message that is emphatic in its confidence and hope. The adversative conjunction “but” signals a radical turn in thought. The readers are addressed affectionately as “beloved” (v. 9), the only time they are so greeted in the sermon. The preacher softens the voice with “Even though we speak in this way” (v. 9; that is, referring to the rigor of the preceding warning; in the Greek text this clause closes rather than opens v. 9, sustaining the positive mode through the entire sentence). However, the strongest signal that salvation and not damnation lies before the congregation is in the opening word: “We are confident [certain/sure/persuaded].” This rhetorical flourish is familiar to readers of Paul, who, after demanding instruction and exhortation, sounded a note of confidence in the readers (e.g., Rom 15:14; Gal 5:10). Repeatedly the writer uses the editorial “we” (we speak; we are confident; we want), enlarging the company of concern beyond the private but without losing the personal relationship. The “those who” of the warning (v. 4) has given way to the pronoun of direct address, “you,” used in every statement of vv. 9-12. That the author is confident of “better things” (a favorite expression of this writer; 1:4; 7:7, 19, 22; 8:6; 9:23; 10:34; 11:16, 35, 40) of the reader—that is, that they will produce a fruitful crop (v. 7)—is in no way to be taken as an apology for the harsh warning. The warning was appropriate; there were clear signs that some were slipping away (“drift”; “neglect”; “inattention”;

“dullness

of understanding”;

has in mind the behavior of the believers spelled out in 10:32-34: endurance of suffering, bearing public ridicule and verbal abuse, being empathetic partners with those subjected to such persecution, showing compassion on imprisoned brothers and sisters, and cheerfully accepting the destruction and confiscation of property.

This record and the faithfulness of a God who does not forget prompts the preacher, not to further warning, but to gentle urging. Here (vv. 11-12) the words are even more personal (“each of you”; see also 3:12-13; 4:1, 11). Every member of the community is to be diligent, persistent, and to realize the fullness of hope to the end. Here the words not only recall 3:14 and anticipate 9:28 but also join in the New Testament’s admonition to all who cling to faith under great duress (Mark 13:13; Rev 2:10). Such faithfulness enables them to throw off the sluggishness (dullness) that had overtaken them (5:11). This, says the preacher, is what “we want” (v. 11). The word em8upodpev (epithymoumen, “want”) is a strong one, indicating passion or desire. When the object of such feeling is less noble, the word is translated “covet” or “lust.” The intensity of emotion was not only persuasive but no doubt also appreciated by those hearing it as deep pastoral affection. The expression “imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises” (v. 12) reminds the readers of the discussion of entrance into the rest of God, a promise that remains open (4:1, 8). More immediately, however, the writer is preparing for the exposition of God’s promise to Abraham, a promise obtained through faith and patience (vv. 13-20). Although Abraham is the example to be imitated in the upcoming discussion, the theme of imitating those who persevere in faith will be repeated (13:7) and enlarged (11:4-38). In chap. 11, the writer will be careful to point out that the faithful of the past did not, in fact, receive “what was promised, since God had provided something better” (11:39 NRSV), a something that had its fulfillment in the Son. But that is an argument for a later time; it is sufficient

see

2:1-3; 5:11-12). Nor is the writer simply trying to put a happy face on a sad situation. The preacher knows the congregation and has firm ground for projecting a hopeful future. According to v. 10, two factors have persuaded the preacher of better things from the congregation. One is the justice or faithfulness of God. That God has been at work among them has been amply stated (2:4; 6:4-5). The second factor is that God’s investment in them has borne fruit in their love and service in God’s name toward the saints (fellow believers). It is not only their past record of serving that gives confidence to the preacher

17

HEBREWS 6:4-12 COMMENTARY at the moment to see the faithfulness of God toward those who live in patient trust. Scripture

yields no clearer model than that of the covenant between God and Abraham.

REFLECTIONS 1. The preacher or teacher in today’s church should not be surprised to find that a discussion of the impossibility of restoring to repentance those who have fallen away does not carry for many parishioners the force of a stern warning. More likely it will sound antiquated or fanatical or foreign. The reasons are several. (1) Repentance has not been understood or experienced as a condition for entering or remaining in the Christian community. (2) The grace of God is commonly viewed as being without ethical or moral expectation but is rather like a giant grading curve on which everyone passes automatically. (3) Both apostasy and heresy are inconceivable to persons who reduce the response to all that God has done and is doing to simply “joining a church.” Under such a circumstance, apostasy is no more than becoming inactive or irregular in attendance. It is only when coming to faith in Christ is experienced as receiving all the gifts of God listed in vv. 4-5 that “falling away” can be seen in all its ugliness and danger. Anyone who takes lightly entrance into the community of faith will not likely be deterred from easy departure by pulpit threats based on 6:4-8. 2. In the history of Christian preaching the sober warning of 6:4-8 has been employed as a weapon against any sin in the church membership regarded as most offensive. Although Hermas was more yielding than Tertullian, both used this text to address fornication, adultery, and remarriage. Single-issue pulpits seem most susceptible to this error, but all of us need to be warned against irresponsible employment of this text in times of anger or disappointment or frustration with the congregation. The message marked “Ultimatum” should be reserved for the appropriate occasion, which most likely will never arise. In the meantime, the difference between the “those who” of the warning (vv. 4-8) and the “you” of encouragement (vv. 9-12) deserves reflection, holding promise for both preaching and pastoral care. 3. When the writer of Hebrews encourages the readers (6:9-12), there is no departure from or lessening of theological seriousness. The preacher does not resort to non-substantive tactics, painting smiling faces on everything and otherwise trying to manufacture good cheer. There is a prejudice in our culture to the effect that everything negative or critical or stern in its expression is somehow deep or profound or substantive, whereas the positive or affirming or encouraging is regarded as shallow and lacking in thought. Preachers are often seduced by this unjustified perception and hence do not support words of hope and encouragement with the same degree of theological reflection as used to undergird other pulpit discourse. In this regard, 6:9-12 is instructive. Here the encouragement of the church is firmly grounded theologically in the justice or fairness or faithfulness of God. God is aware, says the writer, of our excellent record of love and service, a record that we continue to maintain. Not only is God aware, but also God is just and dependable. Hence the congregation can expect continued favor and the support necessary for their diligence to the very end. God is true to God’s own self; therefore, they will not be abandoned on their way to inherit the promises. As Paul expressed it, human faithlessness does not nullify the faithfulness of God (Rom 3:3-4). The relationships of love and service within the congregation are grounds for encouragement, it is true, and the models of faith and patience among those who have gone before likewise spur the members on in spite of severe difficulties. But the solid and unshakable foundation for all their hope is the character of God. So important is this consideration that the writer will develop it further in vv. 13:20,

78

HEBREWS 6:13-20

HEBREWS 6:13-20, THE GROUND FOR HOPE NIV

NRSV

‘When God made his promise to Abraham, since there was no one greater for him to swear by, he swore by himself, ‘saying, “I will surely bless you and give you many descendants.”# And

13When God made a promise to Abraham, because he had no one greater by whom to swear, he swore by himself, saying, “I will surely bless you and multiply you.” And thus Abraham,? so after waiting patiently, Abraham received what _ having patiently endured, obtained the promise. Was promised. _ ‘Human beings, of course, swear by someone greater than themselves, and an oath given as 6Men swear by someone greater than themconfirmation puts an end to all dispute. '7In the selves, and the oath confirms what is said and same way, when God desired to show even more puts an end to all argument. '7Because God clearly to the heirs of the promise the unchangewanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of what was able character of his purpose, he guaranteed it by promised, he confirmed it with an oath. '8God did an oath, '’so that through two unchangeable this so that, by two unchangeable things in which things, in which it is impossible that God would it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled prove false, we who have taken refuge might be to take hold of the hope offered to us may be strongly encouraged to seize the hope set before greatly encouraged. ‘We have this hope as an us. 'We have this hope, a sure and steadfast

anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the anchor of the soul, a hope that enters the inner inner sanctuary behind the curtain, 2°where Jesus, — _ shrine behind the curtain, 2°where Jesus, a fore-

who went before us, has entered on our behalf.

He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.

runner on our behalf, has entered, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

214 Gen. 22:17

2Gk he

(COMMENTARY In this third and final unit of the section 5:116:20, the writer turns again from exhortation to exposition. It is clear, however, that the exposition is in the service of the word of encouragement offered in the preceding unit (vv. 9-12). In fact, this unit elaborates on words already introduced: “blessing” (v. 7), “promises” (v. 12), “faith and patience” (v. 12), and, further could be understood as a development of the affirmation in v. 10, “God is not unjust.” There are three discernible parts to this unit: vv. 13-15, which deal with God and Abraham; v. 16, which enlarges on God’s sworn promise to Abraham to a principle common to human relations; and vv. 17-20, which apply the sworn promise to us as the ground of our encouragement and hope. Verse 20 closes with a repeat of the ending of 5:10, “a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek,” thus returning the reader to the subject

temporarily delayed while the author addressed the question of the readers’ capacity to understand so difficult a discussion. 6:13-15. These verses develop two themes: Abraham as a prototype of those who trust in God’s promises and God’s promise, guaranteed by an oath. The first theme is familiar not only from the treatments of Abraham in biblical and Jewish literature but also from his frequent appearance in this role in the NT (Rom 4:3; Gal 3:6; Heb 11:8-19; Jas 2:21-23, which puts a different accent on the story). The brevity of the treatment of Abraham’s faith, patience, and endurance at this point is probably due in part to the assumption of the reader’s familiarity with the story (cf. 12:17, “afterwards, as you know”), in part to the fact that Abraham will reappear in chap. 11 as the model faith pilgrim, and in part to the adequacy of such a brief statement to make specific

79

HEBREWS 6:13-20 COMMENTARY confirmation in the oath as well. That the preacher is trying seriously to persuade the congregation is reflected in the use of the forensic language of the courtroom: “swear,” “oath,” “to end debate,” “surely [with certainty],” “provide a guarantee,” “give proof,” “impossible to falsify,” “unchangeable [irrevocable],” “secure an oath”

the general exhortation to imitate “those who through faith and patience inherit the promises” (v. 12). The other theme, God’s promise guaranteed by an oath, receives extended treatment, not simply because it is less familiar but rather because it is God’s promise and not our faith or endurance that is the ground of all encouragement and hope (see also 7:20-22, 28). God’s promise to Abraham was twofold: the multiplying of his offspring (Gen 12:2; 15:5; 22:17) and the possession of the land (Gen 12:7; 13:14-17). Abraham’s relation to the land, which he sought in faith, will receive attention in 11:816; here the writer is concerned only with the promise of many descendants. The apparent quotation in v. 14, “I will surely bless you and multiply you,” is not really a quotation but rather a sharpened summary of Gen 22:17: “I will indeed bless you, and | will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore” (NRSV). What gives this promise unusual significance is that it follows the most severe trial of Abraham’s faith, the offering of his son Isaac (Gen 22:1-14). God had promised earlier, but now, in view of Abraham’s trust beyond comprehension, a trust that was willing to give up the only conceivable means for gaining that promise of descendants, God undergirds the promise with an oath:

(vv. 13-18). Critical situations call for strong language, and both Abraham and the recipients of Hebrews were in critical situations. That God would make a promise and then confirm it by an oath, swearing by God’s own name and nature, having no one and nothing greater by which to secure the oath, is strong language. Some Jewish commentators on Gen 22:17 discussed the appropriateness of speaking of God’s swearing. Philo, a Jewish philosopher, historian, and biblical interpreter in Alexandria early in the first Christian century, reported that some were offended by the idea, but in his own opinion: There is nothing amiss in God’s bearing witness to himself. For who else would be capable of bearing witness to him? .. . God alone therefore is the strongest security first for himself, and in the next place for his deeds also, so that he naturally swore by himself when giving assurance regarding himself, a thing impossible for anyone else.

The language may have had its origin in oath ceremonies that Israel adopted and adapted from neighboring religions. In systems of polytheism, the lesser beings swore by the greater, but in monotheism, there are no lesser and greater gods. Therefore, God’s own name is the guarantee of a promise God would swear to keep.% 6:16. As indicated above, this verse moves away from the God-Abraham encounter per se and enlarges on the function of oaths in society familiar to the readers, whether that society be Jewish or Hellenistic or a mixture of the two. As in our own culture, an oath raises ordinary human speech to another level of responsibility, for once the oath is given (“I do solemnly swear”), the one swearing comes under the laws of perjury. The oath is thus taken as confirmation of the truth of statements made; therefore, debate about those

“By myself I have sworn, says the LorD: Because you have done this, and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will indeed bless you, and I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore.” (Gen 22:16-17 NRSV)

The author of Hebrews may be anticipating another oath of God concerning Melchizedek (7:21, quoting Ps 110:4), but in this context the reference to God’s oath has one clear purpose: to undergird further the reader’s confidence in the dependability of God. Much is at stake for both the writer and the church addressed. If the drifting neglect, the sluggish inattention of the church members, has a portion of its cause in the hardships the people are enduring, then they need to look to Abraham, whose faith endured the offering of an only son. If their behavior has a portion of its cause in a faltering trust in God’s dependability, then they need to remember not only the promise but its

63. Philo Allegorical Interpretations I11.205-6. 64. Hugh White, “The Divine Oath in Genesis,” JBL 92 (1973) 165-79, esp. 172-79.

80

HEBREWS 6:13-20 COMMENTARY statements ends. If, however, it is established that a person lied under oath, debate resumes and the

the writer intended to evoke by portraying the Christians as those who have fled, those who are refugees. The flight from Egypt comes to mind (the exodus theme was developed earlier in chaps. 3-4). Then again, in ancient times persons fleeing for their lives could run to the place of worship and lay hold of the altar, where they would be safe from pursuers (cf. 1 Kgs 1:50-51; 2:28-30). The writer may be recalling the LXX, where the Greek word used here for “those who flee” (katabuyovtes kataphygontes) is used to describe persons fleeing from avengers to designated cities of refuge for asylum (Deut 4:42; 19:5; Josh 20:9). The NRSV seems to favor this last possibility with the translation “we who have taken refuge:” Since the author does not develop the image, perhaps it is best to leave open the possibility of association with exodus and pilgrimage language, so important and richly suggestive in Hebrews. In any case, we who flee are not scattered aimlessly by fear; rather, we move deliberately toward the hope lying before us. Here “hope” is not a subjective quality describing us but is an objective reality, synonymous with “promise,” what we have been and will be given through the redemptive act of Christ. Then hope is present as assurance (6:11), but it is also eschatological. The participle “set before us” permits both present and future reference. Verses 19-20 not only continue the description of “hope” but also turn the reader’s attention to the work of Jesus as high priest, the major subject next to be developed. In v. 18, “hope” was the goal set before fleeing refugees; in v. 19, “hope” is an anchor of the soul. This nautical metaphor for stability was rather common in Greek literature,°° but is absent elsewhere in biblical writings. Its meaning is clear, however, especially with the modifiers “firm” and “secure.” The word “secure” or “steadfast” (BéBatos bebaios), sometimes translated “valid” or “in effect,” is a favorite of this writer (2:2; 3:6, 14; 9:17) and a most important one for persons who are refugees or pilgrims in the world. The writer now moves from the nautical metaphor to what is almost a personified image of “hope”: It “enters the inner shrine behind the curtain.” The subject is hope, but one

one so sworn is punished. In this formal sense, oaths functioned similarly then and now. 6:17-20. Drawing on this analogy from human discourse, the author now explains the meaning of God’s oath for “the heirs of the promise.” God’s words do not, of course, require confirmation, but God wanted to “show even more clearly” (demonstrate more abundantly) the unchanging nature of God’s purpose. Hence the oath, to confirm even more assuredly to the ones addressed the trustworthiness of God. The writer of Hebrews knows, and the readers must not forget, that this certain truth about God underlies not only the entire message of the sermon but also their lives, individually and as a community of faith. It is to underscore this truth that God does what was really not necessary but was an accommodation to human need; that is, God guarantees a promise. The word translated “guaranteed” (eotTetw mesiteuo, “confirmed,” NIV) is literally “interposed” or “mediated,” but in the legal language of the passage refers to the act of an intermediary in offering security or a guarantee. It is difficult not to hear in the word the description of Christ as mediator in passages yet to come (8:6; 9:15; 12:24). As for the identity of “the heirs of the promise,” the writer is at this point non-specific. At v. 12, those who “inherit the promises” refers obviously to patriarchs and matriarchs whose faith was worthy of emulating. At 2:16, “the descendants of Abraham” clearly are those who are to inherit salvation, and no doubt the readers will embrace the expression as including themselves as being by faith the children of Abraham and heirs of God’s promise. The promise and the oath, both unchangeable, immutable, irrevocable, are the pillars underneath the strong encouragement provided the believers (v. 18). That God could lie is “impossible” (see Commentary on 6:4 for the author’s fondness for this word). In this context, “encouraged” is the translation preferred over “exhorted,” even though both are possible (12:5; 13:22). However, even when taken as “exhort,” tapakaéw (parakaleo )never loses its intrinsic sense of comfort and support. Those who are thus encouraged are identified as “we who have fled” (NIV; “taken refuge,” NRSV). We cannot know for sure what particular image

65. For examples, see W. L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, WBC 47A (Dallas: Word, 1991) 153.

81

HEBREWS 6:13-20 COMMENTARY can see how easily the writer can move in v. 20 to Jesus, for only the high priest entered the holy of holies, the inner sanctuary, and then only on the Day of Atonement. About this much will soon be said, but for the present the writer’s presentation of hope needs to be heard. Hope is the goal lying before the refugees; hope is the firm and steady anchor of the soul; hope is in the very presence of God, in whom is our assurance and toward whom we move. By introducing the imagery of the tabernacle and the scene of the mediating work of the high priest, the author returns to the subject briefly delayed at 5:10: Jesus as our high priest. At this point three affirmations about Jesus in this role are made: (1) He has entered the inner sanctuary behind the curtain; (2) he is a forerunner; and (3) he has entered “on our behalf” (v. 20). The curtain or veil mentioned here refers to the partition between the holy place and the most holy place in the desert tabernacle (Lev 16:2, 12, 15; Exod 26:3135). It was this corresponding curtain in the Temple that was torn from top to bottom when Jesus died (Matt 27:51; Mark 15:38). That Jesus went inside this curtain specifically recalls the entry into the inner shrine by the high priest on the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:2). The work of Jesus presented in terms of this cultic activity will be developed later in Hebrews (9:3, 8, 11; 10:19-20). It is enough at this point that the imagery be evoked and that it begin its own impact on the readers in preparation for that discussion. Very likely the recipients were already familiar with symbolic interpretations of the structure, the furniture, and the activity of the tabernacle and its successor, the Temple. For example, in some intertestamental Jewish literature, the curtain represented the division between the lower heavens, where angels dwelled, and the highest heaven, the dwelling place of God. The saints of old who experienced ascensions encountered this division of the heavens.® Some forms of Gnosticism that 66. Testament of Levi3:2-4; 1 Enoch 14:10-20.

may have influenced early Christianity (still an open debate) understood the curtain to represent the barrier between earth and heaven, between the material and the spirit worlds. According to such a reading of Hebrews, Christ, by his descent, penetrated this barrier and by his ascent penetrated it once more, opening the way for his followers to leave the material world and enter the sanctuary of God’s presence. Kaésemann has been a strong advocate of locating Hebrews in — such a gnostic milieu, but with few in agreement.” At 8:1-6, the heavenly counterpart to an earthly sanctuary will receive more extensive treatment.

The second affirmation in v. 20 about Jesus as high priest is that Jesus entered behind the veil into God’s presence as a “forerunner” (1 pdSpoos prodromos). This is the only use of the word in the NT, although it occurs in the LXX and in Greek literature in various contexts: the runner out in front in an athletic event; a herald announcing the approach of an important person or group; a scout in advance of an army; or even the early fruit that promised the arrival of the harvest. In the culture of the tabernacle or Temple, the high priest was not a forerunner. No others, not even priests, followed him into the holy of holies; he went alone. By contrast, Christ, even though his salvific work of offering himself was peculiar to him alone, was a forerunner; that is, he prepared for others to follow.

This interprets in part the third affirmation: Christ entered “on our behalf.” Just as his earthly ministry of death on the cross was on our behalf, so also is his continuing ministry in God’s presence, not solely as intercessor but as the one who makes possible our entry into the heavenly sanctuary. But first the author must find a ground for the claim that Christ is a high priest. That ground is Melchizedek. 67. E. Késemann, The Wandering People of God, trans. R. Harresville and I. Sandberg (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984) 223-25.

REFLECTIONS 1. When the writer of Hebrews develops the twin themes Abraham’s (and our) faith, it is both striking and refreshing that the receives the extended treatment. This is not to say that faith as the to God is neglected in the Hebrews sermon. By no means; faith is

of God’s faithfulness and theme of God’s faithfulness acceptable human response a note sounded repeatedly,

HEBREWS 6:13-20 COMMENTARY reaching a crescendo in chap. hears this and says this, faith trust, are left to have faith in exercise in self-help. Let the not break promises, that God

11. But prior to faith is God’s faithfulness, and unless the church can be urged upon the frustrated, who, lacking a clear object of faith. Without a clear “whom” or “what,” faith becomes another pulpit not cease saying that God is dependable, that God does does not abandon.

2. Like faith, hope is a primary ingredient of a life healthy and alive toward God. But the contribution of 6:18-20 to our thinking about hope is that it is presented not so much as our posture toward God and the future as it is a quality of the Christian message, real and certain in itself, however we may happen to feel on any given day. Hope is out in front of the refugees, beckoning them. Hope is an anchor firm and secure in the very place where God is. Hope has already entered the inner sanctuary, where the act of atonement is offered and received. We must have hope, to be sure, but on occasions when we feel no hope, hope still exists. There is hope beyond hope; therefore, the Christian life is not held hostage to feelings. Hebrews 6:18-20 breaks the subjective captivity of the gospel. 3. Hebrews 6:13-15 dips into Genesis 22 to draw upon God’s promise and oath to Abraham as a resource for the encouragement of the believers. That promise and oath follow immediately the story of Abraham’s offering his son Isaac, but there is no mention of that story to the readers. The writer knows that they know it and that the memory of it will do its own appropriate work in their minds. A lesser preacher would have milked that story for all kinds of hortatory urgings. “You think you have it rough? You think your faith is being tested? You think you are making sacrifices? Look at Abraham, giving up his only son, etc., etc., etc.” There is neither encouragement or effective exhortation in telling those who are suffering that others have suffered more, in telling those grieving that others have lost more, in telling the hungry that others have actually starved. Such spoutings produce feelings of guilt, shame, and anger—all of which are not only unproductive but also destructive of the faith that was already only barely clinging to the altar.

83

HEBREWS 7:1—10:39 THE DIFFICULT DISCUSSION OVERVIEW Melchizedek to ground a priestly christology in Jewish Scriptures and, most important, in the plan of God before there ever was a tabernacle or a levitical priest. The section before us, 7:1—-10:39, is clearly the central movement of the epistle-sermon. Vanhoye, whose detailed (and sometimes strained) literary analysis of Hebrews as an elaborate concentric composition has influenced most subsequent analyses, regarded 7:1-10:39 as the third of five

he writer of Hebrews comes now to the * subject repeatedly anticipated but rng at s 10 because it was a matter about which“ have much to say that is hard to explain” (Sell NRSV). The subject is the high priestly ministry of Christ. The reader has known since 1:3 that at some point this christological development was coming. Tantalizingly brief references to the effect that Christ functions for us as priest were sprinkled through the discussion (1:3; 2:17-18; 3:1; 4:14-16) until finally, at 5:6, the full assertion is made by means of Ps 110:4: Christ is a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek, an assertion repeated at 5:10 and 6:20. The figure of Melchizedek (Gen 14:17-20) will occupy the writer only at 7:1-10, but “the order of Melchizedek” will directly and indirectly undergird the christological argument of this entire section. Therefore, Ps 110:4 is absolutely pivotal for the writer’s portrayal of Christ. In 5:7-9 it was evident that the author had access to traditions about the earthly life of Jesus, whether or not those traditions were mediated through the synoptic Gospels. However, nothing in those traditions (at least in the ones available to us) of the preacher, teacher, exorcist Jesus provides a biblical basis adequate to support a high priestly christology. After all, Jesus was not a Levite, and never in his visits to the Temple in Jerusalem was he there in the role of a priest. On the contrary, according to the Gospel accounts he Was opposed by the priests. The writer looks, then, not to those accounts but to Ps 110:4 for an exegetical foundation. Just as Paul countered Mosaic legalism in the church by going back to Abraham (430 years earlier, Gal 3:17) for the faith covenant that provided continuity between Judaism and Christianity, so also the author of Hebrews went back of the levitical priesthood to

movements in the argument of the text. Two movements (1:5-2:18; 3:1-5:10) lead to this section, and two (11:1-12:13; 12:14-13:19) flow from it. His schema differs, however, from what is offered here in that he includes 5:11-6:20 as a preliminary exhortation and 10:19-39 as a final exhortation, both within the section. He is correct in observing the close parallels between these two exhortations (warning and encouragement), but is not persuasive in arguing for their inclusion in the section. This commentary separates 5:11-6:20 as preparation for the difficult discussion and joins 10:26-39 to 11:1-12:17 as a part of the call to fidelity and mutuality based on the argument of 7:1-10:39. Various commentators use slightly different outlines, but all are offered in the service of the writer’s argument and the reader’s understanding. There are within this section three major divisions: 7:1-28; 8:1-10:18; and 10:19-39. The first establishes Christ’s priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek; the second develops the high priestly ministry of Christ in terms of sanctuary, covenant, and sacrifice; the third speaks briefly of life individually and communally in response to this ministry of Christ. 68. A. Vanhoye, La structure littéraire de I’Epitre aux Hébreux (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1963). For his influence on most subsequent analyses, see Lane, Hebrews 1-8, \xxxvii-Ixxxviii.

84

HEBREWS 7:1-28 OVERVIEW

HEBREWS 7:1-28, CHRIST AND MELCHIZEDEK OVERVIEW Obscure figures of the Old Testarnent whose portraits are very briefly sketched or whose stories contain elements of mystery attracted great interest in subsequent generations. Enoch vanished from the earth because God took him (Gen 5:24); Moses’ grave was never found (Deut 34:6); Elijah ascended in a whirlwind (2 Kgs 2:11). It was not simply curiosity that drew poets and scholars to these characters; the gaps and ambiguities provided room for traditions to develop around these figures in support of various theologies and institutions. The shadowy and mysterious Melchizedek belongs in this company. His sudden appearance and disappearance (Gen 14:17-20) are an invitation to all who would find in antiquity a precedent or the origin of their own traditions. In rabbinic literature, the account in Gen 14:17-20 is interpreted as the transfer of the priesthood from Melchizedek to Abraham and his descendants. Psalm 110:4, “You are a priest forever according

priest,’° but Kasemann’s case for such speculation’s being pre-Christian and influential in Hebrews is not very strong. Philo of Alexandria allegorically interpreted Melchizedek in Gen 14:18-20 as “the right word or principle””! in each of us. Chronologically, Philo could have been available to the writer of Hebrews, but on this matter they seem worlds apart. In 1956 in Qumran Cave 11 manuscript fragments were discovered that bear witness to one Melchizedek tradition in at least one Palestinian Jewish community early in the first Christian century. According to this very fragmented document (110 Melch), Melchizedek held a position above other heavenly beings, was an agent of divine judgment associated with the final year of Jubilee, and had a significant role on the Day of Atonement. While 110 Melch comments on several isolated scriptures, there

to the order of Melchizedek” (NRSV), was thus understood as having been spoken to Abraham.°? Of course, anyone “having neither beginning of days nor end of life” (Heb 7:3) would have a place in the visions of apocalyptic writings and in those speculations perhaps spawned by apocalypticism, which we refer to as Gnosticism. Along this line,

110:4.72 These brief comments are sufficient to instruct us that the writer of Hebrews was not

is no mention of either Gen 14:17-20 or Ps alone in port of a however, Christ to

Kasemann identifies Melchizedek as one of several incarnations of the primal Adam who was a

commenting on Melchizedek in suptheological position. Hebrews is alone, in its line of thought: from Jesus Ps 110:4 to Gen 14:17-20.

70. Kasemann, The Wandering People of God, 202-5. 71. Philo Allegorical Interpretation II1.79. 72. J. A. Fitzmyer, “Further Light on Melchizedek from Qumran Cave 11,” JBL 86 (1967) 25-41.

69. F. L. Horton, Jr., The Melchizedek Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976) 114-30.

Hebrews 7:1-3, Melchizedek, King and Priest NIV

NRSV

This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, and Abraham gave him a tenth of everyhing. First, his name means “king of righteous-

This “King Melchizedek of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham as he was returning from defeating the kings and blessed him”; and to him Abraham apportioned “one-tenth of everything.” His name, in the first place, means “king of righteousness”; next he is also king of Salem, that is, “king of peace.”

ness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” °Without fatherormother, without gene85

HEBREWS 7:1-3

NRSV

ee Gon Hane of days or od of life, ae a

pier io cee withoutre ogy, having neither beginning of. days nor end of

theSon . God he remains a ae lorevel,

life, but resembling the Son a God,he remains

a priest forever.

(COMMENTARY Two brief paragraphs are devoted to the person of Melchizedek and his meeting with Abraham (Gen 14:17-20). The first (vv. 1-3) consists of a paraphrase of Gen 14:18-20 and an interpretation of what the text does not say; the second (vv. 4-10) interprets the significance of the Genesis account. Verse 10 returns to v. 1: Melchizedek met Abraham, a statement that forms the inclusio. In the Greek text, vv. 1-3 constitute one elaborate sentence (“For this Melchizedek . . . remains a priest forever”) that has been divided to accommodate English style. The poetic or hymnic qual- ities of the sentence have been noted by commentators, leading some to theorize that an early Melchizedek hymn lay back of vv. 1-3 and perhaps vv. 1-10.73 Perhaps that is true, but for the Hebrews writer’s purposes, Gen 14:17-20 is viewed through the lens of Ps 110:4, and it is the declaration of the psalm that determines what is and what is not to be interpreted in the Genesis text. Genesis 14 records the victory of Abraham over a coalition of five kings, the rescue of Lot, and Abraham’s meeting with the king of Sodom on his return from the war. During their meeting, King Melchizedek appears, offering bread and wine, but not until Gen 14:186 does Hebrews 7 pick up the story: Melchizedek was a priest of God Most High. That Melchizedek was a king is also important for Hebrews, because Psalm 110, the central text for the christology of the letter, joins kingship (Ps 110:1) and priesthood (Ps 110:4). In fact, at 7:2 the writer elaborates on Melchizedek’s kingship, first etymologically (his name in Hebrew means “king of righteousness”) and then geographically (“king of Salem” means “king of peace”). Even so,

of primary importance here is his priesthood; he blessed Abraham and from Abraham received a tithe of all Abraham had (Gen 14:1920). Thus far, the author of Hebrews has drawn his message from what is stated in Genesis 14, but the interpretive burden increases in v. 3 with the most important assertion of the passage, “resembling [like, in like form] the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.” How can such a conclusion be drawn from Gen 14:1720? Using an accepted method of rabbinic exegesis, the writer interprets the silences of the text. According to Genesis 14, Melchizedek suddenly appears, performs a priestly function, and disappears. The text’s silences about whence and whither are interpreted: motherless, fatherless, no genealogy, no beginning, no end. Verse 3 is a classic example of terse, condensed language for rhetorical effect. The writer is not arguing but is giving the recipients an impressive way of reading the text. And why this reading? Because it supports the primary text, Ps 110:4: “You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek” (NRSV). If Christ’s priesthood is forever, like that of Melchizedek, then Melchizedek’s had to be forever. The “forever” is derived from the silence of his coming and going. “From nowhere to nowhere” is translated “from eternity to eternity.” While the argument seems to be from Melchizedek to the Son of God, it is, in fact, from the Son of God to Melchizedek. The conviction that Christ is our eternal high priest finds its support in Psalm 110, which then becomes the key for interpreting Genesis 14. It is not enough, however, simply to declare Melchizedek an eternal priest; the author wants to express it in a way that will anticipate the coming argument as to the superiority of Mel-

73. R. Jewett, Letter to Pilgrims (New York: Pilgrim, 1981) 117-18.

86

HEBREWS 7:1-3 COMMENTARY chizedek’s priesthood over levitical priesthood. Since the levitical priesthood depended on the record of parentage and an approved genealogy and since it passed from generation to generation because of the fact of death, v. 3 is more than a rhetorical flourish. In its poetic description of Melchizedek’s eternality is a distilled statement of

the inferiority of the levitical priesthood, its dependence on the contingencies of parents, genealogy, and death. But the writer will not leave these subtleties to be caught by a few; they will be spelled out so that no one will fail to understand. (See Reflections at 7:26-28.)

Hebrews 7:4-10, Melchizedek Is Superior to Levites NIV

NRSV

‘Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder! SNow the law requires the descendants of Levi

patriarch gave him a tenth of the spoils. *And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly

4See how great he is! Even? Abraham the

who become priests to collect a tenth from the

office have a commandment in the law to collect tithes’ from the people, that is, from their kindred,‘ though these also are descended from Abraham. °But this man, who does not belong to their ancestry, collected tithes’ from Abraham and

people—that is, their brothers—even though their

brothers are descended from Abraham. °This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. 7And without doubt the lesser person. is blessed by the greater. ®In the one case, the tenth iscollected by men who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be living. °One might even say that Levi, who

blessed him who had received the promises. ‘It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. ®In the one case, tithes are received

by those who are mortal; in the other, by one of whom it is testified that he lives. °?One might even

collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abra-

say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid

ham, ‘because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body ofhis ancestor.

tithes through Abraham, 'for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him. a Other ancient authorities lack Even brothers

Ora tenth

¢ Gk

COMMENTARY and promise. When one thinks in terms of corporate personality or community rather than individuals, then it becomes clear that the primacy of Abraham is more than chronological. In addition, Abraham is the one who received the promises from God {(v. 6; 6:13-15). The promises, confirmed by an oath (Gen 22:17), are superior to the law of Moses, by which the Levites operate (v. 5). The law states that levitical priests are to receive from all non-priestly Israelites a tithe (Num 18:21-32), but Melchizedek received a tithe from the one with the promises. The writer does not at this point develop arguments for the superiority of promise over law as did Paul in Romans and Galatians, but it is clear and

The writer extols the greatness of Melchizedek through several lines of thought, beginning with the matter of the tithe. Although the levitical priests also received a tithe, on several counts Melchizedek is greater. First, he received a tenth of the spoils or booty of war (v. 4). The spoils consisted of the most prized and valuable materials taken from an enemy (gold, silver, ornate furniture and clothing, fine horses, etc). In other words, Melchizedek received a tithe of the very best. Second, he collected a tithe from Abraham, and it is the greatness of Abraham that argues for an even greater Meichizedek. Abraham is the patriarch (v. 4), which is to say that he is the progenitor of all Israel—he is Israel in prospect

87

HEBREWS 7:4-10 COMMENTARY will become clearer that this is the writer’s position. Third, Melchizedek blessed Abraham, and, in the writer’s value system, the one who blesses is always greater than the one who is blessed (vv. 6-7). Fourth, Melchizedek received a tithe as one who was totally apart from a genealogical record, since he was a priest “in perpetuity” (v. 3), while levitical priests were mortal (ato8vnoKovTes dvOpwtor apothneskontes anthro poi; lit., “dying men,” v. 8) and hence had to be replaced. And finally, Levi himself paid tithes to Abraham in the sense that he was “still in the loins” of Abraham when Abraham paid tithes (vv. 9-10). In other words, the one who received tithes paid a tithe. The writer seems to

recognize a difference in the weight or duality of this final argument, prefacing it with the qualifier, “one might even say” or “so to speak” (v. 9). The line of argument is to our ears unusual and perhaps unpersuasive, but within the writer’s available methods of interpretation and in a culture that thought in terms of the solidarity of the race, both living and dead, the yet unborn Levi could be understood as being represented in his ancestor Abraham. Viewing vv. 9-10 as “artificial” and “playful”’* may be taking the writer’s reasoning too lightly. (See Reflections at 7:26-28.) 74. H. W. Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989) 197.

Hebrews 7:11-19, A New Priesthood NIV

NRSV

"If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come—one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? '2For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law. '3He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the

11Now if perfection had been attainable through the levitical priesthood—for the people received the law under this priesthood—what further need would there have been to speak of another priest arising according to the order of Melchizedek, rather than one according to the order of Aaron? '*For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in

altar. '4For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. And what we have said

things are spoken belonged to another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. '4For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 1SIt is even more obvious when another priest arises, resembling Melchizedek, '°one who has become a priest, not through a legal requirement concerning physical descent, but through the power of an indestructible life. '”For it is attested of him, “You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.”

the law as well. ‘Now the one of whom these

is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, '°one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible

life. '”For it is declared: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”? '8The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless '*(for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

'8There is, on the one hand, the abrogation of an earlier commandment because it was weak and ineffectual '(for the law made nothing perfect); there is, on the other hand, the introduction of a better hope, through which we approach God.

217 Psalm 110:4

88

HEBREWS 7:11-19 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY The homiletical commentary (midrash) continues, but the person of Melchizedek and Gen 14:17-20 are left behind and in their place are “the order of Melchizedek” and Ps 110:4. Unlike the historical narrative of Genesis 14, Psalm 110 is an oracle of God—that is, a direct declaration of God’s will and word. In form, wv. 11-19 constitute an inclusio, as did 1-10; that is, the writer returns in v. 19 to references to perfection and law, introduced in v. 11. 7:11-12. This unit of the argument opens with a rhetorical question of a standard variety: If this were the case (but it is not; the Greek text presents a condition contrary to fact), then why would the following be said? The question is based on a deduction from Ps 110:4, which speaks of another (of a different kind of) priesthood to the effect that the psalmist would not have spoken thus if the levitical priesthood had been fully effective. The ineffectiveness of the levitical priesthood lay in its inability to “perfect” the people (v. 11). The writer’s fondness for the word “perfection” and the range of meanings in its usage were noted earlier (see Commentary on 2:10; 5:9, 14; 6:1): The Son is perfected through suffering, and the believers are to grow into perfection (maturity). But here the writer introduces yet another use of the term: the perfecting of the people through priestly activity. As is the habit of the writer, an idea is introduced without comment, telegraphing ahead to a discussion yet to come. At this point we may assume that the perfection of the people through priestly activity refers to that right and complete relation to God effected through the priestly sacrifice of Christ. Perfection, then, has both present and eschatological dimensions. The writer will return us to this subject. Important to the argument here is the writer’s joining of the priesthood and the law (Mosaic), first in a parenthetical comment in v. 11 and again in v. 12. The NRSV inadequately translates “for the people received the law under this priesthood” {v. 11). To say “under” might convey simply a temporal sense: The people received the law during the time of this (levitical) priesthood. The NIV more correctly captures the strength of

the prepositional phrase: The people were given the law “on the basis of” this priesthood. This is to say not only that the relation between the law and the priestly system is inseparable, but also that the law was based on the cultus. It is now quite clear that the Hebrews writer has a cultic understanding of Mosaic legislation, as stated in v. 12: “For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well.” In other words, the entire system under which Israel lived would change with the arrival of the “different” priest, the priest after the order of Melchizedek. The inability to perfect the people was the flaw of the entire system and not of the priests themselves. The levitical (Aaronic) priests were called and appointed of God (5:1-4), but they functioned, says the author, in a system that was incomplete, unable to fulfill its adherents. As the argument unfolds, it will be important to keep this writer’s perspective on the law through the rituals of the tabernacle (temple) free from the predominating influence of Paul, whose extensive treatment of the law as a system of works and merit is quite different. 7:13-14. The author finally addresses the objection that has hovered over every reference to Christ as a priest: He was not of the tribe of Levi, but of the tribe of Judah (Matt 1:1; Acts 13:22-23; Rom 1:3). So how could he be a priest? In an interesting move, the writer turns this objection into an affirmation, saying, in effect, “Of course, Christ was not a Levite; that is my point. He was a different (etTepos heteros; trans. “another”) priest from a different (translated “another”) tribe; he was of a different order, the order of Melchizedek.” That Christ was of Judah rather than Levi is not, therefore, a grudging concession but a truth that is obvious (v. 14) and in support of the claim that Christ is a priest like Melchizedek. 7:15-16. What is even more obvious is the superiority of the priest resembling Melchizedek over those of the line of Levi (v. 15). Notice that the writer substitutes “resembling” (v. 15; also v. 3) for “order,” making it clear that Christ’s being a Melchizedek priest is not a matter of lineage or tradition or succession but of likeness or similarity to Melchizedek. That similarity lies in “the power

89

HEBREWS 7:11-19 COMMENTARY unlike that of a levitical priest, was “indestructible.” The resurrection-exaltation of Christ is surely in the writer’s mind here. Whether one argues that Ps 110:4 led the writer to a priestly interpretation of Easter or that Easter turned the writer to Ps 110:4,7° the conclusion is the same: At 7:17 the two are joined in the word “forever.” As we will see, at v. 21, Ps 110:4 will be introduced not with the language of witnessing but with that of swearing, and it will be used in the service of another point altogether.

of an indestructible life” (v. 16). The resurrection of Jesus is likely in the author’s mind here. The power or authority of Jesus’ work comes from his eternal nature and the life he has, exalted at God’s right hand (Ps 110:1). This eternality had been attributed to Melchizedek (v. 3), and in this respect Christ is a priest “after the likeness” of Melchizedek. In sharp contrast is the authorization of levitical priests by “legal requirement concerning physical descent” (v. 16), recalling statements made about the law in vv. 5 and 11-12. Literally, v. 16 says, “according to a law of a fleshy commandment.” The word “fleshy” (odpkivos sarkinos) does not here carry all the pejorative meanings attached to it in Paul’s letters, but it does speak of the genealogical ground of the levitical priesthood, of the attention given to physical matters in laws regarding priests and their functions, and of the transient nature of both the regulations and the priestly system itself. 7:17. Psalm 110:4 is quoted again, one of three such direct citations in Hebrews (cf. 5:6; 7:21). In 5:6, the quotation is employed to show that just as the levitical priests were appointed by God (5:4), so also was Christ. The words of Ps 110:4 are understood as God’s words addressed to Christ, establishing that he was appointed by God to be a priest. But while Ps 110:4 in Heb 5:6 was used to show that Christ was /ike levitical priests in divine appointment, at 7:17, 21 the same text serves the argument that Christ’s priesthood is superior to that of the Levites. This argument, that Christ’s priesthood is superior to or better than that of Aaron, is the burden of Hebrews 7, and Ps 110:4 carries that burden. Of the ten allusions to or quotations of Ps 110:4 in Hebrews, seven occur in this chapter.” In v. 17, the citation is introduced with the language of witnessing: “For it is attested [NRSV; “declared,” NIV; lit., “it is witnessed” (uaptupeitat martyreitai)| of him.” And the witness is that his priesthood is “forever,” or perhaps more appropriately, “unending.” Hence the psalm is offered as proof of the preceding assertion that Christ’s life,

7:18-19. These verses are framed on the familiar pattern “On the one hand... but on the other,” with the second half of the construction carrying the stronger or more important message. The first half announces the abrogation (annulment) of law. This is legal terminology, much stronger than “change” of law at v. 12. But how does the replacement of a transient priesthood based on genealogy with an unending one based on a life without genealogy (v. 3) annul law? For the writer, law and priesthood are inseparably joined (7:5, 11-12, 16); the replacement of one means the replacement of the other. In addition, the law that established the levitical priesthood was “earlier”; that is, the declaration of priesthood in Ps 110:4 was, in the writer’s view, chronologically later than the law of Moses and, therefore, announced a successor to the levitical priesthood (argument from chronology appears earlier at 4:69). It is interesting that in 7:1-10 the writer argues that Melchizedek, being historically prior to Levi (Gen 14:17-20), is superior, while here God’s declaration about the order of Melchizedek is subsequent to Levi (Ps 110:4) and, therefore, superior. And finally, the law is annulled because it was “weak and ineffectual” (unprofitable, useless). While the author of Hebrews might well agree with Paul that the law is “holy and just and good” (Rom 7:12 NRSV) and that weakness lay not in the law but in the flesh (Rom 8:3), the fact is that the writer is here pursuing another line of thought. In the language of Hebrews, the ineffectiveness of the law lay in its inability to “make perfect” (v. 19; see also v. 11); this is to say, it was not able to bring God’s people to their

75. Since only Hebrews in the NT uses Ps 110:4, it seems unlikely that this verse would have appeared in a list of OT passages useful for Christian preaching. Such lists are referred to as testimony books, although their existence is unproven. Psalm 110:1, however, is quoted or alluded to in eleven NT documents and seems to have circulated widely as useful OT testimony to Christ as Messiah-King. Cf. the chart of citations in David M. Hay, Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity, SBLMS (Nashville: Abingdon, 1973) 163-66.

76. In arguing against the popular position that Philo strongly influenced Hebrews, Williamson finds the resurrection of Jesus a sufficient

magnet to draw texts directly from the OT without mediation through Philo. See R. Williamson, Philo and the Epistle to the Hebrews (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970) esp. 443-49.

90

HEBREWS 7:11-19 COMMENTARY intended end. The writer thus looks to Christ, a priest like Melchizedek, to fulfill this eschatological expectation of being in God’s presence, since he is, on our behalf, at the right hand of God (Ps

12:24). As for the nature and ground of this hope, see the Commentary on 6:18-20 especially, but also at 3:6 and 6:11. In 7:19, it is this hope that encourages and emboldens the believing community to approach God. Even though drawing near or approaching God has at times a cultic meaning (Exod 24:2; Lev 10:3), it is best here to take the expression in its broader sense of worshipers coming into the presence of God (Isa 29:13; 58:2; Hos 12:6). (See Reflections at 7:26-28.)

LitOsts): This access or approach to God is present through our prayer and Christ’s intercession (4:1416), but is also a hope (7:19). That this hope is “better” is no surprise to the reader, given the writer’s demonstrated fondness for this word (1:4; OT T5228: 0309230 1'0:34: shi 1165-35.4 405

Hebrews 7:20-25, Confirmed by God’s Oath NIV

NRSV

79And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, *!but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him:

20This was confirmed with an oath; for others who became priests took their office without an oath, *'but this one became a priest with an oath,

because of the one who said to him,

“The Lord has sworn — and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever.’ ”¢ “2Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant. 23Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; “but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save completely’ those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them. :

“The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, ‘You are a priest forever’ ”— 2accordingly Jesus has also become the guarantee of a better covenant. 23Furthermore, the former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office; **but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. Consequently he is able for all time to save? those who approach God through him, since he

a2] Psalm 110:4

always lives to make intercession for them.

625 Or forever

4 Or able to save completely

(COMMENTARY superiority of Christ’s priesthood over that of Aaron’s line, neither of which is surprising. In fact, both have been so fully anticipated as to seem repetitious. It is the conclusions drawn from them that grab the reader’s attention. Both arguments are, like the one in vv. 18-19, framed on the “On the one hand... but on the other” pattern, but translators obscure the form in favor of diversity of expression, thereby losing the cumulative force of repetition in argumentation.

These six verses fall naturally into two sub-units: vv. 20-22 and vv. 23-25. Verses 26-28 could easily be included here as a third subunit, all three being bound as an inclusio, beginning (v. 20) and ending (v. 28) with the unusual word translated “taking an oath” (6pKkwpoota horkomosia). Since, however, vv. 2028 are a rhetorical flourish serving as a conclusion to the entire chapter, that sub-unit will be discussed separately. ‘ Verses 20-25 contain two arguments for the

7:20-22. The first argument, simply stated, is 91

HEBREWS 7:20-25 COMMENTARY ready familiar from 7:3, 16-17. Here the difference between the levitical priesthood and that of Christ is reframed in terms of “many” and “one.” The Levites are many—that is, generation after generation—because they are subject to death. Christ, however, is one, because he continues forever. He has no successor but “remains” (v. 24; recall the frequency of this word in the christology of John’s Gospel, e.g., John 1:32-33, 38-39; 4:40; 6:27; 8:31; 12:34; 14:10). This line of argument proceeds from Ps 110:40 just as the argument in vv. 20-21 proceeded from Ps 110:4a. And again, the writer draws a conclusion: “Consequently” or “Therefore” (v. 25) Christ is able to save for all time (NRSV) or completely (NIV). The adverbial phrase can be taken either way, but given a context filled with terms like “eternal,” “unending,” and “always,” the temporal sense is to be preferred, but with no loss of meaning if translated “completely.” The beneficiaries of this salvation are those who approach God through Christ the high priest. This metaphor of “drawing near” to God is a favorite of the writer, who is mindful of its cultic base but expands on it to refer to the whole of a Christian’s relation to God (see Commentary on 7:19). The “complete” or “for all time” quality of this salvation rests on two affirmations about Christ. First, he continues alive forever, and therefore his priestly endeavors for his followers never cease. Second, priestly ministry involves making intercession. His sympathy for us because he was one of us (4:15; 5:1; 5:7-9) and his access to God as one appointed of God (5:5-6) and who is now at God’s right hand (1:8, 13) join as the twin credentials qualifying him to intercede on our behalf (4:1416). The writer is not at this point careful to specify the intercession as forgiveness and, therefore, an extension of the benefits of the cross or as More general intercession for the saints, involving occasions of trial and persecution as well as commission of sin.”® But if his salvation is “complete,” it is difficult to imagine the favor of intercession being episodic or reserved for only certain conditions. The word here translated “make intercession” (evtvyxdvw entygchano ) occurs elsewhere in the NT four times, all with this sense of petitioning

that priesthood confirmed by an oath (Christ’s) is superior to priesthood without an oath (levitical, Exod 28:1). This argument is a straightforward interpretation of Ps 110:4a, taken to be the direct speech of God to Christ: “You are a priest forever.” In v. 17, that Christ’s priesthood was unending was argued from his indestructible life; here it is established by God’s oath. Earlier statements about God’s making oaths (3:11-4:3; 6:13-18) have prepared the reader to receive this unusual language about God. But as though God’s swearing was not emphatic enough, the writer underscores it with the rhetorically forceful double negative: “And it was not without an oath!” (preserved in the NIV, lost in the NRSV; for an earlier example of the double negative, see 4:15). The unexpected conclusion to this argument involves a move in thought from priesthood to covenant (v. 22). This is the first use of this word in Hebrews, but its introduction follows a familiar pattern of the anticipatory use of important terms to be developed later (8:6-9:20; 10:16, 29; 12:24; 13:20). Therefore discussion of “covenant” (Sta6yjKkn diatheke | will be reserved until discussion of chap. 8. However, it is important to notice here two features of this covenant. First, “a better covenant” is an extension of the earlier reference to “a better hope” (v. 19). This is to say that the hope of which the writer speaks will have its implementation within a covenant relationship between God and the believing community. Second, of this better covenant Jesus is the “guarantee” or “surety” (Eyyvos engyos).’” The word is quite different from “mediator,” which will be employed later (8:6). One who is a “surety” guarantees the work or commitments of another, even at the risk of property and even life itself. The LXX uses the word at Sir 29:15: “Do not forget the kindness of your guarantor,/ for he has given his life for you” (NRSV). While it is possible to interpret the expression to mean that Christ offers his life as our surety toward God, the context argues for the opposite meaning: The God who promises and makes oaths also guarantees the covenant with Christ’s priestly offering of himself for us. 7:23-25. The second argument of this sub-unit turns on the “transient-permanent” contrast, al-

78. H. W. Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989) 211-12, summarizes a range of views on the nature of Christ’s intercession.

77. \t would be instructive to review the points at which the author has previously introduced the name “Jesus” (2:9; 3:1; 4:14; 6:20).

92

HEBREWS 7:20-25 COMMENTARY or pleading on behalf of another (Acts 25:24; Rom 8:27, 34; 11:2). The image of Christ alive in God’s presence, ministering on behalf of believers, is a major contribution to the church’s struggle

with the question, How do the blessings of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection survive the constraints of time and place in history? (See Reflections at 7:26-28.)

Hebrews 7:26-28, Christ, Our Eternal High Priest NIV

‘

NRSV

20Such a high priest meets our need—one who is holy, blameless,.pure, set apart from sinners,

exalted above the heavens. ?’Unlike the other

26For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, blameless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.

high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices

27Unlike the other? high priests, he has no need

day after day, first for his own sins, and then for

to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for those of the people; this he did once for all when he offered himself. 28For the law appoints as high priests those who are subject to weakness, but the word of the oath, which came later than the law, appoints a Son who has

the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. #*For the law appoints as high priests men who are weak; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.

been made perfect forever. 2 Gk lacks other

(COMMENTARY This final sub-unit of the chapter is a rhetorical flourish on the eternal high priest, recalling the burst of praise of Melchizedek with which the chapter began (v. 3) and, more distantly, the hymn to the Word of God at 4:12-13. Like the other two, five characteristics are listed, and like v. 3, the traits are listed without conjunctions, a well-known rhetorical device for accenting by eliminating the dulling effect of repeated conjunctions. The majestic nature of the passage suggests that a fragment of a hymn or poem is embedded here, but efforts to extract it are inconclusive. In content, vv. 26-28 function not only as a summary of vv. 1-25 but also to anticipate the continuation of the argument in 8:1-10:18. The reader will notice that just as the argument moved from Melchizedek (Gen 14:17-20) to the order of Melchizedek (Ps 110:4), so also now it moves to Christ as high priest without need for repeated authorization from Psalm 110. In other words, the writer believes the case has been made. In these three verses, Christ as high priest will be presented in terms of character, achievement, and status.

7:26. Both the character and the self-giving of Christ are, says the writer, “fitting” or “appropriate” (mpéT1u prepo, v. 26). This expression was used at 2:10 to speak of God’s making the pioneer of our salvation perfect through suffering. Here the appropriateness seems to have us in mind (“fitting that we should have such a high priest”), although the distinction should not be too sharply drawn. Whether from the perspective of God’s activity or of our need, the fittingness lies in God’s purpose. The three adjectives characterizing our high priest are not common in either the LXX or the NT. The word “holy” (dotos Aosios) is not the one most frequently used but does occur in reference to God (Rev 15:4; 16:5), to Christ (Acts 2:27; 13:35), and to believers (1 Tim 2:8; Titus 1:8). “Blameless” (dxakos akakos) is found elsewhere in the NT only at Rom 16:18. The most cultic of the three, “undefiled” (aytavtos amiantos) appears at Jas 1:27 and 1 Pet 1:4 and again at Heb 13:4, but with a clearly ethical sense. The three words together echo 4:15, but this vivid elaboration adds little to the sense expressed at 4:15. The two participial phrases, “having been

93

HEBREWS 7:26-28 COMMENTARY separated from sinners” and “having become exalted above the heavens” refer essentially to the same event, the elevation of Christ to the presence of God. It is in this sense that he is apart from sinners and not in any way that would diminish his capacity for human sympathy, a point the writer has taken great pains to make repeatedly (2:10-18; 4:14-16; 5:1-2, 7-8). The one who passed through the heavens (4:14) is now “above the heavens”—that is, in the presence of God Most High (1:3), who occupies the heaven beyond the heavens. In the cosmology of the time, “heavens” (ovpavoi ouranoi) was commonly a plural word referring to regions above the earth occupied by spirit beings, a view reflected especially in Paul’s affirmations of the cosmic scope of Christ’s redemptive work (Phil 2:10-11; Col 1:1520). In expressions of praise, “heavens” is a plural of “majesty.” 7:27. Here it becomes clear why the writer has presented the unique character of Christ in v. 26: He is unlike other high priests who (1) offer sacrifices repeatedly and (2) first for their own sins (5:1-3). In contrast to other high priests, he (1) made one sacrifice once and for all and (2) had no need to offer a sacrifice for himself, being without sin (4:15). In speaking of “daily” sacrifices by the high priest, the writer seems to have collapsed into a single image the entire sacrificial system, both the daily offerings of priests and the annual sacrifice by the high priest (Yom Kippur). Had the writer said “yearly” rather than “daily,” the statement would have been historically correct, but perhaps “daily” was chosen to sharpen the contrast between the repetition of the levitical system and the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ.79 Here in this verse is the author’s first use of 79. W.L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, WBC 47A (Dallas: Word, 1991) 194, summarizes scholarly opinions about the writer’s apparent misstatement.

the expression “he offered himself.” Whether Isa 53:10 lay in the immediate background of the writer’s thought is uncertain; certainly many NT writers expressed in a variety of ways that Christ gave himself for us. However, it is only in Hebrews that the idea and its many inferences are developed into the image of a high priest offering himself as a sacrifice for sin. Up to this point the writer has spoken of Christ’s high priestly work as primarily that of intercessor (2:18; 4:14-16; 7:24-25): his sacrifice of himself for sin is a theme yet to be developed. It is interesting that the discussion moves from intercession to sacrifice when chronologically one would have expected first the sacrifice and then the move into God’s presence as intercessor. Perhaps this is a case of arguing from the matter of lesser difficulty to the greater or, more likely, from the point established by Psalm 110 (at God’s right hand, intercessor), a text widely used in the early church, to texts not commonly cited to establish that Christ’s death was also a high priestly act. We anticipate more clarity to come. 7:28. The chapter closes with a summary framed as contrasts between the levitical high priest and Christ, again referred to as Son (recalling 1:2; 3:6; 4:14; 5:5, 8). The appointment of the high priest is in the one case by law (vv. 11-12, 18-19), in the other by an oath (vv. 20-22). The high priest appointed by law is subject to weakness (i.e., death, vv. 8, 23); the one appointed by an oath is eternal (6:20; 7:3, 21, 25). The oath came later than the law, replacing the weak and ineffectual commandment (v. 18). The law made nothing perfect (v. 19), but the Son “has been made perfect forever” (v. 28). Perfection here carries the force of permanence and finality, clear implications of the exaltation of the Son to the right hand of God (Ps 110:1, 4).

REFLECTIONS 1. Hebrews 7 contains some of the most interesting examples of rabbinic exegesis to be found in the New Testament. There are interpretations of silence (the sudden appearance and disappearance of Melchizedek = motherless, fatherless, without beginning or end), of chronology (Melchizedek is earlier than Levi, therefore greater; Ps 110:4 is later than the law, therefore superior), of the power of oath to abrogate law, and others. These methods should not merely satisfy historical curiosity or serve as models uncritically embraced; rather, they should prompt critical examination of one’s own methods. One of the more interesting of the writer’s

HEBREWS 7:26-28 REFLECTIONS arguments, that Levi paid a tithe to Melchizedek because Levi was in Abraham’s loins

when Abraham paid the tithe (vv. 9-10), deserves special attention because it is predicated on a biblical perspective much larger than Hebrews 7. That perspective is sometimes called “corporate personality,”

a conviction

that the many

are really one, that community

is

primary, including the departed, the living, and the yet-to-be born. Generations after the exodus, Israelites recited before God: “A wandering Aramean was my ancestor... . when the Egyptians treated us harshly and afflicted us... we cried to the Lord” (see Deut 26:5-10). Notice the collapse of historical distance before the greater belief that Israel is one. Persons caught in individualism and subjectivism have difficulty not only interpreting such texts but also forming strong communities of faith. 2. If there were uncertainties earlier, chapter 7 makes it abundantly clear that the cultus provides the writer’s perspective on the faith and practices of both Judaism and Christianity. Both law and covenant are discussed, but only in their relation to the sacerdotal system. Paul’s categories of works and faith are not here. The reader of Hebrews is addressed as a worshiper whose life is fulfilled in drawing near to God (4:16; 6:19-20; 7:19, 25). To be sure, Paul had a strong sense of worship, viewing life (Rom 12:1) and work (Rom 15:16) liturgically and often quoting hymns and confessions in his letters. However, it is the writer of Hebrews who makes the case for God, whose presence is the goal of the faith pilgrim, and for Christ, whose life, death, and exaltation make access to God possible. The one perfected through suffering is able to perfect those who look to God through him. Hebrews would, therefore, urge the church not only to take worship seriously but also to _ take it theologically and christologically. Gatherings of the church to massage the self hardly qualify according to the standards of Hebrews. 3. Closely tied to the preceding reflection is the work of Christ as intercessor with God on our behalf (4:14-15; 7:24-25). This dimension of Christ’s saving work is generally neglected, although Hebrews has the support of Paul (the Spirit intercedes, Rom 8:26-27) and John, who deals more lengthily than does any other New Testament writer with the crisis created by the departure of Christ, addressing such questions as, Where is Christ now? and What is his relation to us? (John 13-17). Without this vital doctrine, the church lives in a barren desert between “Christ was here” and “Christ will be here again.” Meanwhile, back at the church, Christian faith consists of believing in an extraordinary past and an extraordinary future. Christ as intercessor transcends the constraints of time and place and restores “today” to the relationship between God and the believer. Many conclude their prayers with “in the name of Christ” with little or no awareness of the christological foundation for the phrase or of the immense encouragement available in the understanding that Christ is continually in God’s presence on our behalf. The study of Hebrews should yield to the reader the sure benefit of this conviction, even to the one who otherwise finds in this sermon-epistle much that is difficult to understand (5:11).

HEBREWS 8:1-10:18, THE HIGH PRIESTLY MINISTRY OF CHRIST OVERVIEW The writer has now established firmly the rank or status of Jesus Christ, and in doing so has

employed the titles on which all further argument _ will depend. He is Son (Ps 2:7; Heb 5:5), King

95

HEBREWS 8:1—10:18 OVERVIEW yet appointed of God, gave his life for us and is now engaged in the high priestly work of intercession. But that is not the whole story, since Christ’s high priestly ministry requires also a sacrifice in the presence of God. It seems most unlikely that the author will make the case for Jesus’ heavenly ministry by simply jettisoning the earth and all the ugly historical contingencies that Jesus endured “for a little while” (cf. 2:9; 12:2-3). The earth is God’s creation, the arena for Israel’s faith, the locus of Christ’s perfection through suffering, and the inescapable circumstance in which the readers are to be faithful. The burden on the writer is to separate heaven and earth in order to affirm what is better and superior, and yet hold heaven and earth together as the single object of God’s love in Christ “through whom he also created the worlds” (1:2 NRSV). The reader can expect, therefore, not only the continuation and even increase of contrasts (earth/heaven, flesh/spirit, many/one, transient/eternal, old/new, external/internal), but also a presentation of the high priestly work of Christ, which transcends and relativizes all contrasts. The centerpiece for the section is Jeremiah 31. In fact, the preacher will not only quote the relevant portion of that text but will also draw on it, directly and indirectly, to authorize an exegetical homily on covenant and atoning sacrifice. The entire section is exposition; exhortation will follow, beginning at 10:19.

(Ps: 20:4 Hebsti:3;013),.and sHigh *Priest (Ps 1O:4> Hebi2: 175.3313 44055) -10550:20; 17:26; 28). “High Priest” will be the title most prominent in what follows, but the other two are essential to the portrayal of Christ as high priest and, therefore, should not leave the reader’s awareness. Rank, then, is no longer the argument; now the writer-preacher will develop the ministry of “such a high priest.” To do so, it must be established that this high priest had the essentials of a priestly ministry: a sanctuary, a covenant between God and humanity within which a priestly ministry has its efficacy, and something to offer: a sacrifice. But a major question will haunt the discussion until it is resolved: Since Christ’s is a ministry in heaven, eternal and in God’s presence, when and where is his sacrifice of himself to be located? If on earth, on the cross, then it could hardly qualify as a high priestly act, since the writer has made it clear that on earth Christ was not a priest (7:14; 8:4). If in heaven, how is one to understand his offering himself as an eternal, heavenly sacrifice? How does one give one’s life for others in a realm “above the heavens”? If his sacrifice is understood as a heavenly act, then what happens to the cross? Does it evaporate in allegorical and spiritual interpretation, or is it reduced to the status of precondition or preface to Christ’s high priestly work? It would be simple enough if the chronology were thus: Jesus, one of us in every respect and

Hebrews 8:1-5, Christ’s Sanctuary NIV

NRSV

The point of what we are saying is this:

Now the main point in what we are saying

We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man. 3Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. “If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. °They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the

is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2a minister in the sanctuary and the true tent? that the Lord, and not any mortal, has set up. *For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; hence it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer. ‘Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer

gifts according to the law. ‘They offer worship in a sanctuary that is a sketch and shadow of the 4 Or tabernacle

96

HEBREWS 8:1-5

NIV

NRSV

tabernacle: “See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain. ¢ :

heavenly one; for Moses, when he was about to erect the tent, was warned, “See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain.”

25 Exodus 25:40

a Or tabernacle

(COMMENTARY So much was said in chap. 7 that the discussion could continue in any one of a number of directions. The writer, therefore, immediately focuses attention: “The main point is this.” The word translated “the main point” (kedddAatov kephalaion) is the very first word and could be translated “the sum” (as in the only other NT use of the word at Acts 22:28); but here the clear meaning is not so much “summary” as “focus.” 8:1-2. These verses state what the focus is: that we have “such a high priest” (7:26) who is identified by location and by function. His location is “at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.” This paraphrase of Ps 110:1 recalls 1:3 (Ps 110:10 was quoted at 1:13). The image of a heavenly throne was deeply embedded in Judaism (Pss 11:4; 47:8; Isa 6:1; 66:1; Ezek 1:26) and abundantly used in apocalyptic literature, including the Apocalypse of John (Revelation 4-5; 7:15-17). The affirmation that Christ is seated at God’s right hand does not serve at this point to declare Christ’s lordship but rather to establish the location of his ministry as high priest. This is to say, Ps 110:4 (that he is a high priest) is joined to Ps 110:1 (his ascension to God’s right hand) to make clear that Christ’s high priestly work will be performed in heaven. (In addition to the explicit use of Psalm 110, there may be an echo of Zech 6:13, where throne and priesthood are joined.) Just as v. 1 identifies the high priest by location, so also v. 2 identifies him by function: He is a minister in the sacred place and tabernacle set up by the Lord, not any mortal. This distinction between the sanctuary and the tent as a whole not only reflects the structure of the desert tent of meeting (Lev 16:16, 20, 33) but also anticipates Christ’s ministry in the inner sanctuary, .where only the high priest enters. The tabernacle the

Lord has pitched (myiyvupt pegnymi, a verb used only here in the NT) is the “true” one—that is, the real, genuine, lasting one (also 9:24; 10:22; recall the frequent use of this word in the Gospel of John to distinguish the real from the apparent, John 1:9; 4:23; 6:32). Commentary on 8:5 will include detailed discussion of the heavenly sanctuary. &:3-4. These verses do not add substantively to the argument but function to set up the many contrasts between the levitical high priest and Christ that will follow. Verse 3 might easily have been framed as a question: Since all high priests are appointed in order to offer gifts and sacrifices (5:1), what will this high priest offer? It is not that the question has not yet been answered; 7:27 tells us that “he offered himself.” But that statement is too sketchy, too ambiguous, open to a range of interpretations. What lies ahead are the details of method and meaning. One thing is sure: His offering will not be “on earth,” because on earth he was not a priest, either by genealogy (7:14) or by law. On earth the levitical priests are the legal appointees (v. 4; 7:16, 18). 8:5. The closing verse of this unit is critical for everything yet to be said, for here the writer states the two-sanctuary position essential for presenting Christ’s heavenly ministry and supports it with God’s instruction to Moses according to Exod 25:40 (Acts 7:44). Perhaps this crucial and extraordinary verse can best be handled in a series of statements. (1) The earthly tent that served Israel in its desert journey was of God, not simply in a general sense but with specific instructions to Moses. The divine communication (“was warned” xonuatiCw chrematizo|) is expressed with the same word used to speak of God’s warning the magi (Matt 2:12) and Joseph (Matt 2:22), reveal-

97

HEBREWS 8:1-5 COMMENTARY of Hellenized Alexandria. He found Plato immensely helpful for this purpose. Plato contended that the real consisted of invisible forms and ideas of which the earthly and material is but a shadow. Hence the dualistic metaphysics of the real and the shadow. According to this metaphysics, Philo developed elaborate allegorical interpretations of the LXX. In fact, he interpreted the same text cited in Heb 8:5 (Exod 25:40) on the real/shadow schemes.®* Whether the writer of Hebrews read Philo or was a product of Hellenistic Judaism and, therefore, worked with similar vocabulary and thought patterns is much debated.® In either case, the Hebrews writer’s incarnational christology and eschatology signal the degree of modification such dualistic thinking had to undergo to serve the gospel, whatever may have been the sources. (4) As helpful as possible associations between Hebrews and Philo, Qumran, apocalyptists, rabbis, OT writers, or Greek philosophers may be in understanding this epistle, the debate revolving around 8:5 is much larger than that of sources. The question is this: Has the writer, in developing the thesis that the true sanctuary is in heaven, with the one on earth its copy or shadow, abandoned the categories of time and history? The heavenly and the earthly, the real and the copy constitute a spatial framework, whereas the dominant perspective of Scripture as a whole is temporal, portraying God at work through the processes of history, from creation to eschaton. Taken alone, spatial categories (above/below) have no place for salvation history, at least not in any serious way. Do they, therefore, replace the old/new framework? On the one hand are interpreters, such as Kasemann,** who regard the heavenly/earthly language fully adequate for understanding the whole of Hebrews. On the other hand are those, like Williamson,® who admit the presence of a modicum of such language but not of such significance as to modify or reduce the dominant role of eschatology in the letter. Closer to the truth than either extreme position is the plain fact that the

ing to Simeon that he would see the Messiah (Luke 2:26), and directing Cornelius to send for Peter (Acts 10:22). All this is to say that the earthly tabernacle was not of human origin and, therefore, is not deserving of general indictments. Its limitations and inabilities lay in its transient nature and defined purposes, unable to do what it was not intended to do. As Paul said of the law, it “is holy and just and good” (Rom 7:12 NRSV), but.... (2) However, the earthly tabernacle is a copy and shadow of the heavenly one. This is the author’s interpretation of Exod 25:40: “See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain.”® Five texts state that Moses was given a pattern or type (Exod 25:9, 40; 26:30; 27:8; Num 8:4). In their contexts, all these references serve to enhance the nature of the desert tabernacle; that is, it was not of circumstantial or even Mosaic origin, but everything about it was of God’s design. However, at Heb 8:5 the use of Exod 25:40 is pejorative; the earthly tabernacle was but a shadow of the real tabernacle, the one in heaven. (3) That there is a heavenly sanctuary and that there are correspondences between it and earthly ones is an idea rather widespread in both Jewish and Hellenistic sources. In Greek literature the heavenly or true temple was the cosmos, but it bore no resemblance to the temples of the various cults in the Greek world. On the contrary, the cosmos as temple was the principal ground for attacking earthly temples as centers of deception and superstition. It is unlikely that such literature served as a resource for Heb 8:5. In Judaism, the idea of a heavenly sanctuary found broad and varied expressions, from simple to a sanctuary with two sacred spaces to the grandly elaborate temple of apocalyptic and mystic writers.*! Among those perhaps most immediately in the background of Hebrews was Philo, who reinterpreted Judaism for the cultured and philosophical minds 80. This is not an exact quotation of the LXX. A verb form is different, and “everything” is added, perhaps borrowed from Exod 25:9. It is not clear whether the author of Hebrews was following a different Greek text or was responsible for the changes. It is interesting that Philo, when citing Exod 25:40, also adds “everything” (Philo Allegorical Interpretation

82. Philo On the Life of Moses 2:74. 83. R. Williamson, Philo and the Epistle to the Hebrews (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970) 142-59, traces the debate but with a strong position of his own. 84. E. Kaésemann, The Wandering People of God, trans. R. Harresville and I. Sandberg (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984). 85. Williamson, Philo and the Epistle to the Hebrews.

I]I.102). Some commentators see here a direct influence of Philo on Hebrews. See K. J. Thomas, “The OT Citations in Hebrews,” NTS 11

(1965) 309. 81. Foran excellent survey, see Aelred Cody, Heavenly Sanctuary and Liturgy in the Epistle to the Hebrews (St. Meinrad, Ind.: Grail, 1960) 9-46.

98

HEBREWS 8:1-5 COMMENTARY writer has employed the categories both of time and of space. Without reference to former and latter, old and new, former times, these last days, faith pilgrimages, and the judgment to come, the readers of Hebrews could feel abandoned to the conditions of history while God and Christ were busy with important things somewhere above

employ both time and space to frame the message for a church living in a culture with both categories is certainly not unique in the New Testament. Paul could find many continuities with the history of Israel (Rom 9:1-5) and hold great hope for the fulfillment of that history (Romans 11), and he could still speak of a Christ who not only came from Israel but also descended from heaven and ascended to heaven (2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-11). To reduce the both-and of Hebrews to either-or would be to oversimplify its message at great loss to the readers. (See Reflections at 9:23-10:18.)

their heads. And without a christology that could more adequately be expressed by heavenly and earthly, by pre-existence, existence, and post-existence, the readers could feel that Christ, indeed, was one of them and even died as they do. But where is the relief from history? For the writer to

Hebrews 8:6-13, Christ’s Covenant NIV

NRSV

*But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. *But God found fault with the people and said “The time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, _ because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord. of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. ‘No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me,

‘But Jesus* has now obtained a more excellent ministry, and to that degree he is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted through better promises. ’For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need to look for a second one. 8God? finds fault with them when he says: “The days are surely coming, says the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; ° not like the covenant that | made with their ancestors, on the day when | took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; for they did not continue in my covenant, and so I had no concern for them, says the Lord. 10 This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their minds, and write them on their hearts, and | will be their God, and they shall be my people. ‘l And they shall not teach one another or say to each other, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12 For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,

a8 Some manuscripts may be translated fault and said to the people.

2Gk he

‘0This is the covenant I will make with the house

99

5 Gk He

HEBREWS 8:6-13

NIV

NRSV

from the least of them to the greatest. 12For | will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.”? 'SBy calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear. a12 Jer. 31:31-34

and I will remember their sins no more.” '3In speaking of “a new covenant,” he has made the first one obsolete. And what is obsolete and growing old will soon disappear.

COMMENTARY 18, it is important to remind ourselves that the author views the whole of religion through the cultus. When discussing priestly ministry, the introductions of “law” and “covenant” are not abrupt shifts of subject; each is inseparably bound to the sanctuary. As for the better promises, nothing is as yet spelled out. We can surmise that what the author has in mind will include inheriting salvation (1:14), entering the promised rest (4:1), and approaching God (7:25), but we wait for further details. Verses 7-8a introduce the quotation of Jer 31:31-34. The function of the introduction is not to draw out the benefits of the new covenant but to underscore the need for it. Had the first been without fault, “no place [“room,” “opportunity”; see Acts 25:16; Rom 12:19] would have been sought for another” (the NIV is preferred here). The fault lies both in the covenant (v. 7) and in the people (v. 8a). In other words, the first covenant is not working to effect the relationship between God and Israel that God desired. Before moving to the quotation about a new covenant, two observations need to be made. First, it is God who gave the old and promises the new; both are God’s doing. This realization should give pause to impulses to attack the old covenant as a preface to extolling the benefits of the new. Unless continuity and discontinuity are kept in tension, both covenants may be misrepresented. Second, since the promise of a new covenant comes within the old, Jeremiah 31 is, in fact, a case of the old critiquing itself. It is important to keep in mind that the Hebrews writer is appropriating a process that is going on within Israel and not between Israel and Christianity. The discontinuity here is to be located

At v. 4 the author used a particle (uév men) that alerts the reader to anticipate in a subsequent clause a particular conjunction (S5¢ de). If de occurs (it may not), then the entire thought can be framed as an “on the one hand... but on the other hand” construction. Such is the case with wy. 4-6. The text says: “On the one hand, if this high priest were on earth he would not be a priest at all. There are on earth those who by law minister in a tabernacle that is a copy and shadow of the heavenly one. Exodus 25:40 confirms this understanding. But on the other hand (v. 6), “Christ has obtained a better ministry.” One can thus understand why many commentators include v. 6 with vv. 1-5. The decision to join v. 6 with what follows is based on the shift in content, a consideration weightier than syntax. The ministry (cf. Commentary on 8:1-2) Christ has obtained is a permanent one (the perfect tense of the verb Tuyxdvw [tygchano]}, conveying that sense. He entered into the heavenly sanctuary to minister on our behalf, and he is still there. His ministry is “more excellent” in that he mediates a better covenant, enacted on better promises. The only other use of the verb expressing the idea of “enacting” in the NT occurs in 7:11. Notice the writer’s continued fondness for the word “better” (kpe(tTwy kreitton, 1:4; 6:9; 7:7, 19, 22), a comparative that carries the weight of a superlative. The better covenant, introduced at 7:22, will be the subject matter of the quotation of Jer 31:31-34 and the discussion that follows. Christ serves this better covenant as mediator (ueottns mesités, 8:6; 9:15; 12:24; unlike “guarantee” at 7:22). Although the writer will more specifically link priesthood to covenant in 10:15-

100

HEBREWS 8:6-13 COMMENTARY within the old and not between the old and the new. The neat division of the Bible into Old and New Covenants (Testaments) makes it too easy to locate discontinuities between the two rather than to be more careful to see tensions within the Old, within the New, as well as between them. The oracle in Jer 31:31-34 is introduced with “God says,” recalling the pattern in Hebrews of using verbs of speaking rather than “it is written,” and in the present tense, as though directly addressing the readers (e.g.,.1:5-8; 2:12; 3:7). This is the lengthiest quotation in the entire New Testament. This passage comes from the series of oracles in Jeremiah 30-33 offering Israel of the exilic period the hope of restoration to the homeland. But the return will not mean simply a return to the covenant made at Sinai; there will be a new covenant relationship between God and Israel that will be qualitatively different. Hebrews reproduces exactly the opening words of Jeremiah’s prophecies: “The days are surely coming” (lit., “Behold, the days are coming”; see Jer 7:32; 9:25; 16:14; 23:5, 7). As for the remainder of the quotation, there are some variations from the LXX, mostly stylistic, that may have existed in the text used by the writer or may have been made by the writer. One should be cautious about reading into these modifications an attempt by the author to speak more negatively of the first covenant and more positively of the second.®

It would be inappropriate at this point to offer a running commentary on Jer 31:31-34; the writer of Hebrews will draw from it what is useful for the immediate purpose and interpret it according to that purpose. It is enough here to observe that the new covenant promises the inscribing of God’s law on the hearts of believers and the forgiveness of sins. There is no offer of new content but a new manner of the law’s being presented and being appropriated. The relationship between God and the people will be restored and all past iniquities removed forever. It was the fault (v. 7) of the first covenant that this relationship had not been effected. But even these central affirmations are not the immediate concern of the author, as v. 13 shows. It is enough at this point to observe that the very phrase “a new covenant” makes the first one old (obsolete). In fact, the obsolete and antiquated (1:11) is near the point of vanishing. To say that it is “near vanishing” should not be taken to mean that the Temple in Jerusalem is still standing but soon to be destroyed. The earthly sanctuary of Hebrews is the desert tabernacle, not the Temple. The phrase “near vanishing” portends the end of the old covenant effected by the inauguration of the new by Christ’s high priestly act, now to be described. (See Reflections at 9:23-10:18.)

86. J. C. McCullough, “The OT Quotations in Hebrews,” NTS 26 (1980) 364-67.

Hebrews 9:1—-10:18, Christ’s Sacrifice

OVERVIEW trees could obscure the forest. Additionally, keeping the sweep of the entire movement in mind is important, because it will seem for a time that, except for the word “covenant,” the writer has lost touch with the textual centerpiece, Jer 31:3134. That is only apparently the case, because the homily will not only return to Jeremiah 31 in 10:15-18, but also will never take its eye off the

This is by far the largest of the the divisions of 8:1-10:18, and it could well be argued that it should not be regarded as a single division, but broken into smaller, more manageable units.®” However, since the whole of 9:1-10:18 is an exegetical commentary on Jer 31:31-34, it seems wise to keep the reader’s eye on the whole, especially since the passage is so full of details about tabernacles, altars, and offerings that the

two primary theses of Jer 31:31-34: the location of the new covenent in the heart and the promise of forgiveness of sin. The contours of the argument in 9:1-10:18 permit discussion to fall into

87. See, e.g., W. L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8, WBC 47A (Dallas: Word,

1991); W. L. Lane, Hebrews 9-13, WBC 47B (Dallas: Word, 1991); H. W. Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989).

101

HEBREWS 9:1—10:18 OVERVIEW and place of the desert tent, these things “are happening.” As for the appropriateness of discussing Christ’s priestly ministry vis-a-vis the tabernacle rather than the Temple, it need only be said that it is the tabernacle that is the copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary (8:5), it was the tabernacle that Moses was commanded to build, and it is the tabernacle that is associated with the old covenant. And, homiletically speaking, a movable desert tabernacle is much more suggestive of pilgrimage, a governing metaphor in the writer’s understanding of the Christian life.

three sub-units: 9:1-14; 9:15-22; and 9:23-10:18. Even within these sub-units, the writer’s literary signals will be observed, permitting focus on even smaller, discrete parts, some of which may have been taken from the church’s liturgical and confessional tradition. Again we need to be reminded that since in Hebrews the desert tabernacle and not the Temple provides the antithesis to the heavenly sanctuary, the present-tense verbs should not be taken as references to what is going on at the time of the writing of Hebrews. Rather, these present tenses are historical presents; that is, in the time

Hebrews 9:1-14, The Old and the New Sacrifice NIV

NRSV

Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. 7A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand, the table and the consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. *Behind the second curtain was a room ‘called the Most Holy Place, ‘which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. ’Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover.? But we cannot discuss these things in detail now. °When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry. 7But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. *The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still standing. °This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. '°They are only a ‘ matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order. ''When Christ came as high priest of the good

Now even the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly sanctuary. “For a tent? was constructed, the first one, in which were the lampstand, the table, and the

bread of the Presence;? this is called the Holy Place. *Behind the second curtain was a tent? called the Holy of Holies. “In it stood the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant overlaid on all sides with gold, in which there were a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tablets of the covenant; °above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat.° Of these things we cannot speak now in detail. 6Such preparations having been made, the priests go continually into the first tent? to carry out their ritual duties; “but only the high priest goes into the second, and he but once a year, and not without taking the blood that he offers for himself and for the sins committed unintentionally by the people. *By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the sanctuary has not yet been disclosed as long as the first tent? is still standing. °This is a symbol4 of the present time, during which gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, 'Cbut deal only with food and drink and various baptisms, regulations for the body imposed until the time comes to set things right. 11But when Christ came as a high priest of the a Or tabernacle © Gk the presentation of the loaves place of atonement 4 Gk parable

a5 Traditionally the mercy seat

102

¢Or the

HEBREWS 9:1-14 NIV

NRSV

things that are already here,? he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. '*He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. '*The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. ‘How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!

good things that have come,? then through the

411 Some early manuscripts are to come rituals

greater and perfect? tent® (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation), '2he entered once for all into the Holy Place, not with the blood of goats and calves, but with his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption. '’For if the blood of goats and bulls, with the sprinkling of the ashes of a heifer,

sanctifies those who have been defiled so that their flesh is purified, '*how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit? offered himself without blemish to God, purify our’ conscience from dead works to worship the living God! aOther ancient authorities read good things to come © GK more perfect ¢ Or tabernacle d@Other ancient authorities read Holy Spirit e Other ancient authorities read your

cl4 Or from useless

(COMMENTARY construction, and in Exod 40:1-38 the story of Moses pitching the tabernacle. There are, of course, other references, canonical and extra-canonical, to the building, its furnishings, and its services with some differences in terminology and in the location of furniture. The descriptions in Hebrews, while generally in accord with Exodus 25-31, may reflect a different liturgical tradition and a knowledge of other texts pertaining to tabernacle and temple services.°® One would get the impression from vv. 2-3 that there were two tents or tabernacles, but it is evident that the writer’s references to two tents are actually to be understood as two compartments or distinct areas of the one tabernacle. In this matter, Hebrews is in full agreement with Exodus. In the first compartment or sanctuary, called the holy place (ayia hagia), were the lampstand (menorah) and the table, and on the table were twelve loaves of the presentation (show bread or bread of the Presence). Behind a curtain was a second sanctuary, called the holy of holies (4y.ra dytwv hagia hagion), or Most Holy Place. In this area, says the writer of He-

Verses 1-14 fall naturally into two parts: vv. 1-10 describe the cultic practices of the levitical priests in the earthly sanctuary; vv. 11-14 present Christ’s high priestly offering of himself. The two parts constitute an “on the one hand... but on the other hand” construction, common to the series of antitheses in the argumentation of Hebrews. Verse 1 begins a cultic recital growing out of 8:13, implicit in the reference to the first covenant. Thus translators are justified in adding the word “covenant” in v. 1: “Now even the first... .” Provisions in the first covenant for cultic practices were in two categories: regulations (ordinances, requirements) and a place, a sanctuary. The writer discusses them in reverse order (chiastic), a pattern now familiar to the reader. 9:1-10. 9:1-5. The “sanctuary” is here designated by the word aytov (Aagion), which refers to the entire tabernacle and not to a particular part of it. The adjective “earthly” (“worldly” [koopKds kosmikos]) anticipates its opposite, the heavenly sanctuary. Verses 2-5 are simply descriptive, and as the author states (v. 5), there is no intent to pursue details beyond what is appropriate for the immediate purpose. Anyone interested in further information about the desert tabernacle can find in Exod 25:1-31:11 God’s instructions to Moses, in Exod 36:2-39:43 the account of its

88. See the excursus in Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 236-38, for a detailed discussion of attempts to account for the differences between Hebrews and Exodus/Leviticus on terminology and the placing of the tabernacle furnishings.

103

HEBREWS 9:1-14 COMMENTARY pates the priestly act of Christ, as does the “once a year,” which, while in contrast with the daily service of the priests, will itself contrast with Christ’s offering “once for all.” The word “offers” (tpocdépw prosphero) also anticipates the way the writer will refer to the self-giving of Christ (9:14, 25, 28; 10:12). In fact, even though it is proper to speak of v. 7 as anticipating the high priestly ministry of Christ, the reality is that it was the high priestly ministry of Christ that guided the presentation of the activity of the levitical high priest.8° The event sketched in v. 7 is the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). The writer selects appropriate details from what was an elaborate day of rituals (Lev 16:29-31). For present purposes, it is enough to recall that the high priest first sacrificed a bull and sprinkled its blood on the ark of the covenant for his sins and those of his family (Lev 16:6, 11, 14), quite unlike Christ, who had no need to offer a sacrifice for himself (5:3; 7:27). Then the high priest sacrificed a goat and offered its blood for the sins of the people (Lev 16:15, 30). Hebrews qualifies this sacrifice as being effective for inadvertent sins, a distinction quite important to the writer (10:26; cf. Num 15:22, 30). 9:8-10. These verses offer an unusual interpretation of vv. 1-7. The description of the desert tabernacle and its rituals has not been offered as a story of ineffectiveness against which to lay the effective priestly ministry of Christ. On the contrary, the very existence of the first tent (holy place) and its cultus offers a revelatory and prophetic word, although that word can be known only through the Holy Spirit. For Hebrews, the role of the Holy Spirit is not solely that of inspiring Scripture so that biblical quotations can be introduced “The Holy Spirit says” (3:7). The Holy Spirit makes God’s Word present “today,” and discloses (makes clear, reveals; see 1 Cor 3:13; 2 Pet 1:14) what had not been understood. And what is here disclosed by the Holy Spirit? That as long as the first compartment of the tabernacle (holy place) “has standing” (used in both a structural and a normative sense), the way into the holy of holies—that is, the presence of God—is not yet manifest. The holy of holies is closed to both priests and laity. That the high priest enters

brews, was the golden altar of incense (v. 4). The strongest traditions locate the altar of incense at the rear of the holy place near the curtain. Priests, who were allowed into the holy place, burned incense on this altar daily (e.g., Luke 1:8-11). However, biblical references to the location of this altar are not exactly clear (Exod 30:1-10; 37:2520% 240:5,-20;, Level O:k6** 1’ Kgs 6:20, 22). OF central importance within the holy of holies is the ark of the covenant, an ornate chest containing the stone tablets from Sinai. According to Exod 16:32-34 and Num 17:10-11, a pot of manna and Aaron’s rod, which budded, were placed “before the covenant.” Among all references, only Hebrews places them inside the ark with the stone tablets. On top of the ark were cherubim of glory, indicating this place as the throne of divine glory. Between the cherubim was the atonement place, or mercy seat (\Akaotrptov hilasterion; Exod 25:17, 21), the focal point of the activity of the high priest on the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:14-15; for detailed descriptions of the tabernacle furnishings, see Exodus 25-31). In fact, as the writer says (v. 5), no more details are needed; the holy of holies and the mercy seat within it locate the ritual soon to be described. 9:6. At v. 1 the author gathered up the cultic expressions of the first covenant in two catetories: regulations and sanctuary. Having described the sanctuary (vv. 1-5), the author turns now to the regulations or rituals (vv. 6-10). Verse 6 presents briefly the priestly activity in the first tent (compartment of the tabernacle), the holy place. Into the holy place the regular priests “are always entering” (note the accent on the continual and repetitive functioning) to attend to their ritual duties. The routine activity included trimming the lamp (Exod 27:21), replacing the bread on the table every seven days (Lev 24:5), burning incense (Exod 30:7), and offering the scheduled sacrifices (Lev 6:8, 30; Num 28:1-10). But the writer goes into no detail because no immediate purpose would be served. 9:7. Into the second tent, the holy of holies, goes not any priest but only the high priest. He enters alone, only once a year, and then “not without blood” (v. 7). Notice the writer’s fondness for the double negative for expressing the very important and essential (4:15; 6:10; 7:20; 9:18, 22). The high priest’s entering alone antici-

89. N. H. Young, “The Gospel According to Hebrews 9,” NTS 27

(1980-81) 198-210, esp. 209.

104

HEBREWS 9:1-14 COMMENTARY alone and only once a year, and never without blood to offer, testifies more to its inaccessibility than to its accessibility. The way into the holy of

(chronos, measurable time). The holy place is, therefore, a figure for a prevailing condition in which the way to God is not open even though gifts and sacrifices are repetitively offered. The condition cries out for the high priestly ministry of Christ, which is also at the present time, but also eschatological and heavenly. Perhaps the best commentary on 9:9-10 is 10:1-2 in that the “symbolic” nature of the gifts and sacrifices of the levitical system corresponds to the “shadow” rather than the reality (cf. 8:5). The author understands that the sacrificial system of the first tent serves a purpose: the ritual cleansing of persons who had been in violation of regulations concerning food, drink, the body, and the essential utensils for daily living. Laws of purity were many, and breaches of those laws called for rituals of restoration. But none of this priestly activity could “perfect” the worshiper (see Commentary on 5:9; 7:11-19). Here the author introduces the word “conscience” (ouvetSnois syneidésis), since it is the conscience that is purged and restored by the offering of Christ. It stands in contrast to “body” (odpé sarx, v. 10), the area of benefit from the sacrifices in the first tent, and also renews attention on the inwardness of the new covenant (8:8-12), which is inaugurated by the high priestly act of Christ. The term “conscience” entered biblical literature from the Hellenistic world, where it meant “awareness of oneself” and was used in both moral and nonmoral senses. In the LXX the word is lodged in the wisdom literature, where it conveys the idea of being aware of sin or wrong in one’s life and can be translated “inner thoughts” or “heart of hearts” (see Job 27:6; Eccl 10:20; Wis 17:11; Sir 42:18). To be perfected in conscience is to be both cleansed of and freed from any hindrance preventing one’s entering into God’s presence. It is to have fulfilled the promise of the new covenant: “I will put my laws in their minds,/ and write them on their hearts” (8:10 NRSV).% But the “regulations of the body” (“flesh,” v. 10) operative in the first tent, the holy place, could not achieve this, and therefore were marked for a “time of correction,” a “time for setting things straight,” a “time of amendment” (v. 10).

holies will be made open by the priestly act of Christ (2:10; 4:16; 10:19-20).% The first tent— the holy place (clearly the antecedent of “this,” v. 9)—is a symbol, a figure, a parable of the present time. Apart from two appearances in

Hebrews

(9:9; 11:19)

the word

“parable”

(tapaBody parabole )occurs in the NT only in the synoptic Gospels, where it refers quite often to extended metaphors. While the word may designate a straightforward comparison, it often refers to a comparison not readily apparent; that is, figurative speech.*! Both uses in Hebrews carry this meaning; in fact, in 9:9 that the holy place is a parable of the present time is a disclosure effected by the Holy Spirit. Key to the meaning of vv. 9-10 is the expression “the present time.” Since the writer is discussing the cultus of the first covenant, it would be easy enough to think only in temporal terms and interpret “the present time” as “past time.” Dispensational thinking could take over and the image would be a simple one: an old cultus replaced by a new one. And the teasing truth is that temporal categories are important in Hebrews (see Commentary on 8:5) and should never be abandoned. However, in 9:9 the holy place is a parable of the present, not the past. Perhaps, then, the category of space might be helpful. At 8:5 the writer spoke of a heavenly and an earthly tabernacle, the real and the shadow. The difference is not one of time but of nature or quality. The difference between the levitical cultus and that of Christ is not so much one of time but of nature. Ministry in the holy place can be going on even while the ministry of Christ has accomplished what could never be accomplished in the earthly tabernacle. Therefore, a chronology of past, present, and future does not adequately frame the message of priestly ministries that differ more in kind than in time. Perhaps this is why the writer uses katpds (Kairos, time in the sense of opportunity or meaningful time) rather than xpdvos 90. There is no need to read into “the way” the gnostic myth of the flight of the soul from the physical world to the spiritual and finally to God, as does E. Kasemann, The Wandering People of God, trans. R. Harresville \ and I. Sandberg (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984) 75-96.

92. Cf. the use of “conscience” at 9:14; 10:2,.22; 13:18. For more on the term, see R. Jewett, Paul’s Anthropological Terms (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1971) 402-46.

91. F. Hauk, “trapaBoar ,” TDNT, 5:744-61.

105

HEBREWS 9:1-14 COMMENTARY argument (see Commentary on 9:10).°° In fact, the “sreater and perfect |elCovos kal TeEAELOTEpas meizonos kai teleioteras; \it., “more perfect”] tent” is but another way of referring to the heavenly sanctuary of 8:1-2 (also 6:19-20). There is no strong reason to interpret “through the greater and more perfect tent” as instrumental; that is, “by means of the greater....” This possible, but strained, reading would then understand “tent” in a metaphorical sense as “body,” meaning “by means of Christ’s body.” This interpretation contradicts the use of “tent” (oknvyj_ skene) throughout this section as it does the following

Like “the present time” of v. 9, “the time of correction” is also a kairos, the right time, the Opportune moment in the purposes of God. Both times, therefore, are to be viewed not simply chronologically, as though one time has ended and another has begun. Although time in the usual historical sense is always a consideration in both Judaism and Christianity, in 9:9-10 the references are similar in meaning to “this age” and “the age to come.” The difference is not so much one of present and future as it is of values, orientation, and meaning. Both “this age” and “the age to come” are here now, but they are qualitatively different realms of being. The same is true of “the present time” and “the time of correction.” 9:11-14. Verses 1-10 presented that which exists “on the one hand”; these verses announce, “But on the other hand.” The adversative conjunction makes it clear that the discussion moves in a new direction, that of Christ’s high priestly offering of a new sacrifice. What follows in this paragraph is a development of what was introduced at 8:1-5. 9:11-12. These two verses constitute one sentence, “Christ... entered,” containing several modifying clauses and phrases. The sentence follows the structure of vv. 1-10, where the place and the rituals of the earthly tabernacle were treated, in that order. Here the place is described in positive and then negative terms—the ritual in negative, then positive terms (ABB’A’, a chiasm). “But Christ having come as a high priest of the good things that have come” identifies the time of setting things right (v. 10) and states it as present and accomplished. The “good things” are not specified, but two were mentioned earlier: access to God and the perfecting of the conscience (vv. 8-9). A number of mss have “good things to come” rather than “good things that have come.” This variant reading has probably been influenced by 10:1, but even there “to come” is not futuristic but refers to that which was yet to come from the perspective of the old law, which foreshadowed a future that in Christ is now present. These temporal expressions should not, however, be allowed to flatten out the passage into a past/present scheme only; the spatial categories of earthly/ heavenly, shadow/real are still essential to the

phrase, “not made with hands, that is, not of this creation.” The author has made it clear that Christ’s body was material and of this creation (2:14-18). It is better to take the expression in its straightforward, local sense: Christ went through the tent, entering the Most Holy Place (holy of holies)—the presence of God. That this tent is greater, more perfect (the comparative of “perfect” is not used in English), and not of human construction recalls earlier terminology (8:2, 5; 9:24). The NRSV, by using “he entered once for all into the Holy Place” (v. 12), translates correctly but confuses the image. The Holy Place often refers to the first compartment of the tabernacle (v. 2), but here it obviously refers to the Most Holy Place, the holy of holies (v. 3), the inner compartment, which the high priest alone entered to sprinkle blood on the mercy seat. The NIV properly conveys this image. That Christ’s high priestly ministry on our behalf involved not only intercession but also sacrifice was anticipated at 5:1; 7:27; and 8:3, but now at 9:12 it is boldly stated. The interpreter must move away from the courtroom forensics and judicial language, made familiar by Paul, and focus completely on the cultus. The writer has set the scene in vv. 1-10: The place is the holy of holies, the sole liturgist is the high priest, the central act is the sprinkling of blood on the seat of mercy, and the time is the Day of Atonement. The one essential element is blood; in the language of Hebrews, the effective entrance into God’s presence is “not without taking the blood” (v. 7). The distance from “blood” language an interpreter may experience might be lessened by 93. See Lane, Hebrews 9-13, 236, for an interpretation of 9:10-11 in temporal terms.

106

HEBREWS 9:1-14 COMMENTARY his or her entering into the thought world of the community for which this ritual was central. Of fering the blood was offering the life (Lev 17:1114), and instructions about the use and disposition of blood were many and very specific:

the blood in the inner sanctuary. Therefore, the atoning work of Christ was not his death on the cross but his once and for all entrance into God’s presence, where he continually intercedes for us.” Taken alone, 9:11-14 can be so read, but the whole of Hebrews will not tolerate this separation of the death from the heavenly installment of Christ. Too much has already been made of Christ’s identification with his brothers and sisters in the flesh, his being tested, and his suffering of death (2:9-18; 4:14-16; 5:7-10) to jettison all that as but a preface to ministry or as pre-priestly. In 10:1-10 the writer will return to the subject of sacrifice, and there the accent will be on the offering of the body of Jesus. More appropriate to Hebrews, therefore, is the understanding that death on the cross, ascension, and entrance into the sanctuary of God’s presence constitute one redemptive movement. 9:13-14. With these verses the author concludes this sub-unit on the old and new sacrifice. Here the meaning of vv. 11-12 is expanded and enriched in the form of an argument @ fortiori (from lesser to greater), a type of argument already familiar from 2:2-3. The “lesser” half of the argument refers again to the rituals of the Day of Atonement, but with the addition of the ritual of the red heifer (for its details and purpose, see Numbers 19). Why there is the reference to this ceremony is not clear. That the heifer was slaughtered and burned “outside the camp” may anticipate 13:12, 13. Even though exegetical traditions differ as to whether the high priest was involved, certain elements in the ritual of the heifer do serve to set up the contrasting sacrifice of Christ: The blood is sprinkled on the outside of the tabernacle, reminding the reader of the external efficacy of the levitical system; the heifer is referred to as a sin offering; and the ashes of the heifer in the water of purification cleanse the bodies (flesh) of those being sprinkled. These rituals have to do only with ceremonial cleansing (vv. 10, 13) from the range of defiling activities and relationships in which the people engaged, such as touching a corpse or being in contact with a foreigner. To be sanctified or made holy is familiar to NT readers as referring to Christ’s gracious act toward believers,

Only be sure that you do not eat the blood; for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the meat. (Deut (2:23 NRSV) For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and | have given it to you for making atonement for your lives on the altar; for, as life, it is the blood that makes atonement. (Lev 17:11 NRSV)

Four statements can now be made that elaborate the condensed but crucial presentation of Christ’s high priestly act in v. 12. (1) Christ entered the heavenly sanctuary, the true and perfect tabernacle, into the presence of God. (2) Christ entered once and for all. This affirmation stands in sharp contrast to the daily repetition of the activities of the levitical priests and the annual ritual by the high priest on the Day of Atonement. (3) Christ offered his own blood, not that of goats and calves (see Commentary on 9:7). Christ offered his own life to God on our behalf, to make atonement, to relate us fully and finally to God, to enact the new covenant, which clearly promises, “I will be their God,/ and they shall be my people..../ For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,/ and I will remember their sins no

more” (8:10, 12 NRSV, quoting Jer 31:33-34). And finally, (4) Christ secures redemption that is eternal; that is, it is not repeated (v. 9) but possesses eschatological finality (5:9). While the word “redemption” (AUTpwots Jytrosis) is rather rare in the NT (9:12, 15; Luke 1:68; 2:38), this metaphor for salvation is common in both Judaism and Christianity, sometimes referring to freedom from slavery, sometimes from prison, sometimes from death, sometimes from sin. The writer does not press the metaphor to refer to any particular transaction, and so it seems best to leave it as open as it is in the text. The sacrifice of Christ is, therefore, consummated in heaven. Some interpreters have argued that Christ’s high priestly work was not consummated in heaven but began in heaven. This is to say that the efficacious act of the high priest was not the killing of the animal but the offering of

94. Argued by W. E. Brooks, among others, but with dissenting voices represented, in “The Perpetuity of Christ’s Sacrifice in the Epistle to the

Hebrews,” JBL 89 (1970) 205-14.

107

HEBREWS 9:1-14 COMMENTARY bodily rituals of the old system and as a term to locate Christ’s offer of himself; it is in the realm of the Spirit, in God’s own presence. (Associating the Spirit with Christ’s death and exaltation is not uncommon in the NT; see Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:45; 1 Tim 3:16; 1' Pet 3:18.) Third; Christ as" the sacrifice is “blameless” or “without blemish,” again preserving the terminology of cultic sacrifices (Exod 29:2; Lev 1:3, 10; 4:3; Num 6:14; as applied to Christ, see Heb 4:15; 7:27). And finally, Christ’s offer of himself purifies the inner self, the conscience (see Commentary on 9:9), from dead works. In other words, rather than cleansing from the defilement of contact with dead bodies, Christ cleanses from the dead works of which believers repent (6:1). The end and purpose of Christ’s sacrifice for us is in order that we may worship (“serve,” NIV) the living God. The verb “to serve” (A\atpevw latreuo) comes from the cultus and has the immediate sense of worship, but throughout the NT it includes service to God much more broadly (12:28; Luke 1:74; Acts 27:23; Rom 1:9; Phil 3:3). (See Reflections at 9:23-10:18).

with spiritual and moral implications, but here it refers to the effects of a ritual system that purified human bodies as well as buildings, cooking utensils, furniture, and all other materials involved in a life ceremonially acceptable in the community of Israel. The “greater” and concluding half of the argument presents the “how much more” of Christ’s high priestly sacrifice. Four affirmations underscore the superiority of his sacrifice. First, his sacrifice is the offering of his own blood, not the blood of another. By speaking of Christ’s blood, the writer maintains the language of the cultus, but what is meant by it is given in the expression “offered himself.” Second, Christ’s offering is “through the eternal Spirit.” This way of referring to the Holy Spirit occurs nowhere else in the NT, but is especially appropriate here. The writer uses the term “eternal” (aiuvios aionios) as a contrast to the daily and annual repetition of levitical sacrifices (5:9; 6:2; 9:12, 15; 13:20). As for the Holy Spirit, the term has already been employed in a variety of ways (2:4; 3:7; 6:4; 9:8), but here probably serves double duty: as a contrast to

Hebrews 9:15-22, Sacrifice and the New Covenant NIV

NRSV

>For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant. ‘In the case of a will,? it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, '’because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. '®This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. '';When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 2°He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.” 2!In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both

15For this reason he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, because a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions under the first covenant.? ‘Where a will? is involved, the death of the one who made

a16 Same Greek word as covenant; also in verse 1

aThe Greek word used here means both covenant and will

24:8

it must be established. !7For a will? takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as

the one who made it is alive. "Hence not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. For when every commandment had been told to all the people by Moses in accordance with the law, he took the blood of calves and goats,° with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled

both the scroll itself and all the people, *°saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God has ordained for you.” ?!And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent¢ and all

620 Exodus

;

6 Other ancient authorities lack and goats

108

¢ Or tabernacle

HEBREWS 9:15-22 NIV

NRSV

the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremo-

the vessels used in worship. *?Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

nies. In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

é

(COMMENTARY

The writer now returns to the theme of covenant and to the language of Jeremiah 31, the basic text being expounded in 8:1—10:18. It may seem to the reader that the author has strayed from the old and new covenant of Jeremiah 31 with discussions of two high priests, two sacrifices, and two tabernacles, but that is far from the case. Covenant, law, and cultus were earlier joined (see Commentary on 7:11-12, 22; 8:6-7, 13; 9:1); in fact, covenant and law have been understood as inextricably bound to cultus, and a change in cultus meant a change in covenant and law. In the plenitude of meanings explored in the discussion of Christ’s purifying and atoning offer of himself, yet one more is now to be unfolded: the death of Christ as the inauguration of the new covenant. The discussion in vv. 15-22 proceeds in this way: Verse 15 summarizes the act and the benefits of the act of Christ mediating a new covenant; vv. 16-17 make a theoretical argument for the truth of v. 15; vv. 18-21 repeat the argument in practical and historical terms; and v. 22 states an axiom, a general truth that has been both implicit and explicit in the entirety of chap. 9. 9:15-17. Verse 15 not only connects with vv. 11-14 as the phrase “for this reason” (because of this) indicates, but also continues the thought established at 8:6: “He is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted through better promises” (NRSV). Before developing further the theme of covenant, two benefits of Christ’s death are stated. First, his death provided an inheritance for those who are called—that is, for his brothers and sisters who were to inherit salvation (1:14; 4:1; 6:17). Here salvation is cast in terms of the promised inheritance developed earlier (4:1-11; 6:12-20). How Christ’s death makes this inheritance available will become evident in the writer's play on the word “covenant” as also meaning

“will” (vv. 16-17). Second, Christ’s death sets us free from transgressions under the first covenant. The metaphor of redeeming occurred at v. 12 and has enjoyed wide employment in Christian circles outside Hebrews (e.g., Rom 3:24-26; Eph 1:7). That these transgressions occurred under the first covenant is simply a restatement of vv. 9-10 and refers to the impotence of the levitical cultus to remove sin. No complicated relationship between cultus and sin similar to Paul’s argument about law and sin (Romans 7) is here implied. In vv. 16-17 the writer proceeds to argue the necessity of Christ’s death for the inauguration of the new covenant, and the argument is based on the principle that a covenant takes effect only at death. What is not altogether clear is the author’s meaning when using the word “covenant.” The term S:a8jKn (diathekeé) may be translated both “covenant” and “will.” If the writer is here playing on the ambiguity of the word and means “will” (as both the NRSV and the NIV have it), then vv. 16-17 are clear and straightforward: A will does not go into effect until the death of the one making the will. The application to Christ’s death is self-evident. Such a wordplay is possible here;°° the author has already proved to be quite a rhetorician and certainly wordplays were not only permitted but encouraged by teachers of rhetoric.°” It is not necessary to argue that in Hebrews a word has only a single meaning (cf. the range of meanings in the word “perfect,” noted earlier). However, the difficulty with shifting the meaning of the word from “covenant” to “will” is that while making a clear and selfcontained argument for the necessity of Christ’s 95. The word is used in the title for the Christian Scriptures: the New Covenant or the New Testament (Will). 96. So argues Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 253-56. 97. See discussion and examples in Cornificius Ad Herennium IV. 14. 20-21.

109

HEBREWS 9:15-22 COMMENTARY substances used, the writer draws the reader’s death, the change of translation interrupts rather attention to one element only: “This is the blood than contributes to the flow of the discussion. The of the covenant that God has ordained for you” word is clearly “covenant” in v. 15, and when the writer proceeds to give an example in wv. 18-21, (v. 20; cf. Exod 24:8). The writer may have used the word is again “covenant.” The question is this: a slightly different translation of Exod 24:8, may Do wv. 16-17 make sense if the key term keeps the have quoted from a liturgy, or may have been sense of “covenant”? Yes, if one assumes the writer paraphrasing. is arguing on the basis of ancient rites of covenant 9:22. At this point the author feels justified in making in which the slaughter of an animal symstating a general truth. The maxim-like affirmation bolically represented the parties who pledged with consists of two parts. First, “under the law almost their lives the keeping of the covenant.”* The person everything is purified with blood” (v. 22a). The or persons ratifying the covenant have thus in a qualifier “almost” is an acknowledgment that in figure given their lives. This may be implied in v. the levitical system there were some rituals of 17, where the expression “takes effect at death” is cleansing using substances other than blood. Secliterally “takes effect on dead bodies.” In support of ond, “without the shedding of blood” there is no this interpretation one may recall the dividing of “putting away” or “removal” of sins (v. 220; the slaughtered animals on the occasion of God’s coveGreek text does not have “of sins” as in the nant with Abraham (Gen 15:6-21) and God’s words NRSV). As this statement looks backward, it refers to an Israel that had not Kept the covenant, “I will _ to the removal of impurities and uncleanness of make like the calf when they cut it in two and the body (vv. 10, 13). Such was the limited passed between its parts” (Jer 34:18 NRSV). In other efficacy of the old system. As this statement looks words, God accepted the blood of the animal as a forward, it anticipates Christ’s atoning work and substitute for the people’s blood, but now that they his mediation of a new covenant under which “I had broken the covenant, the pledge of their blood will remember their sins no more” (8:12 NRSV). (lives) will be collected (cf. also Ps 50:5). One may As a whole the statement is a fitting summary of understand death, therefore, as necessary for the the claims made about blood thus far in this effectiveness of a “covenant” as well as for a “will.” chapter: Blood provides entrance before God (v. 9:18-21. If vv. 16-17 provide the argument in 7), purification of the conscience (v. 14), inauguprinciple, these verses provide the example of the ration of a covenant (v. 18), cleansing of those shedding of blood as essential in the inauguration entering a covenant (v. 19), and purifying of of a covenant. The writer draws on the tradition almost everything (v. 22). Not surprisingly, then, of the covenant at Sinai to make the point. The the writer repeats the phrase already twice used reader who turns to Exodus 24 to read in full the (vv. 7, 18), a phrase cast as a double negative for account of the ritual recalled in vv. 19-20 may be emphasis: “not without” or, as best translated surprised to find noticeable differences. Apparhere, “without blood shedding, there is no forently the writer of Hebrews is either following a giveness.” Again, let it be said to the reader whose tradition other than Exodus 24 or is taking the confession and piety do not include the language “first covenant” in a general sense and hence feels of blood sacrifice that both the understanding and free to amalgamate various rituals performed “unthe appreciation of the message of Hebrews reder the law” (v. 22). To the Sinai ceremonies, quires placing oneself within a cultus in which goats are added from the Day of Atonement, and the above-mentioned vocabulary and actions were water, scarlet wool, and hyssop from the cereintegral to rituals of cleansing, renewal, approachmony of the red heifer. Other embellishments ing God, and community forming. The writer is may be the author’s own or drawn from liturgies unavailable to us.” But for all the complexity of presenting the benefits of Christ for believers in the Sinai covenant ritual and in spite of all the these same images, obviously with hope for the same effects: cleansing, renewal, approaching 98. Lane, Hebrews 9-13, 242-43, defends this position. God, and community formation. (See Reflections 99. N. H. Young, “The Gospel According to Hebrews 9,” NTS 27 (1981) 205. at 9:23-10:18.)

110

HEBREWS 9:23-10:18

Hebrews 9:23-10:18, The New and Final Sacrifice NIV

NRSV

3It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. *For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. *Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. ?°Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. ?7Just

23Thus it was necessary for the sketches of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves need better

sacrifices than these. For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made by human hands, a mere copy of the true one, but he entered into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself again and again, as the high priest enters the Holy Place year after year with blood that is not his own; 26for then he would have had to suffer again and again since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to remove sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27And just as it is appointed for mortals to die

as man is destined to die once, and after that to

once, and after that the judgment, 7°so Christ,

face judgment, **so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him. ] Oj. law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. °But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, “because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. STherefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; Swith burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. 7Then I said, ‘Here | am—it is written about me in the scroll— I have come to do your will, O God.’”? 8First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them” (although the law required them to be made). °Then he said, “Here a7 Psalm 40:6-8 (see Septuagint)

having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin, but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him. ] Since the law has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the true form of these realities, it? can never, by the same

sacrifices that are continually offered year after year, make perfect those who approach. *Otherwise, would they not have ceased being offered, since the worshipers, cleansed once for all, would no longer have any consciousness of sin? *But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sin year after year. “For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. °Consequently, when Christ? came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body you have prepared for me; ° in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure. 7 Then I said, ‘See, God, I have come to do your

will, O God’ (in the scroll of the book‘ it is written of me).” 8When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are of fered according to the law), °then he added, “See, I have come to do your will.” He abolishes the aOther ancient authorities read they Gk uncertain

\

111

6Gk he ©

¢ Meaning of

HEBREWS 9:23-10:18 NIV

NRSV

I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the second. '°And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrtifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. "Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand

first in order to establish the second. '°And it is by God’s will? that we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11And every priest stands day after day at his service, offering again and again the same sactifices that can never take away sins. '?But when Christ® had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, “he sat down at the right hand of God,”

3and since then has been waiting “until his enemies would be made a footstool for his feet.” !4For

of God. 'Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, “because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy. 'SThe Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. Firsthe says: '6“This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds.”? Then he adds: “Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more.”? '8And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin. 416 Jer. 31:33

by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. "And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us, for after saying, 16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds,” '7 he also adds, “I will remember‘ their sins and their lawless deeds no more.” '8Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin. aGk by that will

617 Jer. 31:34

6 Gk this one

¢Gkon their minds and I

will remember

COMMENTARY far to press the analogy in v. 23. Animal sacrifices purify the earthly sanctuary (Lev 16:16; 20:3; 21:23; Num 19:20). Does this mean that the better sacrifice of Christ purifies the heavenly sanctuary? If thus pressed, then there is sin or impurity in the heavenly realm in need of cleansing. Some proponents of this view draw from Revelation 12 (Satan in heaven) and from the belief in hostile principalities and powers in heavenly places, familiar from the Pauline circle (e.g., Rom 8:38; Eph 3:10). However, such excursions take us far afield from the thought world of Hebrews. It seems wiser to take the analogy in a broad and general sense, to understand that Christ has entered the heavenly sanctuary with a better sacrifice—that is, himself—but to draw no more detailed comparisons than the writer does in the verses that follow (vv. 24-26). As for the purging

The argument now moves away from the focus on sacrificial victims and blood and back to the discussion in vv. 11-14. The occasion is the Day of Atonement, the officiant is the high priest, and the setting is the inner sanctuary. However, as at vv. 11-14, the reader is asked to think again in the Platonic categories of the real or true heavenly sanctuary and its earthly shadow or sketch; that is, the one Moses built (see Commentary on 8:1-6). The rites described earlier (vv. 18-21) purified the building, vessels, and people related to the tabernacle, which was but a copy of the heavenly one, but the heavenly sanctuary itself requires a better sacrifice (v. 23). The use of the plural “better sacrifices” is not meant to imply more than one (the writer is adamant about that!) but simply to parallel “these rites.” 9:23-26. Interpreters are divided as to how

112

HEBREWS 9:23-10:18 COMMENTARY or cleansing in the heavenly or spiritual world, the writer has spoken only of the purifying or perfecting of the conscience of the believers (vv. 9, 14). Whether identifying the cleansing of the heavenly tabernacle with the purifying of the conscience is an interpretation too subjective is a judgment withheld until further discussion by the writer.’ For the present, it is important to maintain the contrasts between Christ ahd the levitical high priest and to underline elements in the contrasts appropriate to the argument. Maintaining the contrasts involves repetition: Christ appeared in heaven itself, not in an earthly copy (8:2-6); Christ offered himself, not the blood of another sacrifice; Christ entered the presence of God, not the inner tent with only symbols of God’s presence; Christ offered himself once for all, not again and again; Christ removed sin, not bodily impurities (vv. 10, 13). Within these contrasts, the writer calls attention to several aspects of Christ’s high priestly ministry. That Christ’s appearance in God’s presence was “on our behalf” recalls the intercessory function of his ministry (2:18; 4:15; 7:25). This accent must not, however, diminish the importance of his act of sacrifice for the removal of sin. The intercession before God is not to be separated from the cross, which preceded it. In fact, the expression “to suffer” (v. 26) is clearly a reference to the death on the cross. That Christ’s sacrifice was “once for all” (7:27; 9:12) is underscored by the absurd alternative: Otherwise it would be necessary for him to die repeatedly “from the foundation of the world”— that is, from the very inception of God’s purpose (4:3). A third and final accent amid the repetitions of vv. 24-26 is the portrayal of Christ’s sacrifice of himself as an eschatological event: “He has appeared once for all at the end of the age” (v. 26). The phrase here translated “the end of the age” is found elsewhere in the NT in Matthew (Matt 13:39, 40, 49; 24:3; 28:20), but the view of Christ as the central eschatological event is more widely expressed (1 Cor 10:11; Gal 4:4; 1 Pet 1:20). That his coming was called an “appearing” or “manifestation” seems to have become lodged in liturgy (1 Tim 3:16; 2 Tim 1:9-10; Titus 2:11; 1 Pet 1:20; 1 John 1:2). The affinity of v. 26 with 100. See W. L. Lane, Hebrews 9-13, WBC 47B (Dallas: Word, 247-48, for an alternative interpretation.

1 Pet 1:20 is striking: “He was destined before the foundation of the world, but was revealed at the end of the ages for your sake” (NRSV). 9:27-28. Quite possibly these verses contain lines drawn from the catechesis the readers had

received at baptism (6:1-2). The comparison between the common human experience (to die only once and then to be judged) and Christ’s salvific work (offered for sins only once and then to appear again to save) is formally balanced, perhaps an excerpt. In content, the comparison joins a popular truism (one death is ordained for each person), an allusion to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah (bearing the sins of many, Isa 53:12), and the cultic imagery common to this epistle (offered for sin). But whether from a catechism or original, the central point is not our death and judgment; these serve as analogies to underscore the emphasis on the once-for-all nature of Christ’s high priestly ministry. The cross and Christ’s entry into God’s presence happened once, are effective for “many,” and will not be repeated. What will happen a second time is his appearing, but this time it will be “apart from sin”; that is, his second appearance will not be to deal with sin, since that work was done once for all. Rather, the Second Coming (that this is a reference to the parousia is clear) will be for the consummation of salvation for those eagerly awaiting his coming. Verse 286 could be translated, “He will be seen by those eagerly expecting him for salvation” (cf. Sir 50:5-10). The writer may here be returning to the image of the Day of Atonement ritual. While all the worshipers waited outside, the high priest entered the Most Holy Place to sprinkle blood on the mercy seat, in the very presence of God. Will the high priest reappear, or is it too audacious for any person to approach God? The people eagerly await his “second coming.” 10:1-18. With this passage the exposition of the high priestly ministry of Christ comes to a close (8:1-10:18); exhortation is resumed at v. 19. At v. 18 the writer will also conclude the interpretation of Jeremiah 31 (8:8-12) and the new covenant, the centerpiece text for the entire argument of 8:1-10:18. The discussion in 10:1-18 falls naturally into two parts: vv. 1-10 and vv.

Lle1e. 10:1-10. The reader of these verses will need to be careful, lest the high degree of repetition

1991)

113

HEBREWS 9:23-10:18 COMMENTARY focuses on the objective rather than the subjective side of Christ’s sacrifice), but attention to the spiritual gain for the Christian is increased. No doubt, the writer is now responding to the inwardness of the new covenant (mind, heart, knowing without instruction, favored with God’s mercy and forgiveness) of Jeremiah 31, quoted at 8:8-12 and repeated in part at 10:16-17. A key term in the discussions of the subjective side of Christ’s sacrifice for sin is “conscience.” The reader met the word at 9:9, at which point an unperfected or unpurified conscience was presented as a hindrance to worship—that is, to access to God. At 9:14 it is clear that the benefit of Christ’s self-sacrifice is the purifying of the conscience from dead works (see Commentary on 6:1) in order that worship of God may follow. The major inadequacy of the system of animal offerings was not only the inability to remove the “conscience of sins” (“consciousness of sin,” NRSV; “felt guilty for their sins,” NIV), but also a reminder, by the fact of constant repetition, of the very sin that could not be erased by the process (vv. 2-3). Of the five occurrences of the term “conscience” in Hebrews, the remaining two will be at 10:22 and 13:18, in each case consistent with the uses at 9:9, 14 and 10:2. Thus this ancient word, variously used in Hellenistic, Jewish, and Christian writers to refer to the human capacity for self-knowing, self-accusing, and when liberated, self-affirming,' is the writer’s term of choice for locating the place where the “objective” act of Christ’s sacrifice meets the “subjective” self of the believer. Nearing the end of the discussion of the new and final sacrifice of Christ, the writer now seeks to show more convincingly the contrast between the levitical priesthood and Christ’s by citing a psalm text that will demonstrate that within the old system itself could be found declarations of its own failing. Such is the focus of vv. 5-10, which consist of a biblical quotation with a brief midrash or commentary. Psalm 40:6-8 is introduced as words of Christ at the time of his incarnation, his coming into the world (cosmos). Attributing OT citations to Christ is fully in accord with Hebrews christology (1:1-4) and has been done previously at 2:12-13. Also consistent with the writer’s prac-

lull the mind into missing what is strikingly new here. For example, vv. 1-4 seem at first merely a summary of what has been said since 9:1. However, a closer reading reveals a new perspective and a new accent. The new perspective has to do with the use of the “shadow/substance” schema associated with Plato’s philosophy and introduced into Hebrews at 8:2-6 (see Commentary on 8:5). In chaps. 8-9 the schema used spatial categories; that is, the earthly tabernacle was but a shadow of the true and real heavenly tabernacle. At 10:1, however, the “shadow” and the “true form”! are temporal categories referring to what the law “foreshadows” and the “good things to come” in Christ. That the benefits in Christ are “to come” does not mean that they are totally futuristic from the believer’s perspective but that from the perspective of the law they were “to come.” By returning to the temporal categories (past, present, future), the writer can again discuss the historical dimension of Christ’s high priestly ministry— namely, his death on the cross. With spatial categories, the ministry of Christ was presented as heavenly, in the true tabernacle, while the levitical ministrations were earthly. Now both Levites and Christ are historically portrayed as anticipation and fulfillment. It would be difficult to overestimate the importance of this shift to temporal categories, without which the death on the cross (historical) would not be an integral part of Christ’s high priestly service. Christ’s ministry as our high priest would be limited to the heavenly work of intercession in the presence of God. If the death on the cross were but a preface to Christ’s ministry and not part of that ministry, the evaporation of the Christian religion into a gnostic myth could be more easily achieved. It was stated above that with 10:1 came a new perspective (not really new but a return to the perspective of Hebrews prior to 8:2) and a new accent. The new perspective is a move away from the spatial categories (above, below) and a return to the temporal categories (old, new). The new accent is the impact of the high priestly ministry of Christ on the believer. Again, the subject is not new (cf. 9:14, even though most of 9:11-28 101. Use of the term “form” (cix«v eikon) does not imply three levels of being: shadow, form, and reality. Here the “true form” (or lit., “the form itself”) refers to the reality itself. This is not an unusual use of the term. See the articles by V. Rad, G. Kittel, and H. Kleinknecht in 7DN7,

102. See C. A. Pierce, Conscience in the New Testament (Chicago: Alec Allenson, 1955) esp. 40-53, 99-103.

2:381-97.

114

HEBREWS 9:23—10:18 COMMENTARY tice is the use of verbs of speaking (“he says”) rather than “it is written.” In its own context, Ps 40:6-8 is a familiar prophetic warning against excessive dependence on ritual and a testimony to God’s preference for obedience and observance of the law within the heart (1 Sam 15:22; Ps 50:8-10; Isa 1:10-13; Jer 7:21-24; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:21-26). This particular citation, however, fits extremely well the writer’s purpose in a number of ways: the sharp contrast between the levitical cultus and Christ’s willing obedience; the contrast between animal offerings and Christ’s offering of his body; the contrast between ritual and the law in the heart. All of these accents serve well the author’s use of Jeremiah 31 with its description of the qualities that prevail under the new covenant. The sacrifice of his own will to God’s and the inwardness of God’s law mark the high priestly ministry of Christ. Between Ps 40:6-8 LXX and its quotation in Heb 10:5-7 there are a number of minor alterations (perhaps made by the writer of Hebrews), but one difference is both noticeable and important: In the Hebrew text and in some texts of the LXX, Ps 40:6 reads, “Ears you have dug for me” (NRSV, “You have given me an open ear”). The image is of one prepared to listen and to obey (as at Isa 50:5 in the description of God’s servant). However, the writer of Heb 10:5 uses a variant reading of the LXX text of Ps 40:6 that replaces “ear” (wtlov otion) with “body” (odua soma). This alternate reading fits perfectly the argument now being brought to a close; that is, not through the repeated rituals of the law’s system, but “through the offering of the body of Jesus once for all” (v. 10) we have been sanctified (2:11; 9:13; 10:10, 14, 29; 13:12). This sanctification is another way of saying what is expressed elsewhere as the cleansing or perfecting of the conscience. Here the writer is underscoring the interiority of both Christ’s act (a delighted willingness to do God’s will) and its benefit (our sanctification). Without directly saying so, the writer is commenting on the inwardness of the new covenant (on the mind, in the heart, mercy and forgiveness). But the word “body,” so important in 10:5-10, stands firm to prevent a totally subjective reading of Christ’s redemptive work. Thus it is a citation from the OT itself, Ps 40:6-8, that authorizes for the writer a bold con-

clusion: “He abolishes the first in order to establish the second” (v. 9; also 8:13). It is important to note that this conclusion is based on the OT’s self-criticism and attempt to correct itself (Ps 40:68 is but one example) rather than a Christian critique of the OT. Just as Jeremiah saw a new covenant replacing the old (31:31-35), so also the psalmist saw the end of the old sacrificial system and the inauguration of the new. The Christian contribution to the thought here is in hearing in Ps 40:6-8 the voice of Christ himself as the one through whom the old ends and the new begins. The reader is now ready to move on to wv. 11-18—except for the nagging uncertainty of the meaning of the rather parenthetical ending of the quotation: “in the scroll of the book it is written of me” (v. 7). For the psalmist, two possible meanings suggest themselves. The line could refer to the common notion of God’s making entries in a book about each of us, what we are to do and

what we do (Pss 56:8; 139:16). Or the psalmist may have had in mind the book of the laws governing the conduct of the king (Deut 17:18). For the Christian reader, the statement may be taken as a general reference to all in the OT that points to Christ. Such a view permits the kind of christological reading we find in Hebrews. 10:11-18. These verses conclude the exposition that constitutes the central section of Hebrews (8:1—10:18). As a conclusion, these verses offer a summary of points already made rather than new material. From a rhetorical point of view, however, this conclusion is worthy of investigation. For example, notice the contrast between other priests and Christ. They stand, because their work never ends but is, rather, a day-after-day-after-day tedium of ineffectiveness; Christ sits, because his single offering once for all has been completed, and he has only to wait until all its effects are brought to fruition. Citing Ps 110:1, with which this section began (8:1), the author relates that the eschatological consummation of Christ’s sacrifice will see all his enemies become a footstool for his feet. The language of “enemies” is preserved but without identification of who or what they are. The one benefit of Christ’s priestly work that is specified is the perfection of the ones “being sanctified” (ayidfw hagiazo, v. 14, present tense, indicating “in process”). The statement combines the idea of fin-

Bes:

HEBREWS 9:23—10:18 COMMENTARY to Christ, or to the Holy Spirit. And given the unified vision of what God is doing from the beginning up to and including these last days in which the Son acts finally and sufficiently, the writer is also comfortable in saying that the words of Jeremiah 31 are “to us” (v. 15). The new covenant is now in place, and its benefits are ours. This is the last word. And the very last word is no more—no more remembrance of sin—and no longer—no longer any need for the continuation of cultic acts that by their very repetition testified to their ineffectiveness. Christ, our high priest, has effected forgiveness of sin.

ished work with the acknowledgment that the believers are still moving toward that completion. (For the different meanings of the word “perfection” in Hebrews, see Commentary on 2:10; 5:9, $A 19, 28%.9:9°-10: 1.) At this point the writer returns to Jeremiah 31, having come full circle since introducing this classic text on the new covenant (8:8-12). Only two features of that covenant are here repeated: its inwardness and God’s remembering sin no more (Jer 31:33a, 340). At 8:8 the citation of Jeremiah 31 was introduced as God’s words; here “the Holy Spirit testifies” (3:7). The writer is comfortable attributing words of Scripture to God,

REFLECTIONS 1. The teacher or preacher who leads a group of reader-listeners into 8:1-10:18 will want to think through in advance what may be major obstacles not simply to understanding this section but to appreciating it and to appropriating it as a meaningful way of entering into and being sustained by God’s behavior toward us in Jesus Christ. The density of the text and its unfamiliar vocabulary will be somewhat daunting. The frequent repetition of points already made may dull interest. But perhaps most critical for fruitful engagements with this material will be introducing participants to a world of ritual, for many a strange and new world. There is a tent or tabernacle that is a “tent of meeting,” a place for meeting, not other persons for fellowship and conviviality, but God. In the tabernacle are pieces of furniture, each with historical and theological significance. There are special persons who minister as priests at the tabernacle, with clear regulations as to appointed days and appointed rituals. On the appointed Day of Atonement the high priest enters alone, beyond the chamber where priests serve into the Most Holy Place to minister before the Mercy Seat, the place of meeting between God and persons who wait anxiously outside for the return of the high priest, who has approached God on their behalf. It is on this analogy, by careful comparisons and contrasts, that the writer of Hebrews frames Christ’s redemptive activity on our behalf. Why so much preparatory work by the teacher or preacher? Because many people have no significant ritual life, religious, political, or cultural, from which to draw analogies. There is a sharp decline in those commemorative events, bodily practices, and public recitals by which people remember and participate in their own history. But this effort with persons lacking memory, theological vocabulary, and significant ceremonies can prove not only satisfying but also life changing. If creating liturgical memories needs explanation or justification, one can begin by pointing out how integral to the experience of a baseball or football game are certain always-repeated sights, sounds, and even smells. 2. At 8:1-5 the writer introduces into christology the spatial categories of the heavenly and real and the earthly, which is a shadow or sketch of the real. Temporal categories, by which the writer presents God’s activity in history, culminating in Jesus Christ, have been and will continue to be used. This heavenly/earthly schema is somewhat different from Paul’s descent/ascent christological pattern, but both testify to the early church’s struggle to find categories adequate to carry the weight of a message reaching into all time and space. In every generation the church seeks in its cultural context vehicles for conveying the gospel. In the case of Heb 8:1-5, the source seems to be Plato, mediated through Philo and certain rabbinic

116

HEBREWS 9:23—10:18 REFLECTIONS exegetes. Identifying sources then and now is important for understanding. However, one wants to avoid the genetic fallacy of thinking that by identifying a source one has explained a concept or image. Oral footnotes, like written ones, often seduce both speaker and listener into thinking a matter has been explained when actually it has only been surrounded. 3. The writer follows the portrayal of Moses’ desert tabernacle as a shadow or sketch of the true heavenly one with repeated discussions of the inabilities of its ritual system (9:1-15, 23-28; 10:1-4). Neither the blood of calves and goats nor the countless other offerings of its priests take away sin. It is very likely that many worshipers before that tabernacle would agree. Prophets warned against excessive dependence on the prescribed rituals (10:5-6, citing Ps 40:6-7), but they did not call for an abolition of tabernacle or temple services. An institution and its ceremonies, which do not provide the ultimate benefit, forgiveness and access to God, can still be of immense value to a community. One should not, therefore, take the designation “sketch” or “shadow” as occasion to speak pejoratively of the tabernacle of Israel beyond such speaking in the text itself. That the desert tent was a copy of the heavenly one (8:5) is not altogether a negative appraisal. And Moses built it according to God’s instruction! Already there is reason enough to reflect on its values. Neither the church nor its several ceremonies assure forgiveness of sin and access to God, but that does not disqualify them as valueless. God can be the source of and authorization for activities, places, persons, and rituals that are not finally salvific but are quite providential in the forming and sustaining of a people. As long as the provisional is not elevated to become the ultimate and absolute, both law and cultus can be held in high and healthy regard as gifts of God. Such a caution also includes the church. 4. The argument of 8:1-10:18 is in large measure an exegesis of Jeremiah 31 (Heb 8:8-12; 10:16-17). Because the new covenant of Jeremiah 31 is discussed in a Christian document, it is easy to forget that the new covenant was God’s promise to Israel through one of Israel’s prophets. A strength of vital religion is its willingness to be self-reflective, to balance calls to remember with calls to move beyond former things, to interpret afresh its own texts and institutions. Jeremiah’s message was not a call to return to Sinai but to accept a new covenantal relationship with God, a relationship characterized as God-centered, relational, inward, and with forgiveness that frees persons to move forward. Hebrews tells the church to overhear Jeremiah’s word from God, to accept it and become heirs of its promises through the mediating act of Christ, but not to become so possessive of it as to forget that it is the offer of a God who is always doing a new thing. Above all, God is a God who enters into covenants with human beings and in those covenants remains faithful. 5. The inwardness of which Jeremiah 31 speaks is characterized by the words “mind” and “heart”; a favorite term for the writer of Hebrews is “conscience” (9:9, 14; 10:2, 22; 13:18). This word has had an ambiguous history among Greeks, Jews, and Christians,’ but in Hebrews it refers at least to the center of our being, doing, and valuing, the “place” in us where the self-giving of Christ meets us and perfects or completes us, and the seat of all conduct and relationships. But two reminders about inwardness are in order. First, the interiority of our faith has its origin and prompting in the interiority of Christ’s own ministry—the sacrifice of his will to the will of God and his delight in doing God’s will (10:5-7). Second, the whole redemptive work of Christ cannot be written without remainder on the human mind or heart or conscience. Out there, historically and objectively, are the person of Jesus, who lived among us as one like us, the cross on which was offered the body of Jesus, the community with whom and among whom the benefits of Christ’s ministry are shared, and the world, created and upheld by the word of his power (1:2-3). 103. See Pierce, Conscience in the New Testament ,esp. 40-53, 99-103.

117

HEBREWS 9:23—10:18 REFLECTIONS 6. We have had occasion to observe that “blood” is in the ancient texts the equivalent of “life” and that the writer of Hebrews at times makes the exchange so that Christ’s sacrifice is the offering of himself (as at 9:14), presenting to God his life. While modern readers may find this expression more palatable than “shedding blood,” it also moves the act of Christ within the circle of response and responsibility by his followers. This is to say, Christ’s offering of his life to God was the ultimate act of worship in order that we, with purified consciences, may “worship the living God.” What, then, is this worship if it is not the offering of ourselves to God in ways appropriate to the nature of God and the needs that present themselves to us? On this matter, the word of Hebrews is not unlike the urging of Paul to the Roman Christians: “Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship” (Rom 12:1 NRSV). 7. At 10:15 the writer says that the words of Jeremiah 31 are “to us.” How can that be, given the historical location of Jeremiah and his audience? Paul also spoke of ancient texts as having been written “to instruct us” (1 Cor 10:11 NRSV). He found a linkage in the parallels between the wilderness experiences of Israel and the “wilderness” experiences of the Corinthian church. The writer of Hebrews spoke similarly in discussing the available sabbath rest (Heb 3:7—4:11). But here the words are “to us” by virtue of being words of the Holy Spirit, which makes the past present. Instead of “It is written... ,” which then requires a hermeneutical move from past to present, from “meant” to “means,” the writer’s use of “The Holy Spirit says...” implies that distances between past and present are dissolved. When words of Scripture are presented as words of the Spirit, every generation is in turn addressed; all can say the words are “to us.” This does not mean the writer has made an uncritical argument by proof text. In the exegesis of Jeremiah 31, the case has been made that the promised new covenant is inaugurated by the covenant-sealing death of Christ. The benefits of that covenant are now in effect: The word is “to us.” 8. In the struggle to understand and communicate the content of 8:1—10:18, the preacher will not want to miss the forceful rhetoric of this epistle-sermon. The two most operative rhetorical devices of this section are repetition and contrast. Under the cultural pressure to say something new in a new way, the preacher may too easily abandon the time-tested value of repetition used in the service of memory, clarity, and cumulative impact. As for contrasts, rhetoricians have long known the persuasiveness of sharp, clear, bold presentations framed as old/new, dead/alive, ineffective/effective, apparent/real, endless repetition/once for all, shadow/substance. Consider one example among many. At 10:11-12, two images are offered. One is of a priest, standing, working in the relentless cycle of the day-after-day repetition of the same words and actions. It is the picture of futility. The other image is of a priest who has made a single offering, a one-time-only act, and is now seated, waiting for the full harvest of benefits from that never-to-be-repeated sacrifice. It is the picture of finality. Much that is presented from desk and pulpit is, of course, properly framed as “both-and.” However, in most recitals of events and relationships there are also discontinuities that beg for crispness and clarity. The writer of Hebrews offers a model for casting such material “on the one hand/but on the other hand.”

118

HEBREWS 10:19-39 OVERVIEW HEBREWS 10:19-39, LIFE IN RESPONSE TO . THIS MINISTRY OF CHRIST OVERVIEW With this unit the “difficult” discussion comes to a close. Perhaps more correctly, the discussion of Christ’s high priestly ministry (7:1-10:18) is now followed with the kind of hortatory material that preceded it. The larger arrangement looks something like this: 5:116:20, exhortation; 7:1-10:18, exposition; 10:19-39, exhortation. Upon closer examination it is clear that the hortatory material in 10:1939 parallels in form that which preceded the

exposition. In 5:11-6:20, the author provides admonition (5:11—6:3), stern warning (6:4-8), and encouragement based on the church’s history of performance (6:9-20). Likewise, here the exhortation consists of admonition (10:19-25), stern warning (10:26-31), and encouragement based on the church’s previous performances (10:32-39). This symmetry is not accidental and testifies to the considerable rhetorical skills of the writerpreacher.

Hebrews 10:19-25, A Threefold Admonition NIV

NRSV

'2Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, ?°by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, ?'and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. “Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. “And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. **Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

19Therefore, my friends,? since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, “°by the new and living way that he opened for

us through the curtain (that is, through his flesh), land since we have a great priest over the house of God, *2let us approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. ?*Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who has promised is faithful. “And let us consider how to provoke one another to love and good deeds, “not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching. aGk Therefore, brothers

(COMMENTARY addressees (“Let us”). The paragraph is, in the Greek text, one extended sentence consisting of a statement of the christological grounds for the admonition (vv. 19-21) and the admonition itself (vv. 22-25). The christological grounds are two: “having boldness or confidence” and “having a great priest.” The translation “since we have”

In this first of the three distinct paragraphs of this unit, the writer begins to develop the implications of what has been said for the lives of the readers (“therefore”). They are directly addressed (“Brothers and sisters,” trans. “friends” in the NRSV for variety; cf. 3:1, 12), and the admonitions again include the writer along with the

119

HEBREWS 10:19-25 COMMENTARY sarx) as appositional to “curtain,” (kataTéTaocpa katapetasma) thereby identifying his flesh as the curtain or veil. Such a strict equation raises for many some uneasy questions.’ For example, since the curtain is a barrier, an obstacle to access to God, does this imply that in his lifetime, “in the days of his flesh,” Jesus posed a barrier to God, a barrier that had to be removed if we were to be able to approach God? Certainly nothing in Hebrews about the historical Jesus can be so construed; quite the contrary, his life among us as one who identified in sympathy with his brothers and sisters is most positively portrayed. In addition, nowhere else in Hebrews, with all its discussion of the veil of the tabernacle, is the veil identified as Christ’s body. The REB breaks up the identification of veil and body with the translation, “the way of his flesh.” This rendering may not be justified, but the interpretive attempt is welcomed. This is to say that “his flesh” should be understood in the movement of the entire passage; the way through the veil has been provided by the offering of himself, by his death, by his own blood. Such an understanding is fully in accord with the entire context and says anew what was stated at 9:12-14 (see also 10:10). The first ground, therefore, on which subsequent admonitions will rest is our confidence to approach God, because Christ’s self-offering has made the way available (vv. 19-20). The second is more briefly stated: “and since we have a great priest over the house of God” (v. 21). The writer is not adding anything to the discussion, but is, rather, employing two phrases to evoke for the reader key presentations made earlier; “great priest” recalls 4:14-16 and “house of God” brings to mind 3:1-6. Those passages are clearer and richer in meaning given the discussion of 7:1— 10:18. Having laid this foundation, the author proceeds directly to three admonitions. 10:22-25. First, “let us approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith.” Our approach to God, of which the writer has already spoken (4:16; 7:19), does not have here a stated purpose, but undoubtedly it is “to worship the living God!” (9:14 NRSV). As will be unfolded, worship has communal and moral, as well as liturgical, impli-

alerts the reader that conclusions are soon to be drawn. The conclusions consist of a threefold admonition, each portion beginning with the hortatory formula “let us”: Let us approach God; let us hold fast; and let us help one another. The first admonition centers on faith, the second on hope, and the third on love, giving the paragraph the balanced and rounded-off quality of a homily. 10:19-21. Not surprisingly, these verses are filled with words and phrases used earlier; after all, subsequent injunctions will depend on and flow out of earlier discussions. The confidence or boldness of which the writer has previously spoken in a strongly subjective sense (3:6; 4:16) now carries more objective weight in that the believer’s boldness has been given firm footing, “authorization,”'* by the entrance of our pioneer, our forerunner (2:10; 6:20) Jesus, who did so in the offering of his own blood. The “on our behalf” quality of his act is implicit in the statement “we enter in the blood of Jesus.” Our entrance is into the sanctuary, the Most Holy Place, where God dwells and where Christ now is (2:10; 4:3, 10; 6:19). The high priestly act of Christ’s self-giving does not leave us outside, as the ancient worshipers stood anxiously awaiting the exit of the high priest, but removes all obstacles to our own access to God. In the vivid metaphor of the Synoptics, the veil has been rent from top to bottom (Mark 15:38 and par.). The cultic language (“by the blood of Jesus”) is preserved, but there is no question, as unique as his act was, that our entry by the “new” (tpdobatos prosphatos, a rare word used only here in the NT) and “living” (4:12; 7:25; 10:31) way will be after the manner of his—and that is by obedience to God’s will (10:5-10). That fact will be spelled out in the remainder of the letter. The translation of nyiv evekatvioev (hemin enekainisen) as “he opened for us” (v. 20) does not quite carry the freight of meaning. More literally, the writer says, “He inaugurated for us,” language that echoes the entire new covenant discussion (cf. 9:18) and sets the reader in that theological context. There has been much debate over the ambiguous phrase “through the curtain [that is, through his flesh]” (v. 20). Essentially the issue is whether the reader is to take “flesh” (adpé

105. The alternative views are clearly presented in F. F. Bruce, The

Epistle to the Hebrews, rev. ed., NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 247-49.

104. Lane, Hebrews 9-13, 279.

120

HEBREWS 10:19-25 COMMENTARY cations. The writer feels the need to say here what should be assumed without being stated: Our approach should be with sincerity and integrity (“true heart,” Isa 38:3) and with abundant faith (6:11). These qualities are born of the confidence (recall both its subjective and objective sides) granted by the act of Christ on our behalf. As preparation for this worshipful approach to

another to love and good deeds” (v. 24). This is now the second time the writer has called on his readers to “consider,” “to think mutually about a matter” (3:1). What is to be considered are ways to “provoke” or “irritate” one another. The word Tapoévaos (paroxysmos) can also be translated “pester.” Provocation can, of course, have a negative sense (Num 14:11; Deut 1:34; Acts 15:39; 1 Cor 13:5), but the word also had a positive use in the sense of disturbing the apathetic or fearful person into activity. Such is its present use: to produce love and good works. The expression is strong but necessary for a community earlier characterized as inattentive, neglectful, and drifting. To this third admonition, like the first, are attached two participial expressions. The first is negative, indicating that some members of the community are neglecting (“abandoning”; cf. Matt 27:46; 2 Tim 4:10, 16) the assembly, the gathering for worship, and acts of mutual support. The reason for this desertion is not stated; later chapters will suggest possibilities: fear of persecution, heresy, feeling the group is not essential to personal faith, leadership tensions, discouragement over the delay of the parousia. This last possibility is suggested by the second participial addition: “encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching” (v. 250). This call for mutual encouragement recalls 3:13, at which point the NRSV chose to use the other sense of the verb, “exhort one another.” Given the condition of the church reflected in vv. 24-25, “exhorting” may be the better translation here. References to the day of the Lord, the day of judgment, or the day of Christ’s coming were so frequent and familiar that the writer needed only to say “the Day.” Reminders that the day was near (Rev 1:3) were integral to sustaining the eschatological expectation of the community, but with the passing of time and the increase of hardship, in some quarters these reminders suffered declining influence. (See Reflections at 10:32:39.)

God, we will have been granted that total cleansing not achieved under the old cultus. Bringing forward the now familiar image of sprinkling (9:13), the inward purification is of heart and conscience, also familiar terms for the interiority of life under the new covenant (8:10; 10:2). Somewhat surprisingly, the writer adds the washing of the body with pure water. This obvious reference to baptism not only recalls Israel’s cultic practice (Lev 16:4; Ezek 36:25-26), but also tes-

tifies to the early church’s joining of baptism to inward changes in the person being baptized. The language here may be liturgical. The similarity to 1 Pet 3:21 is striking: “And baptism, which this prefigured, now saves you—not as a removal of dirt from the body, but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (NRSV). Second, “let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering” (v. 23). Here is the second half of a rhythm recurring throughout the sermon: Let us approach (move forward); let us hold fast. Already the writer has urged this tenacity (3:6, 14; 4:14) and with special reference to hope, the “sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters the inner shrine behind the curtain” (6:19 NRSV). Confidence and firmness to the end must characterize hope, because the final results of Christ’s work are not yet in and there are many enemies (10:13). This confidence is grounded, finally, not in the strength of our grasp but in the trustworthiness, the faithfulness of the one who keeps promises (6:13-18). Hence, “confidence” is never solely a subjective state of the believer. Third, “let us consider how to provoke one

121

HEBREWS 10:26-31

Hebrews 10:26-31, Warning About the Future NRSV

NIV

26For if we willfully persist in sin after having received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, ?”but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. “Anyone who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy “on the testimony of two or three witnesses.” ??How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by those who have spurned the Son of God, profaned the blood of the covenant by which they were sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace? *°For we know the one who said, “Vengeance is mine, | will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” 'It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

elf we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, @7but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. ??7How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? °°For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; | will repay,”? and again, “The Lord will judge his people.”° “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. 430 Deut. 32:35

630 Deut. 32:36; Psalm 135:14

COMMENTARY Warnings to the readers have appeared in hortatory passages with some frequency (2:1-4; 3:12; 4:1), but by far the most severe occurred at 6:4-8. The warning here in 10:26-31 parallels 6:4-8 in both form and function. Each consists essentially of four statements: the previous experience of the believers; the apostasy; the impossibility of renewal; and the final fate.'°° A major difference between the two is that 10:26-31 is framed in the cultic language of the preceding exposition. It might be helpful to review 6:4-8 and commentary as preparation for reading 10:26-31. 10:26-27. The introductory “for” joins what follows to the exhortations immediately preceding (vv. 22-25). More specifically it is likely that v. 25 triggered this warning, because the writer has just referred to neglectful absence from church assemblies and the approach of the day of reckoning. In fact, the first-person plural of vv. 19-25, joining writer and readers in the same community

of grace and duty, continues in vv. 26-31. No one, not even the author-preacher, is exempt from the warning. The very first word in the Greek text (exovoiws hekousios) is “willfully” (“deliberately,” “intentionally”), its position of prominence announcing that it is the key term in the warning. Note also the use of the present tense of continuing action (“keep on sinning,” NIV; “persist in,” NRSV), making it clear that the violation and its penalty consist of sin that is intentional and continuous. In speaking of intentional or willful sin, the author is recalling the language of Num 15:22-31, where it is stipulated repeatedly that atonement ceremonies under the first covenant dealt with “unintentional” sins. The superiority of the new covenant to the old, as has been argued in 8:1-10:18, gives to the words “willful” and “continuous” a special gravity. That the warning is to those living within the new covenant is expressed in the phrase “after having received the knowledge of the truth” (v. 26). Here in digest is a reference to the benefits of the new covenant presented more elaborately in 6:4-5. Having “knowledge of the truth” seems

106. See W. L. Lane, Hebrews 9-13, WBC 47B (Dallas: Word, 1991) 296-97, for a clear display of the parallels, not only between the two warnings but also between the encouragement passages that follow (6:9-

12; 10:32-36).

122

HEBREWS 10:26-31 COMMENTARY to have been a rather broadly used way by which early Christians referred to their faith experience (John 8:32; 17:3; 1 Tim 2:4; 4:3). It comes as no surprise to the reader that for those who thus repudiate the covenant with its benefits, which they had enjoyed, Christ’s sacrifice cannot be repeated (v. 26); that his self-offering was once for all has been repeatedly stated (10:10, 12, 14, 18). Instead of another sacrifice’ for sin, there awaits a certain judgment of fire (v. 27). While a general conflagration was widely associated with God’s final judgment (Isa 26:11; Zeph 1:18; Matt 25:41; 2 Pet 3:7, 12), the language here seems more reminiscent of the fiery punishment of the rebellious Levites under Korah’s leadership (Num 16, esp. v. 35). Those to be punished with raging fire are characterized as “adversaries,” persons who “stand over against” God. The writer may have in mind the enemies to be put underfoot, the image in Ps 110:1 (Heb 1:13; 10:13). 10:28-29. The argument here is on the pattern of “lesser to greater” (a@ fortiori), used also at 2:2-3. Under the law of Moses, the death penalty was stipulated for murder (Lev 24:17), for blasphemy (Lev 24:14-16), and for idolatry (Deut 17:2-7). This last violation is the one in the writer’s mind, since it constituted a breach of covenant, required the testimony of two or three witnesses (Deut 17:2-7), and for it punishment was to be administered “without pity” (Deut 13:8), even if the guilty person were a relative or friend. The writer’s logic moves forward without wavering: If this sequence held for those who violated the old covenant, those who reject life under the new can expect even more severity. Greater blessings imply greater judgment; the measure of height is the measure of depth. In three participial phrases the violation of the apostates from the new covenant is graphically presented. First, they have trampled underfoot the Son of God (the NIV is more literally correct here). The verb “to trample” (katatatéw katapated) is used elsewhere to describe what happens to salt that has lost its savor (Matt 5:13), to pearls cast before swine (Matt 7:6), and to seed scattered on a path (Luke 8:5). One can hardly imagine a metaphor of greater contempt. The use of the title “Son of God” further underscores the depravity of the act. Second, they have treated as “common”/

the covenant. Although the phrase “blood of the covenant” recalls for Christians the eucharist (Mark 14:24 and par.; 1 Cor 11:25), there is no evidence that the writer is referring to a sacramental dispute that occupied a later generation.!°7 Here the term refers straightforwardly to Christ’s act of giving himself for our sins (9:12, 14; 10:19). And finally, the violators have “outraged” (evuBpiCw enyobrizo; “insulted,” NIV) the Spirit of grace. The participle is a form of the word transliterated Ayodris, used in the Hellenistic culture to refer to a haughty arrogance that belittles others.' At Matt 22:6 the word is translated “mistreated” (servants); at Luke 11:45, “insult”; and at 1 Thess 2:2, “shamefully mistreated.” These who have “shared in the Holy Spirit” (6:4) now behave toward that Spirit, which had made specific in their lives the grace of God, with words, conduct, and attitude borne of cynical self-importance. That the writer framed this strong sentence as a question (“What do you think these perpetrators deserve?”) does not reflect uncertainty but calls on the readers themselves to pronounce the sentence of judgment. 10:30-31. However, that judgment is not theirs to make. Judgment, like salvation, is God’s work, not the readers’, not their leaders’, and not the writer’s. And lest anyone think that the writer is making the judgment or is calling on the readers to do so, two texts are cited that remind everyone that judgment belongs to God alone (Deut 32:35a with a slight variation from the LXX, and Deut 32:36; also Rom 12:19). While judgment often involves the vindication of God’s people, at v. 30 the accent is clearly on the punishment of apostates. In closing the warning, the writer gathers up all that has been said in vv. 26-30 in a sentence that has the ring of holy law or prophetic pronouncement: “Fearful it is [“Fearful” is emphasized by being placed first in the sentence] to fall into the hands of the living God.” While falling into God’s hands can be an experience of comfort and rescue (2 Sam 24:14), it is not so here. The living God is held before apostates as “a consuming fire” (12:24). At stake is the majesty and holiness of God. 107. Ignatius To the Smyrneans VII. 108. See G. Bertram, “UBpis Aybris,” Theological Dictionary of the NT, 8:295-307. The opposite of Hybris is described by Philo Concerning God 10.5 as the character of God.

“vulgar”/“profane” (koivds koinos) the blood of

123

HEBREWS 10:26-31 COMMENTARY saries. The position and public esteem of the patron would require severe punishment of the former client. This social, rather than cultic, interpretation of Hebrews views God as patron, Christians as clients, and Christ as the mediatorbroker. Any Christian who violated this relationship, either by neglect or by public words and behavior, would thereby be guilty of holding up the patron to ridicule and shame, while trampling underfoot the benefits previously enjoyed. Such persons would be apostates, and since the honor and majesty of God was at stake, would have to be punished, severely and finally. Whether this cultural analysis provides an adequate rationale for the vocabulary, theology, and argumentation concerning apostasy in Hebrews is a judgment needing further reflection.'° (See Reflections at 10:32-39.)

The behavior described here and at 6:4-8, which the author regards as beyond the restoration of repentance and without forgiveness because there is no more sacrifice for sin, can be understood through the language of covenant. Throwing off the bond of covenant, old or new, was seen as final and fatal. However, an alternative way of understanding apostasy has been offered by a probing of the patron/client relationships that were prevalent in the first-century Mediterranean world. From correspondence and other documents of the time, we have learned that persons in position to bestow favors (freedom, money, political advantage, etc.) entered into relationships, directly or through a mediator (broker), with persons needing and seeking those favors. In return the clients gave to their patrons gratitude and honor. If a client were ever to violate that relationship, either by public denial or gradually drifting away, the affront to the person and honor of the patron would be of such gravity that the patron and client would become adver-

109. For the best case for this cultural analysis (thus far), see David deSilva, Despising Shame: A Cultural-Anthropological Investigation of the Epistle to the Hebrews, SBLDS 152 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995).

Hebrews 10:32-39, Encouragement from the Past NIV

NRSV

3?Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you stood your ground in a great contest in the face of suffering. **Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. “You sympathized with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions. 35S0 do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded. *°You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you~ will receive what he has promised. °’For in just a very little while, “He who is coming will come and will not delay. 38 But my righteous one? will live by faith. And if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with him.”°

32But recall those earlier days when, after you had been enlightened, you endured a hard struggle with sufferings, “sometimes being publicly exposed to abuse and persecution, and sometimes being partners with those so treated. *4For you had compassion for those who were in prison, and you cheerfully accepted the plundering of your possessions, knowing that you yourselves

But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved. 438 One early manuscript But the righteous

638 Hab. 2:3,4

124

possessed something better and more lasting. Do not, therefore, abandon that confidence of yours; it brings a great reward. *°For you need endurance, so that when you have done the will of God, you may receive what was promised. 5” For yet “in a very little while, the one who is coming will come and will not delay; °° but my righteous one will live by faith. My soul takes no pleasure in anyone who

shrinks back.” But we are not among those who shrink back and so are lost, but among those who have faith and so are saved.

HEBREWS 10:32-39 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY Again, returning to the parallel passage at 6:912 might be helpful. It and the present passage are texts of encouragement, recalling former days of faithfulness in the congregation, urging that such behavior be sustained in the present, and anticipating eschatological confirmation and reward. At 10:32-39, however, we are given more details about the recent history of the church. 10:32. The adversative conjunction “but” alerts the reader to a radical shift from vv. 26-31. The fundamental ground for encouragement is in remembering former days. The activation of memory was basic to preaching in both synagogue and church (Lev 19:33-34; the entirety of Deuteronomy,; “1; Cor 15:1;02 Tim 1:6; «2 Pet 3:2), -and those days to be remembered were not necessarily “the good times.” For example, the Israelites were urged to embrace the stranger among them, remembering their own bitter experiences as strangers in Egypt (Lev 19:33-34). So here, the recollection is of times of verbal and physical abuse, but times, nevertheless, when they were firm, bold, and sympathetic. The writer need only briefly remind the readers that their “contest with sufferings” (an athletic image to be developed later in chap. 12) came “after you had been enlightened” (v. 26; 6:4). Becoming followers of Christ did not end hardship but began it in new and intense ways. 10:33-34. These verses lay out in four expressions, framed in the now familiar form of a chiasm, the former experiences to be remembered: A B

B’ A’

publicly exposed to abuse and persecution being partners with those so treated having compassion for those in prison cheerfully accepting the plundering of possessions

This presentation makes clear the two aspects of the congregation’s sufferings: those endured directly and those endured in sympathy with others. Those directly endured were of two kinds: verbal

abuse (reproach, derision, taunt [Jer 20:8; 24:9]) and physical abuse (a general term for all kinds of affliction [Mark 13:19; Acts 20:23; Rom 5:3]). Added to the pain was its public nature, the believers being made a “spectacle” (“theatrical display,” 1 Cor 4:9). But under such humiliating conditions the faithful did not avoid further disgrace by abandoning fellow believers in their times of trial; rather, they entered into their sufferings as partners, as sharers in a common lot. This description is in sharp contrast to the tendency of some to absent themselves from the church assemblies (v. 25). Demonstrating sympathy for those imprisoned involved more than a feeling of sadness or regret; rather, it meant visits, providing food, running errands, and perhaps interceding (Matt 25:36; Phil 2:25). All of these activities meant risking further verbal and physical abuse. The plundering of the property of Christians may refer to official seizure, mob violence, or perhaps to the burglarizing of the homes of

believers who were taken to prison.'!° Citizens of the many provinces of the Roman Empire did not wait for imperial edicts to make life miserable for minority groups, ethnic or religious. However, the Christians were able to endure the loss of one kind of property because they were sustained by the certainty that they had another kind of possession, “better” (1:4; 7:19; 8:6) and “permanent” (7:3; 11:14-16; 13:14). In fact, the Christians not only endured such treatment, but they also “cheerfully anticipated” it, embracing a perspective traced back to Jesus himself (Matt 5:12; Luke 6:22; Rom 5:3; Acts 5:41). 10:35-39. Words of encouragement conclude by urging three qualities that the congregation already possesses, as demonstrated by past performances: boldness, endurance, and faith. In urging that the readers not throw away their boldness, the writer is speaking not only of a quality of tenacity (3:6) but also of the confidence granted them by the high priestly ministry of 110. Lane, Hebrews 9-13, 300, cites Philo’s description of the violence against Jews in Alexandria in 38 ce: “Their enemies overran the houses now left vacant and began to loot thern, dividing up the contents like spoils of war” (Against Flaccus 56). Of course, pogroms against Jews in any city would also affect Jewish Christians (Acts 18:1-2).

HEBREWS 10:32-39 COMMENTARY more reasonable to understand “in a very little while” as the author’s way of introducing the Habakkuk citation on a note of urgency and perhaps addressing a lethargy born of the delay of the parousia. In the citation of Hab 2:3c4, the writer again uses the LXX and not the Hebrew text, and again there are variations from the LXX text. The writer may be following a different text of the LXX or, given the importance of Hab 2:3-4 for the early church, may be using a form of the citation already adapted for Christian use.'!? More likely, however, at least some of the modifications are the work of the writer of Hebrews. Other than Stylistic differences, Heb 10:37-38 varies from Hab 2:3c-4 LXX in three significant ways: (1) The definite article is added to the participle “coming” (referring to the vision in Hab 2:3c) to make it read O€pxduevos (ho erchomenos), “the one coming” and, therefore, messianic; (2) the “my” of Hab 2:4 is moved from “my faith” (“my faithfulness”) to “my righteous one” (i.e., the reader); and (3) the order of the two clauses in Hab 2:4 has been inverted so that “My soul takes no pleasure in anyone who shrinks back” (v. 38) follows rather than precedes “but my righteous one will live by faith.” The reasons for this inversion of clauses are probably two: (1) In its new location the reference to one who shrinks back clearly refers to the believer (“my righteous one”) and not to the Messiah (“the one who is coming”); (2) by ending with the line about anyone who shrinks back, the writer is able to conclude with an exhortation that both repeats the previous warning (“Do not throw away your confidence,” v. 35) and anticipates the discussion of faith that follows. This is to say, vv. 38639 are perfectly fitted as transitional. From a rhetorical point of view, vv. 38-39 contain two familiar and forceful moves. First, the two verses form a chiasm:

Christ (4:16; 10:19). What is at stake is the final reward, the lasting possession, that God will give in the day of judgment, since judgment includes not only punishment but also God’s favorable response to their work and love (6:10). Likewise, the endurance the congregation needs now as much as ever was formerly a principal quality of the membership (v. 32). Whether the implied loosening of their grip was due to a worsening of afflictions endured or to attrition is not evident. To the “very end” (6:11) can be a long time, but for them “endurance” was the very definition of God’s will (v. 36). At the end of endurance lies the “promise” (€TayyeAta epangelia), a term already familiar as a reference to the salvation provided by Christ (4:1, 8; 6:12, 17; 8:6), which will reappear frequently in chap. 11 (11:13, 17,

33,39). The final quality urged on the readers, faith, is introduced by a composite quotation of Scripture (vv. 37-38) to which the writer adds a brief homiletical application (v. 39). Noticeably absent is the author’s usual introduction of a quotation: God says, Christ says, or the Holy Spirit says. That omission might have been for rhetorical effect in order to follow the general eschatological remark in v. 36 with the sharp and sudden “a little while.” The brief citation (three words) is from Isa 26:20, and it may have been detached from the remainder of Isa 26:20 in early Christian liturgy to serve an eschatological accent. The whole of the verse says, Come, my people, enter your chambers, and shut your doors behind you; hide yourselves for a little while until the wrath is past. (Isa 26:20 NRSV)

Is the Hebrews writer citing this verse and then “correcting” it with the use of Hab 2:3, 4 because the church addressed had adopted Isa 26:20 as its scriptural support for a pattern of retreat and withdrawal from public life? At least one commentator thinks so.'!' But the general portrait of the congregation (drifting, slipping, neglecting, forgetting, waning) hardly fits the image of a church that has deliberately taken a position of acquiescence, which it supported with Scripture. It is

A B B’ A’

live by faith not shrink back not shrink back have faith

This construction both aids the hearer’s memory and makes the impact of emphasis by repetition.

111. T. W. Lewis, “‘... And If He Shrinks Back’ (Heb 10:38b),” 7S 22 (1975) 88-94.

112. J. A. Fitzmyer, “Hab 2:3-4 and the NT,” in To Advance the Gospel: New Testament Studies (New York: Crossroads, 1981) 236-46.

126

HEBREWS 10:32-39 COMMENTARY Second, the writer’s arrangement of the material makes possible a more effective final exhortation, “not this... but this,” which denies the negative and affirms the positive: We are not those who shrink back and are lost (destroyed) but those who have faith and are saved (preserve the soul). By

saying that we are not of or among the shrinkers but of or among the faithful, the writer anticipates a roll call of those among whom we live, men and women who did not shrink back but who held firmly to their faith in God. Such will be the content of chap. 11.

REFLECTIONS 1. We have learned by this time that the author of Hebrews is a skillful preacher, and nowhere is that fact more evident than in the hortatory portions of this epistle-sermon. Some of the rhetorical strategies have been noted in the commentary. For example, the balanced admonitions to faith, hope, and love in 10:19-25 are given to the reader in the symmetry of homiletical form. Preachers are warned, however, to beware of pre-packaged sermons, even if they are presented in the biblical text itself. Rather than be seduced into shortened preparation when faced with a text that is preaching itself, one is well advised to dig into the problems addressed by the writer’s homily. The congregation of readers is suffering waning zeal and a noticeable decline in attendance at its assemblies. Why? Is it the problem of individualism? Is nothing significant being said or done? Do those attending face public ridicule? What more likely produces a debilitating lethargy: persecution, lack of attention from the culture, or cultural favor? Perhaps this church has allowed itself to be defined by its opposition and has not really defined itself by God’s gracious act in Christ. Since the time of Socrates, philosophers and theologians have observed a condition that afflicts persons and communities, sometimes without causes known to themselves, called ennui. Sails hang limp, but not for lack of a breeze. In the church the condition is labeled akedia, often translated “sloth” and listed among the seven deadly sins. How is it to be addressed? 2. If the writer of Hebrews thinks the church being addressed is even approaching ennui, then one can better understand the intensity of the warning against apostasy (vv. 26-31). There is a passion in the warning that burns with a fire rarely seen or heard. In the writer’s case it is borne both out of concern for the church and out of a theology that has a once-and-for-all quality. It is covenant theology, which sees God’s gracious act toward us in Christ as sufficient for the human condition of sin. The author cannot imagine anyone experiencing its benefits and then willfully breaking the covenant. Language is strained to describe such an act: The Son of God is trampled underfoot, the blood of the covenant is treated as profane and vulgar, and the Spirit of grace is regarded with haughty contempt. It takes a high view of the Christian faith to make such a “low” possible. For Christians who regard all matters of religion as optional, as opinions of only private merit, and as unworthy of such passion, the language of 10:26-31 must, indeed, sound primitive and unenlightened. Perhaps the readers of Hebrews, drifting and neglectful as they were, saw nothing in the life of their congregation remotely deserving of such a warning. Maybe that is just the point.

3. The readers are reminded (10:32-39) that their sufferings, their verbal and physical abuse, began “after you had been enlightened.” One wonders if these believers were alerted before baptism to the real possibility that discipleship would bring hardship. So easy it is to say that one has pain and troubles in the world, but if one trusts in the grace of Christ, pain and troubles are carried away. Perhaps the old problems do depart, but they are often replaced by large, unexpected ones, known only to, borne only by, those who speak and act for God in the world. Faith and love and hope and generosity and forgiveness have enemies out there,

127

HEBREWS

10:32-39 REFLECTIONS

enemies not yet put underfoot. Until they are, candidates for baptism need to be informed: It is not only disobedience but also obedience that exacts a price. 4. In 10:32-39, the writer turns to the faculty of memory to nourish faith and encourage those who believe. Memory is essential to the life and vitality of both Judaism and Christianity. The exodus continues to be a resource for those who remember; the self-offering of Christ continues as a reality for those who share the sacrament of remembrance. For both synagogue and church memory is of two kinds: the memory of what God has done prior to our own lives, and the memory of what God has done within the span of our own years. It is this second kind that is being activated in Heb 10:32-39. The congregation is urged to turn the pages of its own history, to remember the difficult times, and to recall especially how boldly and graciously they responded to those hardships. The young can borrow these memories and claim them as their own; the ones who lived those memories can be continually refreshed by them. Blessed is the congregation that can call up its own record of love and good works as a resource for times of discouragement.

128

HEBREWS 11:1-12:17 A CALL TO FIDELITY AND MUTUALITY OVERVIEW hat a new section begins at 11:1 is clear, “for reasons to be elaborated, but not so clear is the terminus. On the basis of common vocabulary and the themes of faith, endurance, and discipline, one could end the section at 12:11. However, 12:12-13 flow naturally enough out of 12:1-11 to argue for 12:13 as the close of the section. As for 12:14-17, the decision is to join them either with what precedes or with what follows. Since 12:18 brings such a dramatic shift in thought and image, it was decided to attach 12:14-17 with the preceding paragraph. No real exegetical gain or loss is at stake; it is in the nature of hortatory material that the subjects treated are multiple and shift easily from one to another. What is quite clear is that 11:1-40 is a unit in form, function, and theme. Technically this unit is exposition, but it functions as exhortation, while 12:1-17 is directly hortatory. The twin themes of faith and endurance in 11:1-40 were introduced in the immediately preceding 10:3639, joining this unit to the context smoothly. In fact, these themes have been anticipated since 6:12-15. “Endurance” (utoyovn hypomone) as a noun occurs only at 10:36 and 12:1, but it is used as a verb at 10:32; 12:2-3, 7. The transition into 12:1-17, therefore, is natural, although 11:40

(“they would not, apart from us, be made perfect”) makes it evident that at 12:1 the subject will shift from faith examples of the past to the present; that is, to Jesus and his followers. The movement, then, is from the earlier experiences of faithful endurance by the readers (10:32-39), to those examples from redemptive history (11:1-40), to Jesus and the Christian community (12:1-17). But this flow of the material toward the future is more than the author’s literary creation. It is chronological in that the sketches of God’s faithful begin at Genesis 1 and continue through Joshua 6, followed by a swift summary of many others. It is theological in that

faith’s endurance and God’s approval are one continuous story of the reliability of God (11:11). It is christological in that the story moves toward Christ, in whom the narrative has its completion and the past faithful their fulfillment. Hence faith is never very different from hope (11:1, 10, 13, 16, 26, 39-40). Enough has been said previously about Christ, in whom God has spoken “in these last days” (1:2), and about those who have entered into the new covenant inaugurated by him to anticipate very clearly the level of expectation in terms of faithful endurance, which will be spelled out in the exhortations to follow (12:1-17).

HEBREWS 11:1-40, LEARNING FROM OUR FOREBEARS IN FAITH OVERVIEW Because 11:1-40 is so obviously a unit in form, function, and theme, and because the reader can move rather smoothly from 10:39 to 12:1, the

question has naturally arisen as to whether this chapter once had a separate existence but has been inserted here by the author or a later hand.

HEBREWS

11:1-40 OVERVIEW cumulative effect when employed in argumentation. But with or without anaphora, the rhetorical use of lists, often constructed from a selective reading of a people’s past, was widespread in the Mediterranean world.''4 Aristotle, in his Rhetoric (Book I) discussed the nature and role, strengths and weaknesses, of “examples” in public speaking. He defended their use as both impressive and persuasive when carefully located and arranged in an address. By “examples” he referred not only to persons but also to events, places, relationships, things, etc. Among Jews. and Christians who drew heavily on sacred history for homiletical purposes, lists of persons and their deeds are not uncommon. Brief lists with sermonic functions can be found at Josh 24:2-13 and 1 Sam 12:6-15. In Wis 10:1—11:1, wisdom functions in the recital very much as faith does in Hebrews 11. However, in an apparent effort to underscore that all commendable behavior was made possible only by the wisdom of God, names are withheld, even though the persons, beginning with Adam, are easily identifiable. The hymn to the ancestors (“Let us now praise famous men”) in Sir 44:1-49:16 has much in common with Hebrews 11, but the closest parallel to this text is in the Christian epistle 7 Clement (1 Clem 17:1-19:3).!!5 However, for Clement the virtue being extolled is not faith but humility. But among these and many other antecedents and parallels, Greco-Roman, Jewish, and Christian, Hebrews 11 remains a composition more properly understood in its own form, function, and context than in relation to possible sources.

In response, let it be said that no extant manuscript of Hebrews is without 11:1-40. In addition, as has been noted, the themes of faith and endurance were introduced in 10:32-36, and the whole of chap. 11 is well joined to that context. Furthermore, the author has already demonstrated the use of exposition of Scripture for purposes of exhortation (3:7— 4:11; 10:30-31, 37-39), which is the nature of 11:1-40. And finally, the theology of this unit is fully consonant with that of the remainder of the epistle. It can be concluded, therefore, that 11:1-40 is the author’s own, and if composed separately, it has certainly been well woven into the fabric of this “word of exhortation” (13:22).!!5 With that in mind, the reader would do well to reflect briefly on this remarkable composition as a single literary piece. Verses 2 and 39 form an inclusio by the use of the unusual passive form of paptupew (martyreo), “to witness.” When so used, it is variously translated “received approval,” “was attested,” “were commended” (vv. 2, 4-5, 39). Throughout the recital of actions by the faithful men and women of old, some form of the word “faith” appears twenty-four times. If one returns to the accounts of these characters in Scripture, one notices that often there is no reference to faith as the moving force in their lives, even though it may be strongly implied. The phrase “by faith” names the perspective of the writer’s rereading of the OT. The eighteen appearances of the phrase “by faith” constitute anaphora, a rhetorical device in which a word or phrase is repeated at the beginning of successive clauses, or verses if used in a poem. Anaphora makes an impact on memory when used to teach, impresses listeners when used in an encomium, and has

114. Michael Cosby, The Rhetorical Composition and Function of Hebrews 11 (Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press, 1988) esp. 1-24, 93-109. 115. The relationship between 7 Clement and Hebrews is much debated. However, that there is a relationship and that / Clementis from Rome has persuaded many that either the provenance or the destination of Hebrews was also Rome.

113. G. W. Buchanan, Hebrews, AB 36 (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1972) 184.

Hebrews 11:1-2, The Meaning of Faith NIV

]

NRSV Now faith is being sure of what we hope

] ] Now faith is the assurance of things hoped _ I for, the conviction of things not seen. 2Indeed, by faith? our ancestors received approval.

for and certain of what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for.

@Gk by this

130

:

HEBREWS 11:1-2 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY In this brief introduction, the writer makes the two affirmations that inform and focus the recital that follows: the nature of faith and the approval of God on the life that was determined by such faith. One can argue that v. 1 does not “define” faith; after all, the word tietts (pistis, “faith”) will sometimes indicate trust or belief and sometimes refer to the quality of loyalty or faithfulness. Rather than offering a definition, the author focuses and gives thematic unity to the discussion. In 10:36-39, faith is presented in a context of related words: “assurance,” “endurance,” “firm hope in the promises from which we do not shrink back.” The orientation is eschatological, and that perspective will prevail through v. 40. As used here, faith cannot be severed from hope. The vocabulary of v. 1 will not be carried through the chapter, but were v. 1 to be read as a refrain following each episode of faith, it would fit naturally. Translators of v. 1 are never satisfied even with their own renderings of the two key but very complex terms, Utéotaots (Aypostasis) and édeyxos (elegchos). Both the NRSV and the NIV treat these words subjectively in terms of “assurance”/“being sure” and “the conviction”/“certain.” The REB is almost objective in translating the first as “gives substance to” and subjective in the second, “convinces us.” There is no question that faith strongly involves the quality of human embrace and trust and tenacity, but this does not handle adequately these two words; that is, it is not a case of “believing it makes it so.” The first term is used at 3:14 with the obvious sense of “confidence” on our part, but at 1:3 the meaning is more philosophical, referring to the very essence or substance or being of God. This is to say, the word points to a reality that does not owe its existence to human awareness. Faith, then, joins the subjective and the objective: “Faith is the

assurance of things hoped for.” Interestingly, hypostasis is used in the LXX at Ruth 1:12; Ps 39:7; and Ezek 19:5 to translate the Hebrew word for “hope” (mpn tiqwa). Hence, in this unusual clause, the certainty both of faith and of faith’s object is asserted. This certainty was earlier anticipated in the image of the anchor behind the veil (6:19). The second key word (elegchos) is more at home in a court of law and can properly be translated “proof” or “demonstration”: “Faith is proof of the unseen.” That which is not seen may be a spatial reference pointing to the Platonic realm of the true and real, encountered earlier in discussions of the heavenly sanctuary (see Commentary on 8:1-5; 9:11, 24). However, it may also be a temporal reference pointing to the future, and given the orientation of the entire chapter toward what lay in promise for all the faithful, the latter sense is the dominant one. Hope (3:0; Such segmentation both follows from the premise and strengthens the perception that James has little thematic coherence. Analysis of earlier portions of this composition, however, gives us confidence that if James is granted literary coherence, his argument becomes much easier to detect. In the present case, there are far more obvious links with the previous essay on speech (3:1-12) than with the verses following 4:10, although there, too, James creates a subtle and substantive connection. Most striking is the question in 3:13, “Who is wise and understanding among you?” which picks up so naturally the warning against becoming teachers in 3:1. There is also the word linkage between “bitter” in 3:11, 14; the phrase “in your members” in 3:6 and 4:1; and the repetition of “restless” in 3:8, 16. It is possible to detect a natural transition from the two sources of water and their fruits in 3:11-12 and the two sources of wisdom and their fruits in 3:13-18. Finally, there is the implied violence of cursing one’s neighbor in 3:9 and going to war against others in 4:1. These links to the passages before and after it only serve to highlight how distinctive the literary structure of 3:13-4:10 is when taken as a unit. The section is, first of all, intensely sermonic. It contains a generous portion of those stylistic features associated with the diatribe: rhetorical questions (3:13; 4:1, 5), abusive epithets (4:4, 8), vivid imagery (4:1, 9), virtue and vice lists (3:1415, 17), sharp contrasts (3:14-17; 4:4, 6, 10), and the citation of authoritative texts (4:6). These stylistic features, however, are fitted into a rhetorical structure that forms the two parts of a call to conversion; 3:13—4:6 sets up an indictment, to

The series of imperatives and assurances in 4:7-10 is clearly shown to be answering the section preceding it by the use of the connective “therefore” in 4:7. The terms of the exhortation, furthermore, mirror those in the preceding indictment. Thus the purification of the heart in 4:8 corresponds to the “selfish ambition in your hearts” in 3:14, as well as to the “purity” attached to the wisdom from above in 3:17. The doubleminded persons in 4:8 respond to the “undivided” (a8taKpitos adiakritos) in 3:17. Most obviously, the command to humble oneself before the Lord with the expectation of being exalted (4:10) picks up from the statement that the Lord resists the proud and gives grace to the humble (4:6) as well as the above/below pattern associated with wisdom in 3:13-17. The content of 4:7-10 is that of a call to repentance: approaching God and fleeing the devil (4:8), moral purification and mourning (4:8-9), submitting to God (4:10). The call to conversion is set up by a more complex indictment, which is structured primarily by a series of rhetorical questions in 3:13; 4:1, 4-5. The first and second of these questions are joined: 3:13 asks about the wise and understanding “among you,” and 4:1 asks about the source of wars and battles “among you.” Each rhetorical question is followed by exposition or accusation. In 3:13-14, the initial contrast between wisdom from above and bitter jealousy is explained by a second set of antithetical statements in 3:15-16. Then 3:17-18 picks up from 3:13 the conviction that true wisdom manifests itself in mild and peaceful behavior. The second set of rhetorical questions forms an antithesis to 3:17-18. The bitter jealousy that in 3:14-15 leads to social unrest now is expressed in terms of wars and battles (4:1). Accusations rather than exposition follow this set of questions: Their desire leads to murder (4:1-2). James then tells them why their prayers do not get answered: They pray only to fulfill their own desires (4:3). This is followed by still another rhetorical question, reminding them of a traditional understanding of the irreconcilability of friendship with God and the world (4:4). The climax of the indictment comes in 4:5-6. Notoriously difficult to translate, the rhetorical

which 4:7-10 is the response. 25. See M. Dibelius, James: A Commentary on the Epistle of James, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976); S. Laws, A Commentary on the Epistle ofJames, HNTC (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981)

209

JAMES 3:13-4:10 COMMENTARY best solution is to read 4:5 as a double rhetorical question: “Does the scripture speak in vain? Is the spirit God made to dwell in us for envy?” The expected answer to these questions is negative. James then introduces Prov 3:34 with the introduction, “but he gives all the more grace.” This

purpose of these verses is plain. The entire exposition comes down to the question of the validity of the scriptural witness concerning the way God works in the world: Is all that Scripture says in vain? Is envy really the proper sort of longing for the spirit God made to dwell in humans? The citation of Prov 3:34 answers the question in the negative and sets up James’s explicit call to conversion. The preceding analysis shows that 3:13-4:10 makes sense as a literary unit. Before turning to the specific theme James develops in these verses, it is necessary to acknowledge that two notorious problems in the text have here been solved in a manner that differs in each case from at least one of the translations provided. The first occurs in 4:2, where the major questions are whether James could actually accuse his readers of killing and, if so, how the sentence should be punctuated. In this case, both translations correctly include the charge “you kill,” but only the NRSV follows the best scholarship in its punctuation by constructing two sentences, each of which begins with frustrated desire and ends in violence. The second problem is much more difficult and has led to a variety of attempts at a solution. Is 4:5 a statement or a rhetorical question or two rhetorical questions? Does the Greek phrase pds bOdvov (pros phthonon; lit., “toward envy”) refer to God as its subject or to the spirit God made to dwell in humans? And what does James mean by “the scripture” that speaks in vain? There are no texts in the LXX close to the contents of 4:5. Is he then making a vague allusion to some specific text, or perhaps to an apocryphal text? Does he intend his question/statement to refer to his citation of Prov 3:34 in 4:6? Or is he referring to Scripture in general? The NIV takes 4:5 as one question and refers the envy to the human spirit, but then adds two other possibilities in its notes. The NRSV, in contrast, makes God the subject and takes the phrase pros phthonon as indicating God’s “yearning jealously” over the spirit placed in humans. The difficulty with this last solution, however, is that the noun $8d6vos (phthonos) is never applied to God in the LXX, and in Greek usage it is always used for the human vice of envy, with which God has nothing to do.”° The

solution is not perfect, but it covers the textual evidence better than the others offered, and it fits the thematic argument James is making in this section, to which we can now turn. As in chapter 1, James establishes a spatial contrast between above and below, exaltation and humiliation. There is first a “wisdom from below,” which is earthly, unspiritual, and demonic and stands in opposition to a “wisdom from above” (3:15-17). The reader recognizes that this wisdom from above is the one that comes from God (see 1:5, 17) as the “word of truth” and the “implanted word” that is to be received with meekness (1:18, 21). Connected to these two sources of wisdom is a second contrast between the “arrogant” (or “proud,” NIV, NRSV), whom God resists, and the “lowly” (or “humble”) to whom God gives gifts (4:6). This language bears within it a spatial imagery: The arrogant person moves upward in self-aggrandizement; the humble person is lowly. Finally, the passage contains a double command (4:7, 10) to “submit” and to “humble oneself” before the Lord, with the assurance that the Lord will respond in kind: “he will lift you

up” (4:10). The spatial opposition between lower and higher, being raised up and being put down, helps to define the religious framework for James’s moral exhortation. Human behavior operates within an overall perception of reality that can be called a “wisdom.” For James, however, only one “wisdom” is true: the one that “comes from above” and measures reality by the God who is the giver of all good gifts (1:5, 17) and alone is able to save and destroy (1:21; 4:12). This is the God who made a “spirit” (tvedua pneuma) to dwell in humans (4:5). The question posed by James, then, is whether the human spirit will live by the wisdom that comes from God or according to an earthbound, unspiritual, “demonic” wisdom that he identifies explicitly with the power of the devil (3:15; 4:7). The moral choice facing humans is also a choice between religious allegiances. The real key to understanding this passage,

26. See, e.g., Plato Phaedrus 247A; Timaeus 29E.

210

JAMES 3:13-4:10 COMMENTARY however, is the recognition that James describes the wisdom from below in terms that would

the nuance of competition and implicit violence that “pride” does not. Arrogance is the self-aggrandizing manifestation of envy that creates the desire to have that will stop at nothing to acquire what it seeks (4:2). The ancients perceived that there is no boundary to such craving and that the logic of envy leads inevitably to social unrest (3:16), battles, and wars (4:1). Ultimately, envy leads to murder (4:2).°° Killing the competition is the ultimate expression of envy. This is the true face of the arrogance that God resists (4:6). This is the wisdom of the world that turns even prayer into something wicked, because it uses God simply as a means of fulfilling envy’s incessant cravings (4:3). In 4:4, James opposes the two measures in the sharpest possible terms. His readers are not those who live completely by the measure of the world. They are not literally killing each other in order to gain possessions. But they are “double-minded” (4:8). They want to live by another measure, another wisdom, even as they claim God’s measure as their own. James employs the language of the Israelite prophets when he calls them “adulteresses” (the NIV and NRSV attempt to be more inclusive, but they miss the fact that the feminine here is part of the symbolism for covenantal loyalty in the prophets, wherein God plays the role of husband and Israel that of the wife, as in Isa 54:4-8; Jer 3:6-10; Ezek 16:38; Hos 3:1; 9:1). James rebukes them for failing to live by what he regards as a shared understanding (“do you not know”) that friendship with the world means enmity with God (4:4). To fully appreciate James’s stark contrast in 4:4, it is necessary first to remember that in this composition, “the world” is not a neutral term, but is used precisely in contrast to God (1:27) and to faith (2:5; see 3:6). The “world,” in other words, represents the wisdom from below. It is also helpful to know the nuances attached to friendship in the ancient world. These have been examined already in the discussion of James’s designation of Abraham as a “friend of God” (2:23). For the ancients, to be friends with another meant to see things the same way, to share the same outlook.?! To be “friends of the world,” therefore, means for James that one chooses to live by the logic of envy, rivalry, competition,

be instantly recognizable to ancient readers but is not visible to present-day readers dependent on translations. In 3:14, 16, and 4:2, James uses terms meaning “jealousy” (Cf\\os zeélos) or “envy” (b86vos phthonos), and he associates with those terms all the characteristics that ancient moralists connected to the vice of envy. Once we realize that James is using rhetorical commonplaces, we are able to see that topics that at first appear to us as disparate are actually part of a single argument. Greco-Roman moralists defined virtue in terms of health and vice in terms of sickness.?”? The loathsome reputation of envy among the vices is suggested by a saying attributed to Socrates that envy is the “ulcer of the soul,” a description that nicely captures the gnawing character of what Aristotle called a “certain sorrow” experienced because someone has something that we do not.”® Why sorrow? Because envy derives from the “wisdom from below” that identifies being with having. A person’s identity and worth derive from what can be acquired and possessed. In such a view, to have less is to be less real, less worthy, less important. Therefore, one feels a sense of loss and, therefore, of grief or sorrow. Conversely, to have more is to be more real, more worthy, and more important. According to the wisdom from below, humans live in a closed system of limited resources and are, therefore, fundamentally in competition with each other. In the realm of material things, for one to have more means that another must have less. The logic of envy demands competition for scarce resources. When ancient moralists observed the vice of envy as it manifested itself in real human behavior, they saw that it lay behind all sorts of rivalry, party spirit, and competition (see 3:14, 16).”° In this moral literature, as in James, envy is consistently associated with hatred, boorishness, faithlessness, tyranny, malice, hubris, ill will, ambition, and above all arrogance (utepndavia hyperéphania), the word that James uses in 4:6, and that the NRSV and NIV translate as “proud.” The term “arrogance” is better, because it conveys 27. See Plutarch On Virtue and Vice. 28. Aristotle Rhetoric 1387B. 29. Cf. Plutarch On Brotherly Love 17.

30. Cf. Plato Laws 869E-870A; Philo On Joseph 5-12. 31. See Plutarch On Having Many Friends 8; On Brotherly Love 8.

ZA

JAMES 3:13-4:10 COMMENTARY cited by James points to that entirely different understanding of reality given by the “wisdom from above” found in Scripture: Life is not about competition for possessions; it is about the receiving of gifts from a God who “gives all the more grace” (4:6). James’s scriptural heritage is obvious as well in the language he uses in the call to repentance (4:7-10). The images of purifying and cleansing derive primarily from Israel’s cultic tradition; people needed to be “purified” to “approach God” in ritual or worship (see Lev 16:19-20). Here James uses the language for moral conversion: They are to “purify their hearts,” which means to become single-minded rather than double-minded. The language of grieving, mourning, wailing, and gloom comes from the prophets, who use such terms for the response of people at the visitation of God (4:9; cf. Jer 4:13-28). But although the language is complex, the message is clear. In a statement of breathtaking simplicity, James tells them to approach God, and God will approach them (4:8). How do they approach? By humbling themselves and being receptive to God’s gifts. How will God approach them? By “giving still more grace” and lifting them up (4:10; see 1:9).

violence, and murder. James’s dualism is complete and unequivocal. Even to “wish” (NRSV) or to “choose” (NIV) to be a friend of the world in this sense is to be “established as an enemy of God.” James’s call to conversion, then, is aimed at those who want not to have to choose, who seek to be friends with everyone, living by God’s measure but simultaneously acting according to the world’s measure. James will not have it. The one who is “wise and understanding” must “show it by his good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom” (3:13 NIV), not by the violence inherent in the competition generated by

envy. James’s exhortation uses the language of Hellenistic moral teaching, but is rooted in the symbolic world of Torah. Those who seek to have two allegiances at once are called “adulteresses” (4:4) precisely because that is the prophetic language for those in covenant with the one God who also seek after idols. And at the climax of his indictment, James explicitly invokes the voice of Scripture. Scripture does not portray the spirit God made to dwell in humans as being for envy. Rather, as Prov 3:34 makes clear, God resists the arrogant and gives gifts to the lowly. The verse

REFLECTIONS This section of James is not only of pivotal importance for the understanding of the composition, containing as it does the essential theological framework for James’s exhortation, but it also provokes reflection on a number of points. It reminds us that conversion is a continuing process and an essential element in spiritual transformation. James is not writing to those “in the world” who explicitly embrace the logic of envy and whose competitive desires lead them to violence, war, and murder. Scholars who imagine that James is warning against some ancient zealot activity miss the mark entirely. He is addressing members of the Christian community who gather in the name of Jesus and profess the faith of the glorious Lord Jesus Christ, but whose attitudes and actions are not yet fully in friendship with God. Too often, conversion is seen as a once-for-all thing. Turning to Christ is thought to be the final answer. Everything in a person’s life before that turning is seen as darkness, and everything after it must, therefore, be cast in light. Such an understanding, however, demands an artificial removal of all ambiguity from Christian life. But James sees that conversion is never complete. There is always double-mindedness, even among those who truly want to be friends of God. The wisdom from below is not easy to abandon or avoid, precisely because it is the “way of the world,” inscribed not only in the language and literature of our surrounding culture but also in our very hearts. Those who recognize this are better able to deal with the continuing ambiguity experienced by all believers, even after an initial conversion to faith. Complete consistency in life is not given by a first commitment. It is slowly and painfully won through many conversions. This realization gives us deeper insight into what

212

JAMES 3:13-4:10 REFLECTIONS James means by faith’s being tested through many trials (1:2-3), and why it should be counted as all joy when such trials occur. Each such test is a possibility for growth and for a new conversion from the measure of the world to the measure of God. It was just so that, when asked to offer Isaac, Abraham’s recognition that God gives a greater gift enabled him to express his faith through his deeds and show that he was a “friend of God” (2:21-23). This passage is a reminder also that the evil we experience in the world through social upheaval and violence and war and murder is not simply the result of inadequate social structures, but is above all the result of a diseased human freedom that has committed itself to a wisdom from below, which distorts reality—and which finds expression in social structures that make such distortions systemic. James’s analysis of envy and the way it leads to murder is the most explicit and powerful in the New Testament, providing dramatic evidence for the earlier proposition that desire gives birth to sin; and when sin comes to full term, it brings forth death (1:15). No analysis is more pertinent to contemporary North American culture, which is virtually based on the logic of envy. In the Reflections on 3:1-12, we considered how the language of advertising creates a world of values in which “to be” means “to have,” and to have more means to be more, a mechanism that is aimed directly at generating “a certain sorrow” when someone has something that one does not, together with the desire to do anything to acquire that which is sought. Every day on city school grounds, we see the accuracy of James’s analysis, as children murder each other in order to acquire that specific pair of sports shoes or athletic jacket that will make them “someone.” But the logic that envy leads to murder spirals beyond the inner city to the highest reaches of society; indeed, it is the engine generating global conflict and war. Why, asks James, are there wars and battles among you (4:1)? It is because of envy, because of the craving—not only in individuals but also in corporations and states—that demands seizing what belongs to another in order that one might become greater. Because James’s analysis makes use of what is best in Greco-Roman moral philosophy as well as in the tradition of Torah, but is not explicitly attached to christology, it is available to a genuinely ecumenical appropriation. James is virtually unique among the New Testament writings in providing the possibility for a social ethics, not only because of the obvious social dimension of reality that it considers, but also because it locates its moral demands within the framework of faith in the living God rather than specifically in the mystery of Jesus’ death and resurrection. Because James attributes social disruption and violence to a disease of the human heart, he does not propose any healing for it except through a turning to God that is explicit and wholehearted. In an age when religious belief does as much to divide as it does to unite, James points to a way of thinking about social ethics that can be engaged by all those who regard human freedom as deriving from and responsible to the God “who gives to all generously and ungrudgingly” (1:5 NRSV). But what James demands of those who think this way is a commitment to simplicity of heart and integrity of purpose that is extraordinarily rigorous. Kierkegaard, who was a lover of this letter, declared that purity of heart means to will one thing. James’s analysis shows how hard that is, and how necessary it is to “approach God” if humans are to avoid that demonic wisdom that makes even prayer a means of manipulating God (4:3). Perhaps that is why the Shaker hymn says, “ ’Tis a gift to be simple, a gift to be free.”

213

JAMES 4:11-5:6 EXAMPLES OF ARROGANCE NIV

NRSV

"Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. '*There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—-who are you to judge your neighbor? 'SNow listen, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.” '4Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. 'Instead, you ought to say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.” '°As it is, you boast and brag. All such boasting is evil. '7Anyone, then, who Knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins. Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming upon you. “Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. *Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. “Look! The wages you failed to pay the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. °You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.? "You have condemned and murdered innocent men, who were not opposing you.

11Do not speak evil against one another, brothers and sisters.? Whoever speaks evil against another or judges another, speaks evil against the law and judges the law; but if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. '’There is one lawgiver and judge who is able to save and to destroy. So who, then, are you to judge your neighbor?

13Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a town and spend a year there, doing business and making money.” '4Yet you do not even Know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. !*Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wishes, we will live and do this or that.” !°As it is, you boast in your arrogance; all such boasting is evil. '7Anyone, then, who knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, commits sin. 5 Come now, you rich people, weep and wail for the miseries that are coming to you. “Your riches have rotted, and your clothes are moth-eaten. “Your gold and silver have rusted, and their rust will be evidence against you, and it will eat your flesh like fire. You have laid up treasure® for the last days. “Listen! The wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out, and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts. °You have lived on the earth in luxury and in pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. "You have condemned and murdered the righteous one, who does not resist you.

25 Or yourselves as in a day of feasting

a Gk brothers

Or will eat your flesh, since you have stored up fire

(COMMENTARY his section of James again challenges the ~ reader who seeks an obvious literary coherence. James 4:11 certainly seems to represent a

Starting point, since 4:10 rounds off the call to conversion in 3:13-4:10, and since 4:11 takes the form of a negative command such as we find at

JAMES 4:11-5:6 COMMENTARY other transition points in the composition (see 2:1; 3:1; 5:12). But should 4:11-12 be read as a discrete command and warrant, disconnected from any larger argument? At first glance, it would appear so, for 4:13 has its own distinctive introduction (“come now!”), which is repeated in 5:1. Some commentators divide these verses into three discrete sections (4:11-12, 13-17; 5:1-6), which is, in effect, to despair of detecting any overall argument.* For that matter, neither is it easy to decide where the section ends. On the one hand, 5:7 seems to respond to what precedes it, since, like 4:7, it uses the connective “therefore” (ovv oun). On the other hand, 5:7-20 has a positive focus on community attitudes in contrast to the harsh attacks that pervade 3:13-5:6. Despite the literary problems, it is appropriate to consider 4:11—5:6 as a single unit, primarily because it is unified by a single theme. Whether those being addressed are “brothers” (4:11) or “those who say” (4:13) or “the rich” (5:1), their behavior is attacked by the author. More significant, their behavior is in each case identifiably a form of arrogance (Unepndavia hyperephania), such as God is said to oppose in 4:6. This section, then, follows James’s call to conversion with three specific examples of arrogance, and it is connected to the preceding section by his final rhetorical question in 5:6, “Does not [God] oppose you?” (see below for the justification of this translation, which differs from both the NRSV and the NIV). The examples move progressively from the “brothers,” whom we assume to be within the community, to “the rich,” who are preeminently the outsiders for these readers (see 2:2-7). There is also a progression in the degree of arrogance revealed, from the slander that judges another in secret, through the public boasting that accompanies public projects, to the systemic corruption of society and the destruction of the innocent by oppression. Corresponding to these degrees of impact is the respective weight of condemnation, from the reminder of who is judge and lawgiver, through the identification of arrogance as sin, to the threat of destruction in the day of judgment. 4:11-12. Beneath such obvious differences in the three examples, however, a single point is

being made, which further examination of each case reveals. The basic shape of James’s argument is laid out by 4:11-12. He begins with a direct prohibition of slander (lit, “evil speech” [katadahid katalalia|). This may, at first glance, seem to be simply one more example of loose speech that James singles out for attention (see 3:1-12). But the next statement is tantalizing: The one who slanders a brother also slanders the law and judges the law (4:11)! There are several unstated premises here. The first is that slander, by its very nature, involves a secret judging (and condemnation) of an associate. It is clear that to assume the right to judge and condemn another is to claim a privileged position of superiority over that person. Second, James considers such superiority to be false. No one has appointed one person to be the judge of another. Then why is that superiority assumed? Here the logic of envy comes into view once more. Slander serves both to lower the neighbor and to elevate the self; it takes away status from another and ascribes it to the one doing the slandering, who poses as the superior judge. It is, in microcosm and in secret, the perfect exemplar of life as competition. Slander, therefore, is a form of arrogance that seeks to assert the self by destroying another. It can thrive between those calling each other “brother,” because it is evil speech carried out in secret. But how does such speech also represent a slandering and judging of the law? To appreciate this connection, we must remember how James has used Lev 19:13-18 thematically throughout this composition. Leviticus 19:16 prohibits slander against a neighbor. To disobey the prohibition against slander, therefore, is to place oneself in a position of superiority to the law; it assumes the right of picking and choosing which of the commandments are to be taken seriously. Just as claiming to live by the law of love yet discriminating against a neighbor is not to “truly” live by it “according to the scripture” (2:8), so also is claiming to live by love while slandering a neighbor a form of falsehood. James identifies the form of arrogance precisely when he tells the people that they are acting as judges of the law rather than as doers of it. He then counters such pretension with the sharp reminder that the One who gave the law is also the only judge of all humans. The final contrast in 4:12 serves to reveal the

32. See M. Dibelius, James: ACommentary on the Epistle ofJames, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976); J. B. Adamson, 7he Epistle of James, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976).

Zh

JAMES 4:1 1—5:6 COMMENTARY foolishness; they are symptoms of something evil (4:16). When James spelled out faith’s perception of wealth and poverty, suffering and success in 1:912, he did so in terms of paradox and reversal; the lowly were to boast in their exaltation, and the rich in their humbling; those who relied on their wealth would pass away in the midst of their affairs, while those who endured testing would gain the crown that is life. In the present passage, the traders’ failure so to think about their lives and so to speak with reference to God’s will is, for those living in the community of faith, to know the right thing to do and fail to do it. For James, this is not simply a moral failure, but a sin (4:17). This statement on the “sin of omission” is a hinge between the preceding example and the one following. If it applies to entrepreneurs who pursue profit without reference to God, it refers even more directly to those who fail to do what the law specifically demands—namely, to provide wages for their workers. 5:1-6. James’s final example of arrogance is the most blatant and evil (5:1-6). Adopting once more the rhythms of the great social prophets Isaiah and Amos, he uses some of his most vivid language in attacking the oppressive rich. In this example, he goes into much greater detail concerning their behavior and the consequences they must face. A distinctive feature of his treatment is the way he weaves those two aspects together, which gives his every statement a harshly ironic dimension. The energy and force of James’s opening words in 5:1 are startling. The rich are to “weep” and to “wail” over the miseries that are coming upon them. Note that what those charged in 3:13-4:6 were supposed to do by way of repentance (4:710) is now happening to the rich by way of judgment. Rather than focus on their misery, however, James describes the fate of their wealth itself: It has become rotten, moth-eaten, rusted (5:2). According to the logic of envy, they had identified their being with their having and thus had been willing to do anything to get more wealth, including fraud, violence, and murder (5:6). They apparently thought that by so doing they were building up treasure for their last days.

reality that slander suppresses: The God who gives the law and who judges according to the law of love (2:12-13) is alone “able to save and to destroy.” Over against this power, James asks, “Who are you?” 4:13-17. The form of arrogance shown in 4:13-17 is not subtle. James characterizes it as ahacoveta (alazoneia), a term that is widely used in Hellenistic literature as the specific quality of the braggart, the boaster, the foolish loudmouth.*$ James summons the people (“come now”) to a consideration of their lack of wisdom from above. Once more, they are given speech to express their plans of future travel, trade, and profit. At the most obvious level, the traders are criticized for their arrogant assumption that they can depend on the future as though it were secure. But at a deeper level, they show that they operate by the wisdom of the world, which is the logic of envy; by selling and getting a profit, they will secure their own future. James responds to them first in the way that Qoheleth would, by reminding them of the evanescent quality of human life (4:14; see Eccl 12:1-8).34 How can they plan for the next year when they cannot guarantee that they will even see tomorrow? The awareness that human existence itself is a “mist that is here and gone” encourages modesty concerning human plans and projects. James also challenges the very view of reality assumed by such friends of the world. Their speech shows that they see the world as a closed system of limited resources, available to their control and manipulation, yielding to their market analysis and sales campaigns. When James tells them that they should say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that” (4:15), he is not simply recommending a more pious form of speech. Rather, he calls for a profoundly different perception of reality. He is recommending the view provided by faith and friendship with God that the world is an open system, created by God at every moment and infinitely rich in resources provided by God for humans to exist and to prosper, in cooperation rather than in competition and mutual elimination. Within this perspective, their pretentiousness and boasting are more than

With bitter irony, James agrees that they have

33. See Plato Republic 560C; Plutarch On Love of Wealth 1. 34. See also Seneca On the Shortness of Life 1:1-4.

done so (5:3), but it is not a retirement fund:

216

JAMES 4:11—5:6 COMMENTARY They have prepared themselves for a day of slaughter (5:5). The very possessions in which the wealthy had sought security eloquently proclaim their own fate: Their precious metals have rusted, and “their rust will be evidence against you and it will eat your flesh like fire” (5:3 NRSV). These rich people perfectly exemplify in their attitudes and actions the logic ofenvy and arrogance James sketched in 3:13-4:10. They have devoted themselves to an exploitative manipulation of the earth, living to fulfill their own desires for pleasure (5:5; see also 4:1-3). In order to reach their desires, they have been willing to deprive their hired laborers of the wages that are owed them (5:4). Once more, James appears to be making an allusion to the scriptural context of the law of love in Leviticus, for Lev 19:13 contains a clear prohibition of just such withholding of wages from the laborer. The language used in Jas 5:6 (“you have condemned the righteous one,” NRSV), furthermore, suggests the sort of judicial procedure James had mentioned in 2:6: The rich use the law courts to perpetuate their fraud and to “condemn” the poor. By the “righteous one” here, James does not have any specific individual in mind (patristic writers thought perhaps that he was referring to Jesus; see Acts 7:52); rather, those oppressed in such fashion are “innocent/righteous” in that they have committed no offense and have suffered the loss of what was owed them for their service. Consistent with the entire biblical tradition, James recognizes that such fraud is a form of legalized violence and murder. To withhold from the poor their daily wages is literally to deprive them of the means of life: “to deprive an employee of his wage is to shed blood” (Sir 34:22). Here the logic of envy that James sketched in 4:2 is carried out in action: “You want something and do not have it; so you commit murder” (NRSV). Here also is the ultimate arrogance of the rich, who assume the divine power to judge and do so unjustly (“you have condemned the righteous one”), and who arrogate to themselves the divine power to “save and destroy” (4:12); “you have killed the righteous one.”

This brings us to the last clause in 5:6. Like most other contemporary translations, both the NRSV and the NIV translate the Greek as an indicative whose subject is the righteous person oppressed by the rich, thus “who does not resist you” (NRSV) or “who were not opposing you” (NIV). There are good reasons, however, for understanding this last clause as a question with God as its implied subject, thus, “Does he [God] not Oppose you?” The reasons for such an interpretation are basically twofold. First, 5:1-6 has alternated the actions of the rich with the response to those actions by God. The statement that the rich had condemned and murdered the righteous person, the supreme act of arrogance, would appropriately lead to the response that God opposes them. Second, the verb “resist/oppose” (avttTaoow antitasso) is identical to that used in 4:6, where it is used to state that God resists the proud (“arrogant”) but gives grace to the lowly. The use of the same verse here after the recitation of three examples of arrogance seems logically to point to God as the subject. If 5:60 is read this way, then James matches the violence of the rich with force from the side of God, who has heard “the cries of the harvesters” (5:4). The willful denial of this righteous God’s election of the poor to be heirs of God’s kingdom has enabled the rich to make friends of the world and to exploit its systems to their own advantage. But in the perspective of faith, James asserts, God’s power is, if not obvious, nevertheless more real. The world is not, as the arrogant suppose, a closed system whose prize goes to the most ruthless. It is an open system answerable to the God who creates it. In contrast to those who are judges with evil designs (2:4), God judges without partiality and on the basis of human deeds (2:12). The rich who have oppressed the poor will experience in their own flesh how God opposes them (5:3, 6). They will discover in the “last days” how judgment can be merciless to the ones who have not shown mercy (2:13).

REFLECTIONS The more it becomes clear that James consists not simply of discrete exhortations but is making an interconnected argument, the more readers are challenged to engage the text at

JAMES 4:11—5:6 REFLECTIONS a deeper level, thinking through some of the connections that James asserts. It is certainly not obvious on the surface that arrogance is the theme of the present section, just as most readers would probably not identify arrogance as the spiritual or moral attitude most problematic for their world or their own lives. For that matter, neither would many present-day Christians think of themselves as living with half of their minds and hearts within the logic of envy. What is the real connection between envy and arrogance? And how can the process of thinking through these connections begin to locate the fundamental moral and religious issue with which readers in James’s day and in our own are obliged to struggle? If we go back to the definition of envy as a sorrow for something we do not have, we can begin to see how this most “needy” of vices lies at the root of arrogance. The logic of envy, as James has shown us, is based on the perception of the world as a closed system of limited resources for which humans are in competition. Envy and arrogance are the two sides of this competitive battle. It is envy that spurs the “have-nots” to violence against those who have what they want; it is arrogance that spurs the “haves” to boast over those from whom they have taken in order to “be” who they are. The value of the examples that James provides is that they show how subtle and pervasive the manifestations of arrogance can be. We may think of it primarily in its overt form of “king of the mountain,” with the temporary childish victor, chest thrown back, arms akimbo, crowing loudly over the vanquished. James shows us that it is often a more secret and sneaky vice whose violence, though covert, is no less real. James’s first example, that of slander, makes the point beautifully. Once we think about it, we can agree that this “evil speech done in secret,” which seeks specifically to tear down another so that I can appear to be superior (as critic, as judge), is driven by envy. Whatever it is that I think my target now possesses that I do not (status, reputation), my intention is to take it away, at least in the perception of my hearers. When we think a bit further, we can also agree to James’s placing this as a form of arrogance not only against the neighbor but also even against God’s law, which forbids such slander: “Who are you,” says James, “to judge another?” Slander arrogates to oneself divine powers of knowing the hearts of others and of being able to condemn them. Only a bit more reflection is required for us to reach another agreement: that slander is one of the most pervasive and destructive forms of arrogance. It operates so consistently that we may not even be aware any longer of its nature, from the whispered remark behind the hand in the pew or at a board meeting, through the screaming tabloid headlines, to the gossip of television talk shows. The willingness to use speech to destroy others simply in order to realize a temporary sense of superiority has become a manifestation of arrogance so widespread it has become normalized. James reminds us that it is a form of speech that is “death-dealing poison” (see 3:8). With the second example, as well, it is not difficult to find the contemporary analogy to the ancient entrepreneurs who planned their trips and anticipated the profits they might make from trade. James challenges them because of their assumption that their world is predictable and controllable, and that they can define their being in terms of their having. In the present-day world of commercialism and conglomerates and multinational corporations, the logic of envy and arrogance is the connective tissue. And within this world, the bottom line of profit or loss is the only measure worth considering. The commercial apprehension of reality is the perfect expression of the outlook of “the world” closed to God as giver of every perfect gift; success is measured by the amount of “goods” (whichever they are) that can be accumulated. Perhaps the most serious question for Christianity in the present cirumstance is whether it is any longer in a position to exercise the kind of prophetic critique of that outlook such as enunciated by James. Is it not the case that many churches are themselves so co-opted by the logic of envy and arrogance—if not in strictly monetary terms, then in terms of membership and influence— that they cannot perceive that such is the way of the wisdom from below, which is earthbound, unspiritual, and demonic?

218

JAMES 4:11—5:6 REFLECTIONS Being heedless of anything else but making a profit is one thing; committing actual violence against others in order to live luxuriously on the earth is another and far more perverted form of arrogance. Once more, we see the way in which James is able to connect the diseases of the human heart to the distortions of the social order. Envy and arrogance can take, do take, a public form in economic and political systems that privilege the few and punish the many, that exploit the resources of the earth for the extravagant life-style of those privileged to live in the first world rather than the third, that reduce the laborers in the fields (and factories and sweatshops and fast-food eateries) to slaves by systems of reward and taxation that perpetuate inequity, that so marginalize major portions of the population that they are unable to sustain their existence at a meaningful human level, that commit legal murder against the innocent by means of litigation and the corruption of the courts. Liberation theology has used this passage in James appropriately to challenge the obvious oppressive systems of government and finance that marginalize and abuse the poor peoples of third world countries. Churches in the first world have been much slower (perhaps because of being co-opted by the logic of envy and arrogance) to challenge the systems of meaning that perpetuate such abuses and generate them from within the comfortable corporate headquarters down the street from the local suburban congregation. But James tells us that we cannot close our eyes to these realities, that even if we cannot by ourselves change them, somehow we must by our own lives challenge them and that, in our own envy and arrogance, we stand within that same distorted view of the world and, therefore, under the same judgment of God.

219

JAMES 5:7-20 A COMMUNITY OF SOLIDARITY NIV

NRSV

7Be patient, then, brothers, until the Lord’s coming. See how the farmer waits for the land to yield its valuable crop and how patient he is for the autumn and spring rains. ®You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord’s coming is near. *Don’t grumble against each other, brothers, or you will be judged. The Judge is standing at the door! ‘Brothers, as an example of patience in the face of suffering, take the prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord. ''As you know, we consider blessed those who have persevered. You have heard of Job’s perseverance and have seen what the Lord finally brought about. The Lord is full of compassion and mercy. '2Above all, my brothers, do not swear—not by heaven or by earth or by anything else. Let your “Yes” be yes, and your “No,” no, or you will be condemned. ‘SIs any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise. '4Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. !°Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective. "Elijah was a man just like us. He prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the land for three and a half years. '®Again he prayed, and the heavens gave rain, and the earth produced its crops. '°My brothers, if one of you should. wander from the truth and someone should bring him back, *°remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save him from death and cover over a multitude of sins.

7Be patient, therefore, beloved,? until the coming of the Lord. The farmer waits for the precious crop from the earth, being patient with it until it receives the early and the late rains. *You also must be patient. Strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near.’ *Beloved,? do not grumble against one another, so that you may not be judged. See, the Judge is standing at the doors! !°As an example of suffering and patience, beloved,? take the prophets

who spoke in the name of the Lord. ''Indeed we call blessed those who showed endurance. You have heard of the endurance of Job, and you have seen the purpose of the Lord, how the Lord is compassionate and merciful. 12Above all, my beloved,? do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your “Yes” be yes and your “No” be no, so that you may 13Are any pray. Are any praise. '4Are

not fall under condemnation. among you suffering? They should cheerful? They should sing songs of any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them, anointing them with oil in the name of the Lord. !°The prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise them up; and anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven. '’Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, so that you may be healed. The prayer of the righteous is powerful and effective. '7E-li’jah was a human being like us, and he prayed fervently that it might not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth. '’Then he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain and the earth yielded its harvest. 19My brothers and sisters,° if anyone among you wanders from the truth and is brought back by another, **you should know that whoever brings back a sinner from wandering will save the sinner’s¢ soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. aGk brothers

220

©Or is at hand

¢ Gk My brothers

4 Gk his

JAMES 5:7-20 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY he last part of James makes a decisive turn ~ inward to the members of the community £ faith with exhortations that are positive and encouraging. It is possible to subdivide the section further. Verses 7-11, for example, have a distinctive eschatological character, and vv. 12-20 can be seen as devoted to speech acts within the assembly. But what joins the entire section together is the turn from condemnation to edification. With the three examples of arrogance in 4:11—5:6, James brought his call to conversion to a conclusion, as well as his depiction of the wisdom from below, which operated in envy and arrogance and led to a world divided by competition and violence. Now James turns to those gathered in “the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1) with instructions on how to build a community unlike that of “the world.” What does a community governed by Jesus’ faith and the law of love look like? How does “friendship” with God affect the way persons speak and act toward each other? James sets out to show how friendship with God leads to solidarity in gift giving and life, just as friendship with the world leads to competition for possessions and murder. 5:7-9. He begins by placing his readers within the context of eschatological judgment. James’s expectation of this judgment—to vindicate the righteous/poor and to punish the oppressive/rich—is neither abstract nor distant. The language James uses makes it clear that the “Lord” whom he expects to come in judgment is Jesus; the expression “the return of the Lord” (tapovota Tov kuplou parousia tou kyriou), which James uses here twice, is not found in the LXX, yet is virtually a technical term for the return of Jesus in the New Testament (see 1 Cor 15:23; 1 Thess 2:19; 2 Pet 3:4; 1 John 2:28). His coming, furthermore, is “near” (5:8); in a statement remarkably close to Rev 3:20, James declares that the judge is “standing at the door” (5:9 NIV). Nevertheless, their present experience is more like those who await “the precious crop from the earth” (NRSV); what they most desire is not yet here. How are those who await this judgment to act? James tells them that they must “strengthen their hearts” (5:8). As always in this composition, the

heart refers to human intentionality; in effect he is instructing his readers to stay focused. This means first that they must be patient. By this, he means more than that they should endure, for the word he chooses (uakpofupta makrothymia), is used for the attitude of “long-suffering” judges. Until the Lord comes, oppression by the rich and powerful will continue. In such circumstances, it would be natural for people to turn on each other. In fact, oppression typically fosters such internal divisions among those under stress. James, therefore, forbids them to “grumble against one another” (5:9). Like the people of Israel oppressed in Egypt, their “complaint” (otevayyos stenagmos) should be turned to the Lord, who can hear them, and not turned against each other (see Exod 2:23-24). If they turn such grumbling against each other, the community itself will become a realm of competition rather than cooperation. 5:10-11. Their patience needs this quality of long-suffering to put up with affliction until the Lord can exercise judgment. James proposes as the model for such endurance the prophets who

spoke in the name of the Lord (v. 10; cf. Matt 5:12; Luke 6:23; 11:49-51). It is startling, perhaps, to see that Job is not only included among the prophets, but is also recommended as the example of endurance. This is not the picture of Job that the dialogues in the biblical book suggest. (Together with the apocryphal 7estament of Job, James seems to be the source for the tradition of the patient Job.) But his reading is not completely off the mark. Job, after all, argued with God even as he looked to God for vindication, but he did not turn in spite against his fellows. And when James reminds his readers that they have seen “the purpose of the Lord,” he reminds them that Job’s endurance was rewarded. The phrase is a difficult one; the NIV translates it as “what the Lord finally brought about,” emphasizing Job’s reward at the end of the biblical story. The macarism of v. 11, “we call blessed those who showed endurance” (NRSV), clearly echoes that in 1:12, “blessed is anyone who endures temptation” (NRSV), showing the connection between this miniature essay and the aphorisms of chap. 1. The statement that God is compassionate and

221

JAMES 5:7-20 COMMENTARY is feeling good should give expression to that truth in song, recognizing God as the generous giver (1:5) of every good and perfect gift (1:17), as the one who is above all compassionate and merciful (5:11), and the source of authentic human blessedness (1:12; 5:11). The next part of James’s discourse on speech deals with the sick and the response to those who are ill within the community. Like 2:14-26, this passage has received disproportionate attention in the history of interpretation because of debates concerning the sacrament of extreme unction, or anointing of the sick. More recent interpretations have sought to locate the custom of visiting, praying for, and anointing the sick within the life of Jewish communities. Each of these activities is attested, although seldom together as here.* It is probably not by accident that James here uses the word €xkAnota (ekklesia, “church”/ “assembly”) for the first time in the composition, for it is the community as such that is threatened by sickness. Will the community rally in support of the sick and show itself to be in solidarity, or will it isolate those who threaten its possession of health and security? We notice that James empowers the sick themselves with regard to the assembly. They are to “summon” the elders, a word that has a definite connotation of official demand (v. 14). The elders are to pray over and anoint the sick person in the name of the Lord (note again the typical early Christian usage, as in Acts 3:6; 4:10). The elders represent the community’s willingness to overcome the alienation that sickness imposes on the sick. The oil they use for anointing was widely used for medicinal purposes in the Greco-Roman world. There is no gap here between physical and spiritual healing. They happen together. The oil gains its power from the human hands that apply it and that, by reaching across pain and loneliness, re-establish the solidarity of the community. The prayer, likewise, is said “over” the sick person as a sign of the community’s commitment and support in the time of crisis. We recognize in these gestures the practices of the early Christians rooted both in the traditions of Israel and in the ministry of Jesus. James’s language contains two remarkable parallels to the

merciful (v. 11) reiterates the theme of God as constant gift giver (1:5, 17; 4:6; see also 2:13). Throughout his composition, James has focused on speech as the indicator of the human heart. Up to this point, his portrayal of speech has been almost entirely negative, as he showed how the tongue revealed that friendship with the world is enmity with God, or revealed a person who was double-minded rather than simple in friendship with God. In this last section, he devotes particular attention to the positive functions of speech within the community. 5:12. Appropriately, he begins with a condemnation of oaths. The instruction echoes the context of the “law of love,” since Lev 19:12 reads (in the LXX): “You shall not swear in my name wickedly and you shall not profane the name of your God.” The prohibition here, however, is absolute, and it resembles most of all the saying attributed to Jesus in Matt 5:34-37. James’s version is somewhat simpler, suggesting that it represents a stage of the saying prior to its incorporation into the synoptic tradition. The prohibition of oaths is in reality the encouragement of plain speech within the community of faith. It is a call to simplicity in speech as well as in heart. If one’s yes can reliably be depended on to be a yes, and one’s no truthfully communicates no, then speech can be trusted. James introduces this commandment with “above all” because such simplicity in speech is fundamental to every other sort of speech and action within the community. Otherwise, the prayer of one in distress, the song of praise, the call for help, the confession of sins, the correction of the neighbor can all be deceptive and destructive, instruments of manipulation and competition rather than cooperation. James forbids oaths, because he desires a community of solidarity based in mutual trust. Such trust is possible only where speech is simple and unadorned with false religiosity. 5:13-16. James turns next to prayer within the community as an expression of truth. The person who is suffering should not say, “I am being tempted by God” (1:13), or seek to retaliate against the source of distress (5:7). Instead one should let one’s cries reach “the ears of the Lord of hosts” (v. 4), for the Lord is the one who “gives more grace” to the lowly (4:6). The person who

35. See, e.g., 0.B Bat. 116a; b.Hag 3a; Testament of Solomon 18:34.

Zou

JAMES 5:7-20 COMMENTARY Gospel accounts of Jesus’ healings. The first is the connection between healing and the forgiveness of sins: “anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven” (v. 15). What makes James particularly intriguing on this point is that he applies the healing not only to the sick individual but also to the community as such: “confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, so that you may be healed” (v. 16). James also shares the gospel tradition’s confidence in the power of prayer to heal individuals from their illness and communities from their alienation. The prayer of faith will save the sick person, and the Lord will raise that person up (5:15), recalling the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ healings (e.g., Matt 9:5-7; Mark 3:8; Luke 7:14; John 5:8) and suggesting the continuum be-

prayers the “earth yielded its harvest,” James implies, so also the Lord will respond to their prayers as they wait for that “precious crop from the earth,” which is the coming of the Lord (v. 7). The prayer of the community that gathers in solidarity to support its sick and, by confessing sins one to another, also strengthens its spiritual weakness is already a victory over the world, which defines itself by envy and competition. 5:19-20. James concludes this section and the letter with an encouragement to mutual correction. Such correction was a staple of ancient moral teaching, both in Hellenism and in Judaism (see Ezek 3:1-11; 18:1-32; Dio Chrysostom Oration 77/78:37-45). It is not a manifestation of that sort of judging or slandering of a neighbor that James condemns in 4:11, for that was the expression of envy. Mutual correction is a form of edification that takes the construction of a community of character seriously. It is a gesture of solidarity for those who have been given birth by the word of truth to seek to Keep each other on the path of truth. Once more, we can detect here an echo of Lev 19:17 (“you will earnestly reprove your neighbor and will not bear sin on his account”), which for James is an expression of the “royal law” of love (2:8). The precise meaning of the final clause is unclear. Is it the brother’s or the sister’s soul that

tween healing and salvation. James makes no great distinction between saving the soul and saving the life, between being “raised up out of the sickbed” and “raised up” in resurrection. His confidence in prayer resembles Jesus’ own: “Ask and it will be given to you” (Matt 7:7; see Jas 1:5-6). 5:17-18. It is in connection with such confidence concerning prayer that James advances his fourth and final example from Torah: the prophet Elijah. Elijah shows that a righteous person’s prayer has great power (v. 16). James refers to the account of Elijah’s “closing and opening of the heavens” in 1 Kgs 17:1—18:45. It is natural that a prophet should have such power, since a prophet’s business is the traffic between God and humans. But James bridges the gap between Elijah and his readers by means of two small, but important, details. The first is that Elijah is called “a human being like us” (NIV, “man just like us”). The Greek is literally, “of like feeling” and, as in passages such as Acts 14:15, serves to link Elijah’s simple humanity to that of the readers: If he could do it, so can they. The second small touch is the implication that Elijah is a “righteous one” (8iKkatos dikaios, v. 166), whose prayer is powerful. This connects him also to the experience of the community that is being set upon by oppressors (v. 6), yet whose prayers will reach the ears of the Lord of hosts (v. 4). Just as in response to his

is saved, or is it that of the one who does the correcting? And what is meant by “covering a

multitude of sins” (v. 20)? The latter phrase may be an allusion to Prov 10:12 LXX, but it is not a clear one (see also 1 Pet 4:8). The best interpretation is that the one doing the correcting will save the other person’s soul from death and that the sins that are covered over (or suppressed/prevented) are the ones the associate might have committed if not corrected. James has sketched how speech can build an alternative community based in solidarity and cooperation rather than in envy and arrogance. It is speech characterized by simplicity and directness, prayer, mutual confession, and mutual correction. And at the end, James tells his readers to do for each other what he has tried to do for them.

223

JAMES 5:7-20 REFLECTIONS

REFLECTIONS This last section of James is a rich source of reflection for any community that claims to live in the faith of Jesus Christ or in friendship with God. As has been obvious from the beginning, such a commitment to an alternative “wisdom,” especially when expressed in a communal mode of life, will inevitably come into conflict with the dominant wisdom of the world. Sometimes this conflict will take the form of direct oppression, such as James describes in 5:1-6. More often, it takes the form of internal stress, as the community seeks to build its own distinctive identity even as many of its members are “double-minded,” divided in their loyalties. Such stress might lead naturally to slander and condemnation of one another (4:11), or of “grumbling against one another” (5:9)—modes of speech that bring the competitiveness of worldly wisdom within the community. These are examples of “armored” speech, which seeks to harm the other while protecting the self. In contrast, James offers speech that makes the self vulnerable to others. Note, for example, how the prohibition of oaths in 5:12 actually encourages speech that is simple, unadorned, and unarmored. When one’s yes can be trusted as yes, and when one’s no can truly be heard as no, then members of the community are exposed to one another in truth. The same sort of vulnerability characterizes genuine mutual correction as opposed to slander and condemnation. The proof is how difficult such reproof is to carry out. Most people prefer a form of secret slander to the open and candid correction of another in love. To risk correction is to risk looking foolish in the eyes of others as well as exposure to a colleague’s anger or rejection. James’s most provocative example, however, is the speech of the sick within the community, as well as the speech that should be used with those who are sick. This is because sickness is a profound threat to the identity and stability of any community. Sickness is not the same thing as sin, nor does James suggest that sickness derives from sin. Yet, sin and sickness are analogous in their social effects. The healing of the sick person, therefore, like the restoration of the community after sin, must take into account the spiritual dimensions of this threat. The way James correlates the healing of illness and the forgiveness of sins testifies to his grasp of this reality. The challenge of physical or emotional or mental illness to the community of faith is to test whether it will behave like friends of God or friends of the world. According to worldly wisdom, the logical response to any form of threat is self-defense. Only the fittest should survive, and competition exists precisely to identify them. Envy seeks strength at the expense of others and, as James has shown, leads inevitably to murder. Has someone we know fallen sick? Then that person is weak and should be left behind. The elimination of the sick person leaves more resources for those who are left. Having to share our attention and resources with those who are weak distracts us from our own growth and weakens us in our own struggle for survival and supremacy. The logic of the world, therefore, is to isolate the sick from the healthy. The healthy organism recoils from what is sick in order to protect itself. Sickness, then, becomes the occasion for social isolation and alienation. This “natural reflex” of survival, however, also becomes a form of sin when it leads to the deliberate exclusion of the sick from the community’s care and support, when the physical distance imposed by sickness is embraced as a spiritual alienation from those who are sick and a rejection of them from community. In James, the sick are empowered to summon the community’s elders. This is as remarkable a reversal of the logic of envy as is the way the community is to honor rather than scorn the poor (2:5). Not those who are well, but those who are sick are to define the truth of the situation. And in the speech of those gathered around the sick, James explicitly calls

224

JAMES 5:7-20 REFLECTIONS for the recognition of the weakness and failure of all, so that not only the person manifestly ill but all those in the community might be “healed” or “saved” by the confession of sins and the prayer of faith. This entire scenario of an intentional community structured according to principles of solidarity and mutual cooperation not only provides the most direct challenge to the practice of our culture concerning the care of the sick, but it also invites us to engage in self-examination concerning all those among us who are in any fashion weak and alienated. It is obvious that the larger society today is based on envy and competition. The sick and the poor (often the same) represent a threat to survival that must be repelled by at best neglect and at worst fraud, oppression, and murder. The harder issue is the extent to which Christianity colludes in an understanding of reality that is based on envy and competition. There is no more visible and obvious indicator than the way churches themselves work with and for the care of children, the poor, the ill, the elderly, the dying. Does the church, like the world, seek its own survival by defending itself against the threat of weakness? Or does the church seek friendship with God by embracing in the same spirit of open gift giving all of God’s creatures, so that the strength of each one is gathered from the shared strength of all? From its opening words to its last, James witnesses to a way of life that is truly radical in its implications. It not only challenges Christians to an integrity in thought, speech, and action, but also, by sketching a vision of the world opposite the one offered by the logic of envy, it offers the possibility for Christians to enter into conversation with others who view the world as defined by a gift-giving God, a conversation in which the insights and clarity of James can contribute toward a genuine social ethics based in solidarity and peace rather than competition and violence.

229

< J it. —wisc) oo in

Tita

:

an

A

Meee

LE

eer

PETER

INTRODUCTION, COMMENTARY, AND REFLECTIONS

BY DAM LDsleeBAIRS EE Td:

i '

a

=

q

f,;

“

ye

'

2 i

f

:

i 2

= vs

i

} me

~

ie

ried

i

HN

-

:

a

Vie

-

7

—

js

7

v

2

2

at

-

a

“

— aiete

@

_

oa

a

5

7

’

7

|

THE FIRST LETTER OF mdi

osOF Bath

INTRODUCTION irst Peter is one of the general or catholic epistles, along with Hebrews; James; 1, 2, +3 John; 2 Peter; and Jude. The general epistles are distinguished from other letters in the New Testament in two ways. First, they are not attributed to Paul. Second, they are (for the most part) addressed not to a particular church but to a group of churches—they are general and, in that sense, catholic.' First Peter is also “catholic” in a larger sense: It speaks to the condition of the churches across the traditional lines of time and place. A letter written for churches that are alienated from the surrounding society and for Christians who are slandered for their faith, it has provided comfort for believers in troubled times from the end of the first century to the beginning of the third millennium. Using the imagery of baptism, it provides a reminder for the baptized of what it means to live out of the sacrament and to live out the sacrament in their lives as individuals and as acommunity. As early as Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians, there is evidence that Christian writers found in 1 Peter words of encouragement that were worth cherishing, repeating, and interpreting. Polycarp alludes to 1 Pet 1:8 as he recalls the suffering and resurrection of Christ, “in whom, though you did not see him, you believed in unspeakable and glorified joy.”* This brings to mind also 1 Peter’s, “Although you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and rejoice with an 1. The designation of 1 Peter as a catholic epistle is found as early as Eusebius (c. 300 cE). See Pheme Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, Interpretation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1995) 1. 2. Polycarp Letter to the Philippians 1:3. See Kirsopp Lake, trans. The Apostolic Fathers, LCL (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1969)1:283-85.

229

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

indescribable and glorious joy” (NRSV).° So, too, Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians 8:1 reflects 1 Pet 2:22, 24, while both texts also interpret Isaiah 53.* From 1 Peter churches in Europe and America may find clues to faithful living as Christendom fades and Christians again feel like sojourners and aliens. Churches in developing countries will find reminders of like-minded Christians, bearing witness to a faith that is still professed by a small minority, but that history shows will hold fast, grow, and flourish.

AUTHOR, DATE, AND AUDIENCE First Peter begins straightforwardly enough: “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ.” An early Christian audience would think what we might: that this was a letter written by Simon Peter, one of the first disciples called by Jesus (Mark 1:16-20 par.), designated by Acts as one of the apostles. Peter was recognized by Paul both as a fellow apostle with special responsibility for the mission to the Jews and as an antagonist on issues relating to the obligation of Gentile Christians in regard to observing the Jewish Law (see 1 Cor 9:4; Gal 2:7-14). Yet in more recent years scholars have raised a number of questions to challenge Simon Peter’s authorship of the first letter that bears his name.° First there is the question of style. The Greek prose of 1 Peter is fairly sophisticated and the syntax fairly complicated. Is it likely that Simon, the Galilean fisherman, would be capable of writing Greek of this sophistication (see Acts 4:13)?° Related to this issue is the fairly clear indication that when the writer of 1 Peter quotes Scripture (the Old Testament), it is the Greek version of the Old Testament that he uses. Usually the citations are very close to the Septuagint. Again, recognizing Peter’s background as one who almost certainly would have known Scripture either in Hebrew or in Aramaic, is this familiarity with the Greek text plausible? Furthermore “Peter” uses the Greek form of his own name, whereas even in writing to Gentiles Paul always refers to Peter by the

Aramaic name “Cephas.”” Further, there is the issue of theological development. All our guesses about the way that doctrine developed in the first century and a half of the church’s existence are in large measure conjectural, but on one fairly plausible reading of doctrinal development, 1 Peter already presupposes conditions that might seem to be later than the time of the apostle. In theology the Jewish/Gentile controversies so central to Paul seem to have faded to the background, and motifs seem closer to those in letters by Paul’s disciples (Colossians, Ephesians, and the Pastorals).° 3. The word for “glorified” or “glorious” (S0Ed¢w doxazo) in the two quotations is the same. 4. See Paul J. Achtemeier, / Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996) 44. Polycarp was martyred in 155 cE. 5. Aclear summary of many of these points is found in Norbert Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, Evangelisch-Katholischer sei fn Neuen Testament (Zurich: Benziger Verlag and Neukirchener Verlag, 1979) 44-46.

7. See Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, 10. 8. So Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 51.

230

1 PETER—INTRODUCTION

Indeed, while there is no clear evidence that the author of 1 Peter knew or used Paul’s letters, there are themes and motifs within it that suggest this epistle was written after the ministry of Paul. Parallels most often cited are between 1 Peter and Romans, on the one hand, and between 1 Peter and Ephesians, on the other hand. For instance, 1 Pet 3:8-9 uses language reminiscent of Rom 12:16-17: Finally, all of you, have-unity of spirit, sympathy, love for one another, a tender heart, and a humble mind. Do not repay evil for evil or abuse for abuse; but, on the contrary, repay with a blessing. It is for this that you were called—that you might inherit a blessing. (1 Pet 3:8-9 NRSV) :

Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly; do not claim to be wiser than you are. Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all. If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. (Rom 12:16-18 NRSV)

It is certainly possible that 1 Peter depends on a recollection of Romans here, but it is also possible that each reflects a growing Christian tradition about non-retaliation, a tradition also reflected in other early Christian literature, such as Matt 6:39. So, too, the close correspondence to some material in Ephesians may reflect the widespread development of particular themes and motifs rather than any direct dependence of 1 Peter on this (deutero-)Pauline letter: Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By his great mercy he has given us a new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places. (Eph 1:3 NRSV)

(1 Pet 1:3 NRSV)

The strong similiarity between the two doxologies results in part from the fact that both are doxologies and share similar, perhaps liturgical, language to declare the thanksgiving that frequently follows the salutation in early Christian letters. Paul Achtemeier judiciously sums up the evidence for the relationship of 1 Peter to the Pauline letters: While the relationship of 1 Peter to the Pauline way of theological reflection cannot be

denied, how much of the “Pauline” flavor of 1 Peter is the result of a common use of early liturgical or confessional material is difficult to say with precision. Similarly, whether the author of 1 Peter was aware of the Pauline letters, or had read them, or whether the “Pauline” ZS1

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

material in 1 Peter had already passed into common tradition by the time 1 Peter was written

is equally difficult to demonstrate.’

In either case, the probable trajectory of influence suggests that 1 Peter was written later than the Pauline letters, and perhaps even later than a probable deutero-Pauline book like Ephesians. If this is true, then it is all the more clear that this epistle is pseudonymous. In terms of the social strictures of the letter, the concern for the fixed orders of house or church seem more likely contemporary to letters thought of as deutero-pauline than to Paul himself. The closest analogies are found in Colossians, Ephesians, and the Pastoral

Epistles.!° In terms of the spread of Christianity, one has to assume a quite rapid expansion to the churches of Asia Minor so that before Peter’s death (traditionally held to be in the 60s of the common era) there were already churches established in a number of towns in Asia Minor, with their own leaders and nascent structures. On the other hand, none of these doubts provides indisputable evidence that Peter could not have written the letter. They raise a complex of issues that have caused a number of students of the epistle to say that the probability rests with the claim that the letter was written after Peter’s death but in Peter’s name. There are mediating positions that try to find a place between the claim that Peter wrote or dictated this epistle word for word and the claim that a later Christian penned the whole thing, using Peter’s name to give weight to its affirmations and prescriptions. One position interprets the epistle in the light of 1 Pet 5:12: “Through Silvanus our faithful brother, as I reckon, I have written to you briefly, exhorting (you) and bearing witness to the true grace of God” (author’s trans.). While it is logically possible that “I have written you through Silvanus” could mean, “I have written this letter and am sending it through Silvanus,” the fact that “Peter” says, “I have written briefly through Silvanus” makes it more likely that the impression the reader is to gain is that Silvanus was the scribe who

took down Peter’s dictation."! There is ample precedent in the New Testament for letters whose author acknowledges a helper. In 1 Cor 1:3, the address is from Paul and Sosthenes, and in 1 Cor 15:21 Paul insists that the final greeting is in his own hand, indicating that the letter up until that. point had been dictated. Second Corinthians 1:1 addresses the Corinthian church from Paul and Timothy. Galatians ends with the indication that Paul is (now) writing with his own hand (Gal 5:11) (cf. Col 4:18). Philippians is from Paul and Timothy (Phil 1:1). First Thessalonians is from Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy (1 Thess 1:1) and also ends with Paul’s 9. Achtemeier, / Peter, 18-19. 10. It is obvious that if one takes Colossians, Ephesians, and the Pastoral Epistles to be Pauline, then the kind of social development 1 Peter reflects may have been taking place in Peter’s lifetime. 11. Leonhard Goppelt thinks that Silvanus helped with the writing. See L. Goppelt, A Commentary on IPeter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 369. Achtemeier cites the use of similar formulas for the one who carries the letter and argues that this is Silvanus’s role. See Achtemeier, / Peter, 350n. 56.

232

1 PETER—INTRODUCTION

handwritten greeting (1 Thess 3:17), emphasized perhaps to contrast it with pseudonymous letters written in Paul’s name. Some have thought that the Silvanus mentioned in this epistle is more redactor than scribe, taking Peter’s general themes or fragmentary exhortations and shaping them into a fuller and more coherent letter. If this Silvanus is the Silvanus of 1 Thessalonians and Acts, he was Paul’s companion and might well have been versed in Greek and in the Greek version of the Old Testament; and he would have used that knowledge to present Peter’s themes in a form accessible to the Gentile, Greek-speaking Christians of Asia Minor.! Still another position suggests that | Peter is a letter from the church at Rome to the churches in Asia Minor. The church at Rome honored Peter and remembered much of his teaching, and, therefore, it was bold to write in his name to the other churches in the East without making any direct claim that Peter penned or dictated the letter himself.'* Each of these mediating positions represents an attempt to maintain the integrity of the claim that Peter was responsible for the epistle while acknowledging the doubts that its every word was written or dictated by the fisherman apostle. Obviously, no one has solved the problem of authorship to the satisfaction of every other interpreter. Not surprisingly, there is a congruence between the interpreter’s understanding of scriptural authority and the claims about authorship. Interpreters for whom scriptural authenticity depends in large measure on its factual accuracy are inclined to support authenticity, either outright or in one of the mediating positions. Interpreters who are more skeptical about the factual accuracy of other parts of the New Testament (the authorship of the Pastorals, for example, or the possibility of harmonizing the events of the Gospels into a single synopsis) are more skeptical of Peter’s authorship. In terms of the theological claims of the epistle, the answer one gives to the question of authorship may make surprisingly little difference. Whether it was written by Peter or by a later Christian in his name, the epistle helps to strengthen Christians in times of distress; sets their lives within the history of God’s activity, which moves from creation to consummation; holds up the atoning death of Jesus Christ; and encourages mutual love among Christian people and forbearance of enemies. Nothing in this list would be impossible for the historical Peter to enjoin; nothing loses its power to shape faith if the words were written by some later Christian in his name. The one difficult interpretive issue, however, is the question of the relationship between authorial integrity and doctrinal authority. There are benign and less benign theories of pseudonymity. On the benign theory, the disciple of an apostle writes a letter in the apostle’s name to say what the disciples believe the apostle would want to have said in a particular situation. Whether or not readers were deceived into believing the letter to be authentic, deception was not the point.'4 On the more suspicious theory of pseudonymity, the whole 12. This is the position of E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter (London: Macmillan, 1958) 9-17. 13. This seems to be Goppelt’s position. See Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 51-52. J. Ramsey Michaels finds a mediating position between this one and the claim of Petrine authorship. See Michaels, 7 Peter, WBC (Waco, Tex.:

Word, 1988) Ixvi. 14. I take this position to be close to the consensus of the contributors to Peter in the New Testament, ed. Raymond E. Brown, Karl P. Donfried, John Reumann (Minneapolis and Paramus: Augsburg and Paulist) 149-50.

233

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

purpose of writing a pseudonymous letter was to mislead readers into believing that the words of some anonymous Christian carry the authority of the apostle. So, for instance, the author(s) of the Pastoral Epistles tries to correct what he thinks is a wrong interpretation of Pauline doctrine by forging a letter, or letters, purporting to be from Paul and throwing in some false memorabilia about fellow Christians, cloaks, and books, deliberately to throw suspicious readers off the scent.’° The question of the authorship of 1 Peter is probably unanswerable. The question of its usefulness to the church is not. We have every scriptural treasure in earthen vessels, and the historical question about the intention of the original author may be less important than the question of what the letter enjoined of its first readers and how it might have brought comfort to them and, by extension, to their successors in every generation, including our own.'° One’s guess about the date for 1 Peter, of course, is closely related to one’s guess about its authorship. If Peter wrote the epistle, and if the tradition that places his death in the 60s is accurate, then the epistle was probably written toward the close of his life. If the letter is pseudonymous, the range of possibilities grows accordingly, and one’s hypothesis is based largely on one’s reading of the historical circumstances of the epistle. From the perspective of the pseudonymous theory, this letter was written long enough after the deaths of Peter and Paul for Christianity to have spread and received some institutional shape in Asia Minor, and long enough for Pauline motifs to have entered into the broader stream of Christian tradition. On this hypothesis, it is appropriate to suggest that the epistle be dated toward the end of the first century. The other clue that might help with dating the epistle is its references to suffering and trouble for the Christians of Asia Minor. Nero’s persecution of the Christians would have been confined largely to Rome and would have been too early for this letter if it was written in the generation after the death of Simon Peter. The emperor worship that seems to have been instituted under Domitian and carried on by his successors is not mentioned in 1 Peter. On the contrary, the emperor is worthy of honor (1 Pet 2:13). Noris 1 Peter driven by the intense hatred of empire that drives Revelation, written probably around the turn of the first century. Furthermore, the troubles that seem to be bothering the recipients of the letter may be more aptly described as local harassments than as systematic persecution. The people are being slandered and perhaps even accused, but there is no sense that the government has turned against them. All this suggests a date toward the end of the first century, when a growing Christian movement had already stirred up trouble among its neighbors but had not yet attracted the attention of the emperor or been forced to choose between allegiance to him and 15. This is a simplification, but not an unfair one, of Lewis Donelson’s reading of pseudonymity in the Pastorals. See Donelson, Pseudepigraphy and Ethical Argument in the Pastoral Epistles (Tiibingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1986) esp. 54-66. 16. Goppelt puts this argument more elegantly. See Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 52.

234

1 PETER—INTRODUCTION allegiance to Christ. About 110 CE, Pliny the Younger, writing from Asia Minor, asked the emperor Trajan for advice about how to deal with people accused of being Christians. The correspondence between Pliny and Trajan reflects developments somewhat later than the situation in 1 Peter; emperor worship was now prescribed, and the Christian movement was growing so fast that Pliny thought it needed to be checked. However, the atmosphere of accusation, charge, and slander that 1 Peter reflects was still present in this somewhat later period. Trajan’s response to Pliny shows something of the circumstances of the growing Christian movement in Asia Minor: You have followed the right course of procedure, my dear Pliny, in your examination of the cases of persons charged with being Christians, for it is impossible to lay down a general rule to a fixed formula. These people must not be hunted out; if they are brought before you and the charge against them is proved, they must be punished, but in the case of anyone who denies that he is a Christian, and makes it clear that he is not by offering prayers to our gods, he is to be pardoned as a result of his repentance however suspect his past conduct may be. But pamphlets circulating anonymously must play no part in any accusation. They create the worst sort of precedent and are quite out of keeping with the spirit of our age.!7

Already in 1 Peter, the label “Christian” was making life difficult if not dangerous (see 4:14, 16), and already in 1 Peter there are hints of anonymous accusations and slanderous insults (see 2:12; 3:9, 16). The evidence seems to point to a letter written between Paul’s lettersto the Gentile churches and Pliny’s and Trajan’s letters to each other. Given the evidence of emperor worship as a problem for John of Patmos and not for the writer of 1 Peter, we can also put this letter before Revelation. One might guess that the letter was written sometime around 90 CE, knowing that one speaks at best of probabilities. The evidence that helps to date the letter also helps us to understand the situation of the audience. First Peter 1:1 gives us much of the crucial information. The letter is written to churches of Asia Minor, and they are probably listed in the order in which the letter might be circulated from one church to the next. (See the map, “The Seven Churches of Revelation," 574.) The recipients are “exiles,” as later they are both “resident aliens” and “exiles.” The author is also presumably an exile, since his word for Rome, from which he writes, is “Babylon,” not only a cipher for an enemy of God’s people (as in Revelation), but also the reminder that Rome itself is a place of exile (see Commentary on | Pet 5:13). Recent work in sociological theory has debated whether these Christians can also be described according to their socioeconomic setting—that is, members of a class of resident aliens, living as guest workers in communities where they had no citizenship and no power.'® More traditional interpretations have seen the language of exile as a metaphorical reminder to 17. Pliny Letters 10, 97, from Pliny, Letters and Panegyricus, trans. Betty Radice (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard . . University Press, 1969) 291-93. David and Elliot by essays the and 1981), Fortress, (Philadelphia: Homeless the for Home A Elliot, H. John 18. See Balch in Charles H. Talbert, ed., Perspectives on First Peter (Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press, 1986).

235

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

these Christians that on this earth they have no lasting home; their citizenship is in heaven." Careful study of the letter suggests a third possibility, one that does not necessarily contradict the other two (anymore than they necessarily contradict each other). Language of exile and alienation is language that distinguishes the Christians who received this letter from the larger culture around them. It is that culture from which they emerged, but now they are a slandered minority, exiled as Israel was exiled in Babylon, strangers in a strange land (all the more strange because it used to be home). It is also quite clear that the recipients of the letter were Gentiles who formerly shared the paganism of the neighbors who now reject them (see 4:3-4). As is so often the case with early Christians, these former pagans; who were ethnically Gentiles, took on the identity of Israel, no people become a people (2:10). “Gentiles” in the epistle refers to those friends and neighbors who had not left their old ways in order to join this Israel in exile, this community of faith. If we can judge the social setting of the recipients of the letter from the rhetoric of its specific advice (2:18—3:7), we can also guess that there were more slaves than masters among these Christians, and more believing wives with pagan husbands than vice versa. No advice is given to masters, but much to slaves. Women are told how to get along with their unbelieving husbands, but husbands (who presumably set the religious rules for the household) receive shorter instructions, all of which presume that their wives are believers, too.

THE USE-OF THE OLD TESTAMENTAN

1 PETER

This epistle is steeped in Old Testament themes, quotations, and allusions. Although the recipients of the letter are mostly Gentiles, the epistle assumes that the Old Testament had become their Scripture. Several features of the use of the Old Testament are noteworthy. (1) As Paul Achtemeier points out, the letter is permeated by a governing metaphor: the image of the church as Israel. “In a way virtually unique among Christian canonical writings, 1 Peter has appropriated the language of Israel for the church in such a way that Israel as a totality has become for this letter the controlling metaphor in terms of which its theology is expressed.”*° Unlike such New Testament writings as Romans and the Gospel of Matthew, 1 Peter does not attend to the relationship between Christians and Jews as possible heirs to Israel. The epistle simply takes over images and phrases that the Old Testament applies to Israel and applies them to the church. Christians are now the people who were once no people; the church is the community of those who were without mercy but have now received mercy (1 Pet 2:10, quoting Hos 2:23). One image in particular from Israel’s story is crucial to 1 Peter’s claims about the Christians of Asia Minor. Just as God’s people were once exiled in Babylon, so also the 19. See C. Spicq, Les Epitres de Saint Pierre (Paris: Librarie Lecoffre, 1966) 40. 20. Achtemeier, / Peter, 69; the whole discussion is found on 69-72.

236

1 PETER—INTRODUCTION

recipients of this letter are exiles in Asia Minor (1:1). Just as Abraham was a stranger among the Hittites, so also Christians are strangers within the dominant pagan culture (Gen 23:4; 1 Pet 2:11).*’ Non-Christians are referred to as “Gentiles,” implying that the Christians are “Israel,” though ethnically most of those who would hear this letter were Gentiles, too (2:12). The author hints that he, too, knows what it means to live in exile, since his code name for the city from which he writes is “Babylon” (5:13). The story of Jesus, too, is foretold by Israel’s story. In particular the Servant Songs of Isaiah provide the explicit and implicit background for 1 Pet 2:22-25 (see Isa 53:4-9). First Peter 2:21 introduces this passage on suffering, in a word to Christian slaves: “For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you should follow in his steps” (NRSV). The epistle thus presents a threefold typology. The suffering servant foreshadows the suffering of Christ; Christ foreshadows the suffering of Christian slaves; and slaves model appropriate behavior for all Christians in the face of suffering. (2) Also pervasive in 1 Peter is the use of passages bound together by key words or images, images that link the passages to each other and also to the situation of the first-century Christians (for other instances in the NT see, e.g., Rom 9:14-21; Heb 1:5-13). In this epistle, the most striking examples are found in chap. 2. In 2:4-8, “stone” is the central image, with allusions or quotations from Ps 118:22; Isa 28:16; and Exod 19:6 with Isa 61:6. Christ is the stone, and Christians are the stone; the stones together build a house or temple. Christ is the cornerstone, the stone the builders rejected, the stumbling block. Similarly, in 1 Pet 2:9-11 a host of OT images and phrases related to being a people are built one on top of the other, leading up to the climactic quotation from Hos 2:23 (in these three verses there are allusions to Exod 19:6; Deut 4:20; 7:6; 14:2; Isa 43:20-21 LXX; 61:6—all woven together). (3) First Peter provides a rationale for its own use of Scripture: Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to

you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. (1 Pet 1:10-12 NIV)

For 1 Peter, the OT was not written to point to Israel but to point to Christ and through Christ to point ahead to the life of the church. The Holy Spirit, who inspired the prophets (and was instrumental in Christ’s resurrection, 3:18), also speaks among contemporary Christian preachers. Indeed, the OT was written for the sake of those preachers and the Christian congregations to whom they speak.

21. See ibid., 71.

: 237

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

(4) Atsome points, at least, the context of the passage 1 Peter quotes adds further light on the significance of that passage in the argument of the letter. For example, 1 Pet 1:24-25 quotes Isa 40:6-8. These verses are immediately pertinent to the epistle’s claim that God’s Word lives and endures. More than that, the larger context in Isaiah reinforces themes found elsewhere in 1 Peter. Isaiah 40:5 declares the revelation of God’s glory, a theme evident in 1 Pet 1:7; 2:12; 4:11; 5:1, 10. Isaiah 40:9 calls for a herald of “good news” to speak to Zion. The verb in the Septuagint of Isa 40:9 is evayyediCw (euangelizo), the same asin 1 Pet 1:12, 25. The larger context of the quotation echoes other themes in the epistle. (5) The “scriptural” resources on which 1 Peter draws may be larger than our. own version of the OT canon. At least in the complicated claim about Christ’s proclamation to the spirits after his resurrection, 1 Peter seems to draw on traditions from / Enoch.”” While the epistle never explicitly says that this extra-biblical material counts as Scripture, the author relies on those traditions in much the same way that he elsewhere draws on canonical OT themes. (6) Finally, 1 Peter implies that the life of Scripture—and its power—lives on in the community of faith. In 1 Pet 1:12, the very purpose of OT Scripture is to provide the good news for Christian preachers. In 1 Pet 4:11, the author is writing about mutual service in the community of faith: “Whoever speaks must do so as one speaking the very words of God” (NRSV). This may imply a reliance on Scripture as the basis for preaching.** More likely, it claims for preaching a representation of that authority found in Scripture; like the prophets of old, Christian preachers speak of Christ for the sake of Christ’s people.

SOCIAL SETTING AND THE LIFE OF FAITH Social context shapes faith, and faith reshapes the social context. The clearest evidence for the nature of the communities for which this letter was written is 1 Peter itself. Yet on the basis of this epistle one can present reasonable hypotheses about the Christians of Asia Minor, and then, of course, use the hypotheses to help interpret the letter. Study of | Peter suggests that the Christians for whom it was written had an ambivalent relationship to the larger society around them. The references to being sojourners, aliens, strangers indicate the distance of these Christians from the society around them. They were not rescued from exile; they were rescued into exile. Their alienation is a mark of their faithfulness: “Live in reverent fear during the time of your exile. You know that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your ancestors” (1:17-18 NRSV). On the other hand, it is clear that the approval of the larger society is crucial not only 22. See William Joseph Dalton, Christ’s Proclamation to the Spirits: A Study of I Peter 3:1 6—4:6, 2nd ed., AnBib (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1989) 166-71. See also Commentary on 1 Pet 3:18-22. 23. Achtemeier acknowledges this possibility. See Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 298-99.

238

1 PETER—INTRODUCTION

to the Christians’ safety but also to their self-esteem: “Beloved, I urge you as aliens and exiles to abstain from the desires of the flesh that wage war against the soul” (2:11 NRSV). Here we might expect an exhortation to shun those pagans whose standards are unworthy of the faithful, but the exhortation continues: “Conduct yourselves honorably among the Gentiles, so that, though they malign you as evildoers, they may see your honorable deeds and glorify God when he comes to judge” (2:12 NRSV). There is intense concern for the internal life of the Christian community, but the “world” is not roundly condemned (as in the Johannine epistles) except as it represents a set of practices that the Christians have left behind (1:18; 4:3-4). Indeed, the hope of 2:12 that the “Gentiles” might in the end glorify God implies a hope for redemption that extends beyond the community of faith. There is an absolute devotion to God as the only God; honoring the emperor is not only allowed but is commended as well (2:13, 17). It is probably the case that the emperor did not yet make the idolatrous demands that lie behind the book of Revelation, but it is also the case that the reverence for authority in 1 Peter lies very far from the suspicion of authority in the later book. Yet 1 Peter 2 is also quite different from Romans 13; the emperor is merely a human figure, one more authority within the created order. There is no sense that the authority is itself divine (unlike Rom 13:1-2). The behavior enjoined in 1 Peter 2 and Romans 13 is very similar, but there are important distinctions between the warrants given for that behavior. First Peter is, therefore, sectarian without being countercultural.”* It raises problems for contemporary Christian obedience. In a time when Christian social action seems to many an essential element in discipleship, is 1 Peter too sectarian and passive to be a guide for Christians in society? On the other hand, does the epistle’s too easy acceptance of the larger society prevent the author from seeing how profoundly Christians must stand against culture? Does the epistle fail to recognize that Christians, who are resident aliens, must be alien, indeed? Study of 1 Peter further suggests that the Christians for whom it was written lived or were enjoined to live uncomplainingly in social structures that were both hierarchical and patriarchal. Pauline churches never fully worked out the implications of Paul’s gospel in Gal 3:28 that “there is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (NRSV). For the churches of 1 Peter, such a radical claim barely appeared on the horizon. This study will suggest that the strong attention to right behavior on the part of slaves and wives (with no attention to masters and slight attention to husbands) probably reflects churches still dominated by slaves and non-slave owners and marked by the Christian wives of pagan husbands. Nonetheless, the demand that slaves and wives be properly subject to masters and husbands enforces a picture of Christianity as meekly submissive— and stands over against quite different visions, such as Mary’s magnificat in Luke 1:46-55. The strongest christological warrants are brought forth to remind slaves to “accept the 24. A phrase suggested by Marion Soards in editorial correspondence.

239

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

authority of your masters with all deference, not only those who are kind and gentle but also those who are harsh” (2:18 NRSV). Christ’s suffering becomes a model for the suffering of slaves, and the suffering of slaves becomes a model for all Christians who suffer unjustly for their faith or for doing good. Therefore, the appeal to submissive behavior colors the christology. Not only does Christ become a model for slaves, but also slavery becomes the lens through which the epistle views christology and enjoins discipleship. Furthermore, wives are urged to be quiet about their faith in order to entice their husbands toward believing, not by explicit profession of faith, but by modest and gentle demeanor. The letter—almost—unquestioningly takes up the androcentric assumptions of the larger society. There is one notable exception. There is no claim that Christian wives should give up their faith in order to conform to their husbands’ religion; in this way, 1 Peter stands against the norms of its larger society. Nonetheless, in our time, when the gospel is rightly seen as including a profound concern for liberation, 1 Peter can be seen as profoundly unliberating. And for churches that urgently need to hear women’s voices, the injunctions to quiet demeanor can be seen as profoundly unfaithful. This study will seek to acknowledge the specificity and otherness of the world for which this epistle was written. It will also suggest that across barriers of culture and time, the epistle has a message that is still good news for Christians.

THEOLOGICAL THEMES The motifs of the epistle are best understood in their context, as one reads through its argument and allusions. Several motifs, however, can be extracted as guides to a more thorough reading. God. Only in 1 Peter in the New Testament is God explicitly designated by the noun “Creator” (ktiotns ktistés; 4:19). The whole epistle presupposes that history is in God’s hands, from beginning to end. From the beginning God has created the earth and called Christians to be God’s own people. At the end, God will provide the imperishable award granted to those who have proved faithful. In between times, God provides the Spirit to encourage believers and to inspire appropriate—and joyful—worship. | Christ. Christ is the one who brings believers to God (3:18). He does this especially through his crucifixion and resurrection. His suffering is both the example and the ground for the faithfulness of Christians who also face suffering. His resurrection is the vindication that makes faith possible and prefigures the final victory, when God, having judged the living and the dead, will be glorified forever (4:11).

Suffering. In 5:12, the author says that he has written a letter of encouragement, and certainly a major purpose of the epistle is to strengthen the Christians of Asia Minor in their time of distress. Whatever the nature of that distress, it serves to strengthen their 240

1 PETER—INTRODUCTION

faith for the last days and to bring them into communion with Christ, whose suffering

prefigures and validates their own.?° Baptism. The only explicit reference to baptism is in 1 Pet 3:18-21, where Christian baptism is an antitype to Noah’s escape in the flood and a laying hold of the assurance made possible through Christ’s resurrection. Yet much of the epistle plays on themes that are appropriate to new Christians, whether explicitly growing out of baptismal traditions or otherwise. ; First Peter deals with two contrasts appropriate to baptismal reflection. There are the temporal contrasts between then and now. In some cases, “then” is what the Christians used to be when they were among the Gentiles. “Now” is what they are as resident aliens in a Gentile world (see 4:1-4). In some cases, now is the era in which Christians live by faith even in the midst of suffering, and then is what will happen in the future, when their opponents will be surprised by God’s judgment and Christians will be given their everlasting inheritance (see 1:4-8; 4:7, 12). Now is the time when Christians live by faith; then is the time when that faith will issue in salvation (see 1:5, 9). There is also the contrast between “us” and “them.” They are the Gentiles who represent the life that Christians have left behind. But within the theology of 1 Peter, there is hope even for them, who may be shamed or astonished into the final redemption (see 3:12). Furthermore, appropriate to the life of new Christians is the assumption, also evident elsewhere in the New Testament, that the gifts of the faithful life will be shown in faithful conduct—in traditional terms, the combination of indicative and imperative (see 1:14-15; 2:1-3, which is explicit in its reference to rebirth and implicit in its allusion to baptism). The new life is life in community, with emphasis on shared responsibility, shared worship, and shared identity as a “chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people” (2:9 NRSV). Those who seem to outsiders to be barely legal immigrants, sneaked over the border to stir up trouble, are really citizens in the only country that counts and members of the family that nurtures and endures. Life in Exile. Finally, Christians are exhorted to be exemplary aliens in the land that does not welcome them. This means that they are to be as upright as the most upright of their neighbors. More than that, they are to forge for themselves an identity that sets them apart without necessarily setting them in conflict with the pagans around them. They are to return good for evil, blessing for slander—hoping, perhaps against hope, that in the judgment their very fidelity may shame their slanderers into believing.

LITERARY FORM It seems obvious that 1 Peter is a letter, with the style of address and final salutation, the thanksgiving or blessing, and the exhortation that are typical of Hellenistic letters of 25. Brox thinks that 1 Pet 5:12 is the key to the whole epistle, and he uses that as a criticism of a too great emphasis on baptismal themes. See Norbert Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentary zum Neuen Testament (Zurich: Benziger Verlag and Neukirchener Verlag, 1979) 18-19.

241

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

the first centuries CE and quite analogous to other letters in the New Testament. It has also been noticed for many years that there seems to be a kind of break between | Peter 4:11 and 4:12, representing either a new subject or a new intensity of interest in subjects already raised. Early in the twentieth century it was proposed that the letter really consisted of two separate pieces joined together. First Peter 1:3—4:11 was a baptismal homily full of the joy of the new life in Christ, and 4:12-5:14 was a word of encouragement in a time where persecution had moved from possibility to reality.2° While this is a possible explanation for the text as we have it, like all such literary constructions, it remains unprovable. This study will affirm that there is clear evidence of themes appropriate to baptism in the first part of the letter, but it will suggest that the last part (beginning with 4:12) is an appropriate expansion and application of themes already introduced, brought to deeper intensity because 4:12 begins the closing exhortation. Whatever the truth about the sources of | Peter, the letter as we have it makes its own literary and theological sense, and we shall read it as one document read or heard by its intended audience from 1:1 through 5:14. Beyond the obvious fact that the epistle moves from salutation to thanksgiving to body to closing salutation, the analysis of the structure of the letter depends in part on one’s interpretation of how the argument or exhortation of the epistle moves. One can detect a continuing alternation between claim and exegetical grounding (cf., e.g., 1:22-23 with 1:24-25; 2:4-5 with 2:6-8). And one can find an alternation between indicative claims and imperative applications (1:1-12 leads to 1:13-16; 2:9-10 grounds 1:24-25 [which validates 1:22-23] and also grounds 2:1-30). David Balch has found helpful internal clues for dividing the body of the letter (1:13-5:11). First Peter 1:13-2:10 works out the themes of the introductory blessing (1:3-12); therefore, these verses form a unit. First Peter 2:11-4:11 is marked by the recurrence of a number of themes—slander, suffering, the contrast between doing good and doing evil, judgment and justice.” There is also a repetition of themes in the beginning and end of this section, in the stress on God’s coming judgment on believers and unbelievers alike (2:12; 4:5) and the stress on glorifying God (2:12; 4:11). First Peter 4:12, with its renewed address (“Beloved”) and its renewed urgency, begins the final section of the main body of the epistle. 26. See the discussions in L. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 15-17; and PaulJ.Achtemeier, / Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996) 58-59. 27. David L. Balch, Let Wives Be Submissive: The Domestic Code in 1 Peter, SBLMS (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1981) 123-29.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Commentaries: Achtemeier, Paul. / Peter. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996. A wonderfully thorough and judicious study of the epistle. The most technical of the works here listed.

Craddock, Fred B. First and Second Peter and Jude. Westminster Bible Companion. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1995. An excellent, less technical study, especially useful for laypeople and adult Bible classes.

242

l PETER—INTRODUCTION Goppelt, Leonhard. A Commentary on I Peter. Edited by Ferdinand Hahn. Translated and augmented by John E. Alsup. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993. A very clear discussion of the issues, especially helpful in looking at pertinent extra-canonical material.

Michaels, J. Ramsey. / Peter. WBC. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988. A study of the Greek text with commentary; balanced and useful. Perkins, Pheme. First and Second Peter, James, and Jude. Interpretation. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1995. Along with Craddock, the most widely accessible of these commentaries, especially helpful for preaching.

Other suggested Balch, David L. Press, 1981. and uses the

studies: Let Wives Be Submissive: The Domestic Code in I Peter. SBLMS. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Sets the domestic code in the context of other Hellenistic and Hellenistic-Jewish literature code as a clue to the setting and themes of the epistle.

Dalton, William Joseph. Christ’s Proclamation to the Spirits: A Study of1 Peter 3:18—4:6. 2nd ed. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1989. A remarkably thorough and influential exegesis of the most puzzling passages in 1 Peter. Elliott, John H. A Home for the Homeless: A Sociological Exegesis of1 Peter, Its Situation and Strategy. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981. Understands the readers of 1 Peter as “resident aliens” in a social and political as well as a theological sense, and reads the letter in that light.

OUTLINE OF | PETER J. 1 Peter 1:1-2, Greetings II. 1 Peter 1:3-12, Praise to God

Ill. 1 Peter 1:13-2:10, God’s Holy People A. 1:13-25, Being Holy B. 2:1-10, Being God’s People

IV. 1 Peter 2:11-4:11, Life in Exile A. B. C. D.

2:11-17, Living Honorably Among the Gentiles 2:18-3:7, Living Honorably in the Household 3:8-22, Faithful Suffering 4:1-11, Living Out Salvation

V. 1 Peter 4:12-5:11, Steadfast in Faith

A. 4:12-19, The Impending Crisis B. 5:1-11, Caring for the Household of God

VI. 1 Peter 5:12-14, Final Greetings 243

im oi Mt cht sha

pace: _— a

¢3 eo J PAE i

=

va

te . 6 aay %

4

ke P)

a ihe aie. ox 0 (2S

“ar :

. et

= . britody ‘aca

FAG sy

1 EBBE RobbZ, (GREETINGS NIV i

NRSV Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,

]

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To the exiles of the Dispersion in Pon’tus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithyn’ia, who have been chosen and destined by God the Father and sanctified by the Spirit to be obedient to Jesus Christ and to be sprinkled with his blood: May grace and peace be yours in abundance.

To God’s elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance.

COMMENTARY rst Peter is written in Greek, and Greek ‘letters of the first century typically began with a salutation: “From X to Y, greetings.” Sometimes the salutation was expanded so that letter writers could give some information about themselves and suggest their concerns for those to whom the letter was addressed.” For Christian writers, the salutation provided the opportunity to begin to present the pastoral and theological motifs of the epistle.2® First Peter 1:1-2 represents the salutation for this epistle. 1:1. The writer introduces himself as Peter. He does not use his proper name, Simon, as recorded in the four Gospels (see, e.g., Matt 1:30; Mark 1:16, 30; Luke 5:8; John 1:40), but only his nickname, “Petros,” Greek for the original Aramaic “Cephas.” Some have seen this as a sign that the letter is late and implies the later church’s devotion to the figure of Peter, leaving aside his probable self-designation as Simon. However, already in 1 Cor 1:12 and Gal 2:11 and six other fimies-(1.Cor 3:22; 9:5: 15:5eGal 1:18: 2:9, 14), Paul refers to Simon only as “Cephas” (kndds

képhas), and in Gal 2:7-8 Paul refers to him simply as “Peter.” Therefore, very early in the Christian community Simon Peter had become Cephas or Peter. The term “Cephas,” or “Peter,” can be translated “rock,” and different Gospels give somewhat different accounts of how Simon the son of Jonah received this name. In Mark 3:16, Jesus seems to designate Simon as Peter at the time that Jesus appoints the Twelve to proclaim the gospel and to cast out demons. The account in Luke 6:14 is similar. (It is possible that Mark and Luke simply record here the fact that at some other time Jesus designated Simon as Peter, but it seems more likely that they thought the naming and the appointment went together.) In Matthew, Simon receives the name “Peter” after his confession of Jesus as Christ, son of the living God, at Caesarea Philippi (Matt 16:18); however, Peter is called Simon Peter by the narrator before that incident. At the story of the call of Simon in Matt 4:18, Matthew seems to indicate that Christians at the time of the writing of the Gospel called Simon “Peter,” but that he was not yet known as Peter within the time of the narrative itself. At any rate, there can be no question that the author of the letter signifies himself to be Simon Peter, Jonah’s son and one of the earliest circle of Jesus’ disciples.

28. See John L. White, Zhe Form and Function of the Body of the Greek Letter: A Study of the Letter-Body in the Non-literary Papyri and in Paul the Apostle, SBLDS (Missoula: SBL, 1972) 7-8. 29. See Norbert Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, Evangelisch-Katholischer

Kommentary zum Neuen Testament (Zurich: Benziger Verlag and Neukirchener Verlag, 1979) 55.

245

1 PETER 1:1-2 COMMENTARY The writer calls himself an apostle of Jesus Christ. “Apostle” is also Paul’s favorite selfdesignation at the beginning of letters (see Rom ii Com Ll? Cor lel: Gal Il) Bren if Ephesians and Colossians were written by persons other than Paul, they use the designation “apostle” for Paul himself, as do 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. Paul, too, certainly thinks of Peter as one of the apostles (see 1 Cor 9:5). In Luke and Acts, the term “apostle” is the Official designation for the twelve who followed Jesus in his earthly ministry and were chosen by him to establish the church in the power of the Holy Spirit.°° First Peter does not elaborate on the call or function of an apostle, as Paul’s letters do. On the one hand, we can assume that for this letter, as for Acts, Peter is self-evidently one of the circle of those who witnessed Jesus’ earthly ministry and resurrection and who bore witness to Jesus in the church’s early proclamation. In its root form, the term “apostle” comes from the Greek verb “to send” (attooTédAw apostelld ) and may go back to the Hebrew notion of the n->vi

(Saliah). The saliah was an emissary sent with the authority, commission, and message of the sender.*’ Therefore, for Peter to be an apostle of Jesus Christ was for Peter to speak with authority given by Jesus Christ and to speak a word that Jesus Christ commissioned him to bring.

It was noted in the Introduction that different interpreters have different understandings of the term “exile” (mapeTtSnyos parepidémos) in the part of the greeting that designates the recipients of the letter. Some scholars think that the Christians who received the letter were “exiled” because they had departed their homelands to become resident aliens in Asia Minor. Other scholars think that all Christians are “exiled” because they are separated for a time from their eternal home.** Language about exile in 1 Peter seems to show an analogy between the Christians of Asia Minor and the Jews who were exiled to Babylon. The stress is not so much on the fact that they

are far from home (whether an earthly home or a heavenly one). The designation emphasizes the fact that they are surrounded and outnumbered by the citizens, the natives, who misunderstand them and who constantly test their faith. One biblical paradigm for these Christians is Abraham. In Gen 23:4 he makes an appeal to the Hittites among whom he lives: “I am a stranger and an alien residing among you; give me property among you for a burying place” (NRSV).*° Just as Abraham had gone forth from his father’s house, so also the Christians of Asia Minor had left behind the practices of their pagan fathers and mothers to find themselves aliens and strangers in the land that used to be their home. Furthermore, for this letter the exile in Babylon would have been a foretaste of the later dispersion of Jews throughout the known world and their status as a sometimes troubled minority. Again 1 Peter takes a term familiar in its application to Judaism outside of Palestine and applies it by extension to Christians. Followers of Christ in Asia Minor are the new dispersion, scattered among opposing Gentiles, the majority community of the pagans. As noted, of course, most of these Christians to whom the letter was written were themselves pagans before they were called by God to Christian belief. A possible forerunner of 1 Peter is found in the letter that Jeremiah wrote to the exiles in Babylon (Jer 29:4-23):34 Thus says the LorD of hosts, the God of Israel, to all the exiles whom I have sent into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon: Build houses and live in them; plant gardens and eat what they produce. Take wives and have sons and daughters. . . . But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lorp on its behalf. (Jer 29:4-7 NRSV)

This portion of Jeremiah’s letter foreshadows the call of 1 Peter to its readers. They are to find their identity among the pagans where they are exiled. In part this means being exemplary citizens of a society that abuses them and honoring the authorities that rule this alien land (see 2:13-17). The order of the Greek text is rather different from that of the NRSV. In Greek the greeting is literally “to the chosen exiles of the diaspora,” not

30. In Acts, Paul is usually not counted as an apostle, but see Acts 14:14. 31. See Karl H. Rengstorf, “Apostolos,” in ZDNT, 1:407-46, esp. 414-18. 32. For the first option, see John H. Elliott, A Home for the Homeless: A Sociological Exegesis of 1 Peter, Its Situation and Strategy (Philadelphia:

33. See Paul]. Achtemeier, / Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress,

Fortress, 1981). For the second option see E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter (London: Macmillan, 1958) 118; and C. Spica, Les Epitres de Saint Pierre (Paris: Librarie Lecoffre, 1966) 40.

1996) 81-82.

34. See J. Ramsey Michaels, / Peter, WBC (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988) xlvi. Michaels also cites other examples of the genre.

246

1 PETER 1:1-2 COMMENTARY “to the exiles of the Dispersion... who have been chosen” (the NIV is more accurate here). It

the context of this letter, God is Father of both the Christians and Jesus Christ.” The Spirit is the one who strengthens Christians in holiness and sanctifies them in their walk. Jesus Christ is both servant and served. The purpose for which the Christians of Asia Minor were chosen was to be obedient to Christ. What makes their obedience possible is the gift of his blood. The phrase probably recalls Leviticus 16, where Aaron is to slaughter a bull and a goat and to sprinkle their blood on the mercy seat in the sanctuary, “because of the uncleannesses of the people of Israel, and because of their transgressions, all their sins” (Lev 16:16 NRSV; see also Exod 24:1-9). The theme is similar to that in Heb 12:24. It points the way to one of the great themes of the epistle: Christ’s suffering for the sake of the faithful and as an example of faithfulness. The fact that the first sprinkling took place while the children of Israel were wandering in the wilderness may also underline the theme that they were exiles—not really at home but nonetheless blessed by God’s mercy. There may also be here a hint of the theme of initiation; the author recalls for the Christians the new beginning made possible for them in Christ’s blood. The common salutation of Greek letters was the word yatpetv (chairein), “greeting.” In early Christian letters, a slightly different word was frequently used, ydpts (charis), “grace.” The coupling of this word with “peace” (eiprjvn eirene) is also typical (see, e.g., Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:3; 2 Thess 1:2; Titus 1:4). For Paul, “grace” is the word that defines the right relationship of God to humankind, God’s total self-giving in Jesus Christ. In 1 Peter the word seems to have less fundamental and less rich connotations, to represent one of the gifts God provides more than the underlying presupposition of all gifts. “Peace” is the translation of the Greek translation of the Hebrew or>w (salém), connoting not only peacefulness but wholeness, health, and well-being as well. The prayer that grace and peace might grow, multiply, abound suggests a rather different understanding from Paul’s sense that grace is the reality in which Christians stand, so allencompassing that nothing can add to its immeasurable depth.

may be that for the writer the election and the exile go together. To be chosen is to be exiled from those around you who have not been chosen in the same way and for the same destiny. This would echo Jeremiah’s letter to the exiles of his time. They are the exiles God has sent into exile. Their exile is a part of their calling and their election (Jer 29:4). The letter was addressed to Christians in five provinces of Asia Minor (see Introduction). If there is any reason for the order in which the provinces are listed, it may be that the letter circulated among the provinces in the order listed, though this remains conjecture.* 1:2. The NRSV translation includes part of the Greek of v. 1 in this verse. The Greek text more literally reads: “To the chosen exiles of the Dispersion ...destined by God.” The Greek term that the NRSV translates as “destined” (tpdyvwotv prognosin) refers to God’s foreknowledge, closely related to the sense of divine destiny but perhaps not simply to be equated with God’s destining. What Peter says is that from the beginning God has elected the exiles in accordance with God’s foreknowledge. This reference suggests not only that the God who elects these exiles has known them from the beginning, but also that God already knew of the whole drama of salvation in which they have a place. The verse refers to the activity of God the Father, of the Spirit, and of Jesus Christ. Goppelt is surely right in suggesting that in the Greek the activity of Father, Spirit, and Jesus Christ all explain the way in which these Christians have been chosen, elected.2° The NIV captures this nuance more clearly than does the NRSV by reiterating the “elect” (ExAextds eklektos) of v. 1 in the “chosen” (prognosin) of v. 2, preceding the explanation of how it is that Christians are elected or chosen. The Father is the one who has known the Christians and their story from the beginning. In 35. See Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 8. For reservations about this theory, see L. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 4-5. See the map “The Seven Churches of Revelation,” 574. : 36. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 70.

37. See Michaels, / Peter, 10.

247

1 PETER 1:1-2 COMMENTARY As Norbert Brox points out, however, already in these verses we see great themes of the writer’s affirmation and exhortation to a people in trouble. They are “chosen, destined, sanctified, sprinkled

with Christ’s blood, and brought into the realm | where grace and peace will grow.”** 38. Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 59.

REFLECTIONS 1. A theme struck immediately by the letter resonates with many contemporary Christians. Are we exiles in the world(s) in which we live? The notion that Christians are “resident aliens,” not really belonging to the troubled and troubling world around us, has from early on had an immense appeal for the faithful. If we understand ourselves to be outsiders, then faithful obedience will require careful attention to what it means to be in the world but not of it. Hauerwas and Willimon have written a book called Resident Aliens.” Drawing on the image from 1 Peter, they ask what is to happen to American Christianity now that American Christendom has come to an end. Only somewhat facetiously they point to the Sunday in 1963 when the Fox Movie Theater stayed open on the Lord’s Day for the first time as the end of the time when Christians could take their hegemony in the United States for granted. On the whole, they argue that the church will find its mission best as a colony rather than an empire. Preaching on | Peter in the light of this analysis, we have to ask whether they got 1 Peter right (Is it as countercultural as their use of the image would imply?) and whether they have the United States right as we move into the twenty-first century. Do Christians still have more power than the first-century Christians of Asia Minor could have envisioned? If so, what responsibility do we have for the world as well as over against it? These are difficult questions, and 1 Peter may help us best by forcing us to raise them. 2. Like the rest of the New Testament, 1 Peter does not present a fully developed doctrine of the Trinity. Yet the letter does claim that the exiles who received this letter have been chosen, elected, in three ways: (1) They have been elected by the foreknowledge of God the Father. (2) They have been elected by the Spirit, who trains them in holiness. (3) They have been elected by Christ, whose blood atones for sins and brings them to God’s mercy seat. If not a doctrine of the triune God, there is at least a threefold understanding of the way in which God acts for believers and in the whole human story. 3. In one sense, the salutation “let grace and peace abound” is highly conventional, the standard stuff of Christian discourse. Yet, what does it mean that already by the end of the first century it was conventional for Christians to greet one another as those whose lives are marked both by grace and by shalom? Perhaps as interesting as the theological insights of the New Testament writers are the signs of the fundamental understandings that marked the life of everyday Christians. If the claim that we live under God’s grace and seek God’s peace is conventional, it is a convention that contemporary Christians could gladly emulate. We sing “Amazing Grace” and sign our letters “Shalom” almost too perfunctorily, too easily. These first-century Christians had left an old world behind to live in a new world marked by God’s graciousness; and the shalom they found they knew was bought at a price—Christ’s suffering and perhaps their own. We seek to find in our worship and our practice the gifts that will enable us to be surprised by the familiar, to claim the traditions as still good news. 39. Stanley Hauerwas and William H. Willimon, Resident Aliens (Nashville: Abingdon, 1989).

248

feb CE

Relesel2

PRAISE TO GOD NIV

NRSV

5Praise be to the God and Eather of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, “and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade—kept in heaven for you, *who through faith are shielded by God’s power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. °In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. “These have come so that your faith—of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire—may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory

3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By his great mercy he has given us a new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, ¢and into an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, °who are being protected by the power of God through faith for a Salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. In this you rejoice,? even if now for a little while you have had to suffer various trials, ’so that the genuineness of your faith—being more precious than gold that, though perishable, is tested by fire—may be found to result in praise and glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed. ®Although you have not seen? him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and rejoice with an indescribable and glorious joy, °for you are receiving the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls. 10Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that was to be yours made careful search and inquiry, "inquiring about the person or time that the Spirit of Christ within them indicated when it testified in advance to the sufferings destined for Christ and the subsequent glory. It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in regard to the things that have now been announced to you through those who brought you good news by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things into which angels long to look!

and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed. Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, °for you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls. '0Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you,

searched intently and with the greatest care, ''trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. 'It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things.

2 Or Rejoice in this

>Other ancient authorities read known

(COMMENTARY : L orbert Brox suggests that the theme of

| 1 Peter can be discerned in the words of 5:12. It is a letter of encouragement,” a 40. See Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 16.

motif that is evident from the beginning of the epistle. Letters written around the time of 1 Peter often opened with thanksgivings or blessings, and the themes of those letters can sometimes

1 PETER 1:3-12 COMMENTARY that salvation has not yet been revealed and will not be so until the last day. The writer here demonstrates two rather different ways of understanding the relationship of the present to the promises of the transcendent God. On the one hand, there is the reality of God’s present rule “in heaven,” where God’s promises are stored up, treasured, preserved, almost as if believers had a divine safety deposit box. On the other hand, there is the promise that God will one day rule fully on earth, and the salvation kept in heaven almost as a secret will be made manifest to the whole creation. Since the original readers of 1 Peter seemed acutely aware that to the larger world they looked foolish and misled, there will be a kind of justice at that last time when God’s true salvation will be revealed and the foolish will prove to be wise, the wise foolish. The claim that Christians have an inheritance in heaven has a rich background in the Old Testament and is also attested elsewhere in Christian literature (see, e.g., Ps 16:5; Rom 8:17; Gal 4:7). It may be that the notion of rebirth in v. 3 leads to the promise of an inheritance, since those who are born as children of God with that rebirth become “legally” heirs of God’s promises.” Notice, too, the shift in the use of pronouns from v. 3 to v. 4. In v. 3 God has given “us” new birth, and in v. 4 God keeps an inheritance for “you.” Rhetorically this is a shift from the confessional to the homiletic, from the testimony about shared faith to the hortatory reminder to the “you” who read of what this shared faith means in their lives. The qualities of this heavenly inheritance, that it “can never perish, spoil or fade” (NIV), suggest what it means to say that Christians are born anew to a living hope. It is a hope that no power can destroy, tarnish, or mar. What can keep believers steadfast while they await their heavenly inheritance is faith. Faith is, in part, the confidence that believers do have a treasure laid up for them that neither moth nor rust can corrupt. The letter throughout helps its readers to find what does not perish in a perishable and perishing world. 1:6-7. The verb with which v. 4 began, “re-

be discerned in the motifs of the thanksgiving.4' Such is certainly the case here, where themes of suffering and hope come together, themes that will permeate the entire letter.

1:3-5. God is praised here for the ways in which Christians have been elected and redeemed. God, who is “Father” in v. 2, is now explicitly acknowledged as (above all) the Father of Jesus Christ. The writer, who prayed grace and peace for the readers, now insists that God has already provided mercy to those who are chosen. In the face of distress and suffering, what God’s mercy provides is “new birth” and “living hope.” For the earliest generations of Christians, it was clear that Christian life was “new birth.” One was not born into the faithful community, but chose it, often leaving behind the security or the good reputation of the old life for the insecurity—and blessing—of the new (see 2:2, 10 for the blessing; for the difficulty, see 3:16; 4:4). Goppelt points out that the word for “born again” (avayevvdw anagennao ) occurs only here in the New Testament, although the motif is obvious elsewhere (e.g., John 3:3, 5, 7; Titus 3:5; Jas 1:18).4* Hope lives because it is based in Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, his triumph over death. Hope lives because death cannot overcome it. Hope lives because even in the face of tribulation it does not back down or grow faint. Living hope is hope that gives life. ; There is a clear parallel here between the new birth of Christians and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Both move from death to life; thus the resurrection of Jesus is the grounds for the new life of the believer. It may be that there is an allusion to baptism here as well, with something like the reminder of Rom 6:4: “Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life” (NRSV). Verses 4-5 spell out the twofold shape of Christian hope. On the one hand, Christians lay hold of a promise that is already kept in the heavens (see Eph 1:11-14; Col 1:5). That is, however difficult earthly life may seem, God’s promise is signed and sealed and guaranteed. On the other hand, the fullness of 41. See Paul Schubert, Zhe Form and Function of Pauline Thanksgiv-

43. See J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, Black’s New Testament Commentaries (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1969) 51-52.

ings (Berlin: A. Topelmann, 1939).

42. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 81.

250

1 PETER 1:3-12 COMMENTARY joice” (ayahdtdw agalliao | can be either indicative or imperative—either “you do rejoice in this salvation” or “you should rejoice in this salvation.” Even if the verse is descriptive, the implication is clear that despite all odds the Christians of Asia Minor are to find joy even in difficult circumstances. “In this” can mean either “in this promise” or “in God” or “in all these circumstances”—i.e., “in the light of everything we have said.” It might also refer to the preceding promise of the last day. In that case, the verb (though strictly in the present) would have to be understood as future: “on that day you will rejoice.”** The NRSV and the NIV both opt for the more general understanding of this clause, and this reading seems to make clearest sense of the movement of the passage. The Introduction suggested that the nature of the various trials is not clearly specified. First Peter is more likely addressed to churches that know local harassment than to churches that are part of any systematic imperial persecution. The “little while” reminds the Christians that they live in the time between Christ’s resurrection and his return and that the “last time” of v. 6 will not be a long time coming. That is to say, the fundamental realities with which they live are with the guarantee of their redemption, stored in heaven, and the promise of their redemption soon to come to earth. The present difficulties are bracketed and made relative by the abiding promises. Verse 7 suggests either the reason for the present difficulties or the result of those difficulties. It may be that the trials are sent in order to prove the genuineness of the readers’ faith; or it may be that, however trials arise, the result is that the genuineness of that faith will be proved. One’s 44, See J. Ramsey Michaels, / Peter, WBC (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988) 27; L. Goppelt, A Commentaryon |Peter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 88-89.

reading of this verse depends in part on one’s interpretation of v. 2, where the author refers to the “foreknowledge” (NIV) or “destining” (NRSV) of God in the lives of the believers. Also pertinent is the reading of v. 6. If the believers have had to suffer trials, is that because circumstances have made such suffering necessary or because God has prepared such a destiny?* The image in the verse is quite clear. Just as gold is refined through fire, so also genuine faith is refined through suffering (cf. Ps 66:10; Mal 3:3). Further, genuine faith is more precious than gold, because genuine faith is imperishable, while even the most precious gold will one day perish. Notice how often the epistle suggests that the gifts of the Christian life have two qualities that set faith apart from the values of the larger world. Christian gifts are immeasurably precious, and Christian gifts are unfading and imperishable. We recall from this verse, too, that genuine faith is absolutely essential, because through faith God’s power preserves the faithful—in their faith—until the last day (v. 3) It is equally clear that this whole test is set in an eschatological framework. The genuineness of faith (faith as genuine) will be made clear at the last day when Jesus Christ is revealed, at the end of this “little while” wherein the faithful now suffer. To whose praise, glory, and honor will faith’s reality redound? Perhaps to the praise, glory, and honor of the Christians, but most certainly to the praise, glory, and honor of God as God is revealed in Jesus Christ. 45. Brox suggests that the very use of the term “trial” (Teipaopds peirasmos) suggests that God is, indeed, the one who sets the tests for the sake of proving the faith and refining the gold. See Norbert Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentary zum Neuen Testament (Zurich: Benziger Verlag and Neukirchener Verlag, 1979) 65. Davids nuances the argument to say that while suffering is not part of God’s desire, it is not outside God’s sovereignty. See Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 56.

o, “Ws

“~

EXCURSUS: SUFFERING IN 1 PETER There are four key sets of references to unjust suffering in this epistle. First is the passage about “unjust trials” (vv. 6-7). Second is the long section on slaves who have to suffer unjustly

EXCURSUS: SUFFERING IN 1 PETER (2:18-25). Third is the encouragement for those who apparently suffer for their open confession of their Christian faith (3:17-18). Fourth is the reference to the “fiery ordeal” in 4:12-19. The material in chaps. 1, 3, and 4 may deal with the suffering that comes to Christians for maintaining their faith in the face of opposition. The reminder to slaves is explicitly encouragement to suffer courageously unjust treatment at the hands of their masters, though implicitly this too may include mistreatment precisely because of their Christian faith. Because slaves suffer unjustly, as Christ suffered, they become a paradigm and example for all Christians, slave and free, who suffer unjustly at the hands of their masters or at the hands of society. We cannot be sure whether the suffering that Christians undergo includes actual judicial proceedings, but certainly it includes slander, innuendo, and abuse (see 2:12; 3:17; 4:14). We also cannot be sure whether the “fiery ordeal” of 4:12 is a new and more threatening example of opposition that calls forth the strong response to be brave and to rejoice or whether, as the letter draws to a close, the rhetoric takes on even greater passion. What is clear is that in this epistle the issue is not why bad things happen to good people. Rather, the issue is how to interpret the suffering Christians undergo as a result of their conviction and confession. First Peter interprets the suffering of Christians in at least these ways: (1) Suffering can provide for the refining of faith. As Achtemeier suggests, in 1 Pet 1:6-7 there is a comparison between the lesser and the greater: If fire can purify gold, then how much more can the fire of suffering purify the faith of those who are steadfast?” There is the implication that the suffering may be sent from God and the promise that the value of faith tested by hardship will be revealed at the end (see also Matt 5:11-12). (2) The one who suffers imitates Christ, who also suffered unjustly, not only as Christians’ redeemer but also as their example (2:21-25; 3:17-18; 4:13; 5:13). (3) Suffering is not only the result of human bad will but also is a consequence of the power of the devil (5:8). (4) Nonetheless, part of the power of Christ’s resurrection was his power to proclaim victory over the forces of evil (3:18-20). Therefore, by implication, Christians know that those who cause their suffering will also finally be judged and defeated. (5) Suffering for being a Christian is itself a sign that the end of history is at hand (4:12-16). (6) When Christ does return, those who have suffered for their faith will receive the reward of eternal glory, and the Spirit, which is the firstfruits of that glory, already is given to the faithful who suffer (1:7; 2:11; 4:13; 5:4, 10-11). 46. See Paul J. Achtemeier, 7 Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996) 100. Cf. Rom 5:3-4; Jas 1:2-4, as cited in Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 91.

o, ~~

7 ~~

1:8-9. Some texts suggest a different reading for the first clause, “Although you do not know him,” suggesting a scribal slip or that the two references in this verse to “see” (using different forms of the Greek verb dpdw [horad]) seem redundant. As both the NIV and the NRSV suggest, however, “see” seems the more likely reading.”

A

~~

What vv. 8-9 show forth is the present reality of the salvation provided the faithful in Jesus Christ. Although the fullness of Christ’s glory is yet to be revealed, those who are reborn to a living hope even now have the privilege of loving Christ, being faithful to Christ, and rejoicing in him. The doxological emphasis suggests that in v. 7 as here the clearest emphasis is on the way in which the work of salvation redounds to Christ’s praise. It is not clear what distinction is being

47. See Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the New Testament (New York: United Bible Societies, 1971) 687.

Zoe

1 PETER 1:3-12 COMMENTARY made when the author says that the readers “have not seen” Christ and “do not see him now.” Perhaps it is simply a way of saying that they were not eyewitnesses to his ministry and that even in the present they know him by faith and not by sight. We notice, too, that the term for “believing” or “faith” has occurred four times in the seven verses of this prayer. Faith is what protects Christians as they await their final salvation (v. 5), but faith is also the way in which Christians relate in the present to the Christ they will see only in the future. Even in the present, faith has its result: the salvation of souls. Therefore, for 1 Peter the Christian promise has at least three elements. It includes (1) the inheritance being kept safe in heaven; (2) the glorious revelation and judgment of Christ on the last day; and (3) the salvation thatis present for believers now as they await that last day. In all these ways, the faith that 1 Peter describes is very much like the “living hope” into which Christians have been reborn. When the letter refers to “the salvation of your souls,” it does not distinguish the soul from the body, but uses the term wuyy (psyche), as the NT often does, to refer to the person, the salvation of the self.*8 1:10-12. These verses stress the particular blessedness of the Christians to whom the letter is addressed. True, they may be undergoing various trials, but the prophets of the OT knew themselves to be servants of these small bands of Christian believers, and the very angels wish that they could know the gospel as these faithful mortals do. One can see both themes present in the Epistle to the Hebrews. In Heb 11:39-40, after the author has brought out the whole roll call of the OT heroes, he adds: “Yet all these, though they were commended for their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something

flect [a] tradition of the angels’ lack of knowledge and of their resultant inferiority to human beings. Hence they desire merely to glimpse what is now openly proclaimed in the gospel.”4? It is evident from the context of these verses that the prophets mentioned here are those of the Old Testament. The purpose of prophecy for the writer of 1 Peter was to foretell Christ’s advent, suffering, and glory. The efficacy of prophecy depended on Christ’s own Spirit, which spoke to the prophets. Clearly for the writer of 1 Peter the Holy Spirit who inspired prophecy could not be other than the Spirit of Christ. Perhaps this reference simply communicates the New Testament idea that it is Christ who sends the Spirit; therefore, one can refer, however anachronistically, to the Spirit of Christ.°° Perhaps, however, the epistle claims that the pre-existent Christ was present in the Spirit to the prophets, bearing witness to himself long before his earthly ministry (see E202) In any case, what is clearly underlined is that the same Spirit who inspired the prophets also inspired the preachers who brought the good news (the Greek word is evayyeAtCw [euangelizo], “to preach the gospel”) to these troubled Christians (see also 1:25). Both prophecy and gospel bear witness to Christ’s sufferings and to the glories that follow those sufferings. Both prophecy and gospel, therefore, also foreshadow the story of these Christians who now suffer in the hope of glory.” The “grace” (v. 10) that comes to these Christians is at least in part the encouragement that comes from that gospel, from that story. First Peter uses the OT in the way that the description of the prophets would suggest. Throughout, as we shall see, OT passages are read as predicting, testifying in advance to Christ’s story. And the function of these OT passages is precisely to serve first-century Christians as they seek encouragement. The blessing of 1 Pet 1:3-12 has a double focus: It is a prayer directed to God, and it is an exhortation directed to the reader. God is praised

better, so that they would not, apart from us, be made perfect” (NRSV). And Heb 2:16 states: “It is clear that [Christ] did not come to help angels,

49. Achtemeier, / Peter, 112. 50. So the note in Kenneth Barker, ed., Zhe NIV Study Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985) 1888. 51. So, e.g., Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 70;J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, Black’s New Testament Commentaries (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1969) 60-61, who cites references from the Church Fathers and recalls 1 Cor 10:4. 52. So Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 61.

but the descendants of Abraham” (NRSV). As Achtemeier suggests, this passage “seems to re48. See, e.g., Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 60; C. Spicq, Les Epitres de Saint Pierre (Paris: Librarie Lecoffre, 1966) 53. »

203

1 PETER 1:3-12 COMMENTARY hope they need for the trials through which they for precisely those gifts in which the readers are called to rejoice. The God who gives hope is __ live. blessed in part so that Christians can take the

REFLECTIONS 1. The claim that Christians are born anew raises some of the same issues as does the image of Christians as “strangers in the world” (NIV) or “exiles” (NRSV) in 1 Pet 1:1. For the Christians to whom the author of 1 Peter writes, it is quite clear that Christian faith represented a conscious and difficult decision to move away from their old lives and from the predominant culture in which they lived. Today “born-again” Christianity can sometimes refer to a particular spiritual experience without radical social or ethical implications. For Christians of Peter’s time, however, it was clear that being born again not only meant adding joy to one’s life, but also leaving behind one’s congenial relationship with neighbors and community. Being born again hurt. 2. Like virtually every New Testament writing, 1 Peter entices us to think about the relationship between present and future in the Christian story. The writer of 1 Peter believes strongly that the fullness of salvation will not be available until God consummates the story that began in creation and will reach its focus in Jesus Christ. The end of the story will be salvation for the faithful and praise and glory for God, but the readers of 1 Peter are not at the end of the story yet; they await that ending with hope. Yet salvation is also a present reality, laid hold of by faith in God and by love for Christ. For Peter as for the rest of the New Testament, we walk by faith and not by sight, but that faith includes the unquenchable hope that one day we will see the one for whom we hope. And that hope is embodied in faith that trusts that God is with the faithful in the present,

too. Jonathan Kozol has written a moving book on the life of poor people in the Bronx, New York. The book is called Amazing Grace, because that is the favorite hymn of many of the residents of that neighborhood and, one suspects, because Kozol is amazed at the grace and courage he found there.” The verse of the hymn that is most deeply loved by the people whom Kozol met catches both sides of 1 Peter’s eschatological reality: final hope and present comfort. Through many I have already ’Tis grace that And grace will

dangers, toils, and snares come; brought me safe thus far, lead me home.

3. The tension between present and future redemption is particularly appropriate in the use of 1 Pet 1:3-9 as a lection for the second Sunday of Easter (Cycle A). The resurrection of Christ provides hope for the future and strength for the present. Christ risen from the dead is both the guarantor of final glory for the faithful and the ground of present Christian joy—even in suffering. Acts 2:22-31, the portion of Peter’s pentecost sermon also assigned for the second Sunday of Easter, plays on a similar combination of present joy and hope for the future. Especially in Peter’s quotation of Ps 16:8-11, the sermon grounds the joy of believers and their hope for ransom from Sheol in the fact that God freed Jesus from death (Acts 2:24).

4. Another theme in 1 Pet 1:3-9 echoes the Gospel lesson for the second Sunday of Easter (Cycle A). The risen Christ assures Thomas, after his bout with doubt, that the greatest blessing 53. Jonathan Kozol, Amazing Grace: The Lives of Children and the Conscience of a Nation (New York: Crown, 1995) 82.

254

1 PETER 1:3-12 REFLECTIONS is given those who have faith without actually having seen the risen Lord. It is just this blessing that 1 Peter pronounces upon the faithful of its generation: “Although you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and rejoice with an indescribable and glorious joy” (1 Pet 1:8 NRSV). Despite all the movies that try to entice us with technicolor portraits of Jesus walking through the Galilee, it is false romanticism to think that our commitment would be improved had we been there to experience his ministry or, like the apostles, seen the risen Lord. Then and now it is finally by faith that we lay hold of the promise that provides hope for our final end and joy for the days until then. 5. A theme emerges here that is as inescapable for contemporary Christians as it was for first-century ones. How do we understand suffering? Commentators read 1 Pet 1:6-7 in quite diverse ways. Is suffering part of God’s plan for believers and for human history, or is it a happenstance whose origin we cannot really discern? Does God send tests in order to refine us, or is it, rather, that when tests come, God uses those tests for the strengthening of our faith? Whether it is the purpose of suffering or only its outcome, what 1 Peter does insist is that for Christians trials can purge and refine and purify faith. Of course, the trials 1 Peter has in mind are those that result from confessing Christ. But Christians in our own time generalize the question. The puzzle that not even this epistle addresses is what most Christians have observed—namely, that the same trials that strengthen some believers destroy others. Persecution can establish faith or destroy it, but even more mundane matters like debilitating illness can lead some to God and others away—and there is no predicting who will turn which way. That truth may be a mystery beyond the purview of the author of 1 Peter and beyond even the most careful discussions of tribulation as refining. 6. No critical biblical scholar is likely to be satisfied with 1 Peter’s description of prophecy—at least not without considerable qualification. Historical-critical studies lead us to doubt that the Hebrew prophets were searching for the date and circumstances of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. Yet this strong statement from a first-century Christian to other first-century Christians reminds us that the Hebrew Bible did not become scripture for the church simply because Christians loved the old, old story or were delighted that Isaiah predicted the birth of a child to King Ahaz (in one interpretation of the historical context of Isa 7:14). As 1 Peter and Paul’s epistles and Hebrews and the Gospel according to Matthew especially show, whatever the prophets had in mind, what Christians found in prophecy was the foreshadowing of that great story that “evangelized” them, the story of Christ crucified and risen again. So for contemporary Christian faith, preaching, and theology, it is not enough to place each passage in its original context without asking how the early church might have found Jesus prefigured in the Old Testament, and how we might find him foreshadowed or adumbrated there, too. Put differently, we are still called to ask how we understand Christ better in the light of those texts whose story provided the indispensable context of his story. For 1 Peter, apparently, the same Spirit preaches the gospel from Gen 1:1 through to the Christian preachers. We are invited to find ways to lay hold of that promise, with integrity but without apology.

255

1 PETER 1:13-2:10 Gop’s HOLY PEOPLE OVERVIEW " his first section of the body of the epistle

mand without promise. The obedience is grounded in the goodness of Christ, whose blood is like that of a lamb without blemish (1:19), the cornerstone of God’s house (2:7). Obedience will find its reward at the final revelation of Christ in glory (1:13). And obedience is nourished by the good gift of God’s own Word as preached to God’s people (1:22-23).

works out the themes of the thanksgiving: How does doxology work out in obedient living? The whole section is grounded in two passages from the Old Testament: the call from Leviticus to be holy as God is holy (Lev 11:44-45) and the promise from Hosea that those who have been no people are now God’s people (Hos 2:23). This call to obedience, however, is not merely a com-

| PETER 1:13-25;BEING H@bY NIV

NRSV

'STherefore, prepare your minds for action; be self-controlled; set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed. '4As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do; '°for it is written: “Be holy, because I am holy.” “Since you call on a Father who judges each man’s work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear. '*For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb

13Therefore prepare your minds for action;? discipline yourselves; set all your hope on the grace that Jesus Christ will bring you when he is revealed. '4Like obedient children, do not be conformed to the desires that you formerly had in ignorance. Instead, as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in all your conduct; !°for it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.” 17If you invoke as Father the one who judges all people impartially according to their deeds, live in reverent fear during the time of your exile.

without blemish or defect. 2°He was chosen before

lamb without defect or blemish. ?°7He was des-

the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. ?!'Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God. 22Now that you have purified yourselves by 216 Lev. 11:44,45; 19:2; 20:7

tined before the foundation of the world, but was revealed at the end of the ages for your sake. 7IThrough him you have come to trust in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are set on God. 22Now that you have purified your souls by

'8You know that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your ancestors, not with perishable things like silver or gold, !%but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a

2 Gk gird up the loins of your mind

256

1 PETER 1:13-25 nee sO. that you have ,love one another oar

4

ent aubonse: add pour the on. _ bOr constantly Cc ancient authorities read 2. pure heart -@Or through the on of.theliving and enduring God > é

(COMMENTARY First Peter 1:3-12 praises God for the gifts that God bestows upon faithful people. First Peter 1:13-25 shows Christians the responsibility that goes with these gifts. The holy God requires a holy people. 1:13-16. The section begins with “therefore,” indicating that the calls to hopeful life that follow are based precisely in the nature of the God who has been praised in 1:3-12. Because you are called by such a God, therefore.... Further, in the immediate context of 1:12, because you have heard such good news, therefore.... 1:13. The writer of 1 Peter frequently uses participles in ways that are ambiguous. The main verb of this verse is “hope” or “set your hope” (édtioate elpisate), and the other terms that both the NRSV and the NIV translate as imperatives are actually participles. Participles can be used with imperative force, but since the letter gives us only the one imperative, one might think that the participles serve in an adverbial way, to show the conditions under which the readers live as they are called to “set their hope.”*4 A somewhat wooden, but perhaps helpful translation would be this: “Therefore having girded the loins

| of your understanding, and being sober, set your hope entirely on the grace to be given you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.” This translation underlines the emphasis that connects the first twelve verses of this chapter with the last thirteen: You have been born to a living hope; therefore: hope. Live out your call. This translation also suggests that metaphors lie behind the descriptions of the lives of those who are called to hope. What the NIV and the NRSV translate as “prepare your minds for action” is more literally “gird the loins of your mind,” as a worker might roll up a gown in order to work or _a pilgrim might roll up his or her garment for the journey. “Be self-controlled” or “be disciplined” (vjdw nepho) more literally means “be sober” as opposed to drunk. (The adverb “entirely” [rehelws teleios| might go with “be sober” rather | than with “set your hope.”) Certainly the phrases —_ are already traditional and the translations capture | much of their meaning, but the metaphors may be richer than the more prosaic paraphrases sug__ gest (on the girding, see John 21:18; Eph 6:14; on being sober, see 1 Thess 5:8, which combines images of sobriety and right clothing; 1 Pet 4:7; in Rom 13:13 the call to sobriety is not merely

cal eae amug con of Petrone —Tetaphorica)|. As elsewhere in the NT, these Peter with Special Regard to Ambiguous Expressions (Abo, Finland: Abo

images are invoked in the light of the impending

Academy Press, 1990). Achtemeier thinks that most participles in 1Peter

coming of Jesus in glory (see 1 Thess 5:8).

can be interpreted without resorting to the rare imperatival participle. See

Achtemeier, / Peter,117.

an

”

Zod

Grace”

is

3

4

(ydpts charis) here seems to have yet

1 PETER 1:13-25 COMMENTARY “Since the one you already call ‘Father’ is also an impeccably fair judge, be sure that you live in appropriate fear of God’s judgment.” The point may equally well be, “Since the one who judges all impartially is the one you are invited to call ‘Father,’ though you rightly fear God, your fear can include confident reverence.” This would be rather like Paul’s confident assurance in Rom 8:15-17 (see also Gal 4:6). The NIV shades toward the first reading, the NRSV toward the second. What is clear in either case is that the claim that God is “Father” is directly related to the call in v. 14 for the readers to be “obedient children.” This is not just a vague general claim that all Christians are God’s children. Like much Christian exhortation, the verse includes both the reminder of God’s gracious relationship to the Christians and the call to responsible living in the light of that relationship. In this context, the exile seems to be the time of waiting for the full salvation that will come “when Jesus Christ is revealed” (v. 13 NIV). 1:18-19. Verse 18 begins with a participle, the force of which is caught better by the NIV than by the NRSV. This statement is not a new idea but a modification of v. 17: “Live in reverent fear, since you know....” Verses 18-19 present one of the great contrasts that underlie the argument of the entire epistle. Christians base their lives not on what is perishable but on what is imperishable; not on what is base but on what is precious. In v. 7 it was the faith of Christians that is precious and imperishable; in vv. 18-19 it is the blood of Christ. Much of 1 Peter is based on these analogies between the life of faith and the gifts of the faithful God. God’s holiness requires the holiness of Christians. Christ’s precious blood evokes the believers’ precious faith. (For other images of gifts that are precious or imperishable, see 1:23, 25; 2:4, 0-7; 3:3-4; 5:4.) Christ the living stone forms Christians as living stones (2:4-5). The reference to Christ’s blood as being like that of a perfect lamb recalls v. 2 and the reminder that Christians have been sprinkled with Christ’s blood in their initiation into faith and obedience. The reference to the unblemished lamb probably recalls Lev 22:21. The perfection of the lamb may be another reminder from Leviticus: Now just as Christ is holy, so also Christians are to be holy (see v. 16). The claim that Christ is himself the

a slightly different meaning from the earlier use in the epistle. Here “grace” is the salvation that will be granted only at the parousia. The whole verse is an exhortation to have hope in the light of Jesus’ impending revelation. As people who are sober, as people who are ready for action, Christians are to live in hope. 1:14-16. Verses 14-15 also have one main thought in the imperative clause: “Be holy” (v. 15). Again the participle describes the state of those who are called to be holy. They do not conform to their former evil desires. (The description of their former lives is more complete in 4:3. The reference to “not conforming” recalls Rom 12:2.) But it is not enough to leave behind the blandishments of the old life. The readers are positively to embrace the possibilities of the new: “Be holy in all you do” (v. 15, NIV). Thus to be a “child” of obedience is both to leave behind the former pagan ways and to embrace the new ways of holiness. That these Christians are children of obedience speaks primarily of their status as those who obey God, but that they are children may also remind us that they are only recently born anew (see also 1:3, 23; 2:2).°° The reference to their former pagan days as times of “ignorance” recalls Acts 17:23, 30 and Eph 4:18.°° The point of these verses is to compare the one who calls to the Christians who are called. A holy God demands a holy people, just as a God of hope creates a hopeful people. The quotation is from Leviticus (see Lev 11:44-45; 20:7; 29:2). One of the dominant themes of Leviticus is the claim that the holy God demands holiness of God’s own people. Here 1 Peter, like much early Christian writing, takes the words that Moses addressed to the children of Israel and applies them unapologetically to the early Christians. It is significant, perhaps, that Moses spoke these words to Israelites still in the wilderness, in exile, as they awaited the entrance to the promised land. So in the next verse we are reminded that these early Christians live in exile. 1:17-21. 1:17. The ambiguity of this verse provides for two possible interpretations, not necessarily mutually exclusive. The point may be, 55. So Michaels, / Peter, 6. 56. Ibid., 58. Note that here, too, the reference is to the behavior of Gentiles.

258

1 PETER 1:13-25 COMMENTARY Sacrificial lamb is found also in 1 Cor 5:7 and Heb 9:5 (and these references may recall Isa 53:7).57 The stress on Christ’s sacrificial gift of himself begins to point to a major theme of the epistle: Christians, too, will be called to courageous sacrifice. 1:20. This verse captures the temporal framework of the whole epistle. The time in which the

trans.]) Then Christ’s glory will be the glory of the faithful. Now is the time of exile, but exile is framed by God’s intention from before the beginning of time and by Christ’s imminent return at the end of time. In the meantime, Christians live by faith and look ahead in hope. 1:22-25. 1:22. Obedience is a major concern of this epistle. Faith shows itself and hope realizes itself through obedience (in this sense, 1:2 states the theme of the whole epistle). The first manifestation of obedience is love for other believers. However one understands the social and political situation of the recipients of this letter, they surely found themselves to be a threatened minority in a disbelieving and sometimes hostile world. Not only the demands of the gospel but also the dictates of prudence suggest the importance of mutual love. Benjamin Franklin’s word to John Hancock, spoken under threat of persecution, applies well here: “We must indeed all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.” This sentence is also full of participles, which can be taken as either imperatives or adverbial modifiers.°° The main verb, in the imperative, is “love one another” (ayatoate agapesate). The verse could begin “Purify yourselves” or “Since you have purified yourselves.” The purifying may also be related to the sprinkling of v. 2 in a reference to the readers’ baptism.*? (Both the NIV and the NRSV take the latter meaning.) The purifying by obedience may refer the readers to both the purity of the unblemished lamb and the quotation from Leviticus, “Be holy as I am holy.” Although the Greek word for “purify” (dyvigw hagnizo ) is here introduced to the letter for the first time, there remains something of that sense that the life of the Christian reflects the purity of God’s life and of Christ’s sacrifice. Two words are used for “love.” In the participial phrase, the term is diiadeddia (philadelphia), the love of the brethren (“mutual love,” NRSV; “love for your brothers,” NIV). The adjective avutékpitos (anypokritos}, which the NRSV translates as “genuine” and the NIV as “sincere,” is more literally, “not hypocritical,” “not feigned.” In a situation

readers live is the end of time, but Christ has been known by God from before the beginning of time. Here God’s work in Christ is analogous to God’s work in Christians. The faithful, too, have been foreknown, destined for their calling of faithfulness (v. 2). Not only does God’s purpose in Christ foreshadow God’s purpose in Christians, but also God’s great act in Jesus Christ is for the sake of this little band of believers in Asia Minor. Just as the prophets serve not themselves but Christian faithful, so also Christ comes not to serve himself but to serve those who believe in him (cf. v. 12). Since this is a letter of encouragement, we can see how the author strives to encourage these faltering Christians by reminding them that from the foundation of the world God has destined them to be God’s people. From the foundation of the world, God has destined Jesus Christ to redeem them through his blood. And God has sent prophets to interpret God’s work in Jesus—for the sake of these same Christian believers. 1:21. The strong analogy between Christ and Christians prepares the readers for the affirmations of this verse. God has done a great work in Jesus Christ: his resurrection and his ascension to glory (see Commentary on 3:22). God has done this great work for the sake of Christians. Because of Jesus Christ, Christians are given the gifts of faith and hope. Faith sustains Christians’ relationship to God in this present time (at the beginning of the end of the age), and hope lays hold of the promise of glory that is soon to be revealed in Christ’s return. (Both the NRSV and the NIV miss the repetition in vv. 21a and 21c of forms of the Greek word for “faith” [ttotis pistis]: “to you who through Christ, [are] faithful to the one who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God” [author’s

58. See Thuren, The Rhetorical Strategy of|Peter with Special Regard to Ambiguous Expressions. 59. So Davids, The First Epistle of Peter, 76.

57. See Michaels, / Peter, 66.

259

1 PETER 1:13-25 COMMENTARY where one Christian may betray another to local authorities, unfeigned love is both virtue and necessity. The second reference to love, in the main verb of the sentence, is dyatdw (agapao}, the most frequently used term for “love” in the New Testament. The whole movement of the verse reminds us of the old summary of early Christian (especially Pauline) ethics: “Be what you are.” Since you have been purified, since you do have genuine love for one another, well, act that out in heartfelt devotion. For v. 22, there is also good textual evidence for the reading, “love one another deeply from a pure heart,” a reading found in papyrus 72 and some other ancient sources. The reading elaborates but does not

change the import of the translation.” The motivation for this love is obedience to the truth. The truth that 1 Peter proclaims requires obedience, not just assent, and is manifested in love, not just in knowledge. 1:23. This verse echoes v. 3 and the writer’s thanks to God for the new birth provided Christian believers through Christ’s resurrection. Now, just as Christ’s resurrection is to eternal life, so also the new life of believers is grounded in an eternal gift. The imperishable seed here is apparently the Word itself, which along with faith and Christ’s sacrifice is another of those imperishable gifts on which these early Christians could found their life and practice.°! As the NRSV points out, the verse could also read “through the word of the living and enduring God,” but the contrast between perishable and imperishable seed and the following quotation from Isaiah 40 strongly suggest that it is God’s Word that lives and endures. Notice the close connection between the living hope of v. 3 and the living word of v. 23. Like the living hope, the living word is itself alive, lively, and life-giving. Notice the close connection between the imperishable salvation of the heav60. See Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the New Testament, 688-89; Achtemeier, / Peter, 135. See also the NRSV and NIV notes. 61. See Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 80.

enly inheritance in v. 4 and the abiding word of v. 23. Both God’s gracious activity and the word of the gospel that proclaims that activity endure eternally. By implication, the blood of v. 19 is also imperishable as well as precious. If the references to new birth in 1 Peter go back to a baptismal homily or liturgy, then here word and rite come together as signs of the new life in Christ. Christians are born anew through the ceremony of baptism, but it is the Word that brings them to that new birth. 1:24-25. In accordance with v. 12, the prophecy from Isa 40:6-8 is understood to be a reminder for first-century Christian believers. The contrast between the perishable flesh and the eternal Word not only looks back to the references to imperishability, but also looks ahead to the concern that faithful people not be held captive to the flesh— that which is bound to pass away (2:11; see also Commentary on 3:18; 4:1-2). Not only these verses themselves but also their context in Isaiah help to provide the themes for the epistle. Immediately prior to the verses quoted, Isaiah declares the revealing of God’s glory, as 1 Peter looks to the final revelation of God’s glory in 1:5-7 (Isa 40:5). Immediately following these verses, Isaiah calls for a herald of “good news” to speak to Zion (Isa 40:9; the verb in the Septuagint is evayyeriCw [euangelizo], as in Petal 12 525)5 Now it is clear for Peter that the good news predicted by Isaiah is precisely that good news that the Christians of Asia Minor have heard, and Isaiah’s prophecy fulfills the description of prophecy in 1:2. Isaiah looks forward to the gospel; the Christian preachers preach that gospel; these little bands of Christians have heard that gospel. The gospel they have heard is the word of which Isaiah spoke—it is the word that lives and endures, gives life and stays alive—eternally (for a different application of the Isaiah passage, cf. Jas 1:10-11).

REFLECTIONS 1. From the admonition of Paul through the meditation of Thomas 4 Kempis, Christians have sought to engage in the imitation of Christ (see 1 Cor 11:1). Drawing on the themes of the holiness code of Leviticus, 1 Peter encourages the faithful to imitate God, to be holy as

1 PETER 1:13-25 REFLECTIONS God is holy. Perhaps imitation is not the best word for this relationship. In the covenant there is not equality between the partners but recognition of reciprocal responsibilities: God’s holiness demands the holiness of the faithful. 2. Here as throughout 1 Peter there is a contrast between two ways of living, two directions of the self. The self can be directed toward perishable things—like silver and gold—or toward the imperishable realities—Christ’s redeeming act on the cross and the Word that proclaims that act. This portion of the epistle implies what the whole letter will make clear: Those who set their hearts on the perishable will perish; those who set their hearts on what endures will endure. In his book on the people of the Bronx, Jonathan Kozol contrasts two citizens of New York. One is a newspaper columnist who has given up on invisible realities and divinely driven hopes. She writes: “All right... . Out there, someone is sleeping on a grate... . and the emergency rooms are full of people. . . . [Still] cruelty is as natural to the city as fresh air is to the country....I used to feel this cruelty was wrong, immoral....Now I don’t know. Maybe it’s the fuel that powers the palace.”

While this woman rejoices in the cruelty-fueled palace, a boy named Anthony grows up with not a fraction of her security and worldly wealth. Anthony has his heart set on another vision; aspiring to be a writer, he writes his hope for God’s kingdom: “God’s Kingdom. ... God will be there. He’ll be happy that we have arrived. “People shall come hand-in-hand. ... “God will be fond of you.”®

3. The holiness of God’s holy people is not centered in God alone or in one’s own devotional life. Holiness builds community, the community of mutual love and support. Just as the holiness code of Leviticus sets a people apart from the unholy nations around them, so also the holiness code of 1 Peter builds a community of brotherly and sisterly love. Love for God, purity of self, love for the brother and sister in Christ are all essential ingredients of the community of living hope that 1 Peter seeks to build. In a nation committed to individualism and a time devoted to consumerism, Americans go church shopping. “What can | get out of it?” they ask. This is far from the God who calls us to be a people, who speaks to us far more often than to me. Perhaps the renewal of the church will come when we begin the “Our Father...” remembering the absolutely essential plural of the pronoun.

4. The immediate

history of the Christians of Asia Minor is set in a much

larger

eschatological framework. Their story was destined by God from the beginning and moves toward God at the end. They have been called; they will be judged. The time between these times looks back to that foundation and forward to that consummation. Any reading of 1 Peter that looks only to the daily life of those Christians (or to ours) misses the depth and scope of the hope Peter proclaims. Some years ago an American graduate student returned from studying with the German New Testament scholar Ernst Kasemann. After listening to one of Kasemann’s particularly impassioned lectures, the student complained, “But Professor, that wasn’t a lecture, it was a sermon.” “Of course,” said Kaésemann, “there’s no time left for anything else.”

5. Christian proclamation is held in very high regard in these verses. It is the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy and the means by which Christians lay hold of new life. Preaching is a primary way in which faithful people can appropriate what God has done in the cross of Christ. Preaching provides what the whole letter provides, encouragement and witness to the true grace of God (see 1 Pet 5:7). One doubts that the author of 1 Peter would be encouraged 62. Jonathan Kozol, Amazing Grace: The Lives of Children and the Conscience of a Nation (New York: Crown, 1995) 113-14.

63. Ibid., 237-38.

261

| PETER 1:13-25 REFLECTIONS to attend Christian worship and hear the preacher begin, “I have a few thoughts to share” or “I know this is only a matter of opinion.” Karl Barth’s great book 7he Word of God and the Word of Man shook preaching in this country with the claim that in preaching the two words come together.” For several decades most of us have been retreating from that claim. We suspect that no one out there believes it; of course, that may be because we have stopped believing it ourselves. 6. Since Easter is the presupposition of Christian faith, the whole New Testament can be read as a commentary on the significance of Easter. Yet it is perhaps especially appropriate that the Revised Common Lectionary turns to 1 Peter during the Easter season. For all its appropriate emphasis on the suffering example of Christ crucified, 1 Peter founds its hope and bases its joy on absolute confidence in the resurrection as the event in which both Christian hope and conduct are grounded. On the third Sunday of Easter (Cycle A), 1 Pet 1:17-23 is linked to the conclusion and response to Peter’s Pentecost sermon (Acts 2:36-41). In the epistle, the author reminds the Christians of Asia Minor that the Word of God preached to them has been the instrument by which God has given them new birth. Quite possibly the author re-calls them to their baptism; certainly he re-calls them to the faith that made them a new people, marked by God’s mercy. Acts enacts what 1 Peter claims. Hearing the word preached by Peter, three thousand people were “cut to the heart” and were baptized. The message of the risen Christ convicts and redeems; born-anew Christians at Pentecost and a generation later in Asia Minor turned from their old patterns of life to devote themselves to the pattern of the apostles. (If I were to preach the two texts, I would certainly sneak in Acts 2:42.) 64. Karl Barth, 7he Word of God and the Word of Man, trans. Douglas Horton (Boston: Pilgrim, 1928).

1 PETER 2:1-10, BEING GOD'S PEOPLE NIV

NRSV

y)

Rid yourselves, therefore, of all malice, and all guile, insincerity, envy, and all slander. “Like newborn infants, long for the pure, spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow into salvation—

Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind. *Like newborn babies, crave pure spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow up in your salvation, *now that you have tasted that the Lord is good. 4As you come to him, the living Stone—tejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him— you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For in Scripture it says: “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him

3if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good. 4Come to him, a living stone, though rejected by mortals yet chosen and precious in God’s sight, and °like living stones, let yourselves be built? into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. °For it stands in scripture: “See, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious; and whoever believes in him? will not be put to shame.” ’To you then who believe, he is precious; but for those who do not believe,

will never be put to shame.”? 26 Isaiah 28:16

aOr you yourselves are being built

262

6 Or it

1 PETER 2:1-10

NIV—

NRSV

7Now to you who believe, this stone is oe But to those who do not believe, ] “The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone,?”¢ Sand, “A stone that causes men to stumble and a ues that makes pee fall’ ¢

“The stone that the builders. rejected — has become the very head of the corner, -

Sand “A stone that makes them stumble, and a rock that makes them fall.” They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.

They nie fecdice they aober the message — which is also what they were destined for. *But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. !©Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. 67 Or cornerstone

c7 Psalm 118:22

-

QBut you are a chosen race,a royal priesthood, : a holy nation, God’s own people,? in order that

you may proclaim the mighty acts of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. '° Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. 4Gk a people for his possession

a8 \saiah 8:14

(COMMENTARY toward the main verb “crave” or “long for pure, spiritual milk.” Malice, guile, insincerity, envy, and slander are those habits that are most apt to destroy the mutual love to which 1 Peter calls believers (1:22). Once again we see that a major feature of the new life in which the faithful live is the mutuality and trust that Christians have with one another. That mutuality and trust require shedding the comfortable old garb of familiar selfishness (cf. Gal 5:19-23; the pattern here, in fact, is much more like 1 Cor 6:9-10, with its explicit reference to baptism as the place where these vices are left behind).© 2:2. The epistle here uses a different term to remind believers that they are living a brand-new life. In 1:3 and 1:23 the author tells them that they have been begotten anew or born anew. Here he says that they are “just born” or “newborn” (aptryévvntos artigennétos), the emphasis not so much on being born again as being freshly born. The reminder that the world of faith is a

The letter alternates between affirmation and exhortation. The readers are reminded of the good news they have heard. Then they are called to live responsibly in the light of that good news. Then they are comforted again by the reminder of God’s election and call. This section provides affirmation and comfort. 2:1-3. Like so much of 1 Peter, this passage represents a contrast between the old life and the new. Perhaps it re-calls the Christians to their baptism. Certainly it reminds them that they are called to live lives very different from what they left behind. If the author is re-calling them to their baptism, then perhaps they remember leaving behind their old clothes and being clothed anew in white baptismal gowns. Leaving behind their old clothes, they left behind their old lives of malice, guile, insincerity, envy, and slander (NRSV). 2:1. Both the NIV and the NRSV translate the opening word as an imperative, “Rid yourselves,” but in the Greek it is another participle (atro8éevor apothemenoi). It may well have imperative force, but it could also describe the circumstances of the readers, “As you rid yourselves of all malice.” In that case, the verses drive

65. Davids notes that instead of the list of virtues we might expect in contrast to the vices Christians leave behind, “we discover a call to

dependence on God.” See Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 81.

263

1 PETER 2:1-10 COMMENTARY brand-new world for them leads to the image of the infant drinking milk, food both good and necessary. There is no implication here that the “milk” newborn Christians drink is somehow inferior to the solid food they will get later on. In 1 Cor 3:2, Paul associates milk with immaturity and with a life still burdened by the cares of the flesh, still lived with one foot in the old age (see also Heb 5:13). Here, however, milk is gift and grace. It is of the spiritual realm, not of the flesh. Both the NRSV and the NIV call this “spiritual” milk, but the Greek adjective AoytKds (logikos) is not derived from the word for “spirit” (Tvetpa pneuma) but from ddyos (logos), “reasonable,” “rightly ordered.” It is the same term Paul uses in Rom 12:2 for “a reasonable worship.” “Spiritual” is a fair enough translation, but the Pauline contrast between flesh and spirit, which also has its place in parts of 1 Peter, is not in the forefront here. Brox, who translates the term “spiritual,” also points to the other uses of Jogos in. 1 Pet 1:23; 2:8; 3:1. Achtemeier suggests that the derivation of the adjective should be directly related to the word of preaching (as in 1 Pet 1:23) and translates the phrase, “the milk of God’s word.” Just as the promised land flowed with milk and honey for the children of Israel, so also Christian believers receive milk as a foretaste of the fuller salvation yet to come. That is why spiritual milk grows newborn Christians toward salvation as mother’s milk nurtures newborn infants toward maturity. The NRSV translates the last part of v. 2 as “growing into salvation,” the NIV as “growing up in your salvation.” The former translation stresses salvation as goal; the latter stresses salvation as gift. For 1 Peter, Christians live with the promise of the fullness of God’s mercy and have a foretaste of what that mercy will be. The two translations capture those two aspects of the epistle’s hope, although the NSRV seems somewhat more accurately to reflect the Greek text and the usual meaning of the preposition “into” (cis eis).

“Milk” is here an image for the whole range of gifts provided to newborn Christians and should probably not be more narrowly specified as scripture or right doctrine. In this context, pure milk is the opposite of guile and slander. The selfishness of the flesh is what believers leave behind for the purity of the new life in Christ. 2:3. The exhortation ends with an allusion to the OT that sums up these verses and provides the beginning for a section of the epistle that piles up scriptural citations to remind the readers of the promises of this life into which they have just been born: “O taste and see that the Lorp is good” (Ps 34:84 NRSV). Now the milk that the believers drink is not only the gift but also the giver; what tastes good is Christ’s own self. The construction of the sentence, beginning with “if indeed you have tasted” (NRSV) or “now that you have tasted” (NIV, perhaps somewhat better) may indicate that there is an indirect reference to eucharist or the Lord’s supper, just as v. 1 may include an indirect reference to baptism.” In baptism, one puts off the old self; in eucharist, one tastes that the Lord is good. These sacraments shape the wholeness of our lives as individuals and as a people. The continuation of the exhortation in v. 4 suggests that the Lord whom Christians taste and the living stone to whom they come is Christ. In Psalm 34, the psalmist praises God for deliverance from distress, and therefore the whole psalm foreshadows themes that will be increasingly important to 1 Peter’s assurances to people under threat. 2:4-8. Now the image for Christ shifts. Instead of being like milk, life-giving and good to. taste, now Christ is like a stone, a foundation on which to build one’s life.’”? But Christ is also a living stone. Christ is not static or staid; Christ is alive. Christ is not barren or cold; Christ is life-giving. The whole section is built on a collection of OT passages dealing with stones, almost as if there were ready-made a kind of compendium of OT references to stones that early Christians thought

66. See the discussion of the image of milk in L. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 129-30.

69. On the possible reference to eucharist, see J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, Black’s New Testament Commentaries (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1969) 87. Brox thinks we may have here

67. Norbert Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, Evangelisch-Katholischer

catechetical material on the new life in Christ. See Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 91. In either case, the stress is on the transition from the old

Kommentary zum Neuen Testament (Zurich: Benziger Verlag and Neukirchener Verlag, 1979) 92. 68. Paul J. Achtemeier, / Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996) 143, 147.

ways to the new. 70. For this image see John H. Elliott, The Elect and the Holy (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1966) 26-33.

264

1 PETER 2:1-10 COMMENTARY could be applied to Christ.7! The OT texts on which the letter draws are Ps 118:22; Isa 8:14; 28:16. 2:4. This verse begins with another participle, a form of the verb “to come” (mpooépxouat proserchomai). The NIV keeps something of the adverbial reading of the participle; “as you come”. represents the circumstances under which believers are being built into a spifitual house. The NRSV interprets the participle as an imperative, “Come to him.” The main verb for this clause is found in v. 5 “you are being built” or “let yourselves be built” (oikoSopeto8e [oikodomeisthe] can equally well mean either one). The verse uses two adjectives for Christ as a stone that are typical of 1 Peter’s terms for evaluating the worth of the gifts God gives in Jesus Christ. The stone that is Christ is both living and precious. So in 1:3 the hope into which Christians are born anew is living hope, and in 1:7 the faith Christians show is “more precious than gold.” Verse 4 shows the contrast between human valuings and God’s valuing. Humans have rejected this stone as if it were dead and worthless. God has chosen this stone as living and valuable. The stone is also “chosen,” “elect,” as the Christians to whom the letter is written are elect as exiles (1:1); that is to say that the Christians, like Christ, are rejected by humans—their pagan neighbors— but are elected and precious in the sight of God. The “precious” and the “elect” quality of the stone is there in the OT source, Isa 28:16, which is here combined with an allusion to Ps 118:22. The adjective “living” is apparently the epistle writer’s own contribution. Christians, therefore, participate in the life of Christ, with both its threat and its blessing. We have already seen how Christians are asked to live in imitation of God: “You shall be holy, for I am holy” (1:16 NRSV). Now the implication is that Christian life imitates or partakes of the reality of Christ’s own life. He is a living stone, and Christians are living stones as well, full of life and life-giving. 2:5. This verse provides the main verb of this sentence and either reminds the believers that

they are being built into a spiritual house (NIV) or exhorts them to let themselves be built into a spiritual house (NRSV). The images pile together. Stones are built into houses, but houses are also temples; and in temples holy priests offer spiritual sacrifices.’* Spiritual sacrifice is surely a reference to the whole shape of the faithful life—the life of holiness. The packed sentence begins to point to one of the main themes of this section of 1 Peter. The gracious God who has sent Jesus Christ through him has called and blessed a new people: God’s people, God’s household, God’s new priesthood. The verse, therefore, serves several functions. It underlines the close relationship between what God has done in Jesus Christ and what God is doing in these Christians. It reminds the Christians that despite their apparent disgrace in the eyes of the world they are precious in God’s sight. It calls them, in somewhat different words, once again to live out their calling, to be holy even as God is holy. (The verses may also point ahead to the reminder of 4:17, that judgment begins “from the house of God.” It is not just that these believers worship in the house of God; they are

the house of God.) 2:6-8. Now the two references that are combined in v. 4 are cited more fully in wv. 6-7. The introductory “therefore” indicates again that 1 Peter finds confirmation for its Christian claims in the prophetic affirmations of the OT (see 1:10-12). The image from Isa 28:16 fits beautifully the epistle’s picture of the household of God. All Christians are living stones, built into the edifice. But the cornerstone is Jesus Christ. He is the cornerstone because the whole building rests on him. He is the cornerstone because the building takes its design from him. No Christ; no building. (The citation of Isa 28:16 does not correspond exactly to either the MT or the LXX. The notion that those who stumble shall be put to shame does represent the LXX; in the MT they scurry about or away, hence the NRSV translation of Isa 28:16, “One who trusts will not panic.”) The “chosen and precious cornerstone” turns the allu72. Brox points out that the “holy priesthood” of v. 4 is picked up in the “royal” priesthood of v. 9. Since the whole imagery of these verses is so closely interwoven, he argues that the spiritual house is also the royal house and that the imagery, which is somewhat elusive, suggests that Christians are built into a holy temple. See Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 98.

71. Notice at least the combination of references similiar to 1 Pet 2:6-8

and Matt 21:42, 44 and themes like 1 Pet 2:6, 8 in Rom 9:33. For the claim that this is traditional material that antedates 1 Peter, see Brox, Der

erste Petrusbrief, 100; Davids, The First Epistle of Peter, 89.

265

1 PETER 2:1-10 COMMENTARY preaching that has been good news and salvation to believers (1:25), the word that endures forever, while those who disobey that word stumble and fall away, like flesh, like the grass. The epistle is like a tapestry with recurring motifs and colors or like a symphony in which a theme recurs again and again in slightly different form. To read one verse is almost always to recall others. Although 1 Peter does not begin to present any full-fledged discussion of providence, call, and predestination, what is clear throughout is that God is in charge of the story of Jesus Christ, of the world’s story, and of the story of individual believers. If some believe, that is because God has chosen them; if some do not believe, that disbelief also lies in the plan and providence of God. 2:9-10. These verses are woven carefully together. Verse 9 represents an array of images drawn from the OT that contrast the believers from the stumbling unbelievers of v. 8. Verse 10 sums up the promise to the faithful as it is found in the passage from Hos 2:23. The two verses make a stunning claim. To unbelievers it seems that the Christian believers have been rejected, as Christ was rejected; they are aliens and exiles, foolish and straying. To the eyes of faith it is clear that Christians are chosen exactly as Christ the cornerstone is chosen, precious and beloved of God. From the perspective of faith, the world is turned upside down. Pagan unbelievers, who seem secure in their positions and their prestige, are stumbling and falling. Christian believers, who seem foolish and useless, are God’s own people—holy, blessed, royal. Verse 9 shows the ingenuity of the author in

sion of v. 4 into an explicit citation. That Christ is chosen reminds the readers that the whole pattern of salvation is part of God’s electing plan from the beginning—centering in Christ but including all believers. That Christ is precious reminds the readers of the pervasive distinction between valuable and tawdry goods, the things of heaven and the things of this world. It is also possible that the reference to the stone established in Zion reminded some readers that in Christ they will come “home” to the holy city, Zion—home from their exile and dispersion. Verses 7-8 use two other quotations to make a key point: God’s faithfulness requires responding faith. Those who have faith know that the stone is precious, but to those who do not have faith the same stone is not a cornerstone. On the one hand, unbelievers reject the stone; they lay it aside as worthless. On the other hand, the “stone” rejects them. It causes them to trip and fall. Those who know who Christ is build their lives on him; those who do not accept him stumble and fall. In a way people pronounce judgment on themselves. See Christ aright, and you are built into God’s household; see Christ wrong, and you stumble, trip, fall. There is another possible interpretation of v. 7a: “Honor” is given to those who believe. This means that believers partake in the honor of the “honored” stone, Jesus Christ. It also distinguishes them from the unbelievers, who, far from being honored, will be “put to shame.”’? The OT references are Ps 18:22 (again the allusion of 1 Pet 2:4 becomes an explicit citation) and Isa 8:14. There is a very similar use of Isa 8:14 in Rom 9:33, where Paul talks about the destiny of Israel. Again the distinction is between the faithful, who receive God’s righteousness, and the unfaithful, who stumble. In Romans, however, the stumbling stone is not so directly identified with Jesus Christ. Again in v. 8 it is clear that faith is not just a matter of believing; it is also a matter of obedience. Just as faithful Christians have been chosen and destined for obedience (1:2), so also the unfaithful outsiders have been chosen and destined for disobedience (see 1:14, 22). What they disobey is the word, presumably the word of

drawing his images from two OT passages.’4 The basic passage, which the others seem to interpret, is Isa 43:20-21: The wild animals will honor me, the jackals and the ostriches, for I give water in the wilderness, rivers in the desert, to give drink to my chosen people, the people whom | formed for myself so that they might declare my praise. (NRSV)

The Septuagintal phrase for the last line is more 74. Brox seems basically correct in suggesting that this is not typological exegesis. The author is not saying that these passages applied first to Israel as type, and then to the church as antitype. He simply reads the OT as applying to believers (as 1 Pet 1:12 would indicate). See Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 103.

73. See Goppelt, A Commentaryon I Peter, 145; Achtemeier, 7 Peter, 149, 160-61.

266

1 PETER 2:1-10 COMMENTARY like “so that they might narrate my praiseworthy deeds”; 1 Peter instead suggests that the faithful celebrate God’s praise in doxology.

mended as holy but also called to holiness. The blessing carries further responsibility. First Peter builds its claims on two fundamental distinctions: the distinctions between the larger world and the community of the faithful, and the distinction between then and now. The first part of 2:9 reinforces the distinction between outsiders and insiders, those who appear to prosper (outsiders) and those who have really received the promises of God’s own people (insiders.) The allusion to Exodus 19 draws a distinction between then and now. Then you were in Egypt; now I have brought you out on eagles’ wings. This distinction builds to the climax of the verse. Once the believers were in darkness, and now they are in light (see the close parallels in Eph 5:8; Col 1:12-13). What brings them into the light is the call of God. The Christians have already learned that God calls them to holiness (1:15). They will learn that God calls them to obedient suffering, if faith requires suffering, and that God calls them into God’s eternal glory in Christ (5:10). Holiness, obedient faithfulness—even if it requires suffering—and eternal glory are all aspects of that light in which the faithful now live and in which they

In the context of Isaiah we are reminded that the chosen people are in the wilderness, exiles,

yet even in the desert God shows them to be God’s own and cares for them tenderly. Three phrases in v. 9 are drawn from the Isaiah passage: “chosen people,” “people belonging to God,” and “declare the praises of him” (NIV). Michaels suggests that the addition of cis (eis, “for”) to the LXX’s “a people of possession” reminds the readers that the fullness of their belonging to God is still reserved for the eschatological future.” The references to “royal priesthood” and “holy nation” are apparently drawn from Exod 19:6 (Exod 23:22 LXX). Again the setting is the wilderness, as Moses speaks to the people still waiting to enter the promised land. The context in Exodus as a whole foreshadows these assurances in 1 Peter: “You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. Now therefore, if you obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession out of all the peoples. Indeed, the whole earth is mine, but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom [1 Peter’s “royal

will live forever. In the light of what God has done for them and in the light of Isa 43:21, believers are not only to obey but also to declare God’s praises. In the context of both Isaiah and 1 Peter, this probably means that Christians are to praise God in worship and thanksgiving.”” The response to being insiders and not outsiders is praise; the response to having been in darkness and now being in light is praise as well. Verse 10 draws on Hosea to bring together the two contrasts that are central to this passage and to the whole epistle—outside/inside; then/now. Once no people; now a people. Once outside; now inside. The citation is from Hos 2:23. God has told Hosea as a sign of judgment to name Hosea’s own children “not pitied” and “not my people.” Now in a prophecy of hope, God tells Hosea that his children, and the children of Israel,

priesthood”) and a holy nation.” (Exod 19:4-6a NRSV)”° The issue for the people of 1 Peter is their status in the eyes of God versus their status in the eyes of the larger world in which they are despised exiles. The story of the exodus, recalled by these verses, reminds them once again that God delivered the despised people of Israel from their enemies, and after the time of their wandering brought them to the promised land. Surely those who read and hear | Peter are to find comfort in this story themselves. The claim that they are a holy people also recalls 1:15-16. They are not only com75. J. Ramsey Michaels, / Peter, WBC (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988) 109. 76. In translating Exodus, as for 1 Peter, there is difference of opinion on whether the word translated “royal” is an adjective or a noun. If itis a noun, the word means “sovereignty” or “monarchy” or sometimes “pal-

ace.” If an adjective, it means “royal.” Selwyn thinks that the word order (parallel in the Greek text to “people chosen” and “nation holy”) and the usage elsewhere in roughly contemporary literature suggests that Baotdevov (basileion) is the noun and tepdtevpa (hierateuma) the adjective; thus the translation would be something like “a priestly royal house.” This would represent a further variation on the motifs of 2:5, “spiritual house/holy priesthood.” See E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter (London: Macmillan, 1958) 165-66. Goppelt leans toward the other interpretation, noting that the word order is dictated by the LXX quotation;

77. Part of the debate between Balch and Elliot is over the question of whether the believers in 1 Peter are called to evangelize or only to “thank God.” The issue rests partly on the understanding of “declare” (kahew

kaleo )in this passage. See John H. Elliott, The Elect and the Holy (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1966) 41-43; David L. Balch, Let Wives Be Submissive: The Domestic Code in 1 Peter, SBLMS (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1981) 132-33; Achtemeier, / Peter, 166. See also Michaels, 7 Peter, 110, who says that lexically either interpretation is possible.

but he also says that nothing crucial depends on one’s translation choice

here. See Goppelt,

A Commentary on I Peter, 149n. 65.

267

1 PETER 2:1-10 COMMENTARY names and to new reality recall the readers to their baptism; certainly they are part of a new community. Certainly the passage is a reminder of that new life that baptism represents, a life in which old ways and worldly expectations are entirely reversed and undone.

will again know God’s pity and will again be God’s people. Just as Hosea’s children changed their names, so also the Christians of 1 Peter know a new reality in Jesus Christ. They are those on whom God has had mercy. They are God’s own people. Again it is possible that the references to new

REFLECTIONS 1. First Peter 1:1-10 reminds us that the difference between Christians and non-Christians is not that we see different things but that we see the same things differently. Those who believe and those who do not believe both see Jesus Christ, the rock. For believers, that rock is the cornerstone or the capstone of their lives as individuals and in community. For unbelievers, that rock is simply to be rejected. What makes the difference between the two ways of seeing is faith. Today two quite different views of the role of Christian theology vie for pre-eminence in the church. Some maintain that faith and the theology that explains it are the property of faith communities. We teach and learn the language and stories of faith with each other, and it is in the context of that communal language and practice that the stories touch us and direct us. Others are eager that Christian theology go public, that we find claims and suppositions that can be presented and defended outside the confines of the church. First Peter, like much of the New Testament, presents a view of faith rather different from either of these current claims. For this epistle, the great story that feeds faith is absolutely public. It is a word declared aloud about deeds seen clearly. The story of Jesus is not hidden. The language about Jesus is not esoteric, confined to insiders, like the secret language of lodges and clubs. Yet the fact remains that when different people hear that very public story, each responds very differently. Some hear the story and find in it the narrative of the way God has had mercy on those who had found no mercy and draws forth a people from those who had no sense of belonging. Jesus is Christ and Lord, cornerstone of the lives they build and the communities they build. Other people hear the same story and find it dull or pointless. The dispute is not about whether Jesus ever lived or about the reports of his words and deeds. They dispute what God did through Jesus, if God did anything at all. Those who hear the story in faith praise God for God’s wonderful deeds. Those who do not hear the story in faith laugh and stumble. It complicates this discussion that, for 1 Peter as for much of the New Testament, the distinction between those who have faith and those who do not is found in the call and predestining of God. But the Christian testimony from the beginning has been something like that. It is not the smartest, the most pious, the most virtuous who know that Christ is cornerstone and not stumbling block. Rather those who have faith know Christ this way—and that faith is always gift, not achievement. One way to insist that faith is a gift is to say that it is destiny and not achievement that makes faith possible. 2. The powerful claim of 2:5, 9 that in Christ Christians have become a royal priesthood is not directly a claim about the orders or offices of church life (any more than the claim that believers are “kingly” is directly a prescription for ordering the political realm). Luther’s strong affirmation of the priesthood of all believers may rest in part on a reading of this text, and from the earliest days of the church the richest theological claims have often been based on re-reading Scripture in the light of one’s own time and under the direction of God’s Spirit.” 78. See the helpful excursus by Brox on the post-New Testament history of the concept of general priesthood. Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 108-10.

268

1 PETER 2:1-10 REFLECTIONS The claim here, however, is not about how believers function in relationship to each other. The claim, based on Exodus, is that as God chose Aaron to be a priest for the sake of God’s glory, so now all Christian people are called by God and all are called to offer sacrifices—not the sacrifice of the altar (neither animal sacrifice nor eucharist is in view here) but the sacrifice of faithful obedience and the life of love that goes with that. The sacrifice these Christians were called to live—and we are called to live as well—is a life without malice, guile, insincerity, envy, or slander, which 1 Peter says we have put off with our faith. A traditional communion prayer captures this motif from the epistle beautifully: “Here we offer ourselves in obedience to you, through the perfect offering of your Son, Jesus Christ, giving you thanks that you have called us to be a royal priesthood, a holy nation, your own people; and to you, O God, Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier, be ascribed blessing and honor and glory and power for ever and ever. Amen.”

3. In the history of Christian faith there has often been a tension between ecclesiology and eschatology—the doctrine of the church and the hope for God’s final reign. First Peter describes the polarity of the Christian life in terms that embrace both ecclesiology and eschatology. On the one hand, there is the language of community, often expressed in the distinction between insiders and outsiders. We are the chosen race, the royal priesthood (or holy palace), God’s own people. Those others are chosen only for stumbling and are separate from God. On the other hand, there is the language of eschatology, the sharp distinction between then and now or between now and the reign of God not yet fully come. Once we were in darkness, but God has called us to light; once (like Hosea’s children), we were without mercy and were no people, now as God’s own people we live in utter mercy. Once we carried those old vices; now we have put them off and taste of God’s own goodness, rich and life-giving as a mother’s milk. The eschatological language tempers the ecclesiastical language. To be sure, some are in and some are out. But every Christian remembers that only yesterday he or she was out and that only by God’s grace has been brought in, received mercy, made a member of God’s people. In the great story God has authored and continues to author, who knows who will find mercy and light tomorrow, who will next be included in God’s dear people?

4. Whatever our reaction to the exclusiveness of the claim that Christians are God’s own (only?) people—by no means unique to 1 Peter in Christian literature—the positive side makes its claim in our generation as in the generation for which the epistle was written. For believers, Christian identity is our identity. Christian community is our community, and Christian family our family. Especially in a time of ongoing racial tension Christians rightly recall that as Christians (not as Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, or Asian people) we are a chosen race. For Christians who take 1 Peter seriously, the line on the application that asks for race ought to be filled in: “Christian.”

269

I PETER 2:11-4:11 LIFE IN EXILE OVERVIEW |

aving been comforted by the reminder of

= @ their identity as God’s people, the readers are now instructed how to live as God’s people in the midst of indifference and even opposition. Both structurally and morally the exhortation to honorable living in 2:11-4:11 is the center of 1 Peter. It represents the author’s most elaborate discussion of the shape of Christian life in a hostile world. The section is a mixture of fairly traditional Greek and Roman exhortation and of a vision of life seen through the Christian story of the cross. Perhaps more accurately, the epistle uses the story of Christ’s passion as a lens through which to view the traditional injunctions in a new way.” For contemporary Christians, the section is difficult in part because structures that seemed to the author commonplace and appropriate seem to contemporary readers antiquated and oppressive. We can understand the import of these verses for contemporary practice, however, only when we give them their due as part of a program for first-century Christian behavior.

from acceptable communities of belief and authority. In sociological terms, the Christians who first read 1 Peter were part of a sectarian movement. As with sects in our own time, argues Elliott, one of their concerns was to form a strong group identity, and the way in which they did that was to adopt standards for the ethical life that set them apart from their non-Christian neighbors. For the Christian community, in other words, there exists a different standard of values, namely the will of God and the exemplary obedience of Jesus Christ, which distinguishes it from outside society. In the estimation of the Gentiles the Christians amount only to a motley collection of lowly aliens, ignoble slaves, religious fanatics and “Christ-lackeys” obsessed with selfhumiliation. Within the family of God, however, and in God’s estimation, Christians enjoy a new status which can only be retained by avoiding conformity to the degrading social norms of the Gentiles. .. . Over against the futile world of the Gentiles the Christians constitute an alternative and superior form

of social and religious organization.®! David L. Balch, who has studied 1 Peter by paying special attention to the codes of behavior in the household (2:13-3:7), also recognizes that new Christian believers are cut off from some aspects of the predominant “Gentile” society. He argues, however, that the main purpose of the exhortations to humble behavior is not to set up a superior and unique set of Christian practices but to help Christians live as exemplary citizens, citizens who outdo the Gentiles precisely in living according to the highest standards of the larger society.®

Significant contemporary interpretations of these verses of 1 Peter have drawn upon socialscientific models to provide hypotheses about the situation of the earliest readers of this letter. Not surprisingly, different commentators have drawn rather different conclusions.

John H. Elliott, in his book A Home for the Homeless, has maintained that the Christians who received this letter were sociologically, and not only spiritually, sojourners and exiles.®° They were among the marginalized people of Asia Minor, living at the edges of power and prestige. As Christians, too, these believers were divorced

81. Ibid., 128. 82. See Balch, Let Wives Be Submissive, 87-88. Elliott argues that Balch relies too exclusively on the household codes in interpreting the overall social strategy of the epistle. See John H. Elliott, “1 Peter, Its Situation and Strategy,” in Charles H. Talbert, ed., Perspectives on First Peter (Macon: Mercer University Press, 1986) 61-78. Balch responds that the household codes in 1 Peter are better understood by sociological theories of acculturation than by those of conflict and that part of the strategy is to counter the Roman fear that foreign cults threaten both the domestic and the civic order. See Balch, “Hellenization/Acculturation in 1 Peter,” in ibid., 79-101.

79. This point is made well and repeatedly in Ferdinand-Rupert Prostmeier, Handlungsmodelle im ersten Petrusbrief: Forschung zur Bibel (Wiirzburg: Echter Verlag, 1990) esp. 53-55, 420. 80. John H. Elliott, AHome for the Homeless: ASociological Exegesis of I Peter, Its Situation and Strategy (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981). On the social location of these early readers, 23-26.

270

1 PETER 2:11-4:11 OVERVIEW We shall need to return to these different hypotheses as we look at particular verses in this section of the letter. Both a careful reading of 1 Peter and attention to the nature of minority believing communities suggest that “sectarian” communities do not necessarily choose between a strong sense of their unique identity and a desperate concern to be approved by the larger society.*° The Pastoral Epistles in the New Testament and any number of contemporary “marginalized” Christian communities show considerable evidence of both strategies. On the one hand, sectarian Christians stress the unique and special gifts of their community; on the other hand, they make perfectly clear that their community can trump the larger society in the very values it most espouses. Thus some contemporary Christians may feel embattled in an increasingly secular society. They deride the society for its values, yet they try to outdo “outsiders” by their zeal for other societal values. They may abhor what they see as sexual leniency but cling fervently to patriotism. They may deplore the popular media but borrow extensively from the strategies of popular entertainment. The mix of separation and accommodation is not confined to either the “left” or the “right” among contemporary Christians. Some Christians argue vehemently against abortion but show strong support for the death penalty. Other Christians staunchly oppose executions, while their position on abortion is indistinguishable from

To be entirely anachronistic, the debate between Elliott and Balch represents an argument over whether the community to which 1 Peter was written is more like the Amish or more like the Seventh-Day Adventists in our own time. Both stand apart from the majority society in their theology and in some of their values, but Adventists tend to participate fully in commerce and comity, while the Amish stand more apart.® However one hypothesizes about the communities for which 1 Peter was written, the fourfold movement of this section of the epistle is fairly clear. In the first subsection (2:11-17) the issue is how Christians should interact with those outside their own households and outside the community of faith, and in particular how they relate to governmental authorities. In the second subsection (2:18-3:7) the issue is how Christians should relate to others, particularly non-Christians, in their own households. Again the question is how to bear faithful witness in a predominantly nonChristian environment. The third subsection (3:822) deals with a particular problem in relation to the pagan environment: the problem of suffering. The final section (4:1-11) places the whole issue of faithful Christian behavior in the larger context of the new life Christians have received through Christ and the reminder that they will be called to account at the last judgment.

that of other more “liberal” Westerners.* 83. Elliott at some points suggests that it is the motivation more than the shape of Christian behavior that marks it off from that of the respectable “Gentiles.” See John H. Elliott, “1 Peter, Its Situation and Strategy,” in Talbert, ed., Perspectives on First Peter, 66. He sees the stress on mutual humility of all Christians as also being different from Hellenistic household codes. 84. Balch, in fact, argues at one point for this twofold aspect of sectarian development. See David L. Balch, “Hellenization/Acculturation in 1

85. See especially Balch, “Hellenization/Acculturation in 1 Peter,” in ibid., 74. He further suggests that the themes of missionary concern in 1 Peter do not fit with Elliott’s strongly sectarian hypothesis.

Peter,” in ibid., esp. 86-96. Elliott’s contribution to the discussion is John H. Elliott, “1 Peter, Its Situation and Strategy: A Discussion with David

Balch,” in ibid., 61-78.

1 PETER 2:11-17, LIVING HONORABLY AMONG THE GENFILES NIV ‘Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul. '*Live such good

NRSV 11Beloved, I urge you as aliens and exiles to abstain from the desires of the flesh that wage war against the soul. '*Conduct yourselves hon-

1 PETER 2:11-17 NIV

NRSV |

lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us. '3Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, '4or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do

orably among the Gentiles, so that, though they malign you as evildoers, they may see your honorable deeds and glorify God when he comes to judge.?

13For the Lord’s sake accept the authority of

every human institution,’ whether of the emperor as supreme, ‘or of governors, as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those

wrong and to commend those who do right. '°For it is God’s will that by doing good you should

free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. '’Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood

who do right. '°For it is God’s will that by doing right you should silence the ignorance of the foolish. '°As servants‘ of God, live as free people, yet do not use your freedom as a pretext for evil. '7Honor everyone. Love the family of believers.?

of believers, fear God, honor the king.

Fear God. Honor the emperor.

silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. '*Live as

aGk God on the day of visitation for human beings ¢ Gk slaves

=~

:

6 Or every institution ordained a Gk Love the brotherhood

(COMMENTARY will further suggest, they are aliens to the world of fleshly desires and at home in the sphere of the soul. It has already been suggested that the readers are aliens and exiles (“strangers,” NIV), not so much because of their social status as marginalized people or because they are separate from their heavenly home. They are aliens and exiles because they are believers amid an unbelieving community; they are a diaspora among a vast majority of “Gentiles” (see 1:1). The NRSV translates v. 11 more literally than does the NIV: “I urge you... to abstain from the desires of the flesh that wage war against the soul.” The verse sets up a kind of parallel. The dominant pagans are associated with the values of the flesh; the “exiled” Christians are associated with the values of the soul. The tension between Christian outsiders and pagan insiders is not merely the struggle between two social groups; rather, it is part of the battle of two different spheres, two kinds of desires, two longings. Pagans long for the things of the flesh; Christians long for the gifts that strengthen the soul. As we shall see, the struggle between flesh and spirit is part of the struggle between God and Satan (see 5:6-11). Here again the NRSV has the more literal translation; “flesh” (sapKikds sarkikos) wages war

2:11-12. 2:11. These verses set the focus for the long discussion of proper behavior that follows. The address to the audience, “beloved,” and the direct exhortation, “I urge you,” indicate the beginning of a new major section of the epistle. The verb “T urge” (tapaxadew parakaleo) is typical of the introduction to paraenetic material in Paul’s letters but is also a standard term for moral exhortation in other Greco-Roman writings.®° It stresses the urgency of the exhortation and the authority of the writer to beseech, if not to direct, the readers. The address to the readers as “beloved” recalls both their love for one another (1:22) and the fact that they are called and chosen by God (1:2).°” The NIV translation “dear friends” leaves out the second aspect of this and undervalues the first. The stress is rather on the readers as “beloved” of the author. The salutation also sets up a contrast between the truth of faith and the appearances of this world. In the light of faith this band of Christians are the beloved; in the light of the

world they are exiles and aliens.®* As the verse 86. See]. Ramsey Michaels, / Peter, WBC (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988) 115. 87. See L. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn,

trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 155. 88. See Norbert Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentary zum Neuen Testament (Zurich: Benziger Verlag and Neukirchener Verlag, 1979); Ferdinand-Rupert Prostmaier, Handlungsmodelle im ersten Petrusbref, Forschung zur Bibel 63 (Wiirzburg: Echter Verlag, 1990) 141-42.

272

1 PETER 2:11-17 COMMENTARY against “soul” (bux psyche), not against “your soul.” This is not only a battle within the life of each Christian but a battle within the cosmos between opposing forces. Furthermore, the outcome of that battle is not really in doubt. Those who listen to 1 Peter remember that the author has already assured them using the words of Isaiah:

with Gentiles, though we have seen that most of the readers certainly were ethnically Gentiles, too. “Gentile” here is a description of one’s faith community, not of one’s ethnic origin. The Christians who were once “no people” are now “the people”—Israel (see 2:10). The verb avaotpédw (anastrepho),which the NIV translates as “live” and the NRSV as “conduct,” is another of those participles that may be translated in the imperative. If, however, one reads it as modifying the main verb, then the verb it qualifies is “refrain” in v. 11: “Refrain from fleshly desires...as you live honorably among the Gentiles.” However the word is translated, it is clear that living honorably and refraining from evil desires are two sides of the same coin. To live honorably among the Gentiles is to live according to standards more honorable even than those the Gentiles hold in honor. There is some evidence from non-Christian sources that what appeared to Christians to be virtues were seen by their detractors as vices, signs of wickedness, or superstition. “It was often the very abstaining ‘from fleshly desires’ that caused pagans to despise Christians. ... Thus Tacitus claimed that ‘they were hated because of their vices’ (Ann. 15:44), and Suetonius refers to them as ‘a class of people animated by a novel and dangerous superstition’ (Nero 16:2).”% The stress on the undeserved slander received by the Christians foreshadows the retelling of the story of Christ, whose passion places the suffering of each Christian in perspective: “When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly” (2:23: NIV}. In v. 12 it is Chfistians who are called to entrust themselves to God, who will judge justly in the day of visitation. Christian hope in the midst of slander and suffering is sustained by the eschatological faith—that God will give victory to God’s people. The battle Christians wage for the soul against all fleshly desires foreshadows the victory God will consummate on the day of visitation. Here the NIV translates more strictly and, therefore, more helpfully than does the NRSV; this

a

“All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord endures forever,” (1:24-254 NRSV; cf. Isa 40:6-8)

Although the NIV misses the connection between 2:11 and 1:24, it does catch something of the meaning that 1 Peter gives to the term “flesh”: “I urge you...to abstain from sinful desires.” Whether or not the author of 1 Peter knew Paul’s letters, he certainly picks up something of Paul’s anthropology here. For Paul, “flesh” was the realm of selfishness, the power that worked destruction both within the individual believer and in the life of the church. While “fleshly” behavior for Paul sometimes referred to unacceptable sexual conduct, in its broader meaning “flesh” was the power that turned people in upon themselves, away from the neighbor and away from God (see, e.g., Rom 7:14-20; Gal 5:16-21).%° For the writer of 1 Peter, the self-centered behavior of the pagans is what Christians have left behind, and yet Christians constantly fight a rear-guard action against the very forces they have defeated in their baptism and rebirth. 2:12. Here the author continues to draw the contrast between Christians and the world in which they find themselves as strangers. The behavior that outsiders malign is, in fact, behavior that is honorable and that honors God, and in the day of God’s visitation the true values of the Christians will be confirmed—even in the eyes of the “Gentiles.” Note how closely 1 Peter identifies the readers with Israel and the non-Christians 89. The classic and still instructive discussion of these categories is found in Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, trans.

Kendrick Grobel (New York: Macmillan) 1:205-10, 232-39. Goppelt suggests that because the contrast between flesh and soul/life (psyche) is not Pauline, 1 Peter draws on general Christian tradition, not on the Pauline corpus. See L. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 156-57n. 10.

90. Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 97.

273

| PETER 2:11-17 COMMENTARY is a visitation not only of judgment but also, of course, of grace (cf. Luke 19:44). While there is a kind of missionary appeal here, the hope that the Gentiles will be impressed by the honorable behavior of the Christians, hope is still eschatological hope. There is no easy assumption that faithful behavior will win admiration in this world; rather, at history’s end, when God comes to visit, the outsiders will behold the good deeds of the faithful. Then, at last, at the last, they will glorify God. This is the judgment toward which the epistle already pointed in 1:17, reminding the readers that God is both Father and impartial judge. It is God whom the Gentiles will glorify, however, not the Christians themselves. The verse keeps the same balance as that of the Sermon on the Mount: “Let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven” (Matt 5:16 NRSV). The good deeds of believers do not redound to the glory of believers; they redound to the glory of God. Psychologically as well as theologically it is striking that the epistle here at least resists the temptation to assume that the day of visitation will mean wrath and destruction for those who have acted destructively and wrathfully against Christians. Instead, the hope is that those who have not understood the good conduct of the faithful in the everyday world will at the final transformation also be transformed—from unbelief to faith (contrast Revelation 18). 2:13-17. Beginning with v. 13 and continuing at least through 3:22, 1 Peter spells out what it means for Christians to “conduct themselves honorably” among the Gentiles. The author writes with a twofold hope. First,.there is the hope that the Christians of Asia Minor may be spared unjust slander and may indeed impress their accusers with the excellence of their behavior. Second, and even more basic, there is the hope that these Christians will live a life that honors God, who has chosen them in Jesus Christ.

2:13-14. It is unclear whether v. 13 is the introductory sentence for only the immediately succeeding verses on the relationship of Christians to government or whether it is, rather, an introduction to the whole series of injunctions regarding proper obedience. Certainly the verb that

274

begins this section, “Be subject” (Utotdoow hypotasso ), provides the basic command that shapes a whole series of proper relationships for Christian people.! Already in v. 13a we see a juxtaposition or a tension that informs the whole discussion of proper Christian behavior. Christians are supposed to “accept the authority of every human institution” (NRSV) or to submit “to every authority instituted among men” (NIV); but they are to do this “on account of the Lord.” The tension is even clearer if the first phrase is translated more literally “pe subject to every human creature.”® If the “Lord” in the second part of the phrase is the sovereign God, then Christians are enjoined to be subject to created authorities for the sake of the Creator. If the “Lord”—as is often the case—is Jesus, then Christians are admonished to follow his example of humble subjection.” It is possible that the kinds of behavior here encouraged give clues to the accusations that outsiders brought against the Christians.%* What the letter urges them to do is to show the accusers to be hopelessly false and misguided. It must also be admitted that much of this advice seems to represent a fairly standard adaptation of approved cultural standards of behavior to the particular case of Christians. There are some important differences, but also considerable family resemblance between this passage and Rom 13:1-7 (see also Titus 3:1 and, a little farther afield, 1 Tim 22179). Certainly one concern for early Christians was that they not be accused of being unpatriotic, and the first concern to appear in the list of injunctions speaks to that issue. The contrast between 1 Pet 2:13-14 and Rom 13:1-2 is instructive. In Romans, Paul writes: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist 91. Kelly argues that, indeed, this verse is the topic sentence for the whole section concluding with 3:22. See J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, Black’s New Testament Commentaries (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1969) 108. Similarly, Michaels Suggests that the injunctions that follow 2:13 are “case studies” of proper subjection. See Michaels, 7 Peter, 123. 92. So Michaels translates itotdynte Tdon avOpwmivny Ktice (Aypotagete pase anthropiné ktisei). See Michaels, 1 Peter, 121. 93. Davids argues for the second interpretation; see Davids, The First Epistle ofPeter, 99. Spicq thinks there may be an implicit argument against idolatrous worship of the emperor, who is, after all, only a creature. See C. Spica, Les Epitres de Saint Pierre (Paris: Librarie Lecoffre, 1966) 101. 94. See David L. Balch, Let Wives Be Submissive: The Domestic Code in 1 Peter, SBLMS (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1981) 82.

1 PETER 2:11-17 COMMENTARY have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment” (Rom 13:1-2 NRSV). Here the reasons for loyalty are much more simply pragmatic. Emperors and governors are one example of those “human creatures” to whom Christians are called to show humble honor. Moreover they are useful because they uphold at least minimal standards of behavior. The description of the relationship of God to emperor to governors does not imply any divine chain of command, as if God authorizes the emperor, who then authorizes the governors. Rather,

ity over the Christian; in themselves, the governors are owed no allegiance by Christians. Authority and allegiance belong to God alone. Nonetheless, Christian freedom is freedom to do what is right, not what is wrong. And_doing what is right includes being properly submissive to governing authorities. Therefore, the evil that Christians are to avoid is the evil that authorities are instituted to punish: the violations of moral behavior that even nonbelievers would condemn. And the evil that Christians should avoid is the evil of failing to give proper submission to those authorities who punish immoral behavior. To avoid such evil is to act honorably among the Gentiles, to avoid slander for Christians, and, more important, at the last day to lead the Gentiles to glorify God (v. 12). 2:17. This verse is a chiasm, a rhetorical figure in which the two outer members are linked thematically to each other and the two inner members are linked thematically to each other as well: ABB’ A’.

God creates the emperor and the governors, and the emperor gives authority to the governors for the sake of good order. 2:15. As this verse makes clear, Christians should Support good order because they want to silence their detractors. Since emperors and governors pro-

mote good order, it is to the advantage of Christians to be subject to them.” This verse beautifully conjoins the two major reasons 1 Peter stresses for proper behavior: to put to shame your accusers in their foolishness, and because it is the will of God, and not just for the sake of self-satisfaction. A similar combination of sanctions for right behavior is presented in 1 Timothy: “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for everyone, for kings and for all who are in high positions, so that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and dignity. This is right and is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior” (1 Tim 2:1-3 NRSV). 2:16. Clearly for the author of 1 Peter, “honorable conduct” means not only honoring those with governing authority, but also doing nothing to draw the wrath—or the attention—of governors. The verse captures the almost paradoxical vision of civic behavior that 1 Peter—and other early Christian writings—commends. Because Christians are servants (slaves) of God—only!— they are free in their relationships to political authorities. In himself the emperor has no author-

A

Honor everyone B_ Love the brotherhood B’ Fear God A’ Honor the king

The B and B’ phrases are internal not only to the figure of speech but also to the life of the Christian community. As insiders, Christians have two responsibilities: to love their Christian brothers and sisters and to fear God. As “outsiders” in dealing with the outside world, Christians are to honor everyone (every created human person or institution, v. 134), in particular the emperor (v. 130). The verse may be partly drawn from Prov 24:21: “My son, fear the Lord and the king, and do not disobey either of them” (author’s trans.). If so, it is particularly striking that 1 Peter shifts the injunction: Fear the Lord, but (only) honor the king. Recall the twofold address with which this whole section began: Christians are “beloved,” insiders called to love one another and to fear God. Christians are “aliens and strangers,” outsiders directed to honor every creature, even their pagan

95. All this tends to confirm Balch’s perspective on the social context and values of these early Christians as 1 Peter understands them. Balch’s argument in part is that for both Hellenized Romans and Hellenistic Jews there is a correlation between the good order of the household and the good order of the state. See Balch, Let Wives Be Submissive, 76. First Peter at least asserts the importance of good household order as an apologetic device against accusations of civic disruption. See ibid., chap. 6.

96. Balch cites Danker’s suggestion that the Proverbs verse may be altered in the light of Mal 1:14, and the whole following section shaped by Malachi’s stress on Israel as God’s servant. See ibid., 96.

279

1 PETER 2:11-17 COMMENTARY wraps up the first verses of this “station table”?” but it also provides a transition to the further discussion of proper honoring and loving in the verses that follow.

opponents, and in particular to honor the emperor (see v. 11). It is also striking that the injunctions for “inside” behavior are stronger than are those for “outside” behavior. Outsiders and rulers are to be honored. Christians are to be loved, and God is to be reverenced with godly fear. In many ways this chiastic injunction not only

97. Goppelt’s term; see his excursus in Goppelt, Peter, 162-79.

A Commentary on I

REFLECTIONS 1. Eschatology shapes the whole letter. These Christians have been called from the beginning, and they will be judged at the end. An unfading and precious inheritance has been laid up for them in heaven. The time in which they now live is the meantime. It is important, a field for faithfulness, but it is made relative by the decision that chose them from the beginning and by the judgment that will determine their end. Everyone who reads the New Testament carefully has to deal with eschatology, because Matthew awaits Christ’s coming in glory and Revelation proclaims God’s apocalyptic victory and every book in between deals one way or another with Christ, the alpha and the omega. To think aright about | Peter is to think about how we live in the meantime. Sometimes we envision the eschaton best as history’s end. Sometimes we envision the eschaton best as history’s depth, present as well as hoped for. Commenting on 1 Pet 2:12, E. G. Selwyn quotes Cranmer’s prayer as a reminder for those times when eschatology not only draws us to the future but also permeates the present: “Lord, we beseech thee, give ear unto our prayers, and by thy gracious visitation lighten the

darkness of our hearts through Jesus Christ our Lord.”” 2. If not baptism, at least the insistence that Christian commitment requires new beginning, new birth, shapes 1 Peter from beginning to end. In the light of Easter, the Revised Common Lectionary includes 1 Pet 2:2-10 as a reading for the fifth Sunday of Easter (Cycle A). Oddly, the lectionary omits the first verse of the chapter and of the paragraph. In this reading, Christians are enjoined to act like newborn infants, without any notice of what we must leave behind to be “born again”: “Rid yourselves, therefore, of all malice, and all guile, insincerity, envy, and all slander” (1 Pet 2:1 NRSV). Like too many sermons on the Nicodemus story, this truncated lectionary reading runs the danger of emphasizing how nice it is to be born anew without recalling how painful it is, how much of the old life must be left behind. For Nicodemus, what needed to be left behind was his status in the synagogue; for the readers of 1 Peter, it was the comfortable co-existence with pagans. No one who thinks very hard about the human comedy will doubt that sometimes malice, guile, insincerity, envy, and slander are just as hard to leave behind as are prestige and power. Giving up gossip may be as hard as giving up clout. The lectionary does hold on to the great affirmations of the text—what it means to be born anew, not just to be an individual with a warm relationship to Jesus, to be part of a race, a nation, a people. The risen Christ does not live only, or even primarily, in the hearts of each believer; he lives triumphant with the God who sent him and in the community that serves him.

3. Our understanding of the social location of the recipients of 1 Peter (at least as the letter implies that location) helps us to interpret the significance of the epistle. Our understanding 98. E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter (London: Macmillan, 1958) 171.

276

1 PETER 2:11-17 REFLECTIONS of our own social location will help to determine how we appropriate the epistle for our own time. Are we strangers and aliens, so radically divorced from the culture around us that we are called to stand over against the values of the larger society and to build enclaves of Christian fidelity? Are we the happy citizens of a society in which Christian values generally win out, so that our proper function is to lend the blessings of the church to the successes of the culture? Or are we (like the implied hearers of the epistle) caught somewhere in the middle—citizens of a society in which we are never entirely at home, but which is still created by God and where good things sometimes happen to good people? Do we want at the same time to strengthen our place as a peculiar people and to be in’ conversation and community with all neighbors who are a part of other peculiar communities? We will answer that question in part out of our denominational as well as out of our theological convictions. First Peter points us to a Christianity that is sectarian enough to know what it stands for, “churchy” enough to promote good citizenship, and “universalist” enough to hope that in the last day even those who have scoffed at our pious silliness will see the light and glorify the God who created us all. 4. Even today the general outline of the appropriate relationship between the Christian community and the larger world that we find sketched in 1 Peter seems appropriate. On the one hand, there are those standards of behavior and commitment that are internal to the Christian community, that set us apart from the larger world, and that we hold to as being the signs of the holiness to which God calls us. On the other hand, there is a whole host of secular goods that do not conflict with our Christian convictions—marks of good citizenship, neighborliness, even social zeal, that may not be rooted directly in the Christian story, but that help us to live as Christians in a pluralistic world. Otherwise how could we vote, run for city council, or join the P.T.A.? There is a tougher question. Is it possible that some worldly values might actually enrich the faithfulness of our commitment to God and to our neighbor? Much rhetoric about the distinctive fidelity of Israel in the midst of a pagan world misses the fact that monogamous marriage, for example, entered Judaism and then Christianity from the “pagan” Greco-Roman environment. Much contemporary Christian rhetoric bemoans the Enlightenment and its stress on rationality and toleration as a falling away from the purer faith of a more theocentric age. But along with the undeniable loss, was there not also some gain in the emergence of sufficient toleration to dampen our ancestors’ enthusiasm for going to war in the name of denominational purity? Much of the contemporary debate on sexuality insists that the secular world should not distract the church from what Bible and tradition have taught. But is it possible that secular studies of the genesis and social location of sexuality have something to teach us that we might incorporate into the enrichment of our faithfulness? If for the Lord’s sake we are to honor “every human creature or creation,” might that at least mean that we are invited to pay some attention to insights that emerge from Athens as well as those originating in Jerusalem? 5. In some ways, our social location is very different from that of the recipients of this letter. In ways that the Christians of Asia Minor could not have dreamed, Christian people now often are the “human authorities” of whom 1 Peter speaks. We have the power that those Christians were told to honor. What does Christian fidelity look like when we not only are called to obey the laws but also to make the laws? How does one move from an ethic for a small minority in an empire to an ethic for at least a nominal majority in at least a nominal democracy? There are at least a couple of clues in 1 Peter. The right role of government is still to “ounish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right.” Christian people need to think about the relationship of punishment to praise and the distinction between right and wrong. Obviously neither of those relationships can be spelled out simply or simplemindedly. In a pluralistic society, Christians will want to argue for the right but not to impose our

Zid.

1 PETER 2:11-17 REFLECTIONS understanding of the right as if from above. For people whose social agenda is set in large measure by the New Testament, there will always be the question of whether there are modes of punishment and praise that might entice evildoers to become doers of good, that might bring slanderers to the point where they can praise God in the day of God’s visitation. Furthermore, the Christian freedom to which this letter points includes at least implicitly the freedom to dissent from the mandates of society—not only of the emperor but also of the republic—if there is a conflict between being God’s slave and being slave to the state. We are called to honor the emperor, but to fear God; and on those occasions when we must choose whether to serve the one we honor or the one we revere, the choice should not be too difficult to make—though often incredibly difficult to carry out. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, Jr., and a host of the less famous stand as constant reminders that sometimes Christian freedom means freedom from society’s rules, and not merely freedom to obey willingly. o, “ye

K2 ~~

“~~

K2 “~

ExCURSUS: THE HOUSEHOLD IT‘ABLES The material in 1 Pet 2:18-3:7 is formally very like the sets of exhortations on household order in Col 3:18-4:1 and Eph 5:21-6:9, and it is quite similar to material found more dispersed through the Pastoral Epistles (1 Tim 2:8-15; 5:1-2; 6:1-2; Titus 2:1-10; see also Did. 4:10-11; Ignatius to Polycarp, 4:3-5:2). The concern for proper order within Christian community and family appears again in 1 Pet 5:1-5. Further, the concern for proper submission within the household is closely related in 1 Peter to proper submission to governmental authorities (as also in 1 Tim 2:1-2; Titus 3:1). David Balch argues persuasively that the antecedents for these household codes are to be found as early as Plato and Aristotle and are continued among Stoics and the Hellenistic Jews Philo and Josephus.” In these non-Christian writings there was great concern for the proper management of the household, with some sense that the security and unity of the state depended on the security and unity of the families within that state.’ So, too, in 1 Peter the overall injunction to orderly behavior begins with the appeal to obey human authorities, starting with the emperor. Governors, masters, and husbands are all examples of the general category of those people who have special authority. Balch argues that the social context for the code in 1 Peter is to be found in 3:15: “Always be ready to make your defense” (NRSV). Part of what Christians have to defend is the accusation that their religion overturns the approved social order. Following the household code is a way of making sure that there is no substance to these pagan accusations.’ The following interpretation will acknowledge much truth to Balch’s claims, but the close parallels to Colossians and Ephesians (where there is not the same concern with confounding pagan opponents) suggest that—whatever its origins—the household code now seemed an appropriate way of encouraging social order within the Christian community. Indeed, in the case of slavery, for 1 Peter the right domestic order is an enfolding of right christology. Slaves suffer unjustly, as did their Lord (2:20-25). 99. Balch, Let Wives Be Submissive, 14-15, 25-56. 100. Ibid., citing Friedrich Wilhelm, 14. 101. See ibid., 90. ~*,

~°,

Se¢

278

%e,

1 PETER 2:18-3:7

I PETER 2:18—3:7, LIVING HONORABLY IN THE HOUSEHOLD NIV

NRSV

18Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and

18Slaves, accept the authority of your masters with all deference, not only those who are kind and gentle but also those who are harsh. !°For it is a credit to you if, being aware of God, you endure pain while suffering unjustly. 7°lf you endure when you are beaten for doing wrong, what credit is that? But if you endure when you do right and suffer for it, you have God’s approval. 2\For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you should follow in his steps. 22 “He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.” *3When he was abused, he did not return abuse; when he suffered, he did not threaten; but he entrusted himself to the one who judges justly. **He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross,? so that, free from sins, we might live for righteousness; by his wounds’ you have been healed. For you were going astray like sheep, but now you have returned to the shepherd and guardian of your souls. Wives, in the same way, accept the authority of your husbands, so that, even if some of them do not obey the word, they may be won over without a word by their wives’ conduct, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. *Do not adorn yourselves outwardly by braiding your hair, and by wearing gold ornaments or fine clothing; rather, let your adornment be the inner self with the lasting beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in God’s sight. °It was in this way long ago that the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves by accepting the authority of their husbands. “Thus Sarah obeyed Abraham and called him lord. You have become her daughters as long as you do what is good and never let fears alarm you. 7Husbands, in the same way, show consideration for your wives in your life together, paying honor to the woman as the weaker sex,‘ since they too are also heirs of the gracious gift of life—so that nothing may hinder your prayers.

considerate, but also to those who are harsh. !°For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. ?°But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. ?'To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. 22“He committed no sin,

and no deceit was found in his mouth.” 23When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. 4He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls. Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, 2when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. °Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. “Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight. °For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, Slike Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear. 7Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.

@Or carried up our sins in his body to the tree ¢ Gk vessel

a22 Isaiah 53:9

279

© Gk bruise

1 PETER 2:18—3:7 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY Both formally and materially these verses comprise the center of the exhortation for Christians to exhibit good behavior in the midst of an unbelieving society. The exhortation to slaves is so shaped by the author’s christology that it becomes evident that these verses are intended directly as an admonition to household slaves and indirectly as an admonition to all Christians who serve Christ, the suffering servant. Unlike the exhortations in Col 3:22—4:1 and Eph 6:5-9, 1 Peter addresses only household servants and not their masters. In part this probably reflects the reality of the churches of Asia Minor; they were composed far more heavily of servants than of masters.'° Furthermore, the attempt to show “good behavior” before pagans may be a response to the accusation on the part of nonChristian masters that Christianity was inciting newly converted slaves to insubordination.'™ It is also clear that the household slaves are examples and paradigms for Christians and, as Elliott points out, that the “household” is a ruling metaphor for the Christian community. It is, perhaps, also for this reason that servants are addressed as “household servants,” not (as in Colossians and Ephesians) as “slaves,” and that the admonition to them is the first of the household injunctions, not (as in the other epistles) the last.!% It may also be that for 1 Peter Christians are slaves (oixétat oiketai) only of God, while they may very well be household servants of earthly masters. So they are slaves of the God whom they fear, but household servants of the masters whom

they obey—for the Lord’s sake.!% 2:18-20. These verses begin the section that is often characterized as a Haustafel, a “table” of rules for the household. Yet it is clear that the concern for a right order within the house is not divorced from the concern for right order within 102. See Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 114-15; Michaels, / Peter, 138. Achtemeier, however, is skeptical of drawing any social implications from this lack. He stresses, rather, the paradigmatic role of slaves as examples for the obedience of all Christians. See Paul J. Achtemeier, / Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996) 192. 103. Balch proposes this possibility, Let Wives Be Submissive, 95. 104. See the helpful discussion in John H. Elliott, A Home for the Homeless: A Sociological Exegesis of1Peter, Its Situation and Strategy (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 205-7. 105. See Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 194, for a similar suggestion.

the community and even the empire. For this reason, Goppelt notes how closely this material is tied to the preceding section and says that all would be better designated “station code” rather than “household code.” The issue is, in the whole of society, how Christians should live out their own “station” in relationship to those with other

stations. !°° 2:18. The exhortation begins again with a participle that can probably best be interpreted as an imperative (as both the NRSV and the NIV do). It reprises the verb with which | Peter urges believers to be subject to every created human being or institution (v. 13).!°? Masters (Seomdétat despotai), like the emperor and the governors, are among those created powers to whom Christians are properly subject. But the readers recall the larger claim of v. 13: They are subject only on account of the Lord. When the author tells them to be subject “in fear” (NIV, “with all respect”; NRSV, “with all deference”), he probably continues to keep the injunction in this larger theological framework. They are to be subject to earthly masters because, as v. 17 has enjoined, they fear God.!% The assumption of v. 18 is that it is no test of Christian fidelity to be subject to good masters; the test is what a Christian does in the face of treatment that is cruel. In this sense, the issue is more complicated than that of obedience to the emperor. There the author assumes that the function of the emperor is to reward right behavior and to punish wrong behavior. Now Christians are enjoined to be subject to masters—even when they behave harshly. One can say that the dilemma of Christian servants suffering unjustly drives the author to the affirmation of Christ’s suffering as comfort and example. But one could equally well say that the story of Christ’s passion as seen through Isaiah 53 shapes | Peter’s description of the proper life of the household servant. The unjust suffering of Christ provides the paradigmatic image that allows the author to interpret the meaning of the unjust 106. Ibid., 165. 107. On participles functioning as imperatives, see footnote number 54, above. 108. See Michaels, / Peter, 138.

280

1 PETER 2:18—3:7 COMMENTARY suffering of Christian household slaves. By extension, the unjust suffering of Christ provides the image that allows the author to interpret the unjust suffering of any of his first readers. “If you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God” (NIV). This is an injunction not only for household slaves but also for all those whom the author assumes find them-

10, 13; 4:10; 5:10, 12. In these cases, the word carries richer theological meaning than it does here, though the implications are somewhat different from those of Paul’s use of the term.) The term ovuveiSnov Oeod (syneidesin theou) in v. 19, which the NIV translates as “conscious of God” and the NRSV translates as “being aware of God,” sometimes means “consciousness” or “awareness,” and also sometimes means “conscience” (as it apparently does in 3:16, 21). Selwyn affirms this interpretation: “The conscience of the Christian slave provides a fortifying motive

selves suffering unjustly.!° 2:19-20. The concern with the Christian’s right conduct before God reminds us that two theological premises introduced this whole section on right conduct: the eschatological hope that Christians’ behavior would convince unbelievers of the rightness of their cause at the time of God’s visitation and the reminder that all Christian submission is undertaken, not for the sake of the created authorities, but for the sake of the God who created them (vv. 12-13). Furthermore, the conduct of slaves is a particularly pointed working out of the larger claim about Christian freedom that 1 Peter makes in direct relation to obedience to governing authorities: “As servants of God, live as free people, yet do not use your freedom as a pretext for evil” (2:16 NRSV). These household slaves, too, are really God’s slaves, not the master’s. Therefore, they are free; and yet precisely for God’s sake they are to use that freedom to do what is right—even when what is right includes totally unwarranted suffering. Two terms in v. 19 are familiar in NT literature,

for the patient endurance of injustice, and is also

satisfied in it.”!!° Whatever the details of particular vocabulary, the general thrust of these verses is clear. As part of the call to be subject to human creations for the sake of the Creator, household slaves are to be subject to their householders—not only when the masters’ demands are just, but also when they are unjust—for such obedience is pleasing and acceptable to God. In this concern for the approval of God, the sense of God’s immediate presence (the consciousness of God) and God’s final judgment (the visitation of God) come together. 2:21-25. Now this injunction to submissive behavior is grounded in the story of Christ’s passion, a paradigm not just for household servants but for all Christians who suffer injustice. Verse 21, in remarkably compact terms, sketches both an ethic and a christology.'!! The first readers of this epistle were those who had been “called.” From the opening salutation throughout the letter, the author has reminded the Christians that their status is a matter neither of historical accident nor of their own decision. They have been called to be who they are, written into a story by God, who is the author of their story and of all history. Now it is clear what their role is, what part they have been called to play. They were called to suffer for righteousness’ sake. This is not bad luck or ill fate; it is their vocation. If we are right in seeing the letter as being shaped in part around themes of

and each is used here somewhat differently from the manner usually expected. The term that the NIV translates “it is commendable” and that the NRSV translates “it is a credit” is often translated “srace” (xapts Charis), although here it seems not to carry the rich connotations of the term when it is used by Paul or in Ephesians. “It adds to your account” would be a more literal translation. This reading is confirmed when the term is used again at the end of v. 20. Suffering for the sake of righteousness represents a credit—with God. Again the immediate concern for impressing the neighbors by correct behavior is set in the larger context: Christians do this for God’s sake. (The writer of 1 Peter also uses the term charis in 1:2,

110. E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter (London: Macmillan, 1958) 177. Spicq also translates ouvel8nots (syneidesis) as “conscience” which the slave has from God. C. Spicq, Les Epitres de Saint Pierre (Paris: Librarie Lecoffre, 1966) 108. 111. Michaels suggests that the reference to the “grace” Christians have before God recalls the whole “grace” that God provides in Jesus Christ; this may bea stretch. See J. Ramsey Michaels, 7 Peter, WBC (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988) 108.

109. This reading is influenced by Prostmeier’s thoughtful interpreta-

tion of these verses. See Ferdinand-Rupert Prostmeier, Handlungsmodelle im ersten Petrusbref, Forschung zur Bibel 63 (Wiirzburg: Echter Verlag,

1990) 155-58.

281

| PETER 2:18-3:7 COMMENTARY baptism and rebirth, then Christians are asked to remember their baptism as a mark of their call. This vocation is grounded not only in God’s call but also in Christ’s passion. Christ’s passion establishes the vocation in two ways: (1) Christ suffered for the Christians (some early mss read “Christ died on your behalf”; that reading is most likely an assimilation of 1 Peter to the more familiar Pauline formula, or to 1 Pet 3:18).!!? (2) Christ’s suffering serves as the example for the appropriate behavior of the Christians. The Greek word for “example” is utoypappos (hypogrammos), which more literally means the pattern that a child, learning to write, traces over.!!> The idea of “walking in his steps” follows the same motif. Christ’s passion is the path Christians take; they trace his pattern, walk in his steps. Verses 22-25 draw very heavily on motifs from Isaiah 53; it may even be possible to say that they are a kind of homiletical elaboration on themes from Isaiah’s great Servant Song. Here are the verses that 1 Peter draws from as found in the Septuagint: He bears our sins and suffers pain for us, yet we accounted him to be in distress, and in suffering, and in affliction. But he was wounded for our sins, wounded for our iniquities; the chastisement [matSeia paideia] of our peace was upon him, and by his bruises we are healed. We have all gone astray like sheep; every person has gone astray on his own path, and the Lord has handed him over for our sins. Yet on account of the evil that was done him, he does not open his mouth. He was led like a lamb to the slaughter and as a sheep that before its shearers is silent; so he does not open his mouth.

And I shall give the wicked for his grave and the rich for his death, because he did nothing unlawful and no deceit was found in his mouth. (Isa 53:4-7, 9, author’s trans.)

The first two verses of this reading of Isaiah 53 (in 1 Pet 2:22-23) shed light on the second claim 112. See Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the New

Testament (New York: United Bible Societies, 1971) 690; Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 109n. 10. 113. See Davids, The First Epistle of Peter, 109-10; Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 179.

282

of 2:21: Christ is the example, the paradigm for Christians. The second two verses explicate the first claim to the readers in v. 21, that Christ suffered “for you.” In elaborating on the promise that Christ is a paradigm, v. 22 quotes directly from Isa 53:9, and the rest of the passage presents themes from Isaiah’s passage to illuminate ways in which Christ served as an example for suffering household servants and for all suffering Christians in the communities to which 1 Peter was written. The reminder from Isa 53:9 that Christ “committed no sin,/ and no deceit was found in his mouth” (v. 22) makes Christ the forerunner of those household servants who “suffer for doing good and you endure it” (v. 20). Therefore, by extension Christ becomes the forerunner of all Christians who suffer unjustly, those who “now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials” (1:6 NIV). Christ lived out his calling as predicted by the prophets, that he should suffer (1:11). Now Christian servants and all Christians undergoing trials live out their calling too (2:21). For Christ, for household servants suffering injustice, for all Christians undergoing tribulation for their faith the end of suffering is glory that comes from God. That glory has already been granted to Jesus Christ (1:11). It relates directly to the eschatological promise to those household servants who were suffering unjustly when 1 Peter was written, who “have God’s approval” (v. 20), and it is the promise for all the suffering Christians who read or hear 1 Peter. Just as Christ’s sufferings led to his glory, so also their suffering tests that faith that “may be found to result in praise and glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1:7 NRSV). An additional benefit of this faithfulness, even in the midst of suffering, is that when Christ is revealed, at least some of those who malign the Christians will “see [their] honorable deeds and glorify God when he comes to judge” (2:12). One can assume that among the slanderers are slavemasters who were anxious about their house slaves’ new religion and that among those slandered are the slaves who suffered reproach precisely for their newfound faith. Verses 22-23 show what suffering slaves and all suffering Christians are to do in the meantime,

1 PETER 2:18-3:7 COMMENTARY before God’s glorious visitation. They are not to give slander in return for slander received, but they are to be like their Lord as he is foreseen in Isa 53:7, 9. The echoes of some of the gospel material are very strong here as well. The passage recalls Mark 14:53-61, Jesus’ silence before false accusations, and Mark 15:19, where Jesus is silent before his taunters. For slandered Christians, the passage recalls Matt 6:43-44 and Luke 6:28. So

citation from Isa 53:5 in v. 24. Now Jesus is the wounded surgeon whose wounds heal the wounded believers.!!° At the conclusion of this rich meditation on Isaiah 53, the author draws on another prophet, Ezekiel, for whom the word of the Lord is: “So they were scattered, because there was no shepherd.... My sheep were scattered, they wandered... over all the face of the earth, with no one to search or seek for them” (Ezek 34:5-6 NRSV). The oracle moves, however, to promise, as the author, and perhaps his readers also, knew: “IT myself will be the shepherd of my sheep... says the Lord Gop” (Ezek 34:15 NRSV). In 1 Peter, Jesus has become the true shepherd; the words are fulfilled in him. The Christians, who before coming to faith were wandering far and wide, have now returned to him—shepherd and guardian, overseer, bishop of their souls. Though to the world the Christians look like wandering sheep (aliens and exiles, 2:11), they know that they are at home in the shepherd’s fold (the “beloved,” 2:11). The image of the shepherd will recur in 5:4, where Peter and the elders are implicitly deputy shepherds as well. As with so much of the NT, these verses are not a full-fledged doctrine of the atonement at all. Rather, they give us a rich mix of images and allusion, drawn largely from Isaiah 53 and from Christian formulas (“he suffered for you”) and from elsewhere in this epistle. The strategy is homiletical rather than systematic. The purpose of the rhetoric seems clear: to strengthen Christian believers, especially household slaves, in faith and in obedient behavior. They are strengthened because they look to Christ as example and as redeemer; through his silence, obedience, and trust he has opened to them the imperishable inheritance that no earthly master can tarnish or destroy. Notice that the whole use of Isaiah 53 in these verses demonstrates precisely that understanding of Hebrew Scripture that 1 Peter has praised in 1:10-11: “Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that was to be yours made careful search and inquiry . . . [concerning]

for 1 Peter, Christians, like Jesus Christ, are to trust their lives to God, who they have already been told is both Father and a just judge (1:17; again the gospel tradition suggests a kind of parallel in Luke 23:46).''4 Here the author reminds Christians to do what he has already assured them they are able to do in Christ Jesus: “Through him you have come to trust in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory” (1:21 NRSV). Now in vv. 24-25—still drawing on Isaiah 53—1 Peter elaborates on the already traditional Christian claim that Christ suffered “for you.” The passage makes two claims about the ways in which Christ represents the believers, or stands as substitute for the believers, in bringing them safely before the one who judges justly. Explicitly 1 Peter says that Jesus took believers’ sins to the cross, thereby delivering them from sin. In theological terms, this could represent either substitutionary atonement wherein Christ, though sinless, took upon himself the punishment for human sin on behalf of believers, or an atonement of victory wherein Christ vanquished sin through his fidelity on the cross (for images closer to the first option, see 2 Cor 5:21; for the second, see Col 2:13-15). Both the NRSV and the NIV may overinterpret (or misinterpret) the phrase about getting rid of sin. The Greek phrase translated quite literally means “in order that having departed from sins

we might live in righteousness.”!!° This is not an explicit statement about Christian freedom (as in the NRSV) or about “dying” to sin (as in the NIV). Implicitly 1 Peter says that as the lamb of God, Jesus suffered for those Christians who before their conversion had themselves been straying sheep. Surely the reference from Isa 53:6 in v. 25 recalls for the readers Christ himself as the sacrificial lamb in 1:19. And there is yet another image of the salvation worked in Christ in the

116. For a powerful poetic reference to Christ as wounded healer, see T. S. Eliot, The Four Quartets, “East Coker,” canto IV, line 1, in The Complete Poems and Plays (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1962)

114. See Spica, Les Epitres de Saint Pierre, 111.

127:

115. See Seiwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 181.

283

1 PETER 2:18-3:7 COMMENTARY anastrophé ) is the same word used in 2:12, and the hope that wives will bear witness to their husbands by their good conduct becomes a concrete example of the broader eschatological hope that the Gentiles may see the honorable deeds of believers and glorify God at God’s visitation (2:12). While these verses attempt to indicate that Christian women are upholding the orders of the household, there is quiet subversion here, since the assumption within that social setting was that wives would follow the religious practices of their husbands and that the unbelieving husbands would be among those Gentiles who maligned their own believing spouses as evildoers (2:12).!° Verse 2 can be translated more woodenly as “when they see the pure conduct in fear [or reverence] of your lives.” In the light of 2:17, the NIV and the NRSV rightly understand the fear as being fear of God. Again wives are obedient to their husbands, not for the sake of their husbands or out of fear of their authority, but “for the Lord’s sake” (2:13). Pheme Perkins helpfully points out that, unlike in the case of household slaves, this passage does not presume that the husbands are behaving abusively, but only that they are unbelieving or even refusing to believe.!?° 3:3-4. These verses describe the appearance of such pure and reverent lives.!2! The adornment of the “quiet spirit” reminds us that Christian women are to win their husbands “without a word” (v. 1). That is, it is not merely the case that conduct speaks louder than words in winning recalcitrant husbands; more than that, the appropriate conduct includes demure silence. Wives are not to argue their husbands toward faith. As is so often the case in this epistle, these verses echo an earlier claim. The quiet behavior of the Christian wives is “unfading beauty...in God’s sight” (NIV)—just as the inheritance of Christians is “unfading” (1:4) and the seed of God’s Word is “imperishable” (1:23). Their behavior is “precious” (toAuTedns polytelés; 3:4) as their faith is “precious” (polyteles; 1:7). The reminder that true adornment is spiritual and not cosmetic is

the sufferings destined for Christ and the subsequent glory” (NRSV). 3:1-7. Now the author turns to husbands and wives. As in Ephesians 5 and Colossians 3, wives are addressed first, but in 1 Peter, the heavier weight of both words and argument rests with the injunction to the wives. Comparing 1 Peter to other Greco-Roman literature on the household, David Balch suggests that “slaves and wives are addressed first by these early Christian moralists because they were the focus of an intense social problem between the church and Roman society. Romans frowned on their wives and slaves being seduced by bizarre foreign cults, and this led the author of 1 Peter to address the household code to those who were the focus of the tension.”!!” 3:1-2. The introductory “in the same way” provides a rhetorical transition; but more than that it suggests that the willing subjection of wives to their husbands follows the same pattern that the letter prescribes for household servants in relation to their masters and for all believers in relation to governmental authorities. Indeed, the participle that both the NIV and the NRSV render as an imperative, “accept the authority of your husbands” (NRSV) and “be submissive to your husbands” (NIV), is another form of the verb in 2:13, where the author enjoins the readers to be subject to every “created authority for the Lord’s sake.” Among the created authorities are not only emperors and householders but also husbands. Here again, wives are to be obedient not for the sake of the husband but for the sake of the Lord, serving the created human authority for the sake of the Creator. The letter is more explicit about how serving the husband might mean serving the Lord. Service can provide a means to witness. Husbands who have not been persuaded “by the word”—who may even oppose the word—might be convinced “without a word” (the wordplay occurs in the Greek, as well as in the English translations) by the behavior of their wives. Achtemeier persuasively argues that this represents an admonition to Christian wives to avoid speaking explicitly about their faith, not to avoid speaking altogether.''® The word for “conduct” (dvaotpobn

118. Paul J. Achtemeier, / Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996) 210. 119. See Balch, Let Wives Be Submissive, 99. 120. Pheme Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, Interpretation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1995) 56-57. 121. Balch, Let Wives Be Submissive, 101-2, presents a number of near parallels from Greco-Roman literature.

117. David L. Balch, Let Wives Be Submissive: The Domestic Code in I Peter, SBLMS (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1981) 96-97.

284

1 PETER 2:18-3:7 COMMENTARY similar to 1 Tim 2:9. In that epistle, there is some sense that the adornment of physical beauty is itself licentious and demeaning. Here it seems rather that Christian women are called to choose between the lesser and the greater—the perishable beauty of physical adornment and the imperishable beauty of a gentle spirit.!22 3:5-6. The “holy women of old” become examples for Christian wives as Christ is an example for Christian slaves. Obviously the examples of Sarah and the other wives provide nothing like the rich christological reflection of the passion story, but the rhetorical strategy is similar: Encourage faithful behavior by recalling exemplars from the heritage of faith. The description of the faithfulness of these women, that they were submissive to their own husbands, exactly recapitulates the exhortation to the Christian wives to be “submissive to their husbands” (v. 1 NIV; the NRSV makes the two phrases exactly parallel). That the women in the OT story were “holy” recalls the earlier exhortation to all Christian women and men to imitate the holiness of God and the reminder that Christian people are now a holy nation (see 1:16; 2:9). According to 1:14-16, Christians show their holiness by acting like “obedient children.” Now Sarah is held up as an example of obedience; her obedience to her husband is by extension also an instance of obedience to God. Pheme Perkins points out that the analogy can only go so far. Sarah shared in the faith of her husband; Christian wives are encouraged to stand fast—quietly but firmly—in their own convictions.!”° Sarah calls Abraham “lord” in the Septuagintal version of Gen 18:12, though the larger context of Sarah’s disbelief in the light of the angel’s announcement is not a noteworthy example of obedience either to her husband or to God. In 1 Pet 3:6, Sarah has become a model of the whole range of right Christian conduct, and Christian women are her daughters because they imitate her behavior (cf. Paul’s different understanding of Christian men and women as Abraham’s children, Rom 4:13-25). The final exhortation to the women not to “sive way to fear” echoes Prov 3:25 and is

probably an encouragement to hold fast their faith even while being submissive and obedient to their husbands.!*4 The Proverbs injunction is preceded in Prov 3:21-22 by the plea to let wisdom and prudence be “adornment for the neck,” a theme echoed in 1 Pet 3:3-4. 3:7. Here the husbands are addressed briefly.!%° Of course, the assumption is that believing husbands will have believing wives and households, so the issue of the relationship to an unbelieving spouse does not arise. What does come to the fore is the obligation of the husbands to behave lovingly to the wives, not in submission (or even mutual submission as in Eph 5:22) but in “respect” (NIV) or “honor” (NRSV). The term “honor” (tiuLy time} is the same term used to tell Christians what is due the king in 2:17. The phrase “in the same way” may hint at a fuller mutuality between husband and wife, a mutuality expressed differently because of their different stations. That wives are weaker “vessels” probably refers only to their physical strength, and perhaps also to their vulnerability—a warning against any possible abuse.!?¢ There is no indication here, as in the Pastoral Epistles, that women are somehow more subject than men to false faith or mistaken beliefs; on the contrary, the apparent assumption that there are more believing wives than husbands in this community indicates that women can be equally strong in faith. Husbands are to behave toward them with “knowledge,” the understanding that recognizes their vulnerability but also honors their gifts. Indeed, the fundamental equality of men and women in the light of God’s coming reign is underlined by the reminder that they are “joint heirs of the grace of life.” Since 1 Peter so strongly stresses the imperishable inheritance given the faithful (1:4), the implication here is that whatever the relative social standing of men and women in this perishable world, in the indestructible realm of grace they are equal. The notion that failing to give due respect to one’s spouse might hinder one’s prayers apparently plays on the assumption of much early Christian writing that the life of prayer is nourished by faithful behav124. So J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, Black’s New Testament Commentaries (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1969) 132. 125. Achtemeier, / Peter, 217, suggests that all males in the Christian community are addressed.

122. L. Goppelt, A Commentary on J Peter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 218, lists a number of close non-Christian parallels from Greco-Roman writing; Michaels, 7 Peter, 159, lists Jewish and Hellenistic parallels. 123. See Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, 58.

126. On the issue of what “weaker vessel” might mean, see Davids,

The First Epistle of Peter, 122-23.

285

1 PETER 2:18-3:7 COMMENTARY behavior that engender right prayer (note that the exhortations to children and parents in Eph 6:1-4 are missing in this section of 1 Peter, yet a somewhat analogous concern for intergenerational order is found in 1 Pet 5:1-5).

ior and hindered by behavior that violates the neighbor or the spouse (see also Jas 4:3).!2” In 1 Pet 4:7, the author calls for the discipline and right 127. So Norbert Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentary zum Neuen Testament (Zurich: Benziger Verlag and Neukirchener Verlag, 1979) 149. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 134, thinks the last injunction applies to both wives and husbands.

REFLECTIONS 1. With good reason we are glad to be beyond a society in which slavery is part of the social order. Toni Morrison’s novel Beloved is the irrefutable rejoinder to any who still try to romanticize American slavery or to make a distinction between benevolent and malevolent ownership of other humans. The mysterious “Beloved” comes to represent all those whose identity disappears in slavery: “Everybody knew what she was called, but nobody knew her name. Disremembered and unaccounted for, she cannot be lost because no one is looking for her, and even if they were how can they call her if they don’t know her name? Although she has claim, she is not claimed.”’” Finally for all the difference between first-century and nineteenth-century slavery, the refusal to condone any slavery is now an established Christian principle, indicating that to be Christian in our time is not simply to accept the values of our honored and faithful forebears in the faith. Yet in 1 Peter the. household slave in his or her obedience is a paradigm of faithful Christian behavior, modeled on Christ’s fidelity and modeling fidelity for other believers. In many ways, 1 Pet 2:16 provides the basic guideline not only for the behavior of these household slaves but for all Christians as well: “As slaves of God, live as free people, yet do not use your freedom as a pretext for evil” (NRSV margin). Christian freedom lives out Christ’s freedom, and Christ’s freedom did not include the freedom to repay evil for evil, but the freedom to repay good for evil. For a host of reasons, we cannot simply take 1 Peter as a clear and infallible guide to contemporary faithful behavior. Our understanding of slavery has unalterably changed. Our sense of the power and the intractability of social forces is mitigated by the knowledge that as citizens and Christians we have the power to make changes in those structures. Yet the difficult and paradoxical shape of Christian life as here delineated stands over us as a challenge and even a possibility. No one can take my freedom from me; but because I am God’s slave, I am free not to resist violence with violence, not to fight fire with fire or to oppose the lies of the oppressive with my own list of persuasive exaggerations and caricatures. 2. The Revised Common Lectionary turns to 1 Peter 2 as a reading for the fourth Sunday of Easter (Cycle A), but evasively assigns the passage 2:19-25. Thus the lectionary manages to hold on to the christological and soteriological affirmation without the sociological context to which it was addressed. The hard task of preaching is to be as honest as we can about both the concrete context for a biblical passage and our own, sometimes quite different, context. In 1 Peter slavery represents both a social reality and a metaphor for Christ’s obedience and for the obedience of Christians. The brave (and honest) interpreter will not look at this passage apart from attention to the tough question of this epistle’s attitude toward slavery. If our social context is entirely different, do 1 Peter’s metaphors function faithfully for our time? If they can do so, it will not be because we have abstracted them from the real world of social relationships. In the lectionary reading, 1 Peter is linked with Psalm 23 and John 10. We find the image 128. Toni Morrison, Beloved (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1987) 274.

286

1 PETER 2:18-3:7 REFLECTIONS of believers as sheep more comfortable than the image of believers as slaves. Yet perhaps both pictures are more problematic than we are wont to admit; or perhaps in the interplay of the two images we can find clues to what it might mean in our time to be faithful to the One who was both our shepherd and the lamb who was slain (1:18-19; 2:25).

3. With good reason Christians find godly and humane grounds to resist images of the household that depend on the submissiveness of wives to husbands. Contemporary feminist concerns for restructuring relationships—including marriage—are not merely a reflection of the triumph of secular values or the, enticements of modern egalitarian political thought. From the clear fact that women were among Jesus’ closest followers to Paul’s bold call that in Christ there is neither male nor female, the New Testament provides its own powerful counterpoint to images of subordination in relationships between men and women (see Gal 3:28). Indeed, one should not underestimate the countercultural implications of this passage from 1 Peter. While the author advises Christian women to behave honorably among unbelievers so as not to stir up unnecessary trouble, he holds firm in the conviction that the wife has the right to her own Christian faith, whether the husband believes or not. In the Roman Empire of 1 Peter’s time, that was a subversive claim, however clothed in modesty and silence.'” Furthermore, the fact that both wives and husbands are addressed and their responsibilities to each other explicated suggests mutuality, if not equality, in their relationship.’ And while as aliens and strangers in the world there is a distinction between the power and authority of wife and husband as God’s beloved, they are both—equally—“heirs of the gracious gift of life” (3:7 NIV). Nevertheless, as with the question of slavery, Christian perspectives on the relationships between women and men are appropriately subject to reevaluation as circumstances and knowledge change. Our study has recognized that the Christian household codes were profoundly affected by the best “pagan” wisdom of their time, and it would require a fantastic feat of intellectual isolationism for contemporary Christians to ignore the discussionsof our own time about gender, patriarchy, and the possibilities and limitations of “liberation.” Different Christians will come to different understandings of marriage and family, and they will do so out of faith. It seems implausible to assume that as we move into the twenty-first century faithful Christian marriage will precisely replicate faithful Christian marriage in first-century Asia Minor any more than faithful Christian citizenship would simply honor the emperor. Obedience to God in our time and place will not look exactly like obedience in 1 Peter’s time and place. Christian freedom is not so simple or so simpleminded as that. We will learn from 1 Peter that Christian marriage includes real mutuality, a gentle spirit—for men and for women alike—and constant communion with one another and with God in the gift of prayer. 4. The relationship between the life of prayer and the life of charity is attested throughout the canon. In Amos, God despises the feasts and solemn assemblies of those who do not do justice (Amos 5:21-24); and in Matthew Jesus tells us that we should not come to the altar until we have sought reconciliation with our brothers and sisters (Matt 5:23-24). In 1 Corinthians, Paul tells the Corinthians that if they take the Lord’s supper without discerning the “body” they eat and drink judgment on themselves (1 Cor 11:29). In part, at least, this is an exhortation to attend to other Christians who are members of the body with aydtn (agapé, 1 Cor 11:29). James insists that prayers are not answered if they do not derive from selfless motives (Jas 4:3) and that it is the prayers of the righteous that are “powerful and effective” (Jas 5:16). Of course, one great stream of biblical faith insists that the sinner’s prayer 129. See Balch, Let Wives Be Submissive, 84-85. 130. See ibid., Appendix V, 142-49, for a persuasive discussion of the basic similarity between the most “enlightened” pagans and Christian household codes on the mix of honor and submission assigned to wives. Overall, Eph 5:21 advocates a somewhat more inclusive notion of mutual subjection than is found in 1 Peter.

287

1 PETER 2:18-—3:7 REFLECTIONS for mercy is blessed in God’s sight, but we note that it is the prayer for mercy that is blessed—not prayers that presume on God’s favor for the unrepentant. (As Matt 18:23-35 reminds us, even the prayer for mercy presupposes our willingness to be merciful.) The life of prayer informs the life of action; but active obedience also enriches the life of prayer. We pray that we might act graciously, but we act graciously in order that we might learn to pray. 5. Interpreters assume that behind much of the christology of the New Testament is the influence of the Servant Songs of Isaiah. In this section of 1 Peter that influence is evident and pervasive. Using Isaiah 53 as the basis for his reflection, the author claims both that Christ suffered for us and that Christ suffered before us. He suffers for our sake and thereby provides present grace and eternal redemption; but he is also our forerunner and paradigm. Our faith in him will not deliver us from the responsibility to follow “in his steps” (1 Pet 2:21). And following in his steps does not simply mean being nice or having integrity or strengthening one’s devotional life. Following in his steps means following to Golgotha. We are only strengthened to go to Golgotha because he has gone before us; but because he has gone before us, there is no pretending that we can escape that terrifying pilgrimage. Despite the comfortably “Christian” culture in which we live, we know people who took up their own crosses. A young man quit a lucrative job in a major merchandising chain because it was involved in shady marketing practice and wanted him to acquiesce. A Chinese student who came to the United States to study law found an apartment at the divinity school and was invited to join in the community Bible study. She has now become a Christian, but because of her outspoken views can probably never return to China and her family again. A congregation made explicit the fact that it will welcome gay and lesbian members, and its denominational association severed all ties. Christ’s cross does not always protect us from our own crosses. 6. In the larger context of 1 Pet 2:11—3:7 Christians in general (2:12) and wives in particular (3:1-2) are urged to practice evangelism by evangelical practice. Wives are explicitly told that it is better to be quiet about their faith and to convince their unbelieving husbands by their excellent behavior. The whole community is not necessarily enjoined to silence, but there is the clear implication that deeds speak at least as loudly as words and that, from an eschatological point of view, good behavior will reap the harvest of conversions. In part this is a counsel of prudence. Women will not get in trouble for acting decorously, while constant verbal plugs for the gospel may make for marital strain. Household slaves are probably not in the position to argue with their masters, but they are in an excellent position to live in ways that elicit admiration. In our own time, when the worst consequence of outspoken evangelism is usually that we feel a little foolish, we may need to be reminded of the power of speaking Christ’s name aloud, and in unfamiliar places. Nonetheless, part of Christian fidelity in our day. as in the time of 1 Peter is the life lived obediently—sometimes decorously, sometimes outrageously, but always faithfully, visibly.

L PETER 3282226

60)Liste

PEE relics

NIV

NRSV

$Finally, all of you, live in harmony with one another; be sympathetic, love as brothers, be compassionate and humble. °Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may

8Finally, all of you, have unity of spirit, sympathy, love for one another, a tender heart, and

a humble mind. °Do not repay evil for evil or abuse for abuse; but, on the contrary, repay with a blessing. It is for this that you were called—that you might inherit a blessing. !°For

inherit a blessing. '°For,

288

1 PETER 3:8-22 NIV

NRSV

“Whoever would love life and see good days must keep his tongue from evil

and his lips from deceitful speech. "He must turn from evil and do good;

he must seek peace and pursue it. '2For the eyes of the Lord are gn the righteous

and his ears are attentive to their prayer,

but the face of the Lord is against those who do onl 'SWho is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? ‘But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear what they fear’; do not be frightened.”* 'But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, !“keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander. '/It is better, if it is God’s will, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil. '8For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, ‘through whom? also he went and preached to the spirits in prison ?°who dis-

“Those who desire life and desire to see good days, let them keep their tongues from evil and their lips from speaking deceit; 'l let them turn away from evil and do good; let them seek peace and pursue it. '2 Por the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous, and his ears are open to their prayer. But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.” 13Now who will harm you if you are eager to do what is good? ‘But even if you do suffer for doing what is right, you are blessed. Do not fear what they fear,? and do not be intimidated, 'but in your hearts sanctify Christ as Lord. Always be ready to make your defense to anyone who demands from you an accounting for the hope that is in you; !*yet do it with gentleness and reverence.’ Keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are maligned, those who abuse you for your good conduct in Christ may be put to shame. '’For it is better to suffer for doing good, if suffering should be God’s will, than to suffer for doing evil. '*For Christ also suffered¢ for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, in order to bring you? to God. He was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit, '°in which also he went and made a proclamation to the spirits

in prison, *°who in former times did not obey, when God waited patiently in the days of Noah, during

obeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, ?!and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge® of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.

the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. 2!And baptism, which this prefigured, now saves you—not as a removal of dirt from the body, but as an appeal to God for’ a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers made subject to him.

412 Psalm 34:12-16 614 Or not fear their threats 8:12 418,19 Or alive in the spirit, '%through which response

4 Gk their fear 6 Or respect ¢ Other ancient authorities read died d Other ancient authorities read us eOr a pledge to God from

¢14 Isaiah e21 Or

3:8-12. This section concludes the discussion of appropriate social relations for Christians and provides the introduction to the discussion of the Christian relationship to the larger society, where the faithful often must suffer for their faith.

3:8. This verse clearly refers to relationships within the church community. “All” Christians— slaves and masters, husbands and wives—are to live according to the virtues set forth in this verse and, by their appropriate behavior within their

280

1 PETER 3:8-22 COMMENTARY community. There is an allusion to Ps 34:8 in 2 Pet 2:3 as well! The “life” and “good days” to which the psalm points are interpreted as marks of the eschatological promise, of the blessing that those who bless will receive. (For “life” as an eschatological gift, see also 3:7.) The injunction to be careful in speaking, and especially the reminder to avoid deceit, recalls 2:22, where under the most difficult circumstances no deceit was found in Christ’s mouth. In following the direction of the psalm, Christians continue to walk “in his steps” (2:21). (The concern with the proper use of the tongue is also found in Jas 3:1-12.) Balch points out that the call in 3:11 to “seek peace” is a summary of the themes of the preceding household rules.!** And the reminder that God’s ears are open to the prayers of the righteous becomes a further explanation of the warning that the prayers of Christian husbands would be hindered unless they behaved uprightly toward their wives (3:7).!°° In all these ways, the psalm citation provides a rich and compelling summation of the themes of the preceding verses. In the contrast between the righteous, whom the Lord hears, and the evil, whom the Lord ignores, the psalm also moves the argument of 1 Peter toward the fuller discussion of unjust suffering at the hands of those who are evil. On the one hand, the psalm warns Christians not to practice evil, but it also inevitably draws toward the discussion of those who practice evil toward Christians. 3:13-22. These verses remind us of what our whole study of the epistle has shown: First Peter was written for a community that was suffering slander, if not persecution, from an unbelieving world. The question Christians face is how to hold fast to the promise of God’s blessing and at the same time act appropriately toward those who are hostile to the faith. 3:13-15a. These verses suggest that on the whole Christians need not fear harm if they are zealous for the good—but the possibility of unjust suffering is not to be ruled out. (They are warned

station, show forth harmony, sympathy, brotherly love, compassion, and humility. The NIV and NRSV translations are probably right to render this verse as a series of imperatives, although it is written as a series of participles and might almost as well be descriptive as prescriptive: Here is who you are as Christian people (similar to 1 Corinthians 13, which Paul wrote to exhort the Corinthians to love but did so by describing that love).!3! 3:9. This verse continues the theme of faithful Christian behavior but begins to shift the focus from Christians’ behavior toward each other to their actions toward the larger (hostile) society. This, too, represents a further application of the station tables, since by implication both slaves and wives are enjoined there to repay the opposition of their masters/husbands with obedience and kindness (2:18; 3:1-2). The exhortation to non-retaliation is congruent with demands we find in other early Christian literature (see Matt 5:38-42; Luke 6:29-31; Rom 12:19:21); The correlation between blessing one’s enemies and receiving a blessing also fits a major theme within the eschatological understanding of the early church: “For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; but if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (Matt 6:14-15 NRSV; see Luke 6:35). First Peter has noted this theme in its description of Christ’s own suffering

(2:23). As so often in 1 Peter, the ethical injunction is set within the providential context of a call. Christians have been called both to bless and to receive a blessing. That call includes a present obligation and an eschatological promise (see 1:15; 2:9, 21; 5:10). Although the language is different, 1:1-9 has a similar combination of stressing God’s choice, suffering in the present, and a future blessing for the faithful. 3:10-12. The quotation from Ps 34:12-16 provides not only a warrant but also a further elaboration of the shape of the faithful Christian 131. Achtemeier keeps the adverbial force of the participles, with the main verb only implied; see Paul J. Achtemeier, 7 Peter, 220. Michaels points out that the virtues enjoined are quite similar to those in Rom 12:9-13. There Paul also writes descriptively, implying the imperative. See Michaels, / Peter, 173. 132. See Pheme Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, Interpretation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1995) 60.

133. See Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 138. 134. David L. Balch, “Hellenization/Acculturation in 1 Peter,” in

Charles H. Talbert, ed., Perspectives on First Peter (Macon: Mercer University Press, 1986) 94-95. Balch also notes the similar use of the phrase (from Ps 34:156) in Heb 12:14 and 7 Clement 22. 135. See Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, 60.

290

1 PETER 3:8-22 COMMENTARY against offenses that deserve punishment in 4:15.) The “blessedness” pronounced on those who suffer for righteousness recalls both the claim of v. 9 that those who do not return evil for evil will receive blessing at the end and the promise of the psalm cited in v. 12 that God’s eyes are on “the righteous.” The term “blessed” (jakdptos makarios), however, is not the same term as that found in v. 9 (evAoyia eulogia)s It is, rather, the “plessedness” pronounced in the beatitudes of the Sermon on the Mount. Indeed, the passage is reminiscent of Matt 5:11-12a: “Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven” (see also 1 Pet 2:20; 4:14; Luke 6:22). We remember that the injunction to slaves in chap. 2 becomes paradigmatic for all Christians who have to suffer for their faith. The exhortation “Do not fear what they fear” is a quotation from Isa 8:12-13, where the prophet is told to take his cue from his faith and not from public opinion. We should not fear what everyone else fears but “the Lord God of hosts... let him be your fear” (NRSV).!%° First Peter takes the reference to the Lord God as the one to be feared and sanctified in Isaiah and applies that word to the Lord Christ. Let Christ be the object of your godly fear; let him be the one you sanctify in your hearts. “Sanctify” (ayrdC€w hagiazo) is the same verb as that in the Lord’s prayer: “Your name be sanctified” (Matt 6:9, author’s trans.). The epistle has already quoted the next verse from Isa 8:14 in the context of the judgment against unbelievers who stumble on the rock that the builder rejected (2:8). Perhaps it is not too long a stretch to suggest that in the overall context of 1 Peter and of Isaiah 8, Christians are here reminded that the rock in whom they put their trust is the rock on whom unbelievers stumble and fall. Again we have the exegetical method that the writer of 1 Peter commends in 1:10-11, to find in the prophets those words that point to the present salvation of 1 Peter’s readers and hearers.

3:15b-16. Here the writer spells out the way in which Christians, even when they suffer evil for doing good, may fear Christ and sanctify him in their hearts. The defense that the faithful are called to make might include defense in a legal proceeding, but more likely it means simply to give an account in the face of those who slander and abuse, as v. 16 would suggest.'!9” Notice that those to whom Christians give an account will themselves have to give an account to God on the judgment day (4:5). That such a defense is to be made “always” and to “everyone” indicates that Christian witness is offered eagerly, and not just under compulsion. For 1 Peter, the whole content of the Christian faith can be summed up as “hope”—a motive and motif that runs through the whole epistle (see explicitly 335 bo, Z2Sr5|. implicitly 138-0212 4-13: 5:4, 6, 10). The gentleness and reverence that Christians show to outsiders in defending their hope mirror the sympathy and humility they show to one another in their communal life (v. 8). The appeal to a clear conscience is an appeal again to make sure that any charges brought against Christians are for their goodness, and not for their participation in evil. (on conscience or consciousness, cf. Commentary on 2:19). The shame that their slanderers may face is probably both the immediate shame of bringing false accusations and the ultimate shame of standing before the God who judges and may yet redeem them (see 2:12; 4:5).!%8 3:17-18. In discussing these verses, Brox points out that v. 17 has something of the same tenor as 3:14 and 4:14. It is a description of the blessedness that is part of God’s will for those who are faithful.'9° Kelly elaborates: “When welldoers suffer, they have the satisfaction of knowing that their suffering is not the moral consequence of their well-doing, even if it is their good actions which have brought their enemies’ hostility down upon them. Indeed, in so far as they can discern 137. Selwyn lists other NT instances of atohoyla (apologia) or the root verb atodoyeouat (apologeomai) with similar meaning: Luke 12:11;

136. Selwyn thinks that the subjective genitive of the LXX has been interpreted here as an objective genitive—not “do not fear what they fear” but “do not fear with the fear of them.” He cites Ps 64:2. See E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter (London: Macmillan, 1958) 192. Brox points out that the situation of Israel before Assyria has become an example for Christians before their unbelieving opponents. See Norbert Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentary zum Neuen Testament (Zurich: Benziger Verlag and Neukirchener Verlag, 1979) 159.

21:14; Acts 19:33; 22:1; 26:1-2, 24. See Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 193. 138. On the eschatological implications, see J. Ramsey Michaels, / Peter, WBC (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988) 190-91. He also shows the resemblance of the whole purpose clause to 1 Pet 2:12, both grammatically and theologically. 139. Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 162.

291

1 PETER 3:8-22 COMMENTARY an example for maligned slaves to follow (2:21), but then it also becomes clear that his suffering is the grounds of their righteousness. Apart from Christ’s suffering it would not be possible to follow him in obedience. In chap. 3, likewise, it becomes clear, in general scope if not in detail, that Christ’s suffering, death, and resurrection are not only the example and motivation for Christian hope in suffering, but also are the grounding for Christian baptism, which makes possible the good conscience in which fidelity—even faithful suffering—is exercised. (There is a somewhat similar pattern in 4:12-14.) In fact, it is the parallel between these two passages, with their balance between the suffering of Christians and the redemption accomplished in Christ’s suffering, that may help us to make sense of one of the most puzzling passages in 1 Peter, the claim that Christ preached to the spirits (3:19-20). We can perhaps best understand this passage by going through it verse by verse. Verse 18 depends on the antitheses that in dramatic form show the astonishing nature of Christian redemption. Christ suffered once for all (as opposed to the ongoing suffering of Christian followers). Christ suffered as the righteous one (for the unrighteous). Christ died in the flesh (but was made alive in or by the Spirit). The first and second of these affirmations are powerful, but no longer surprising. In a context in which Christian slaves in particular and the whole community of believers in Asia Minor in general are being encouraged to stand fast in hope, there is comfort in the claim that the daily slanders that Christians suffer are finally overcome by the one great passion of Jesus Christ for the sake of the world. For all believers who know that they are also sinners (see 4:3), there is comfort in the realization that the death of the righteous Christ frees repentant sinners and “brings them to God.” The puzzling phrase is that Christ was “put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit” (NIV) or “put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit” (NRSV). While resurrection throughout the NT is a great mystery, there is not generally the sense that some part of Christ died and some other part was brought to life, as if the body died and the soul lived. There are somewhat similar phrases in Rom 1:3 and 1 Tim 3:16, both formulas perhaps adapted by the letter writers to

God’s hand in their afflictions, Christians have

grounds for rejoicing.” !4° Verse 18 presents the underlying christological grounding for the blessedness of Christian suffering. There is a remarkable range of variant readings for the first phrase of the verse. The 7extual Commentary on the New Testament chose the text used by the NRSV rather than that used by the NIV—“Christ suffered for sins” (Xptotos TEP auapTLav ETabev Christos peri hamartion epathen) rather than “Christ died for sins” (XptoTos Tepl duapTiav amé8avev Christos peri hamartion apethanen). The phrase seems more consistent with the argument of the epistle, and it is easier to see why later scribes would substitute the traditional phrase “he died” for the less traditional “he suffered” in conjunction with “for sins.” In either case, the notion of suffering clearly means “suffering unto death” in the context of the reference to Christ’s passion, resurrection, and ascension.'*! It is not only that such suffering will receive vindication in the last judgment, but that by such suffering Christians imitate the redemptive suffering of Christ himself. This is a pattern already seen in the discussion of the obligation of Christian slaves to suffer unjust treatment (see Z2\-25): Indeed, the whole pattern of 2:18-25 is very like the pattern of 3:13-18. This suggests again that the relationship of slave to (unbelieving) master has become paradigmatic for the relationship of Christian to (unbelieving) opponent. “If you endure when you do right and suffer for it, you have God’s approval.” (2:20 NRSV) “If you do suffer for doing what is right, you are blessed.” (3:14 NRSV)

“For to this you have been called, because [éTt hoti| Christ also suffered for you...so that you should follow in his steps.” (2:21 NRSV) “For [Aoti] Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, in order to bring you to God.” (3:18 NRSV)

In chap. 2 the suffering of Christ first represents 140. J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, Black’s New Testament Commentaries (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1969) 145.

141. See Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the New Testament (New York: United Bible Societies, 1971) 692.

292

1 PETER 3:8-22 COMMENTARY their circumstances.'*? We have already seen in 1:24 that the flesh is associated with the perishable, on the basis of Isa 40:6-8. Michaels’s suggestion that the flesh represents Christ in his earthly limitation and the Spirit in his resurrected glory is as plausible

one moment in that saving act is hard to reconstruct does not make the basic thrust of the letter’s claim any less clear or any less powerful. There are three basic interpretations of the claim that Jesus preached to the spirits in prison. The third interpretation is the most persuasive, but questions remain. The three options noted here are nicely outlined in the NIV study Bible. (1) Before his incarnation, Jesus preached to the disobedient people of Noah’s time, perhaps through Noah himself. (2) Between his death and resurrection, Jesus descended to the place of the dead and preached to the spirits of the evil people of Noah’s time. (3) Between his death and resurrection, Jesus ascended to the realm of the wicked angels (sons of God) who are mentioned in Gen 6:2, 4 as forerunners of Noah and the wickedness of Noah’s time. There Jesus proclaimed God’s victory over all principalities and powers. In deciding which interpretation is most likely, one should begin by noting that it may not be the case that this claim about the risen Christ’s preaching to the spirits represents the same affirmation as 4:6, where the gospel is proclaimed even (or also) to the dead. For instance, in 3:19 the spirits receive some kind of proclamation (the verb is knpvoow [kerysso]), while in 4:6 the dead have clearly received the proclamation of the gospel (evayyeriCw euangelizo). We need to begin by trying to understand 3:19, and then in studying 4:6 see whether the affirmations are really the same. In 3:19 it is clear that the proclamation described took place after the resurrection, and it is the risen Lord who did the proclaiming. The puzzle is, Who were the spirits to whom such proclamation was made? The epistle tells us that they are spirits who did not obey during the time of Noah. This suggests two possibilities. Either these are the spirits of the people whose disobedience is contrasted to Noah’s obedience, and who perished in the flood. Or these spirits are the offspring of the intercourse between the “sons of God” and mortal women, described in the puzzling passage Gen 6:1-4, a passage that precedes the story of Noah and also leads into it. (Genesis 6:5 seems to be a comment on Gen 6:1-4; the behavior of the sons of God and the mortal women is part of the wickedness God condemns.)

as any: “If ‘flesh’ is the sphere of human limitations, of suffering, and of death (cf. 4:1), ‘Spirit’ is the sphere of power, vindication, and a new life.”! In the larger context of chaps. 3-4, “flesh” also might be the realm of human passions and intentions, those misdirected volitions that put Christ to death; if so, he was put to death “by the flesh” but raised “by the Spirit.” This is also a possible translation of

the Greek.!“ 3:19-21. In part one suspects the reference to “Spirit” here provides the transition to the claim in vv. 19-20 that Christ preached “to the spirits.”

The €v ® (en Ao) with which v. 19 begins may not be a direct reference to the Spirit (as in their different ways the NIV and the NRSV both take it), but rather a circumstantial adverb, “in which circumstances” or “when” (cf. 1:16).!# Verse 196 is the subject of much scholarly discussion. When did Christ do this? What spirits? How does this verse relate to 4:6 (if at all)?!4° While trying to adjudicate the various claims, two disclaimers should be kept in mind. First, the material is complicated, its historical and religious background uncertain, and its meaning unclear. This statement is one of those NT passages from which contemporary readers realize that the first Christians lived in a world with radically different presuppositions from their own—some of them so different that they cannot be reconstructed with any confidence. Second, the way in which one interprets the meaning of vv. 19-20 is not particularly crucial for understanding the larger argument of the epistle or even of the chapter. What the epistle here affirms is that the saving act of Christ’s suffering, death, resurrection, and ascension is laid hold of by believers in their baptism. His saving act and their baptism together “bring [the faithful] to God” (3:18). That the nature of 142. See Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 196-97. 143. Michaels, / Peter, 205. 144. This is close to Achtemeier’s proposal, PaulJ. Achtemeier, / Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996) 239. 145. See Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 197. 146. For discussions, see Michaels, / Peter, 196-211; Selwyn, The First Epistle ofPeter, 314-62; Bo Reicke, The Epistles ofJames, Peter, and Jude, AB 37 (New York: Doubleday, 1964) 109-15; Achtemeier, / Peter,

244-46.

293

1 PETER 3:8-22 COMMENTARY is never used. On the contrary it is commonly

William Joseph Dalton, in a thorough and largely persuasive discussion of this passage, has searched other literature roughly contemporaneous with 1 Peter and found evidence that there was considerable speculation about the offspring of the angels discussed in Gen 6:1-4.!4” He judiciously set this passage in the context of the whole epistle:

used for the ascent of Jesus into heaven.”!°$ Selwyn points out that “in the Patristic evidence before A.D. 190... despite the popularity of the doctrine of Christ’s ‘harrowing of hell,’ 1 Pet. iii 18ff. is never quoted as authority for it.”!4 According to Dalton, the purpose of 3:19 is to provide encouragement for the exhortation of 3:14, “Do not fear what they fear, and do not be

The strategy of the letter is not to fire the addressees with new enthusiasm for the conversion of the pagan world, but to enable them to reflect on their Christian calling and the value of suffering for Christ’s sake, so that they can stand firm and faithful despite their experience of alienation. This last point is particularly important for the understanding of 1 Peter 3:19: Christians are not being called on to imitate the example of Christ by going out and heroically proclaming the gospel to the most notorious sinners. On the contrary, the strategy of 1 Peter is the strategy of survival.!48

intimidated.”!°> Encouragement is given in the memory of the risen Christ, who, vindicated by God, ascended to the presence of God. On the

way to God’s throne, he stopped at the prison of the evil spirits of Genesis 6 and there declared his victory over them and over evil. Other “ascension” material in the NT may be pertinent. The hymn in Phil 2:6-11 suggests Christ’s victory over powers “underneath the earth” as well as in heaven. Ephesians 1:20-21 notes that Christ’s ascension places him over all subordinate spirits but with no reference to their location. First Timothy 3:16 includes the distinction between the realms of flesh and spirit, the idea of vindication, and ascension to glory. It may also reflect something of the same thought world as 1 Pet 3:19-21. While I am largely persuaded by Dalton’s

In searching comparative literature for an understanding of who the spirits might be, Dalton focuses especially on the book of Enoch, in which spirits (as usually in the NT) are supernatural spirits and not the souls of dead persons.!4° Furthermore, in / Enoch 10:4-13, the warning for Noah to prepare for the flood is closely connected with the “binding” of the angels in Gen 6:1-4. These angels were blamed for leading people astray in the rebellion that led to the flood.!*° Dalton further thinks that the prison in which the spirits were imprisoned was for the wicked spirits awaiting judgment and that it was probably

extensive argument, other interpreters are more inclined to believe that Christ preached to the souls of those people who were destroyed in

Noah’s flood. Others maintain that the prison of evil spirits was to be found in the underworld and not in the mid-heavens.'*° Given our present state of knowledge, it is hard to see how these issues can be finally resolved. . What is clear is that v. 19 takes its place in

located in the lower heavens, between earth and

the throne of God.'°! While the verb knptcow (kérysso) can refer to preaching the gospel, both in the NT it often has the more general meaning of “proclaiming” or “declaring.” In this context, it refers to a declaration of victory.'°? Dalton also says that when the NT writers refer to Christ’s descent into the realm of the dead, they always explicitly say that Christ went “down”: “The verb Topevopat poreuomai [I go] found in | Pet. 3:19,

153. Ibid., 162. See also Acts 1:10-11. Dalton does not here list any

examples. The verb is also used in 3:22, with clear reference to the ascension. See ibid., 162n. 73. 154. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 340. 155. Dalton, Christ’s Proclamation to the Spirits, 124, 127. 156. For the first argument, see Pheme Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and/ude, Interpretation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox,

1995) 65; L. Goppelt, A Commentary on | Peter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 259, who thinks Christ preached the gospel, not victory, there. On the second argument,

147. W. J. Dalton, Christ’s Proclamation to the Spirits: A Study of I Peter 3:18-4:6, 2nd ed., AnBib 23 (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1989). 148. Ibid., 23. Dalton also argues that vv. 19-21 are a baptismal catechesis inserted within a hymn fragment (3:18-22), but this sourcecritical claim is not crucial to his argment. See ibid., esp. 26. 149. Ibid., 153-54. 150. Ibid., 167-68. These are apparently the same spirits mentioned in 2 Pet 2:4 and Jude 6. 151. Ibid., 159-61. 152. Ibid., 153-59.

see Reicke, The Epistles of James, Peter, and Jude, 109-11, who thinks

the “spirits” may have included the disobedient people of Noah’s time as well as the angels, that the location of their prison may be in the underworld, and that Christ preached the gospel to them in prison, an example to the readers of 1 Peter to be forthright in declaring the gospel to their pagan opponents (109-11). Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 155-57, reads the text much as Dalton does. Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief,

181, acknowledges our distance from this tradition and remains agnostic about its details.

294

1 PETER 3:8-22 COMMENTARY the whole movement of 3:18-22, wherein Christ’s

appeals (or makes a pledge) to God may be simply a rhetorical play on the ways water is used (see Eph 5:26). It may, however, as Dalton suggests, represent a contrast between baptism and circumcision, which removes the unseemly foreskin from the body without working the salvation that is available in baptism. The clearest analogy would be Col 2:11-12: “In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh in the circumcision of Christ; when you were buried with him in baptism you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead” (NRSV, using the marginal reading for v. 11). Here the “putting off” of baptism is implicitly contrasted with the “putting off” of the circumcision that is made “with hands,” the physical removal of the forseskin.!°° Dalton also points out that the syntax of this verse implies a strong contrast between what baptism is and what it is not. Were the reference to washing, the epistle would more likely read “Not only through the removal of dirt from the body, but also as a appeal.”!°° Further clarity about the meaning of this passage depends in part on how far one would think either the author or the recipients of this letter would be sensitive to distinctions between circumcision and baptism. Even harder than understanding the first part of this contrast is understanding the second part. The NRSV understands baptism here as “an appeal to God for a good conscience,” or as in the marginal note, “a pledge to God from a good conscience.” The NIV translates the phrase “the pledge of a good conscience toward God.” The NIV study Bible interprets the translation as: “The act of baptism is a commitment on the part of the believer in all good conscience to make sure that what baptism symbolizes becomes a reality in his life.” The word variously translated as “appeal” or “pledge” is €tepuitnya (eperotema). Dalton

suffering, death, resurrection, and ascension comprise the normative narrative that gives courage and significance to the suffering Christians of Asia Minor. Christ’s suffering gives meaning to their suffering, and his victory provides them the promise of eschatological victory as well. (The passage also recapitulates and expands on the description of the work God does in Christ, which consists of Christ’s suffering and subsequent glory, 1:11-

£2:) Just as the reference to Christ’s resurrection “in the Spirit” led directly into the reminder of his proclamation to the spirits (v. 19), so also the reference to the disobedient spirits of Noah’s time leads into the description of Noah as prefiguring Christian baptism (vv. 20-21). Using the flood as a type for Christian baptism requires some metaphorical athleticism, since Noah’s family was saved from the water and Christians are saved through the water—though one can say that the water that destroyed the disobedient provided safety for the obedient (avtitutos antitypos; cf. Heb 9:24; for tUttos [typos], see Rom 5:14; Heb 8:5). The few who are saved are Noah and his family. There is certainly the implication that the Christians of Asia Minor, though few in number, are saved, while the far more numerous host of the disobedient are destined for destruction—unless, of course, they are shamed into repentance. In this regard the reference to God’s patience also has typological force.'°’ The God who was patient in the time of Noah is also patient now in the time of 1 Peter. The end is coming, but has not yet come. There is still hope that the disobedient “Gentiles” may be shamed into believing (as in 3:16).'°° Verses 21-22 comprise the one passage in 1 Peter in which baptism is mentioned explicitly, though, as noted above, remembrance of baptism provides an implicit background for many of the

letter’s themes. The contrast between the washing that removes dirt from the body and the baptism that

159. The term for “putting off” is different in Colossians (améK6vols apekdysis) from that in 1 Peter (ad8¢01s apothesis). Dalton, who makes the argument for a reference to circumcision, shows other places in the NT where “putting off” refers to those practices that the (newly baptized) Christian leaves behind. See ibid., 200-202. 160. Ibid., 203. The discussion of the foreskin as “filth” in Jewish and

157. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 158, sees the reference to

God’s patience as a reading of Gen 6:3. 158. Dalton agrees with the typological and eschatological force of the reference but doubts that it has much to do with hope for the pagans. This is in keeping with his insistence that Christ’s preaching to the spirits did not include any hope of their repentance: See Dalton, Christ’s Proclama-

early Christian writing is less persuasive, as is the comparison with Jas 1:21. One needs to be persuaded of the reference in the James passage to make it work in 1 Peter. See ibid., 203-6.

tion to the Spirits, 191.

295

1 PETER 3:8-22 COMMENTARY approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering” (NRSV).!°! The key question is what interpretation makes most sense in the light of the larger movement of 1 Peter’s discussion of Christ’s passion and victory and of the believers’ baptism and faith. In this context it seems most likely that the “conscience” to which the letter refers is that assurance by which believers lay hold in baptism of the victory Christ has attained on their behalf. 3:22. This verse is very close to 1 Tim 3:16 in its affirmation.'® It brings the passage on baptism full circle to a reminder that the shape and significance of the Christian life are grounded in the story of Jesus’ suffering and victory. It is not, finally, baptism that saves, but the resurrection of the Christ into whom the faithful are baptized. In baptism, Christians with good conscience and full assurance lay hold of that victory that Christ achieved over his sufferings and that he promises over their sufferings as well.

shows how seldom the term is used to mean “request” or “appeal” in other Greek literature, though his own preference for “pledge” relies largely on literature considerably later than 1 Peter. The writer of 1 Peter uses the word “conscience” (ouvetdnots syneidesis) also in 2:19 and 3:16. In each case the term seems to refer not so much to a subjective attitude as to an orientation of the person toward God. In 2:19 it is the conscientious relationship toward God that makes suffering endurable and worthy. In 3:16 it is conscientious confession that will help shame the Opponents before the judgment of God. Suffering and confession grounded confidently in God show forth “good conscience” and bear the fruits of faithfulness. Just as faithful suffering and faithful confession are grounded in God and directed toward God, so also conscientious baptism puts off what is fleshly and cleaves wholeheartedly to God, who is Spirit. It is that wholehearted binding to God that is either pledged or (less likely) besought in whatever words the baptized person professes. The power of God as Spirit, the power that saves the baptized, is manifested in Christ’s resurrection, which is the Spirit’s work or occurs within the sphere of the Spirit’s power (see 3:18). Perhaps the best parallel is Heb 10:22-23: “Let us

161. See Ibid., 211. Much of Dalton’s discussion of the “pledge” involved in baptism refers to uses of €mepuitnua (eperotema) and to baptismal practices from the late second century and later.

162. This again lends some credence to Dalton’s reconstruction of the basic shape of this passage and its affirmation of Christ’s subordination of the spirits by his resurrection and ascension.

REFLECTIONS 1. This section of 1 Peter raises an issue for contemporary Christians that is central to much early Christian literature: the issue of non-retaliation in the face of evil. The call to endure suffering rather than to return it in kind is set here as elsewhere in the context of the eschatological promise: The one who blesses now, and perhaps especially the one who blesses the enemy, will “inherit a blessing” when the full inheritance promised in Christ comes to fruition at the last days. Among Christians who are or have been the victims of abuse and oppression, the call to non-retaliation has of late had a bad reputation. Cannot this represent the means by which oppressors play on the piety of the oppressed simply to prolong evildoing? As usual it is easy for those of us who are relatively powerful in our society to urge non-retaliation on those who are relatively powerless. Nonetheless the larger context nuances the claim that Christians are to suffer for doing right rather than to return evil for evil. Within the context of 1 Peter, Christians are to suffer if need be, but not to suffer silently. They join the struggle against oppression by speaking honestly and powerfully of what they hold dear, making their defense unapologetically. Christ himself becomes an example of this activity, of course, and when we read the Gospel accounts of his passion we note that he was by no means altogether passive. His silence and his speeches manifest power in weakness, and that power is as clear as the

296

1 PETER 3:8-22 REFLECTIONS weakness. Thus for Christians the unwillingness to abuse and to slander does not mean the Willingness to take abuse and slander without speaking the word that might convict or even convince those who do the abusing and slandering. In twentieth-century America, the great example of non-retaliation is Martin Luther King, Jr. But his nonviolence was not non-resistance. On the contrary, the courage he and his followers showed was the courage of active, and risky, faith. Further, the claim that those who suffer unjustly will inherit a blessing is not simply a promise of pie in the sky. It sets the hope that informs the whole context of 1 Peter—that Christ’s resurrection and ascensidn are the guarantee of the victory of his cause over the forces of evil. Christians can refuse to do violence to those who oppress them because Christians are biding their time, or biding God’s time, until the (near) moment when they will be vindicated and their oppressors shamed. 2. It is, perhaps, in this context that we can make the best sense of the passage about Jesus’ declaring or preaching to the “spirits in prison.” That the evil spirits who led people astray in Noah’s time are in prison is itself a sign of hope. That Christ preached victory over them (as Dalton interprets this event) makes clear that the fulfillment of that hope is accomplished in Jesus Christ. The christological image of Christ as victor lies just beneath the surface here. To be sure, Christ suffered as Christians suffer, but in his resurrection he not only overcame suffering but he also raised his flag of victory over the evil forces that bring suffering on the just and the faithful. The recounting of this proclamation is itself a way of grounding hope; so contemporary Christians, too, need to live with the promise that the apparent victories of this world are not the final victories—that the final victory is in God’s hand and is foreshadowed by Christ’s resurrection. It is this theme of Christ’s victory over suffering and evil that makes 1 Pet 3:13-22 an especially appropriate passage for Easter (Cycle A, Easter 6 in the Revised Common Lectionary). Any occasional annoyance at the tendency of the lectionary to avoid tough verses fades before the assignment of this text on preaching to the spirits. Surely the lectionary rightly sees this as a passage grounded in the triumph of Easter, in many ways similar to the great hymn in Phil 2:6-11. As with Philippians, the christological affirmation has ethical implications. Here, in the light of Christ’s triumph, Christians can stand fast in the face of opposition. So, too, the text fits well with the assigned text of Paul’s speech at the Areopagus (Acts 17:22-31). Paul begins his sermon with an appeal to the common religious experience of his audience but ends with the shocking and difficult claim that the God in whom we live and move and have our being is also—and above all—the God who has raised Jesus Christ from the dead. This is the promise Dionysius the Areopagite and the woman named Damaris heard and believed, as have all the believers to whom 1 Peter was written, all of whom turned from the worship of many idols to serve the true God, who has made “angels, authorities and powers” subject to the risen Lord.

3. First Peter 3:18-22 is again assigned as the epistle reading for the first Sunday in Lent in Cycle B. By beginning with v. 18, the reading moves away from the stress on Christian courage in the face of opposition to the appropriate Lenten stress on Christ’s passion for the sake of sinners. The Old Testament reading, Gen 9:18-19, provides the data for 1 Peter’s claim that eight persons were on Noah’s ark. The Gospel lesson, Mark 1:9-15, provides an example of proclamation from Jesus’ ministry, perhaps to balance the proclamation to the spirits after his death and resurrection—though if this interpretation is right the content and purpose of proclamation in the two instances were strikingly different.

4. The injunction to “not fear what they fear” (3:14 NRSV) represents an insightful reading of the nature of idolatry. Idolatry is not only worship of the wrong god, but also it is fear of the wrong power. It is to give the non-gods the power that should belong only to God—to

297

1 PETER 3:8-22 REFLECTIONS frighten us, to make us awe-struck. The antidote to false fear is right worship: “But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord.” Paul reminds us that “whatever does not proceed from faith is sin” (Rom 14:23 NRSV). In the context of 1 Peter, all action that is based on fear of powers less than God is also sin. Excessive nationalism may be the other face of excessive fear of others. Egotism is the game we play to fend off the fear of our own insignificance. The need constantly to assert the superiority of our race or our faith or our way of living poorly masquerades our fear of others—that they may take away what we hold most dear, that what they hold most dear is better than what we have. For the people to whom Isaiah spoke in the passage quoted in 1 Peter, what they feared was Assyria and its power. All of us have constructed Assyrias in our imaginations, dreaded forces so threatening that we cower in fear. Isaiah’s strong word is still a word for us: For the LorD spoke thus to me...and warned me not to walk in the way of this people saying: Do not call conspiracy all that this people calls conspiracy, and do not fear what it fears, or be in dread. But the Lorp of hosts, him you shall regard as holy. (Isa 8:11-13 NRSV)

First Peter simply underlines and elaborates that claim by reminding us that the one we hallow in our hearts is the Lord Christ, who alone brings us to the holy God. 5. There is a rich understanding of the meaning of baptism in this passage. According to 1 Peter, the waters of baptism have symbolic or sacramental power. But that power is confirmed through the conscience or intention of the believer; and yet the believers can only lay hold of the victory God has already won in Jesus Christ. The waters are prefigured by the waters of the flood, and just as those waters had tremendous power to destroy the sinful (and to save the righteous), so also baptism has tremendous power. It does not work superficially, like washing your hands—or on another reading, like circumcision—but it works to bring the whole person into a lasting relationship with God. Baptism also requires the “conscience” or “intention” or “pledge” of the person being baptized. There is no sense here that baptism operates outside of the determination of the person being baptized. Precisely what the difficult phrase in 3:210 means is very hard to determine, but we can be quite sure that baptism involves the volition of the one who chooses to lay hold of God in Christ. (Of course, we have seen from the beginning of this epistle that the antecedent act is always God’s call and election of the faithful.) But, above all, baptism enacts the power of Jesus Christ, who, in his resurrection, ascension, and power over all the lesser authorities, also has the power that baptism requires; he has the ability to bring us to God. (Note that the stress here, unlike in Romans 6, is on Christ’s resurrection and victory, not on his dying and rising.) This passage says nothing explicit about the means of baptism or the required age of the person being baptized. It does point to a theology of baptism in which the sacrament, the intention, and the work of God in Christ are conjoined. In our time, when baptism has too often become the ecclesiastical equivalent of the baby shower (for infant baptism) or of getting a driver’s license (for adolescent “believers’” baptism), 1 Peter calls us again to the utter seriousness of the sacrament—the mystery of faith conjoined with the mystery of Christ, gifts that lie too deep for words.

298

1 PETER 4:1-11

1 PETER 4:1-11, LIVING OUT SALVATION NIV

NRSV

A

A

Therefore, since Christ suffered in his body, arm yourselves also with the same attitude, because he who has suffered in his body is done with sin. 2As a result, he does not live the rest of his earthly life for evif human desires, but rather for the will of God. For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—tiving in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry. “They think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation, and they heap abuse on you. *But they will have to give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. °For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live os to God in regard to the spirit. ’The end of all things is near. Fherelore be Clear minded and self-controlled so that you can pray. ®Above all, love each other deeply, because

Since therefore Christ suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same intention (for whoever has suffered in the flesh has finished with sin), 2so as to live for the rest of your earthly life? no longer by human desires but by the will of God. *You have already spent enough time in doing what the Gentiles like to do, living in licentiousness, passions, drunkenness, revels, carousing, and lawless idolatry. They are surprised that you no longer join them in the same excesses of dissipation, and so they blaspheme.¢ But they will have to give an accounting to him who stands ready to judge the living and the dead. °For this is the reason the gospel was proclaimed even to the dead, so that, though they had been judged in the flesh as everyone is judged, they

might live in the spirit as God does.

7The end of all things is near;? therefore be

love covers over a multitude of sins. °Offer hospitality to one another without grumbling. !°Each one should use whatever gift he has received to serve others, faithfully administering God’s grace in its various forms. !'If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God. If anyone serves, he should do it with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ. To him be the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen.

serious and discipline yourselves for the sake of your prayers. ®Above all, maintain constant love for one another, for love covers a multitude of

sins. °Be hospitable to one another without complaining. !°Like good stewards of the manifold grace of God, serve one another with whatever gift each of you has received. ''Whoever speaks must do so as one speaking the very words of God; whoever serves must do so with the strength that God supplies, so that God may be glorified in all things through Jesus Christ. To him belong the glory and the power forever and ever. Amen. aOther ancient authorities add for us; others, for you © Gk rest of the time in the flesh ¢ Or they malign you a Or is at hand

(COMMENTARY There is an almost circular movement from 1 Pet 3:8 to 1 Pet 4:11. In 3:8-17, the Christians of Asia Minor are encouraged to live lives that are faithful and mutually upbuilding. In 3:18-22, this behavior is grounded in the suffering, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ. In 4:1-11, the christological claims of the epistle again become the grounds for moral exhortation—for directions for the faithful life. 4:1-6. 4:1-2. The epistle makes clear that it is the story of Christ’s suffering, death, restrrec-

tion, and ascension that provides motive and measure for the life of faithful Christians, “since, therefore Christ suffered... arm yourselves.” The difficult part of the first verse of this chapter is the reference to life in the flesh and the relationship of that description to the larger claim that those who suffer in the flesh have somehow “finished with sin.” We have already seen the clue to the claim that Christ suffered in the flesh in the discussion of 3:18. The claim that Christ died in the flesh or suffered in the flesh is

299

:

1 PETER 4:1-11 COMMENTARY the realm of the flesh, one has already enlisted on the other side: the side of righteousness against sin; the side of the Spirit against the flesh. Choosing life rather than death, the faithful Christian has “ceased from sin,” moved from the realm of the old into the new. This contrast will continue to control this section through its conclusion in v. 6. We can schematize the contrasts of these two verses. To the world against which Christians do battle belong the “flesh” and “sin” (v. 1) and “human desires” (v. 2). To the realm in which faithful Christians live belong “the same intention” as Christ’s and “the will of God.” The contrast recalls Jesus’ words to Peter in Mark 8:33: “You are setting your mind not on the things of God but on the things of humankind” (author’s trans.). Christians in both texts are seen as living in a battle between two realms. Of-course, until Christ returns the realm in which we live (as in v. 20) is “the realm of the flesh,” so that even though Christians have suffered in the fleshly realm and put sin to rout, it is still within the realm of the flesh that they are bound to live. The NRSV marginal note, therefore, is much more helpful than the translation “earthly life.” The realm of the flesh is under sentence and will be undone, but as yet it provides the sphere for Christian living. 4:3-4. These verses characterize the nature of the realm of the flesh and the shape of its opposition to the faithful. What is particularly striking is that the realm of the flesh is also the realm of the Gentiles. All the more obvious, therefore, is the reason why the realm of the flesh is both the realm the faithful have left behind and the realm in which they have to live out the rest of their earthly days. They are in the world, but not of it; among the Gentiles, but not of their number. (One needs to remember that “Gentiles” are “non-Christians,” and not “non-Jews” in 1 Peter.) Kelly is certainly right in seeing rhetorical sarcasm in v. 3. “You have already spent time enough” means that you have already spent more than enough time.'°” The phrase the NRSV translates as “what the Gentiles like to do” represents the Greek term BovAnwa (boulema). Boulema means “the intention” or “the will” or “the disposition” of the Gentiles, so that the will of the Gentiles is

not simply the claim that his body suffered and died. In this verse even more than in 3:18 it seems clear that (as is often the case for Paul) the flesh is not only the realm of mortality but also the realm of selfish desire that stands in opposition to the will of God. The term “flesh” here is closely parallel to the words of v. 2: “human desires.” In the realm of human desires, Christ suffered and died in order to triumph over those human desires in the power of the Spirit.!° When the readers of the epistle are told to “arm” themselves, it is presumably to do battle against those same fleshly powers that provided the context for Christ’s suffering. The metaphor is military and looks ahead to the battle against Satan, the roaring lion of 5:8.' Tt seems plausible to suggest that the realm of the flesh is the realm where Satan can tempt and hurt the faithful, though it is not necessarily the realm under his control. The “same” understanding presumably means the “same” understanding that Christ had and corresponds to the intention or understanding of v. 2, “the will of God.” (Cf. Phil 2:2 where the Philippians are told to have “the same love.” Does that mean mutual love, or does it mean love like the love that is “in Christ” in 2:1?) In this context, the claim that “whoever suffers in the flesh has ceased from sin” makes rather more sense. This must be a parenthetical application of the story of Jesus to that of believers. It is not a further explication of the meaning of Christ’s death, since he did not have to “cease

from sin.”!° Suffering in the flesh does not mean having bodily pain; it means doing fierce battle against the forces of human desire—the realm of the flesh—and bearing the suffering that comes with that battle.!°° When one does battle against 163. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 276-77, correctly points out that the christological formula “flesh/spirit” is here applied anthropologically. Perhaps more accurately, the anthropological implications of the christology are spelled out. 164. Goppelt lists a number of uses of the military image for faithful Christian life. See ibid., 179n. 13. 165. For a Pauline reading in which Christ has taken on sin, though without being sinful, see Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 166. 166. This is somewhat different from Goppelt’s reading that the suffering unto death of Christian people is a necessary part of the conquest of sin (Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 281-82), and from Perkins’s more direct tie to baptismal language about dying and living again in Christ (Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, 68). Kelly presents both a christological (Christ brought sin to a halt) and a baptismal (Christians have died to sin) interpretation as possibilities (Kelly, The Epistles ofPeter and Jude, 167-68). First Peter 2:24 lends some weight to the christological proposal. Davids examines several proposals, none of them precisely like the one suggested here. See Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 148-50.

167. J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, Black’s New Testament Commentaries (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1969) 179.

300

1 PETER 4:1-11 COMMENTARY contrasted with the will of God (using another Greek term, 6€Anya [thelema]) in v. 26 (in Rom 9:19, boulema is used for the will or intention of God). The phrase “will of the Gentiles,” therefore, is directly parallel to “passions of humans” in v. 2a; the term for “passions” (€mL6vptar epithymiai) recurs in the catalogues of vices in v. 3. These Christians had formerly lived according to human passions and Gentile intentions; now they will live according to the will of God. (The whole “then” but “now” pattern was anticipated in 1:14-15.) The catalogues of vices here recall other NT lists and, therefore, may be seen as fairly standard rather than as representing some particular insight into the unique vices of the pagans of Asia Minor. See Rom 13:13-14 and Gal 5:19-21, cited by Kelly,'® but also 1 Cor 6:9-11, which shows the same temporal distinctions between what these Gentile Christians used to be and what they are now. The old ways are the “futile ways inherited from your ancestors” (1:18 NRSV). Selwyn gives the most thorough discussion of each of the offenses listed, along with appropriate parallels from non-Christian literature.!°° The fact that the list climaxes and concludes with the reference to lawless idolatry recalls Rom 1:18-27. In 1 Peter, as in Romans, idolatry is the fundamental mistake of the pagan, and the other vices are manifestations of that profoundly erroneous orientation. The epistle now returns to a familiar theme, the way in which pagans slander the Christians. Now this description is given a particular motivation and a theologically loaded description. The motivation for the “Gentiles” to slander the Christians is that the believers had formerly joined in the dissipation the pagans still enjoy. The pagans are astonished that their former partners in dissolution now stand aside, and—jealous or angry or appalled—the pagans speak evil against them. The description of this slander is not only that it is untrue and vicious but also that it is blasphemous (for earlier descriptions of the pagans’ slandering of Christians, see 2:12; 3:9, 16; for Christ as an example of one suffering such slander, see 2:22-23). The most obvious and probably the most persuasive explanation for this slander against Christians is that for pagans to speak against those

who are faithful is to speak against the one in whom they have faith—and that is blasphemy.'”° Certainly in Mark 3:28-30, the false accusation against Jesus— that he acts under the authority of Satan—is blasphemy, because it slanders the Spirit of God, which empowers and validates his ministry. We have already seen here that the suffering of Christians replicates the suffering work of Jesus, and that slander against Christians recalls slander against Christ. So perhaps it is not inappropriate to say that when the faithful are maligned, the God they worship is maligned—and that is blasphemy. 4:5-6. These verses place the distinction between then and now and between Gentiles and believers into the even larger eschatological framework, in the perspective that informs the wiholesepistie_(see [55,75 13; 4:13,.17% 5:4). Then (formerly) those who are now Christian joined the pagans in their dissipation. Now the pagans judge and misjudge the Christians for their faithfulness. Then (finally) the pagans will themselves be judged by the One who judges the living and the dead. There is a nice verbal echo in this passage. In 3:15, Christians are always to be ready to “make a defense” or to “give an account” to those pagans who demand it of them. In 4:5, it is the pagans who will need to give an account to the God who even now “stands ready” to judge them. One may recall that this final judgment may not lead only to condemnation, but instead, for some at least, to shame and perhaps—by implication—to repentance (see 3:16). The reminder that God is judge of both the living and the dead leads to the much interpreted and much disputed claim of v. 6. Before attempting a provisional solution to its problems, we note two things. First, it is the claim of v. 5 that is central to the argument in this portion of 1 Peter; v. 6 is an expansion and elaboration on that verse, and one need not be clear about the meaning of the elaboration in order to understand the fundamental claim that God is judge of all. In other words, the amount of exegetical ink used on this passage is not proportional to its centrality to the 170. See L. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 287, for a similar reading. Selwyn points out that BAaodnew (blasphemeo ) can also be used of slandering other people without the theological overtones, but reading Matt 12:31-36 (some of it par. Mark 3), he comes to a suggestion much like that in this study.

168. Ibid., 170. 169. E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter (London: Macmillan, 1958) 211-12.

301

1 PETER 4:1-11 COMMENTARY they think about these dead persons, hope that they, too, may be heirs of life through the Spirit. Notice, too, that the contrast between flesh and spirit, which has permeated vv. 1-6, plays a crucial role in this climactic verse as well. Like the living, the dead have been judged in the realm of the flesh, but as with the living there is hope that they may live in the Spirit. Many interpreters think that the function of this passage is to declare that judgment and salvation extend to those who lived before Christ’s coming, to whom he declared the gospel after his crucifixion and resurrection. Goppelt thinks the affirmation is an expansion of the claims of 3:1819 and a kind of affirmation of what Paul wrote in Rom 14:9: “For to this end Christ died and lived again, so that he might be Lord both of the dead and the living” (NRSV). Just as after his resurrection Christ preached to the rebellious spirits, so also he declared good news to those who had already suffered death as a consequence of their sins in the flesh. Perhaps he declared good news only to those whose behavior had already marked them as righteous. Perhaps he preached good news to all, so that the possibility of repentance and new life extended to all who had died before Christ’s coming.'”? An alternative explanation for this verse is provided by Dalton. He also finds a Pauline parallel, not in Romans but in 1 Thess 4:13-17:

purposes of the letter. The issues are fascinating as we try to reconstruct the thought world of some early Christians, but it is not central to either the kerygmatic or the paraenetic strategies of 1 Peter. Second, 4:6 has often been combined with 3:19 as if these were clearly descriptions of one event. However, the language and function of the two passages are rather different, and v. 6 needs to be interpreted on its own terms. There are two possible interpretations of the claim that the gospel was proclaimed to the dead. The first is that the gospel was proclaimed to those who had died prior to Christ’s coming—either in Hades or wherever was understood to be the abode of the dead. The second is that the gospel was proclaimed to those Christian believers who had died after Christ’s coming but before the writing of 1 Peter and, therefore, before the final judgment. Though they are not now alive, their previous sins (in the flesh) have been judged, and they will—with the Christians of 1 Peter’s time— live forever with God in spirit. There are persuasive arguments to be made for each of these claims, and the evidence for each claim consists in large measure in evidence against the other. Thus the discussion of the meaning of the passage can begin by noting that the “event” of 1 Pet 4:6 needs to be distinguished from the

“event” of 1 Pet 3:19-20. It was suggested in the commentary on chap. 3 that the “spirits” to whom Christ preached were not the spirits of the departed dead, not even the spirits of those people who had disobeyed in the time of Moses. They were, rather, spiritual beings, either the angels of Gen 6:1-4 or their offspring, who dwelt in some abode below the heavenly home of God, and to them Christ declared victory as he ascended to heaven.!7! In v. 6 the reference is clearly to the proclamation to “dead” human beings, and what is proclaimed is not victory; it is explicitly the gospel. The point of the verse is twofold: First, it emphasizes the universality of judgment—God judges both the living and the dead. Second, it provides hope for the Christians of Asia Minor as

But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about those who have died, so that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.... For the Lord himself, with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call and with the sound of God’s trumpet, will descend from heaven, and the dead in Christ will tise first. Then we who are alive, who are left. (NRSV)

The context of 1 Peter 4 is the eschatological judgment, when the dead will rise and the living and the dead will be judged. There is no reason given in this passage to think that it was Christ who proclaimed the gospel to the “dead.” Rather, he was the subject of the gospel that was preached while they were still living. Dalton suggests that this also makes the best sense of the conclusion of the verse, which he

171. Perkins thinks that the two passages refer to the same event, in both cases to preaching to the spirits of departed persons. See Pheme Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, Interpretation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1995) 68-69.

172. See Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 288-91. His reading depends in part on a somewhat different interpretation of 1 Pet 4:1 than given here, Death in the flesh is the necessary precondition for salvation (ibid., 290).

302

1 PETER 4:1-11 COMMENTARY translates, “In order that, though judged in the flesh in the eyes of people, they might live in the

the sphere of the flesh, where Christians suffer and are slandered, and the sphere of the spirit, in which they will be vindicated and will have life. 4:7-11. 4:7. The eschatological basis for this epistle’s hortatory emphasis comes to the foreground again. Christians need to live in the sphere of God, into which they have entered through baptism, because the judgment of God is not some distant possibility. It is at hand, at the door, drawing near. The two imperatives become another way of summing up what the epistle has said about standing fast in the midst of the Gentile world. “Think wisely” (owbpovéw sophroneo ) as opposed to the foolishness of your former life. “Be sober” (vjhdw nepho) as opposed to the various forms of excess in which your neighbors revel. The call to sobriety reminds the readers of 1:13, where the author also uses the term nepho (“be sober”) as an exhortation in the light of Christ’s impending final revelation, and it points ahead to 5:8, where sobriety arms the believer against the weapons of the devil. It also contrasts with the third verse of this chapter, the reminder that the Gentiles prefer drunkenness to sobriety, and the implicit reminder that not so long ago, so did the hearers of this letter.!” The writer provides the two exhortations to “think wisely” and to “be sober” and then closes the verse with a bare prepositional phrase, “for prayers.” Does this mean that wisdom and sobriety are the preconditions for right prayer, as both the NRSV and the NIV translations seem to assume? (A possible parallel would be the exhortation to husbands about proper living in 3:7; see 3:12.)!”? Or does it mean that thinking wisely and keeping sober prepare the Christian for prayer?!®° Or is prayer itself the primary means of thinking rightly and staying sober? 4:8. “Above all” echoes directly the “end of all” of v. 7. As all things come to an end, above all things hold fast to love. Love here is love for the other members of the community and brings

spirit in the eyes of God.”'”> The verse has a double contrast again: on the one side, judgment in the realm of the flesh, according to human standards; on the other side, vindication in the spirit according to God’s standards (see Commentary on 4:2-3). That is, although the pagan slanderers might think the death of Christian believers is proof that their claims about God’s vindication are false, in fact God will vindicate believers by bringing them at last to salvation.'7* How can we decide between these options? Certainly Dalton is right to see a parallel (an inclusio) between 3:18 and 4:6: “He was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit” // “they have been judged in the flesh... (but will) live in the spirit.”'”° The overall claim again is the correspondence between Christ’s suffering, death, and consequent victory and the suffering, death, and consequent victory of believers. In this context, 1 Peter is read most consistently if the issue in 4:6 is the fate of believers who (like Christ) have suffered unto death and who, like him, will be vindicated in the spirit.'7° Nonetheless, whichever way one interprets this verse the overall claim of this section of the epistle is that God is the righteous judge of all and that, therefore, Christians are to stand firm in their resistance to their old idolatry—despite the slander of their former fellow carousers—trusting to God, who will judge them justly and give them life in the Spirit. The phrase kata 8eov (kata theon) might mean that Christians are to live in the Spirit “as God does” (NRSV), that they will live “by God’s standard,” or that their life is “in God’s sphere” as opposed to the human sphere.!”” The whole claim is set in the contrast between 173. W.J. Dalton, Christ’s Proclamation to the Spirits: A Study of 1 Peter 3:18-4:6, 2nd ed. (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1989). 174. Dalton finds a close parallel here in Wis 3:4. See ibid., 238; the whole argument is found on 230-41. 175. Ibid., 240-41. 176. The NIV translation basically reads the text Dalton’s way by inserting “now” before “dead.” Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 273-76, also reads the text largely as Dalton does. See also Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 153-55; and PaulJ. Achtemeier, / Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996) 291. Brox remains agnostic about whether the dead hear the gospel when they are dead or heard it during their lives; the overall point of God’s vindication

178. For other uses of the first verb see Rom 12:3 in the eschatological context of the Christian transformation, and Mark 5:15, where the man who has been driven by demons when released by Christ is in his “right mind.” For the second see in addition to 1 Pet 1:13 and 5:8, 1 Thess 5:6, 8, where the term is used in a very similar eschatological setting, and 2 Tim 4:1, where Timothy is urged to be sober “in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and coming” (NRSV). 179. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 216, makes this connection. 180. So Davids, The First Epistle of Peter, 156-57.

of those who are faithful remains. See Norbert Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief,

Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentary zum Neuen Testament (Zurich: Benziger Verlag and Neukirchener Verlag, 1979) 195-201. 177. For the second alternative, see Davids, The First Epistle of Peter,

147.

303

1 PETER 4:1-11 COMMENTARY us back to the strong stress on upbuilding community life we have already seen in 3:8. The difficult part of the verse is the second half: “Love covers [over] a multitude of sins.” What can this mean? The phrase may already have been almost proverbial for early Christians. It occurs in Jas 5:20, where the particular manifestation of love—bringing back a straying Christian—covers a multitude of sins. Behind it lies Prov 10:12, and in various forms it is found in a number of early Christian sources.!®! Selwyn cites those who interpret this declaration as meaning that love covers over the sins of unbelievers and opponents.!®? In the context of this epistle, however, the concern about covering sins seems to be a concern about the life of believers, not of those who are hostile to them. The statement cannot mean that sins are excused by love, since the sphere of sin is the sphere that is judged by God and left behind by believers (4:2-4). It cannot mean that love hides the multitude of sins, since the all-judging God sees with eyes that miss nothing (4:5-6).!88 Rather, the point seems to be that as suffering Causes sin to pause by moving the faithful Christian out of the realm of sin, love (which is the manifestation of faith) is a sign and fruit of the move from the old sphere, where sin had power, to the new sphere, marked by sobriety, faith, and love. It is a sign not of the flesh but of the spirit and, therefore, of life according to God’s purposes (4:6).'*4 Just as faithful suffering in the flesh brings sin to a halt (4:10), so also faithful loving covers sin over, puts it finally in the past. 4:9-11. These verses show what this love looks like in the community of faith. Hospitality was an important Christian virtue. Hospitality included both the willingness to serve as host for one’s fellow Christians in worship and fellowship and the willingness of the local community to serve as host for itinerant prophets and preach181. Fora list see Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 178. 182. See Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 217. 183. Though this seems to be the meaning Selwyn finds most likely. See ibid., 217. 184. Kelly’s interpretation is rather close to this. See Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 178. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter, 157-58, notes that in Proverbs the phrase refers to “covering over” another’s sins without exacerbating a bad situation, though he acknowledges that may not be the meaning here. J. Ramsey Michaels, / Peter, WBC (Waco, Tex: Word, 1988) 247, argues that “sin” is primarily a social phenomenon and that the love of the community can virtually blot it out.

ers.'8° In 1 Peter, the context seems to be especially hospitality within the community of one’s fellow Christians. But what does it mean to be in community according to the love that covers sins? The reminder that Christians are to be hospitable without complaining is a word pertinent enough in every generation that it needs no further comment. Verses 10-11@ are similar to the discussions of spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians and in Ephesians 4. The three key words of v. 10 in remarkably short compass show forth the epistle’s understanding of charisms and responsibilities in the church. Christians are “gifted”; Christians are “stewards”; Christians “serve.” Christians are gifted; their roles in the church are not their own accomplishments but are entirely from God. Christians are stewards; they are responsible for the faithful use of those gifts.!°° Christians serve; the right use of the gifts God has given is for mutual upbuilding, for the sake of other Christians. The gifts God has given are also “manifold,” so the examples in v. 11 must stand for a larger list of ministries. The two examples given, however, are exemplary as well as illustrative. God gifts Christians to speak, and God gifts Christians to act on behalf of one another. In a brief phrase, 1 Peter provides a very high doctrine of proclamation, though of course there is no indication that preachers are a particular subgroup of Christians. One suspects the model is more like 1 Corinthians 14, with various Christians speaking in worship. Of course, this is both a promise and a warning. When one speaks, the promise is that the words may be God’s own words to the people. Therefore, Christians should pay heed to what they say; they should live up to the high calling of faithful speaking. The exhortation recalls the strong view of proclamation in 1:12, that through the Holy Spirit, Christian preachers have brought to their congregations mysteries so mighty that angels fear to look upon them. Serving, which is a gift in the first place, is not possible through the strength of the server, but 185. For examples of other pertinent texts, see Michaels, 7 Peter,

247-48. 186. Kelly points out that the word “steward” (oi KovoLos oikonomos) is usually a technical word for the slave entrusted with management of the master’s property. See Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 180. The NRSV makes it sound more like a simile than a job description: “like stewards” rather than “as stewards.”

304

1 PETER 4:1-11 COMMENTARY only through the strength that God provides. So, then, God gives gifts; God gives words; God gives strength. Verse 11 moves toward doxology. Since it is God who gives the gifts, gives the words, and gives the strength, then in all these things—in all things indeed—it is God who is to be glorified. That glorification is through Jesus Christ, whom the whole epistle has shown to be the One who brings Christians to God (3:18). One niay notice in these few verses the repetition of forms of the noun “all things” (tds pas). The end of “all things” is near. Above “all things” have profound love for one another. In “all things” let God be glorified. This is not conversa-

tion about middling matters or modest steps. This

is the one God claiming the glory due to God through Jesus Christ. Soon that glory will be made manifest as all things come to an end. Now above all things (all those things that are passing away) that glory is served through the love that Christians show to one another. Because God is both the source and the end of all things, giver of gifts and words and strength through Jesus Christ, therefore the exhortation is bound to end in praise.!%” 187. The doxological delight that God has glory forever becomes again a comfort to Christians who now live “in the spirit as God does” (4:6). Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 220, has a thorough discussion of doxologies in the NT.

REFLECTIONS 1. E. G. Selwyn (whose book of grammatical notes contains a hidden wealth of homiletical hints) quotes Lancelot Andrewes, who reads | Pet 4:1 along with Romans 6: To cease from sin, | say, understanding by sin, not from sin altogether—that is a higher perfection than this life will bear but as the Apostle expoundeth in the very next words (Romans 6:13)... from the dominion of sin to cease. For till we be free from death itself, which in this life we are not, we shall not be free from sin altogether; only we may come thus far .. . that sign “reign not,” Wear not a crown, sit not in a throne, hold no parliament within us, give us no laws; in a word... that we serve it not.”!%

2. The NIV translation of 4:4 (“they think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation”) probably rests on a text from Strago cited by Selwyn and referring to rock pools filled to overflowing at high tide. This may be something of an etymological stretch as a translation, but it has the homiletical payoff of finding in the situation of the first-century pagans a striking analogy to the situation of Noah’s contemporaries, who drowned in their own flood.” 3. This section of the letter draws heavily on a polarity or dialectic that can be characterized as the contrast between living in the sphere of the flesh and living in the sphere of the spirit. On the one hand, that contrast is between unbelievers and believers; on the other hand, it is a contrast between the past and the present. For the writer of 1 Peter, the unbelievers are those who live by “human desires” rather than by “the will of God” (4:2). Those human desires stem from idolatry and result in all manner of licentiousness. To be Christian for this epistle is, as we have seen, to be a sojourner or resident alien; and one way to define a faithful person is to say that he or she stands against the fleshly devices and desires of the pagan outsiders. However, for 1 Peter even those who live in the fleshly sphere have not been entirely excluded from the possibility of mercy. In 3:16 there is the hope that at the judgment day those who have reviled the Christians may yet be shamed (to repentance), and so the judgment declared in 4:5 may not mean the end of hope even for those who have lived according to the flesh. (See Commentary on 2:12.) 188. Lancelot Andrewes, Sermons, vol. ii, pp. 202ff.; quoted in Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 210. 189. See Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, 212, who is not sure that the tidepool example is pertinent.

305

1 PETER 4:1-11 REFLECTIONS The discussion of insiders and outsiders in this epistle is finely nuanced. On the one hand, Christians find their identity in their distinction from the larger world of pagan dissipation. On the other hand, they do not declare the pagans hopelessly lost to salvation, and they surely remember that those who now celebrate Christ’s goodness were themselves also the “unrighteous” whom Christ has brought to God (3:18). Therefore, the contrast between the sphere of the flesh and that of the spirit is also a contrast between past and present. The “sins” of the pagans are the very sins in which the readers have themselves spent time aplenty. Now in the present they can live by the will of God and in the hope of glory at the end of all things, but they also know that they have not long been free from the reign of flesh. In this contrast, therefore, there may be a model for an understanding of the relationship of Christians to the larger unbelieving, or pagan, society. On the one hand, we find our identity in part over against them, praying to desire the things of God and not to be captive to human and fleshly passions and desires. On the other hand, we know that just yesterday we were subject to the very same forces we now condemn in the world around us, and therefore it may well be that tomorrow other pagans will find the judgment and mercy of God. As Christians we stand apart from the world and its tests; but we have not been apart from that world for long, and our hope and sympathy for those who are still bound by the flesh should reflect honesty about our own recent and narrow escape.

4. Kierkegaard wrote a masterful sermon on 1 Pet 4:8 and the love that covers a multitude of sins. He interpreted the text as meaning that the love of the faithful covers over the sins of others, and does it with such power that it makes one want to rethink the interpretation of the passage suggested by this commentary. Kierkegaard wrote first of the power of love to cover over sins, and then of the fact that it takes multifaceted love to find the many ways necessary to cover the multitude of sins. The sermon ends with an interpretation of a familiar gospel passage—as a story about | Pet 4:8. When the scribes and the Pharisees had taken a woman in open sin, they brought her into the midst of the temple before the face of the Saviour; but Jesus bowed down and wrote with His finger in the ground. He who knew everything, knew also what the scribes and the Pharisees knew, before they told Him. The scribes and the Pharisees soon discovered her guilt, which was indeed easy since her sin was open. They also discovered a new sin, one of which they made themselves guilty, when they artfully laid snares for the Lord. But Jesus bowed down and wrote with His finger upon the ground. Why, | wonder, did He bow down; why, I wonder, did He write with His finger upon the ground? Did He sit there like a judge who listens attentively to the story of the accusers, who, listening, bows down and jots down the principal points so that he may not forget them, and may judge strictly; was the woman’s guilt the only thing which was noted by the Lord? Or did not He who wrote with His finger on the ground, rather write it down in order to erase it and forget it? There stood the sinner, surrounded perhaps by those even more guilty, who loudly accused her, but love bowed down and did not hear the accusation, which passed over His head into the air; He wrote with His finger in order to blot out what He himself knew; for sin discovers a multitude of sins, but love covers the multitude of sins. Yes, even in the sight of the sinner, love covers a multitude of sins. For by one word from the Master the Pharisees and the scribes were struck dumb, and there was no longer an accuser, no one who condemned her. But Jesus said to her: “Neither do I condemn thee, go and sin no more,” for the punishment of sin breeds new sin, but love covers a multitude of sins.'”

5. In remarkably brief compass, 4:10-11 gives a picture of the mutuality of church life the author envisions for the churches in Asia Minor. The promise of 4:6 is that those who have 190. Soren Kierkegaard, “Love Covers a Multitude of Sins,” in Edifying Discourses: A Selection, ed. Paul Holmer, trans. D. and L. Swenson (London: Collins, Fontana, 1958) 78-79. The whole sermon is found on 63-79.

306

1 PETER 4:1-11 REFLECTIONS died and will be resurrected will live “in the spirit as God does” (NRSV). In striking ways the community of faith already lives in the spirit and Christians represent the life of God to one another. Those who proclaim—whether through sermon or spiritual saying or prophecy—speak as those entrusted with God’s oracles. They become God’s voice to one another. Those who minister or administer are servants of God’s strength. So God’s power and God’s strength are manifested in the church through the service of Christians toward one another. The gifts that come from God are returned to God through praise. Like the creation itself, the church comes from God and returns to God; its life from source to goal is doxology, and that doxology is lived out in the love Christians’ show to each other. Pheme Perkins spells out the practical implications of this: “Passages like this one remind Christians today that faith requires community. Believers should be active members of local churches that are gathered for prayer, for mutual support, for celebration. They are also reminded that local churches should be places in which all members of the church share the particular gifts that God has given them.”””' 191. Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, 71.

307

1 PETER 4:12-5:11 STEADFAST IN FAITH OVERVIEW '@

irst Peter 4:12 marks the break that some

“=

commentators think indicates that the

author or compiler of the epistle now moves from a baptismal homily to a more direct letter of exhortation and injunction. Reasons for skepticism about the “two part” theory of the composition of the epistle are indicated in the Introduction. It is argued there that there is not an evident break in the occasion for the epistle between 4:11 and 4:12. Three further comments may be added. First, the reconstruction of hypothetical sources behind extant writings is notoriously tricky. Suggestions about the editorial policy behind 1 Peter may be suggestive or even plausible, but given the limits of available evidence they can hardly be compelling. Second, even if it is the case that the author of this epistle joined together two disparate sources, or one source and his own later letter, the document that he wrote is the document that extends from 1:1 through 5:14; therefore, he presumably found continuity between the earlier and the later parts of his epistle. The job of the exegete is to try to seek the basis for that unity, both in the history behind the letter and in the literature of the letter itself. Third, to shift from the perspective of the author to the perspective of the readers, both original and modern, the document we read or hear is 1 Peter, and it needs to be understood as one piece of literature, however many literary sources may lie behind it. It has its own integrity and moves toward its own purposes. As we both try to understand how

308

first-century congregations may have heard this letter and try to understand its significance for faithful people today, we need to attend to the letter as a whole. Therefore, we can consider the section from 4:12-5:11 as an expansion and intensification of themes already apparent in this epistle. The subsection 4:12-19 reinforces the author’s reminder that suffering is an inescapable part of the life of his hearers. Such suffering shares in the suffering of Christ himself, and it carries with it the promise of final glory. Indeed, the very fact of suffering shows that the final judgment and blessing draw near. Verse 19 draws the hortatory conclusion from this analysis of suffering and provides the transition to 5:1-11: “So then, those who suffer according to God’s will should commit themselves to their faithful Creator and continue to do good”

(NIV). First Peter 5:1-11 (as with other passages in this epistle) specifies what doing good might include. In a pattern rather like the household or station codes of 2:18-3:7, the household of faith is now addressed. Elders are reminded of their responsibilities for those under their care, and those under their care are reminded of their proper deference to their elders. All of the Christians who hear or read this letter are called to stand fast and faithful under the stress of opposition. All are assured that the outcome of this difficulty lies in the hands of a gracious God.

1 PETER 4:12-19

1 PETER 4:12-19, THE IMPENDING CRISIS NIV

NRSV

"Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you. '*But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed. “Tf you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you. 'If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler. “However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name. For it is time for judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God? !8And, “Tf it is hard for the righteous tobe saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?” '9So then, those who suffer according to God’s will should commit themselves to their faithful Creator and continue to do good.

12Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal that is taking place among you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. 'But rejoice insofar as you are sharing Christ’s sufferings, so that you may also be glad

and shout for joy when his glory is revealed. If you are reviled for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the spirit of glory,? which is the

Spirit of God, is restingon you.? But let none of you suffer as a murderer, a thief, a criminal,

or even as a mischief maker. !°Yet if any of you suffers as a Christian, do not consider it a disgrace, but glorify God because you bear this name. '7For the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God; if it begins with us, what will be the end for those who do not obey ihe gospel of God? 8And > “Tf it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the ungodly and the

sinners?”

2

Therefore, let those suffering in accordance with God’s will entrust themselves to a faithful Creator,

while continuing to do good.

218 Prov. 11:31

aOther ancient authorities add and ofpower © Other ancient © authorities add On their part he ts blasphemed, but on your part : he is glorified

(COMMENTARY 4:12-16. Because Christians know that the glory and power belong forever to God through Christ, they are able to face the ordeals imposed upon them during the passing age in which they live. In many ways the whole section of 4:125:9 drives toward the benediction of 5:10-11. It is in that confidence that Christians are able to live faithfully. We have no way of knowing whether the “fiery ordeal” of which the author writes is some cataclysmic event more dramatic than the obvious opposition and slander that the first part of the letter has presupposed. The “ordeal” may represent the visible sign of the eschatological claim of 4:7, “The end of all

has prepared the readers for this climactic exhortation, and the passage itself is set within a strong sense of eschatological expectation (see 4:13). On the one hand, there may be some further outbreak of opposition that warrants this apparently more energetic response. On the other hand, this may be a rhetorical move as the letter draws to its close, rehearsing the themes of the epistle but modulating into a new key. Goppelt writes: “What is new is not the situation but the parenetic interpretation that is now given for this situation of permanent social discrimination and legal uncertainty....To this point the readers have been admonished to refute discrimination by just behavior in order to avoid conflicts... . Here

things is near” (NRSV). In this way, the author 309

1 PETER 4:12-19 COMMENTARY there will be only joy. The pattern is one we have seen throughout 1 Peter. Christ suffered and was raised in glory; now you suffer, but when he returns you will share that glory. Verses 14-16 remind the readers that the life that shares Christ’s victory is a life marked by the power of the Spirit (see 3:18; 4:6; on the role of the Spirit in the life of the congregation, see also 1:2, 12; on the relationship of “spirit” and “glory,” see 2 Cor 3:18; on the promise of glory, see 2 Cor 4:17¢ Gol: 3:4-:).% The. Spirit is. expiicihy presented as the first fruits of the eschatological promise, because as Christians await glory in (4:13), the Spirit of glory already rests upon them (4:14).!°* Because the Spirit rests upon them and is a foretaste of glory, Christians who are “insulted” because they carry the name of Christ (NIV) are also “blessed.” Here as in 3:14 the term for “blessed” is wakdptos (makarios). In both cases blessedness, the eschatological gift, is pronounced on those who suffer unjustly. In 3:14, Christians suffer for doing what is right. Here the christological definition of what counts as right is made explicit; the blessing is pronounced on those who suffer in Christ’s name. This suggests that something of what it means to share in the sufferings of Christ (v. 13) is to suffer for Christ’s sake. In both cases the phrase is closely parallel

it is not the occurrence of suffering but the fundamental necessity of suffering that is ad-

dressed?17? “Beloved” (ayatmtot

agapetoi) is a reprise of the address of 2:11. As in that case, this address marks the beginning of a section of direct and quite personal exhortation and carries with it a kind of urgency. Also as in 2:11 the first readers are invited to think of themselves both as “beloved” of the author and as loved by God in Christ (see 1:3-4, 9-10). The imperative to not be “surprised” (Eeviteo8e xenizesthe) uses the same word as 4:4 where the Gentiles are “surprised” by the faithfulness of the Christians. One does not need to be surprised if one reads what is going on in the light of God’s providence. The pagans, who have no clue, are astonished; Christians, who have every clue they need, should not be astonished at all. That the “fiery ordeal” is also a test or temptation brings the readers back to 1:6-7. There they were reminded that for a little while they may suffer various “tests” so that the genuineness of their faith may be proven “as through fire.” The root word for “fire” (ttp pyr) is the same used in 1:7 and 4:12. Now the fire is burning, and the faith is under trial. Verse 13 states with great clarity and intensity one of the main themes of the epistle. The readers have already been reminded that Christ’s suffering was both the example for their suffering and the grounds of their salvation (3:18; see also 2:21-25, addressed specifically to slaves but clearly with implications for all believers who undergo suffering). Now they participate, share in, have the communion of Christ’s suffering. The verb form of kotvwvia (Koinonia) is used here, a word that can represent mutuality, communion, or fellowship. In 1 Corinthians 10 the fellowship also includes the communion of the Lord’s supper, where Christians participate in Christ’s suffering in a somewhat different way (see 1 Cor 10:16). Again 1 Peter presents the “already” and the “to be completed” vision of salvation in Jesus Christ. Because Christians share in his suffering, they can already rejoice; but when his glory is revealed they will rejoice exceedingly. Put in other words, now suffering and joy combine; then

to Matt 5:11-12.!% The claim that Christians are being reviled for being Christian is a theme that recurs throughout 1 Peter—not so much a sense of physical persecution but a sense of insult, slander, accusation. As in the earlier admonition to slaves (2:20) and to the entire Christian community (3:17), the epistle reminds the readers that in suffering the Christian participates in Christ’s suffering, only if the one who suffers does so unjustly, as Christ did. The list of possible offenses for which Christians might suffer recalls the list of their former 193. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 323. 194. Does the Spirit’s “resting” upon believers recall the Spirit’s descending on Christ at his baptism and resting on him (Matt 3:16, with another term for “resting”}? See also Isa 11:2, which could obviously be read messianically but here is interpreted as pointing toward believers. Michaels, / Peter, 264. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 324n. 32, thinks that Num 11:25 and the spirit given the elders is the closer parallel. 195. Some texts add to 4:14, “On their part he is blasphemed but on your part he is glorified.” See NRSV note. Metzger notes the lateness of the texts, and his committee thinks the phrase is an explanatory gloss, though the theme fits well enough with the rest of 1 Peter. See Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the New Testament (New York: United Bible Societies, 1971) 695.

192. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 311. Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 211, calls it an “escalation.”

310

1 PETER 4:12-19 COMMENTARY behaviors in 4:3-4.!°° What surprises the pagan Opposition is that Christians no longer act in such ways; and Christians need not be surprised if they suffer the consequences of their neighbors’ astonishment. The term “Christian” (xptotiavés christianos) in v. 16 was not yet widely used of Christ’s followers in the New Testament. The use of the term in Acts 11:26 and 26:28 by non-believers’ may suggest that the term was coined by outsiders.!%” The use of the term here may also indicate that 1 Peter was written somewhat late in the first century, when the phrase had become more commonplace. The claim that one should glorify God “for that name” or “by means of that name” calls us back immediately to v. 14. Those who are insulted “in the name of Christ” should rather glorify God “by the name of Christ(ian).” Again it is a matter of “glory.” Those who suffer unjustly for Christ’s sake will participate in Christ’s glory at the eschaton (4:13). In the meantime they can be encouraged because the spirit of glory rests upon them (4:14), and, therefore, they should glorify God (4:16). The NRSV catches and the NIV misses the threefold use of terms related to

how far it should be pressed. Nor am I at all sure... whether a pardon ought to be granted to anyone retracting his beliefs, or if he has once professed Christianity, he shall gain nothing by renouncing it; and whether it is the mere name of Christian which is punishable, even if innocent of crime, or rather the crimes associated with the name. For the moment this is the line I have taken with all persons brought before me on the charge of being Christians. I have asked them in person if they are Christians, and if they admit it, I repeat the question a second and third time, with a warning of the punishment awaiting them. If they persist, I order them to be led away for execution; for, whatever the nature of their admission, I am convinced that their stubbornness and unshakeable obstinacy ought not to go unpunished.!%

4:17-19. These verses again place the “fiery ordeal” in its appropriate eschatological context. This difficulty is not merely trouble; it is the prologue to judgment day. Thus in v. 17 the author makes the eschatological claim in yet another way. While distinctions between katpds (Kairos), meaning time as the significant moment, and xpdvos (chronos}, meaning time as it ticks on, may be overdrawn, the use of kairos here is congruent with the eventful use of the term in other NT passages, like Mark 1:15. The passage from 1 Peter, too, is about time that is fulfilled and comes to its climax in the mercy of God. Fulfilled time includes judgment, as the whole letter has affirmed. The passage says that judgment begins with the house or household of God, that is with the Christian community, and apparently includes the suggestion that the present suffering may be part of that judgment, the sign of the movement toward history’s climax. Achtemeier catches the nuance of the passage: “The judgment...is the final judgment of which the present suffering of the Christians is not so much a harbinger or proleptic participation as it is part of it, indeed the

“glory” in vv. 13-14, 16. The whole passage also echoes v. 11. One does wonder whether here we have gone beyond the neighborly insult and abuse to the implication that Christians are sometimes being turned in and tried precisely for being Christian. Pliny’s letter to Trajan probably comes from a somewhat later time than 1 Peter, when Christianity was growing apace in Asia Minor and when Opposition was more organized and more widespread. Nonetheless, Pliny’s words suggest further developments of a pattern already nascent in the situation 1 Peter addresses: I have Christians. the extent them, nor

never been present at an examination of Consequently I do not know the nature or of the punishments usually meted out to the grounds for starting an investigation and

beginning of it.”!% The picture of the church as God’s house has been underlined by the injunctions of 2:18-3:12, where the instructions for particular Christian

196. Inthe Commentary on 4:3-4 the similarities to 1 Cor 6:9-11 were noted. The term d\AotpietticKoTos (allotriepiskopos), translated by the NIV as “meddler” and by the NRSV as “mischief maker,” occurs only here in Greek literature of this era. Achtemeier translates it as one who “defrauds others” and provides an excursus explaining his interpretation. See PaulJ.Achtemeier, 7 Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996)

198. Pliny Letters x.96. Trajan’s response is x.97. See LCL 285-87. 199. Achtemeier, / Peter, 315. For a discussion of the background for

the joining of suffering and judgment, see Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 330-32. The background for the claim about the household of God may be Ezek 9:6 or Jer 25:29. See Norbert Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentary zum Neuen Testament (Zurich: Benziger Verlag and Neukirchener Verlag, 1979) 222.

3027311-12° 197. Seeibid.,

313. Other early Christian and non-Christian references are cited in L. Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, ed. Ferdinand Hahn, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 327n. 41.

311

1 PETER 4:12-19 COMMENTARY stands ready to judge the living and the dead does not exempt believers from that judgment (see 4:1,

households are generalized into a reminder of the mutual sympathy that should mark the shared household of believers—the church. The image of the household for the body of believers takes us back to 2:5, where Christians are reminded that they are to be built “into a spiritual house.” The house is marked by Christ’s being its cornerstone and by its distinction from the larger world outside—those who are not yet, at least, part of the “royal priesthood” and “holy nation.” The same contrast between insiders and outsiders is still at issue in this verse with the comparison between the appropriate judgment for believers and the even greater judgment for those who disbelieve (see also 2:17 for Christians as the “family of believers” ).2° The contrast drives toward, or is driven by, the quotation from the LXX version of Prov 11:31, quoted in v. 18. Both v. 170 and v. 18 draw on the traditional rhetorical move from the lighter to the heavier, or from the lesser to the greater. If judgment on those who are faithful will be fearsome, how much more terrible will be judgment on those who do not have faith? Nonetheless, the purpose of the warning here is not to pronounce God’s judgment on the outsiders but to remind insiders that they, too, continue to stand under judgment as well as mercy. Even though those who have suffered in the flesh “have finished with sin,” temptations to sin remain—and the one who

SE The “therefore” of v. 19 makes clear where this whole passage, beginning with 4:12, is meant to direct the readers. In the face of present persecution and coming judgment, faithful people are called to do two things. First, they are to trust in God, who will judge, but who will do so with justice and mercy. That God is here called “faithful Creator” reminds the Christians of Asia Minor that from the beginning of time to the end of time they live under the providential power of God (see, e.g., 1:5). This is the only place in the NT where God is referred to by precisely the term “creator” (ktlotns ktistes).2°! Second, because they trust in God’s mercy and acknowledge God’s judgment, they are to continue to do good. The whole epistle has spelled out in considerable detail what “doing good” means (the term dya8otrovéw [agathopoieo| is used also at 2:14-15, 20; 3:6, 17) 202

When the author says that the faithful readers are “suffering in accordance with God’s will” (NRSV), he probably does not mean that it is God’s will that these people should suffer. Rather, he is saying that given suffering, one should respond according to God’s will and not lose heart or return evil for evil.

200. Goppelt thinks that those who will receive greater judgment are not simply those who disbelieve, but those who disobey the gospel by opposing Christians. See Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter, 332.

201. Ibid., 335. 202. See ibid., 336.

REFLECTIONS 1. The great challenge of interpreting the New Testament for contemporary Christians is not dealing with mythology but with eschatology. These verses simply bring front and center what is the background of the whole epistle. History moves toward God’s final judgment and mercy in Jesus Christ, and for 1 Peter history is moving toward that final day at amazing speed. The suffering that Christians undergo is in part a further sign that judgment time is already under way and will soon reach its consummation. By the time of the writing of 2 Peter it was already clear that the expectations of the earlier Christian church had not been met as expected: “But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day. The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance” (2 Pet 3:8-9 NRSV). In our time it is not only that the final judgment has been delayed, but also that we cannot simply think

312

1 PETER 4:12-19 REFLECTIONS about that event in traditional terms, where Christ comes from “on high” to signal the beginning of final judgment. The solution to the puzzle of how to understand eschatology for contemporary Christians is beyond the scope of these reflections or their author. Yet two familiar reminders still seem helpful. First, in part, talk about eschatology is a reminder of the transcendent significance of our lives. Decisions we make are not only our business but also stand within the providence and judgment of God. Our acts have consequences beyond the visible and measurable—consequences that are invisible and eternal. Second, the eschatological framework of 1 Peter declares what we can still lay hold of only through hope: that not only individual lives and decisions but also the movement of history is shaped by God from creation to consummation. The fullness of that consummation is beyond either our predicting or our imagining. But that consummation is foreshadowed in the victory we have seen—the victory of Jesus Christ over sin and death. That affirmation (declared, e.g., in 1 Pet 3:18-22) provides the sign that enables us to lay hold of God’s future in confidence. Jonathan Kozol, visiting the poverty-stricken people of the Bronx, New York, found that their faith was too simple or too deep to lend itself to easy demythologizing of final promises. In a neighborhood full of the ugliness of poverty and

drugs and despair, Kozol visited P.S. 65: I ask the children to tell me something they consider beautiful. Virtually every child answers, “Heaven.”?”

2. As with so much of 1 Peter, and as with so much of our lives, we are faced in these verses with the question of how to understand the suffering of faithful people. The passage makes three suggestions that by no means exhaust or solve the issue but are helpful encouragements to those who suffer. First, suffering may, indeed, provide the test by which our faith and convictions are strengthened. Second, suffering provides the opportunity for us to participate in Jesus’ own story, not only his passion but also the promise of glory that is at the end of that story. Third, as we have seen in 1 Pet 4:19, faithful people are invited to suffer “in accordance with God’s will.” This does not mean that God wills each individual his or her suffering, but that when suffering comes it provides the opportunity for us to live according to God’s will, in trust and in doing good. No one, of course, should take these verses as encouraging Christians to seek suffering in

a misguided attempt to imitate Christ. Rather, these verses assure us that as suffering came to Jesus unbidden, it may also come to us, and from his story we can take comfort. No one, as well, can simply take these assurances as sufficient solution to the enormous issues of theodicy. Rather, they provide practical intermediate steps to help Christians get through the sufferings that are sometimes inescapable without losing either hope or charity. 203. Jonathan Kozol, Amazing Grace: The Lives of Children and the Conscience of a Nation (New York: Crown, 1995) 123.

Pee Pen lee CARING POR THE HOWSsEROLD OF GOD NIV

:

NRSV.

To the elders among you, | appeal as a

Now as an elder myself and a witness of

fellow elder, a witness of Christ’s sufferings 5 and one who also will share in the glory.to be

the sufferings of Christ, as well as one who shares in the glory to be revealed, I exhort the

i

313

1 PETER 5:1-11 NIV

NRSV

revealed: ?Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, serving as overseers—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but

elders among you 2to tend the flock of God that is in your charge, exercising the oversight,? not under compulsion but willingly, as God would have you do it*—not for sordid gain but eagerly. 3Do not lord it over those in your charge, but be examples to the flock. “And when the chief shepherd appears, you will win the crown of glory that never fades away. °*In the same way, you who are younger must accept the authority of the elders.¢ And all of you must clothe yourselves with humility in your dealings with one another, for “God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” 6Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, so that he may exalt you in due time. ’Cast all your anxiety on him, because he cares for you. ®Discipline yourselves, keep alert.? Like a roaring lion your adversary the devil prowls around, looking for someone to devour. °Resist him, steadfast in your faith, for you know that your brothers and sisters? in all the world are

eager to serve; *not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock. *And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade

away. ‘Young men, in the same way be submissive to those who are older. All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.”? Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. 7Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you. 8Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. ’Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know that your brothers throughout the world are undergoing the same kind of sufferings.

undergoing the same kinds of suffering. ‘And after you have suffered for a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, support, strengthen, and establish you. ''To him be the power forever and ever. Amen.

And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast. ''To him be the power for ever and ever. Amen.

aOther ancient authorities lack exercising the oversight © Other ancient authorities lack as God would have you do it ¢Or of those who are older @ Or be vigilant € Gk your brotherhood

a5 Prov. 3:34

(COMMENTARY The word translated “I appeal” (NIV) or “I exhort” (NRSV; tapaxadéw parakaleo) in v. 1 is often used in epistles to mark the beginning of final remarks (see Rom 15:30; 1 Cor 16:15; Heb 13:22): Perhaps in the light of the preceding eschatological exhortation, the author returns to a kind of station code. Now he speaks not of the right order within the households of Christian people, but of right order within the church, within the spiritual household where judgment has already begun.2

5:1-5. In these verses, “elders” are clearly church leaders, but the more literal connotation of their designation as “older Christians” also enters into the balanced exhortation to the “younger” in v. 5. The pattern of balanced exhortation reminds one of the balance between wives and husbands in 3:1-7 (in each case, there is more elaboration of the responsibilities of the first member of the set). 5:1-4. Throughout the epistle, Christ has been set forth as an example for those who read or hear this letter. Now the author sets himself (or his fictional self) forward as the exemplary figure. As a fellow elder he is an example for the elders.

204. See Ferdinand-Rupert Prostmeier, Handlungsmodelle im ersten Petrusbref, Forschung zur Bibel 63 (Wiirzburg: Echter Verlag, 1990) 178.

314

1 PETER 5:1-11 COMMENTARY The Greek for “fellow elder” is one word (oupTpEOBUTEPOS sympresbyteros), like the English “co-elder” or “co-pastor.” As one who knows Christ’s sufferings and Christ’s glory, the epistle writer is an example to all the Christians to whom he writes. Of course, the author’s claim that he was a witness to Christ’s suffering is in part an

a line of precedence. Christ is the chief shepherd and overseer. Peter also gives an example of tending and overseeing the flock. Now these elders of Asia Minor are to follow in these apostles’ footsteps. The fundamental reminder to the elders is that the flock to which they tend is God’s flock, and they are its caretakers, not its masters. Within that understanding the specific responsibilities of the elders are sketched out briefly. They are to serve ungrudgingly (not under compulsion) and gladly, not for personal gain but so that others might gain, not by haughtiness but in humility. (The reminder that Christian leaders should not “lord it over others” is also found in Matt 20:25; Mark 10:42.) The great chain of exemplary behavior continues. Christ is the example for Peter; Peter is the example for the elders; the elders are the example for the flock. 5:5. As is so often the case in 1 Peter, this injunction has an eschatological sanction. The good shepherds will be rewarded by the Good Shepherd at the time of his appearing. The crown of glory they will receive is another of those “unfading” gifts that 1 Peter promises to those who have faith (see 1:4 for a variant of the same term; for a similar theme, see 1:23). This verse is the balancing exhortation to the “younger”—presumably both younger members of the church and members of the church who are not leaders, not “elders.” The “likewise” is the mark of reciprocity of Christian life as the epistle commends mutual respect (see 3:1, 7; similarly 1 Cor 7:3-4). The instruction to the youths is brief: “be subject to the elders.” The verb “be subject” (utotdcow hypotasso ) is the same word used in 1 Pet 2:13, 18; 3:1, 5, and (for angelic powers) 22. Verse 50 presents the more general exhortation that includes elders and younger Christians alike, so that while the younger Christians are called to submission, no Christian is exempt from humility. The “all” of v. 50 recalls the “all” of 3:8 where the specific “station” exhortations are now generalized to the claims of faithfulness upon all Christian people.2°” The quotation is again from the LXX version of Proverbs (here Prov 3:34). The preceding proverb reads, “The Lorp’s curse is on the house of the wicked, but he blesses the abode

attempt to establish his apostolic authority.2°° The term for “witness” (\Wdptus maftys) may by this time already have taken on something of the meaning of “martyr,” one who not only witnesses but also shares in that suffering. In that sense, the author is a follower of Christ and a forerunner of the Christians of Asia Minor who faced their own more modest martyrdoms. Moreover, as one who now shares in the glory that will be revealed, the author lives in that eschatological “between the times” where he has placed his readers, waiting for a consummation that is not yet complete but already manifest (see, e.g., 1:3-5, 8-9, 23; 4:1314). The exhortation to the elders rings familiar in other exhortations to church leaders of the first century. The passage is particularly reminiscent of Paul’s exhortations to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20, where elders are also designated as shepherds and as overseers and where they are also warned against using their ministry for gain. In that chapter, Paul uses himself as an example of pecuniary restraint (Acts 20:33-34). The qualifications for bishops in 1 Tim 3:1-7 and for elders in Titus 1:5-9 also show parallels with this passage.” The phrase that the NRSV translates “to tend the flock of God” more literally means “to shepherd the flock of God”; it points ahead to the call to await the chief shepherd in 5:4 and back to the reference to Christ as shepherd and guardian of souls in 2:25. “Guardian” in 2:25 translates éttakxotros (episkopos, NRSV). The verbal form of that noun is found in 5:2 as “serving as overseers” (NIV). In a tradition that the author and his audience may have known, the risen Christ appointed Peter to shepherd his sheep (John 21:16). In the larger context of the letter, and perhaps the even larger context of early Christian tradition, therefore, the elders stand in 205. See E.G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter (London: Macmillan,

1958) 228. 206. On the shepherd image, see also / Clem 4:43 cited in Goppelt,

A Commentary on I Peter, 344.

207. See Prostmeier, Handlungsmodelle im ersten Petrusbref, 173.

5

S15

| PETER 5:1-11 COMMENTARY of the righteous” (Prov 3:33 NRSV). If the readers knew their Scripture well enough to know the context, this would echo the concern for God’s house in 1 Pet 4:17. The proverb that the author quotes here places the issue of human reciprocal respect in the context of the greater issue of the will and judgment of God. It also recalls the hope that Christians are to have for the last day and “the grace that Jesus Christ will bring you when he is revealed” (1:13 NRSV). 5:6-11. 5:6. This verse sums up the instructions to elders and youths and provides a transition to the closing encouragement in the face of suffering. The quotation from Proverbs has already given the call to humility its proper grounding in the intention of God. Now the author reminds the reader that the fundamental humility that marks Christian life is precisely humility before God. The pattern of humility now and exaltation to come states in new words the tension or dialectic of the whole epistle. Now humility, then exaltation; now suffering, but then glory. The whole pattern was introduced in 1:3-10, is now reiterated toward the end of the epistle, and really governs all the comforts and injunctions in between. 5:7. Here the readers are reminded that the power of God that humbles them also comforts them; God, who is strong, is also strong to save. The NRSV play on words, “Cast all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you,” unfortunately is not found in the Greek, but nicely catches the theological balance anyway. The comfort moves to warning and then will move to comfort once again. God’s mighty hand is opposed by a power. weaker than God, but it is a real power nonetheless. 5:8. This verse begins with two bare imperatives summing up the appropriate response of faithful people in the face of present danger and coming judgment. Twice already we have encoun-

tered the call to sobriety (1:13; 4:7). This behavior is the appropriate response in the light of the dangers of Satan and the powers of God, and it stands in contrast to the licentiousness of the readers’ former behavior (see 4:3-4). The call to be alert is characteristic of apocalyptic warnings, as in Mark 13:34. The two verbs occur together in| “EhessOther ancient authorities read on your account ¢ Other ancient authorities read will be burned up

4Or earnestly desiring

354

2 PETER 3:1-13 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY 3:1-2. After the digression of 2:100-22, the author returns to the main argument of the letter body with a transition in these verses (based on Jude 17). Whereas the digression describes the false teachers in the present tense, the reference in v. 1 to this being the second letter intended as a reminder recalls 1 Peter and reestablishes that the letter is a testament of Peter regarding the future. The transition prepares the churches for “Peter’s” prediction in vv. 3-4 that false teachers will arise after his death (cf. 1:12-15), a common theme in farewell addresses. The author exhorts the churches to remember OT prophecy and Jesus’ commandment (ethical teachings), given through the apostles who founded the churches in faith (i.e., “your apostles”), concerning the parousia and its accompanying judgment. Reminding the audience of these teachings and appealing to the OT, to Jesus, and to the apostles is the same strategy the author used in 1:12-21. By referring to the audience as having “pure thinking” in a moral sense (cidtkolvns dtdavoia eilikrines dianoia; “sincere intention,” NRSV; “wholesome thinking,” NIV) and by reminding them of Jesus’ commandment, the author distinguishes the audience from the false teachers who have forgotten the commandment (2:21) and who follow after their own lusts (3:3). 3:3-4. As mentioned in vv. 1-2, there were OT prophecies of scoffers who mocked the delay of divine judgment (Amos 9:10; Mal 2:17) and early Christian prophecies of the arrival of false teachers in the last days. These Christian prophecies are attributed to Jesus (Matt 7:15;

teachers will indicate to the churches that they are the scoffers who were predicted to come in the last days. In v. 4 the author presents the accusation of the false teachers as part of the prophecy of Peter: “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since our ancestors [lit., “fathers”] died [lit., “fell asleep”|,all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation!” (cf. 2:30). This accusation is in the form of a rhetorical question, reminiscent of such questions raised by scoffers of God in the OT (beginning with “where is” [mod éoT.v pou estin|}, including questioning of God’s intervention in judgment (Jer 17:15; Mal 2:17 LXX). The promise mentioned is part to those of Jesus referred to in 1:4, including some which seem to limit the parousia to the lifetime of Jesus’ contemporaries (cf. 3:13; Matt 16:28 par. Mark 9:1 par. Luke 9:27; Matt. 24:34 par. Mark 13:30 par. Luke 21:32; John 21:22-23; cf. Matt 10:23). The false teachers are denying the parousia because, according to apostolic proclamation, the fathers, the first generation of Christians, were to have experienced the parousia, but died without its materialization. 3:5-13. Besides the death of the first Christian generation, the false teachers seem to be basing their scoffing and denial of the parousia on the premise that the world has not experienced judgment of cosmic magnitude like that expected to accompany the parousia (cf. vv. 10, 12). This is the argument the author refutes in vv. 5-7. The denial of the false teachers has parallels in the Epicurean denial of providence, or divine intervention, in the world in both creation and judgment. The Epicureans denied God’s providence and the reality of judgment on the basis of the delay or slowness of divine judgment.?? In vv. 5-13 the author refutes the false teachers’ two-pronged accusation of v. 4. Refutation is indicated by the shift from the prophecy of false teachers and their accusation given in the future tense in vv. 3-4, to the author’s refutation of the accusation in the present tense in vv. 5-13. The

24:11, 24; Mark 13:22), to Paul (Acts 20:29-30; 1 Tim 4:1-3; 2 Tim 4:3-4), and to others (1 John 4:1-3; Did. 16:3). However, these prophecies are not merely reiterated here; rather, Peter is portrayed as giving an analogous prophecy of scoffers of the parousia and judgment. In v. 3, “scoffer” (Eutatktns empaiktes) is a derogatory term for someone who despises and ignores religion and morality. It is partially defined as “indulging their own lusts” (NRSV) or “following their own evil desires” (NIV; €mtOuuta epithymia)—that is, to follow the flesh rather than God’s direction

29. See J. Neyrey, “The Form and Background of the Polemic in 2 Peter” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1977) 203-5; “The Form and Background of the Polemic in 2 Peter,” /BL 99 (1980) 420.

(2:10a, 18). The words and deeds of the false 355

2 PETER 3:1-13 COMMENTARY out judgment (v. 4), these verses refute the accusation that the promise of the parousia is false because it did not occur during the first Christian generation. That v. 8 begins further refutation is indicated by the opening phrase, “do not ignore this one fact,” which is similar to the opening phrase of v. 5. Whereas in v. 5 the false teachers are accused of overlooking God’s Word in judgment, in v. 8 the churches are urged not to overlook God’s forbearance. In v. 8 the author reworks Ps 90:4: “For a thousand years in your sight/ are like yesterday when it is past,/ or like a watch in the night” (NRSV). This verse was used to prove that human life is transient, while God is everlasting (Sir 18:9-11) and that the period before the eschatological end would seem long to humanity, but not to God.» The author affirms that what may seem like a delay of the parousia is not a delay from God’s perspective, and the author still expects the parousia to come in the lifetime of those whom he addresses (1:19; 3:14). The formula “not... but” (oU...dAd ou... alla), which the author uses to reject the false teachers’ accusations, begins v. 9 (as also 1:16, 21). This verse explicitly refutes the main point of the accusation that the promise of the parousia is false because it was temporally limited to the lifetime of the apostolic generation. The author does not address the problem of the failure of the parousia to occur within this limited time. Rather, he admits the delay and affirms the eventual fulfillment of the promised parousia. He alludes to Hab 2:13, a central passage in Judaism’s reflection on the problem of the delay of God’s judgment.s The delay does not indicate a false: promise, but God’s forbearance as provision for the repentance of sinners. The argument that God’s judgment is delayed due to God’s forbearance was traditional (Joel 2:12-14; Jonah 4:2; Rom 2:4; Shepherd of Hermas, Visions 8:11:1), and it was often used to explain the delay of eschatological judgment.*4

accusation that the world has continued without judgment is refuted in vv. 5-7 (as in 2:30-10a), and the accusation that the promise of the parousia is false because it did not come during the lifetime of the first Christian generation is refuted in vv. 8-13. This defense in vv. 4-13 is partially derived from a Jewish apocalyptic source or argumentative scheme that, in spite of its delay, defended the doctrine of God’s intervention with judgment in history.*° 3:5-7. The opening phrase of v. 5, “they deliberately ignore this fact,” implies that the false teachers can make their accusation only by ignoring the facts of the creation, the flood, and the fiery judgment described in these verses. As in Genesis 1, the author of 2 Peter here stresses the role of God’s Word in creation. By God’s Word the heavens and the earth were created (v. 5); by God’s Word water was stored up for world judgment at the flood (v. 6); and by God’s Word fire is stored up for cosmic judgment at the parousia (v. 7).2! The unexpressed conclusion is that God clearly has and can intervene for judgment by the same Word that underlies creation itself. The affirmation in v. 7 that the present heavens and earth have been stored up for destruction by fire “py the same word” underlying the flood indicates that the author believed he was drawing this information from prophecy. This prophecy may have been the Jewish apocalyptic source he was using or OT texts (e.g., Deut 32:22; Isa 66:15-16; Zeph 1:18). The argumentation of vv. 5-7 is tied to that of 2:30-10a. The example of the flood affirms that God’s judgment is active in history (2:5-6). The example of Sodom and Gomorrah affirms that the judgment of the ungodly will be by fire (2:6). Like the watchers, the unrighteous are kept for judgment (2:4, 9). Now it is affirmed that the heavens and the earth are kept for the judgment of destruction by fire and the destruction of the godless. 3:8-13. Whereas vv. 5-7 refute the false teachers’ accusation that the world has continued with-

The parousia and judgment are affirmed in v. 10. The affirmation opens with the verb “will come” (€xw echo) to emphasize that, although God’s patience delays the parousia, surely it will

30. A source or scheme also used to explain the delay of the parousia in / Clem. 23:3-4 and 2 Clem. 11:2-4. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 283-84. 31. Whereas the NRSV leaves it ambiguous, the NIV takes the referent beginning v. 6, “by means of which” (8i dv di hon), to be the waters of v. 5. Itis the waters of creation that were the means of the flood. However, the referent is more likely to be the waters and the Word of God of v. 5. This understanding assumes that there is parallelism in 3:5-7, with all three verses assuming that God’s Word is the means of accomplishing judgment.

32. 2 Apoc. Bar. 48:12-13; Pseudo-Philo Biblical Antiquities 19:13.. 33. See 1OpHab 7:5-12; Heb 10:37; 2 Apoc. Bar. 20:6; 48:39. 34. See / Enoch 60:5; Ignatius To the Ephesians 11:1.

356

2 PETER 3:1-13 COMMENTARY come. It refutes the false teachers’ accusation underlying vv. 4 and 9 that the Lord’s delay in fulfilling this promise voids that promise. The simile of the thief probably comes from Jesus’ parable of the thief in gospel tradition (Matt 24:43-44 par. Luke 12:39-40; 1 Thess 5:2; Rev 3:3; 16:15). The simile is quite effective in conveying both the unexpectedness of the parousia and the threat of judgment it brings to those who impose on the patience of God by delaying their own repentance.

At the parousia the heavens will pass away and then the elements will dissolve with fire. Here “elements” (ototxeia stoicheia) may denote either what constitutes things in creation (earth, air, fire, and water) or heavenly bodies (sun, moon, stars). The author’s dependence on Isa 34:4 LXX indicates that the elements are not primarily those of creation, but are the heavenly bodies instead. However, since the earth is preserved for a fiery judgment (v. 7) and since a new heaven and earth will be coming (v. 13), whatever constitutes things in creation, including the earth, will be dissolved as well. This scenario corresponds to the picture of the end times that is found in early Christian eschatology in which both the earth and the heavens pass away (Mark 13:31 par. Matt 24:35 par. Luke 21:33; Matt 5:17-18; Luke 16:17; Rev 21:1). The resulting state of the earth and the deeds done upon it are described as “found” (cupeOrjoetat heurethesetai; “disclosed,” NRSV; “laid bare,” NIV).°° Without the obstruction of the heavens, which are now burned away, the works 35. There are several textual variants here. “Will be found” (cUpeOhoetat heuethésetai) and “will be found destroyed” (ebpeOrjoeTar hudpeva heurethésetai lyomena) are the two major variants. In the context of cosmic conflagration, the latter reading makes better initial sense. The former reading is usually questioned on the grounds of internal evidence. How can the world “be found”? However, “found” (heurethésetai is the preferred reading because it has the superior external evidence, and internally it is used of the faithful Christians’ being “found” at the parousia (3:14). Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, WBC, 316-21.

of humanity will become visible to God and vulnerable to judgment.*° This is the destruction of the ungodly, when the earth is destroyed by fire (v. 7), and why the faithful are exhorted to be “found” (heurethesetai) at peace and without spot or blemish at the parousia (v. 14). This state is one aspect of the biblical image of the wicked’s trying in vain to hide from God’s eschatological judgment (Isa 2:19; Hos 10:8; Amos 9:1-6; Rev Oaloaby/p AS was common to epistles and testaments, the author ends his refutation (3:1-10) by exhorting the churches about behavior appropriate in the light of the certainty of the parousia and judgment (3:11-13). The new heavens and earth are the home of righteousness, and righteousness will characterize its citizens as well. The author assumes that while Christians are waiting for the parousia, living godly lives (being morally vigilant, 1 Corl 6:13; Gol: 4:2: d-Pet.5:8). will hasten its coming (here expressed as “the day of God”). This is a corollary of v. 9, which claims that God delays the parousia to allow for repentance, and it stands in contrast to the false teachers’ assumption that its delay makes the parousia void and ungodly behavior inconsequential. Verse 13 is a positive affirmation of the parousia and a new heaven and earth based on the promises of Christ (1:4), which contrasts its denial by the false teachers (3:9). Common to Jewish apocalyptic,?” the content of the promise is derived from Isa 65:17; 66:22 and was adopted by early Christianity (Matt 19:28; Rom 8:21; Rev 21:1). The fire of judgment will return creation to chaos so that a new creation may emerge. 36. Cf. 2 Clem. 16:3. 37. See 1 Enoch 45:4-5; 72:1; 2 Apoc. Bar. 32:6; 44:12; 57:2; 4 Ezra dss

REFLECTIONS 1. It is noteworthy that one way of remaining faithful in our Christian doctrine and ethical walk is to continually remind ourselves of the teachings of Scripture and tradition that have been handed down to us. It is not enough to read them for confirmation or church membership classes and then put them aside. Our Christian heritage needs to be celebrated and brought back to our consciousness continually in new and exciting ways in order for it to remain a

2 PETER 3:1-13 REFLECTIONS vital part of our lives. This heritage needs to be incorporated into preaching, teaching, and liturgy and become a continual reminder of the purposes and promises of God.

2. The scoffers are indicative of our tendency to despair of the promises of God when God does not respond to our pleas within the time span we have set as reasonable or convenient. We would like God’s help, insight, power, and strength when we want it, not when God in sovereignty deems it appropriate. We may not scoff verbally, but our prayer life, church attendance, and overall life-style may begin to suffer as we despair of God’s promises. However, based on God’s work, God’s timetable, and God’s mercy, we can affirm that God will act on promises given.

3. The argumentation in 3:5-7 leaves lingering questions about creation. It does not teach that the heavens were created long before the earth (“heavens existed long ago and an earth was formed...” NRSV); rather, like Gen 1:1, it teaches us that both the heavens and the earth were created long ago. As in Genesis, the understanding of creation is Near Eastern—the earth and sky were created by the pushing back of the waters of a primeval ocean above, below, and around the earth (Gen 1:2, 6-10). At the flood this primeval ocean was released from the bounds imposed by creation, and the world returned to chaos (Gen 7:11). 4. Patience (“slow to anger,” 3:9) is often cited as a character trait of God (Pss 86:15; 145:8), based on God’s self-revelation in Exod 34:6-7. This mercy is an outgrowth of God’s love in putting up with sins of sinners and withholding the judgment the sin deserves at the time it is committed. This gives the sinner time to repent; but this time of mercy is not unlimited. Judgment will eventually come for the unrepentant, and the time of its coming is as unpredictable as the coming of a thief. Thus we should not take so much comfort in the patience of God that we do not immediately repent when we stray from the way of righteousness or ignore our obligations to evangelism with a false sense that there is plenty of time to attend to the unrepentant. 5. In the light of the eventual destruction of all creation and the evil within it, and the fact that the new heavens and earth are the home of righteousness, we are advised to live “lives of holiness and godliness” (3:11 NRSV). Such a life-style is partially defined by 1:5-7. Our call to right living is partially motivated by our desire to live eternally in righteousness with God when all that is subject to corruption is destroyed. 6. In 3:9, 12 the churches addressed by the author of the epistle are the ones whom God is patiently waiting to repent, especially those whom the false teachers have led into sin (2:14, 18; 3:17). The author is not saying that the time of the parousia depends on the action of the church—delayed for unrepentance and lack of evangelism (3:9) and hastened for godly living (3:12)—as though God had no say in the matter. Rather, in God’s sovereignty and by God’s mercy and love there is allowance for the spiritual state of the church and the world to which the church is to proclaim God’s love and mercy. God’s forbearance is also motivated by the desire that all people repent (Ezek 18:23, 32; 33:11; 1 Tim 2:3-6), and such forbearance alerts us to the fact that the time to evangelize is limited.

358

2 PETER 3:14-18 EXHORTATION

TO STABILITY

NIV

NRSV

'4So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. 'Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. '°He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. "Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position. '*But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.

14Therefore, beloved, while you are waiting for these things, strive to be found by him at peace, without spot or blemish; and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, '°speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. '’You therefore, beloved, since you are forewarned, beware that you are not carried away with the error of the lawless and lose your own stability. '*But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.? aOther ancient authorities lack Amen.

(COMMENTARY 3:14-16. These verses comprise the closing of

with God), without spot or blemish (morally blameless; v. 14). “Found by him at peace” (NRSV) is probably a better understanding than “found at peace with him” (NIV). As 3:10 indicates, what is primarily being described is the act of Christ’s finding the Christian at the parousia and, secondarily, the state in which the Christian is actually found. This state of being “found” by God at peace is Opposite that of the false teachers, who are blots and blemishes on the love feast (2:13). Christians are often expected to be without spot or blemish at the time of the parousia (Eph 1:4; 5:27; Phil bstOr 2:15; Col T2241 Thess: S213;-o:2o° Jude 24). Striving for this state is part of the Christian’s walk, making every effort to support the faith (1:5) and being “very eager” to confirm their call and election (1:10). In vv. 150-16 the author bolsters the entire message with his portrayal of Peter. Peter is an

the body of the letter, beginning with direct address. The body closing reiterates and emphasizes what has been said and urges attending to, and taking responsibility for, the matters discussed. It corresponds to the rhetorical peroratio, which reiterates the main points of the probatio and appeals to the audience’s emotions to persuade them to respond as desired. Exhortation based on the promise of the parousia and the assurance of judgment, begun in v. 11, continues in vv. 14-16. This section reiterates topics from vv. 8-13 as it instructs the churches in how to live while awaiting the parousia. In v. 9, the Lord’s patience is to allow for repentance, and here this patience is expressed as salvation (v. 15). In v. 10, the Lord is said to come as a thief, and the earth and everything done on it are “found”; and the churches are to strive to be “found” by God at peace (reconciled

359

2 PETER 3:14-18 COMMENTARY stance that people take influences their ethical stance. 3:17-18. The letter closing functions like the peroratio in reiterating topics and appealing to emotion. The closing begins with a warning, “You are forewarned” or “already know.” This warning resumes the fiction of Peter’s prophecy (2:1-3; 3:3-4) and is a main feature of the testament genre—to forewarn the community of false teachers who will come after the death of the testator. Whereas the churches are stable in the truth (1:12), the false teachers and their followers are unstable (2:14, 3:16) and threaten the stability of the churches (3:17). There is the threat that the church will be carried away by the error of following these false teachers as others have done before them (2:15, 18). The letter ends with a doxology (cf. Jude 2425), which is unusual because it is addressed to Christ, and not to God. The ending may be a doxology because the personal greetings of the typical epistolary ending would be difficult to construct for a pseudepigraph—that is, a work written as if someone other than its author wrote it. The author is mainly interested in being “Peter” to give instruction, not to elaborate a fiction. Christ’s glory is not and to the “day of eternity” (NRSV) or “forever” (NIV), the unending eschatological future to be ushered in at the parousia. It is the day dawning (1:19), the day of God (3:12).

apostle; the use of “our” in “our beloved brother Paul” probably refers to the apostles as a whole, with whom Peter is identified (1:1, 16-19). The author points out that both Peter and Paul have the same inspired message for the churches, Paul’s being written “according to the wisdom given him”—that is, by inspiration (like the OT prophets, 1:20-21). Paul sent his message to the churches in letters, which specific ones we do not know. Paul’s letters contain some things hard to understand (as the history of scholarship attests!), but it is implied that Peter can interpret them and that so can those with knowledge and stability, like the churches addressed. It is the “ignorant and unstable,” like the false teachers, who twist Paul’s revelation to their own destruction, as they do with the OT (1:20-21) and other sacred writings, the “other scriptures,” as well. Here the author is referring to the false teachers’ destructive opinions (2:1) and deceptive words (2:3)—that is, doctrine supporting behavior that leads to loss of salvation and destruction at judgment (2:1, 3, 12; 3:7). They may have misinterpreted (or even rejected) Paul’s teaching on the imminence of the parousia (Rom 13:11-12; Phil 4:5; 1 Thess 4:15) or understood some passages as being supportive of antinomianism, the teaching that moral laws are nullified by faith (2:19, “promise of freedom”; Rom 4:15; 5:20; 8:1; 1 Cor 6:12), a problem Paul himself faced (Rom 3:8; 6:15; Gal 5:13). Perhaps both notions are in view, since the eschatological

REFLECTIONS 1. Paul’s letters are sometimes hard to understand. This assessment by the author of 2 Peter is unsettling to some modern Christians. How can we say that about inspired Scripture written by an apostle? Lack of clarity results from several things. Paul was addressing the specific situations of his churches. They were familiar with the details of these situations and did not require Paul to provide explanation, even though we would like to have it today. (Just what was the Colossian heresy?) Paul and his churches shared social, cultural, and ideological assumptions and corresponding practices that are unfamiliar to us (e.g., honor and shame as a basis of social interaction). Thus Paul’s approach and advice to his congregations puzzles us. Finally, Paul’s approach to argumentation and persuasion are Jewish and Greco-Roman. The “logic” of his approach to a problem in a letter may elude us 2,000 years later (e.g., his argument for the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15). 2. Our eschatological expectation has a bearing on our ethics. Lack of any real expectation of the return of Christ in judgment can diminish our resolve to live a Christ-like life. However, a vital expectation can motivate us to set our ethical walk in order, to renounce immorality in every form, to repent of sin, and to be reconciled in every way with God. This is not only

360

2 PETER 3:14-18 REFLECTIONS for the negative reason of the fear of losing our salvation, but for the positive reason of wanting to be the kind of righteous person who can inhabit the new heavens and new earth. 3. When Scripture to truth change then live in delusion too the truth.

we are not properly conducting our lives as Christians we can tend to misinterpret support our perversion of the faith. Sin blinds us to the truth. Rather than let us, we change the truth so that we do not have to change to conform to it. We a delusion that we think justifies our thinking. We do not want to examine this carefully for fear that its weaknesses will become all too apparent in the light of ‘

4. The danger always exists that we can lose our spiritual stability by being carried away by false doctrine and practices. We cannot take our spiritual stability for granted. We should grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ, who is our Lord. It is knowledge of him and his grace freely given that has granted us everything necessary for life and godliness and supports the development of virtues and spiritual fruit in our lives, keeping us free from corruption. This growing or sanctification process is the antithesis of being carried away by wrong thinking and behavior, becoming ineffective in faith, forgetting cleansing from sin, and losing salvation (1:3-11).

361

ties +n’

* Aen ng et

See AER

Se

=e ea

ins

Mae PRS) -seCOND, AND THIRD PRETRs OF JOHN INTRODUCTION, COMMENTARY, AND REFLECTIONS

BY Cc CEIPPONsBEAGK

THE FIRST; SEGOND; AND det UR ode BRS OE

JOHN

INTRODUCTION ow plain, how full, and how deep a compendium of genuine Christianity!”! Thus did John Wesley (1703-91) estimate the First Epistle of John. As three of the canon’s catholic or general epistles (along with James, 1 and 2 Peter, and Jude), the Johannine letters have justly enjoyed esteem disproportionate to their size. As well as rewards, these texts offer their interpreters some mysteries.

THE AUTHORSHIP OF 1, 2, AND 3 JOHN AND THEIR ATTRIBUTION IN THE EARLY CHURCH Very little can be said with confidence about the author of these documents. Like the Fourth Gospel, the First Epistle of John is anonymous. The sender of 2 John (v. 1) and 3 John (v. 1) identifies himself, not as “John,” but as 0 tpeoBUTEpos (ho presbyteros, “the elder”), a designation patient of alternative interpretations (see the Commentary on 2 John 1). While the matter is beyond knockdown proof, the Second and Third Epistles are sufficiently similar to 1 John, stylistically and substantively, to suggest that “the elder” authored all three letters (cf. 1 John 2:7; 3:11/2 John 5-6; 1 John 3:6/3 John 11). This commentary will proceed from the assumption that the Johannine letters were composed by the same author, who, for the sake of convenience, will be referred to as “the elder.” For its first seven centuries the church’s reception of the Johannine epistles was fitful 1. John Wesley, The Works ofJohn Wesley, vol. 21: Journal and Diaries IV (1755-65), ed. W. Reginald Ward and Richard P. Heitzenrater (Nashville: Abingdon, 1992) 427 (journal entry for Thursday, September 1, 1763).

365

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

and heavily dependent on assumptions about their authorship. First John is the earliest and consistently best attested of the three; its wording is echoed as early as 135 CE in Polycarp’s Letters to the Philippians (cf. 7.1 with 1 John 2:24; 3:8; 4:2-3). Along with 2 John, 1 John is indisputably quoted around the year 180 in Irenaeus’s Against Heresies (cf. 1.16.3 with 2 John 11; 3.16.5 with 1 John 2:18-19, 21-22; 3.16.8 with 2 John 7-8 and 1 John 4:1-2; 5:1). From the third century onward, acceptance of the First Epistle was secure and widespread, owing mainly to its ascription to John the son of Zebedee, whom the early church came to identifyas the “disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23; 19:26-27; 20:1-10; 21:7, 20-24) and the author of the Fourth Gospel. Furthermore, 1 John’s content was found congenial with several religious and theological interests of the patristic church, such as refinements in the doctrine of sin and the refutation of heresy. Doubtful apostolic authorship and sparseness of content probably account for the slight use, neglect, or rejection of the Second and Third Epistles during the same period.* Third John is unattested until the mid—third century.’ It appears to have been carried into scriptural recognition on the coattails of 2 John, just as the popularity of the Second Epistle derived from the church’s recognition of the First. By the late fourth century, in some regions, the three epistles were regarded to be a unit and were circulated as such. As confirmed by the Venerable Bede (672/73-735), their collective acceptance into the canon was ultimately based on the medieval church’s consensus that the apostle John had authored all three epistles.° Nevertheless, there is no hard evidence to support the composition of 1, 2, or 3 John by John the apostle and son of Zebedee, an inference challenged as early as 130 CE by Papias of Hierapolis.° Likewise, Dionysius of Alexandria (d. c. 264) expressed doubt that John of Patmos, the author of Revelation (Rev 1:9; cf. Rev 1:1, 4; 22:8), had written either John’s epistles or the Gospel of John.’ The authorship of the Johannine letters remains a mystery. Unlike many patristic interpreters, however, we may safely regard these letters’ continuing benefit for the church as both logically and theologically independent of their authorship. If “the elder” did not consider the verification of his identity crucial for his message’s validity, then neither need we.

THE RELATION-OF THE EPISTLES TO THE GOSPEL OF JOHN Most interpreters, ancient and modern, have recognized an appreciable resemblance in the ideas and phraseology of the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine letters: among others, “to know [or walk in] the truth” (see John 8:32; 1 John 2:21; 2 John 1, 4; 3 John 3); “a 2. Cf. Tertullian On Modesty(c.220) 19.10, 26-28 with 1 John 4:2; 5:16-17. 3. See Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 3.24.17-18; 3.25.2-3. 4. Ibid., 6.25.10, citing Origen (c. 185-254), 5. Bede, Commentary on 2 John 1, in The Commentary on the Seven Catholic Epistles of Bede the Venerable, Cistercian Studies Series 82 (Kalamazoo, Mich.: Cistercian Publications, 1985) 231. 6. See Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 3.39-3-4. 7. Ibid., 7.25.18-23. See R. Alan Culpepper, John, the Son of Zebedee: The Life of aLegend, Studies on Personalities

of the New Testament (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1994). This work is a definitive study of the figure of John in Christian antiquity. On traditions related to the Johannine letters, see 89-95.

366

1, 2, AND 3 JOHN—INTRODUCTION commandment” to “love one another” (John 13:34; 15:12, 17; 1 John 3:23; 2 John 5); the completion of joy among believers (John 15:11; 16:24; 17:13, 1 John 1:4; 2 John 12). The likenesses between the Gospel of John and 1 John are especially abundant; for instance, the address to believers as little children (John 13:33; 21:5; 1 John 2:1, 12, 14, 18, 24); the presentation of Jesus as advocate, or “Paraclete” (John 14:16; 1 John 2:1); the world as the realm of disbelief or hostility John 7:7; 8:23; 15:18, 19; 17:16, 25; 1 John 2:16; 3:1, 13; 4:5); the importance of “abiding” in God or in Christ John 6:56; 15:4, 5, 6, 7; 1 John 2:6, 27, 28; 3:6, 24; 4:13, 15, 16). Such resemblances as these would seem to support the composition of 1, 2, and 3 John by the Fourth Evangelist, a position held by some scholars.* Their equally impressive differences, some of which will be detailed below, lead most interpreters (including me) to think that the Gospel and the epistles were probably composed by different authors within a circle of communities that shared a common Johannine tradition.’ Heavier debate swirls around the letters’ dating. Which came first: one or all of the epistles or John’s Gospel? The question of chronology usually turns on the interpretation of perceived divergences, between the letters and the Gospel, in their social situation and theological point of view. Commentators’ assessments of the evidence split into roughly four groups: (1) those who believe that one or more of the letters antedated the Gospel; (2) those who think that John was written before 1, 2, or 3 John; (3) those who hypothesize a more fluid, mutually contemporary process of composition, in which the characteristics of one or more of the epistles are in some way presupposed by parts of the Gospel; and (4) those who find the evidence too ambiguous to invest confidence in any proposed sequence for the creation of these writings.'° The complexity implied by alternative (3) is plausible, though by its nature impossible to reconstruct without considerable speculation. Option (4) is laudable for its candor and (1) for its inclination to treat the letters on their own terms; still, it is difficult to interpret the vagaries of 2, 3, and especially 1 John apart from the Fourth Gospel.'! Less problematic is a modified version of possibility (2): if the letters do not rely on John in its finished form, they manifestly draw from a Johannine tradition whose most extensive 8. See, forinstance, A. E. Brooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, |CC (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1912) i-xix; Werner Georg Kiimmel, /ntroduction to the New Testament, rev. ed. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1975) 442-45, 449-51. 9. Among others, C. H. Dodd, “The First Epistle of John and the Fourth Gospel,” B/RL 21 (1937) 129-56, which is presupposed by the same author’s The Johannine Epistles, MNTC (New York: Harper and Bros., 1946); Judith Lieu, The Second and Third Epistles ofJohn: History and Background, Studies of the New Testament and Its World (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1986) 205-22; Hans-Josef Klauck, Der erste Johannesbrief, EKKNT 23 (Ziirich: Benziger/Neukirchener, 1991) 42-47; Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: Introduction and Commentary (New York: Crossroad, 1992) 34-39. a Each of these alternatives is exemplified, respectively, by Georg Strecker, The Johannine Letters: ACommentary on 1, 2, and 3 John, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995) xxxv-xliii; Stephen S. Smalley, 7, 2, 3John, WBC (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1984) xxxv-xliii; Charles H. Talbert, Reading John:A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine Epistles, Reading the New Testament (New York: Crossroad, 1992); and Judith M. Lieu, The Theology of the Johannine Epistles, New Testament Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). 11. Similarly, see D. Moody Smith, First, Second, and Third John, \nterpretation (Louisville.: John Knox, 1991) esp. 1AN28.32, 30:

367

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

extant deposit is that Gospel. Such an assessment comports with a date for the epistles’ composition around the turn of the first century CE, as most commentators suggest and the evidence of Polycarp supports.'* We cannot be sure that these letters were composed in the order that they were canonized. Working from the assumption that all three were written at about the same time, in practice most interpreters have found 2 and 3 John more intelligible in the light of 1 John. Since Smyrna’s Bishop Polycarp Knew 1 John, Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey) is a possible provenance for the letters; of late, however, scholars have tended to locate the Johannine literature closer to Palestine, perhaps in Syria. Itis impossible, in any case, to confirm the epistles’ original locale. Also beyond verification is their composition after the Fourth Gospel. Nevertheless, 1 John appears to know at least the tradition on which that Gospel was based. Accordingly, the present commentary will interpret the letters of John within the context of the Gospel of John.

THE SETTING OF THEJOHANNINE.LEETERS IN RELIGIOUS ANTIQUITY Introducing his exegesis of the Johannine epistles in The Interpreter’s Bible, Amos N. Wilder observed that, in contrast to John’s Gospel, 1 John “lacks evidence of Semitic style. It reflects more directly than John a Hellenistic milieu . . . not Greek, properly speaking, but Oriental-Gnostic.”'* Wilder’s appraisal conformed with Rudolf Bultmann’s analysis of the First Epistle, which hypothesized a source with oriental, non-Christian gnostic tendencies, used but corrected by the author of 1 John." Especially in Germany there is continuing support for the view that John’s Gospel and letters are at home within gnosticism (asyncretistic movement, characterized by a radically dualistic worldview, which proposed salvation by revealed, esoteric knowledge). Such a theory is by no means impossible; nevertheless, it runs up against substantial problems. The correspondence between gnostic and Johannine conceptuality is not as precise as sometimes alleged, and the literature of gnosticism, though indebted to older traditions, is considerably later than any of the NT documents. At present many scholars speak with less certitude than Bultmann or Wilder of a gnostic background for the Johannine letters. They are more inclined to regard Johannine Christianity as a part of the background for gnosticism as it evolved in the second century and beyond. An important reassessment of Johannine literature has occurred with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which can be confidently dated to the century before the NT. Understandably, Wilder’s treatment of 1 John’s background does not engage the Qumran 12. Polycarp Letter to the Philippians 7.1. 13. Amos N. Wilder, “The First, Second, and Third Epistles of John,” in JB, ed. George Buttrick et al., 12 vols.

(Nashville: Abingdon, 1957) 12:213.

14. Rudolf Bultmann, “Analyse des ersten Johannesbriefes,” Festgabe flir Adolf Jtilicher zum 70. Geburtstag (Ttibingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1927) 138-58. Bultmann’s theory, refined to posit an “ecclesiastical redaction” of the First Epistle, was presupposed for his commentary The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973).

368

1, 2, AND 3JOHN—INTRODUCTION texts, the first of which had been found less than ten years before he penned his introduction. The parallels between the scrolls and John’s epistles should not be exaggerated. To take-but one example, Qumran’s radically pious devotion to the law of Moses!® is obviously different from 1 John’s radical obedience to the commandments of Jesus Christ (2:3; 3:23). Yet the affinities between Johannine and Qumran language are equally hard to deny; among others, “doing the truth” (1 John 1:6 [also John 3:21]/1QS 1:5; 5:3; 8:2) and “walking in light” or “in darkness” (1 John 1:6-7; 2:9-11 [also John 12:35-36]/10S 3:20-25). Although the nature of the relationship between John and Qumran remains a debated question, the discovery of the scrolls has indisputably enhanced scholars’ appreciation of Jewish influence, beyond the OT, on the Johannine writings.'° As a result, John’s vocabulary and ideas, which at one time seemed closely akin to Greco-Roman mysticism

or “higher paganism,”!” have been largely reconceived within the contexts of Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism. More conspicuous in the religious background of John’s letters, especially 1 John, are basic confessions within early Christianity about God, Christ, and Christian responsibility.'® The claim that God sent the Son into the world (1 John 4:9) to accomplish, by his sacrificial death, atonement for sin (2:2; 4:10), salvation (4:14), and familial fellowship with God (1:3) lies at, or very near, the core of the proclamation of other New Testament witnesses (cf. Matt 11:25-27/ Luke 10:21-22; Acts 3:19; Rom 3:25; 8:15-17; Gal 4:4; Eph 2:1-10; Heb 4:15-5:10; 9:11-10:18). While nuanced in a distinctively Johannine idiom (cf. John 7:17; 13:34; 16:8, 10), the importance of doing God’s will (1 John 2:17), the performance of righteousness (1 John 3:7, 17), and the commandment to love God and neighbor (1 John 4:21) are closely paralleled in the synoptic Gospels (Matt 7:21; Mark 3:35 par.; 12:28-34 par.; Luke 6:46; 13:25-27), in Paul (Rom 12:2; 13:9-10; Gal 5:14), and in James (Jas 2:15-16). Like Paul (1 Cor 15:3-11), the author of 1 John (1:1-4; 2:7; 3:11) underscores the indebtedness of his preaching to Christian tradition shared with his readers. Close verbal and conceptual similarities that obtain between the Gospel and epistles of John were noted earlier in this introduction. The letters of John apparently drew from, and exemplify, a discrete Johannine tradition within primitive Christianity. Whether this tradition manifested itself sociologically as a “sect” or a “school” has been much discussed in the past twenty-five years; predictably, judgments in that matter depend greatly on how 15. See 10S 5:8, 21; 6:6; 8:15; 1QpHab 7:10-11. 16. See Marie-Emile Boismard, “The First Epistle of John and the Writings of Qumran,” in John and the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Crossroad, 1991) 156-65. The influence on 1 John of OT narratives (like that of Cain and Abel, 1 John 3:12; cf. Gen 4:1-16) and ideas (notably sin and its atonement, | John 2:2, cf. Lev 16:1-34) is real, though apparently minimal. The question of Scripture’s bearing on the Johannine letters has been usefully reopened by Judith M. Lieu, “What Was from the Beginning: Scripture and Tradition in the Johannine Epistles,” NW7S

39 (1993) 458-77. 17. Notably, Dodd, 7he Johannine Epistles, xvi-xxi, which anticipated his more extensive account in The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953) 3-130.

18. On this subject Otto A. Piper, “I John and the Didache of the Primitive Church,” /BL 66 (1947) 437-51, remains well worth consulting.

369

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

those terms are defined.!° For the purpose of this commentary one need only observe that 1 John implies, and 2 John (v. 1) and 3 John (v. 1) expressly indicate, the existence of different Christian congregations within a Johannine network, for which those letters’ author assumes an advisory and perhaps supervisory responsibility. The situation seems similar to that in Revelation 1-3, where John of Patmos issues encouragement and warning to a nearby circle of seven churches in Asia Minor. At the time of the composition of the Johannine epistles, the communities addressed by the elder showed signs of disintegrating (on which, see below).

THE GENRE OF 1, Z, AND 3 JOHN On at least one feature of the Johannine epistles there is practically universal agreement: Second and Third John are real letters, adhering as closely to the epistolary conventions of antiquity as any such literature in the NT. Second John contains petitions addressed to a community. Third John is a more private communication (v. 1), adopting the form of a letter of recommendation (v. 12). Identifying the genre of the First Epistle, however, has proved vexing, both for what it contains and for what it lacks. In comparison with ancient letters, 1 John has neither a formal salutation nor a formal conclusion. While epistolary material may stand without the former (Hebrews) or the latter James), it is unusual for an epistle to omit both. Most commentators concur that the form of 1 John does not clearly register as that of an epistle, but there is no consensus on how this document should be classified—whether as an essay, or a treatise, a sermon or a manifesto, an encyclical or a circular letter, to name but a few proposals. Functionally at least, some of these alternatives (sermon or essay) are more closely analogous to documents contemporaneous with 1 John than are others (encyclical). Furthermore, many scholars judge 1 John to be acommentary on, or in some sense an application of, the Johannine tradition, perhaps even to the extent of being

modeled after the Fourth Gospel’s general framework.”° If these questions cannot be resolved, they can be clarified. Whatever its genre, 1 John is a written communication (1:4; 2:1, 7-8, 12-14, 21, 26; 5:13), which does not preclude its having been experienced orally or aurally by its first readers. It is unwise to force 1 John into a single generic pigeonhole. In antiquity literary categories—letters, in particular— were often conflated with other genres (as we can witness throughout the canon). In the NT, form typically follows function; it is more important that we understand what 1 John does, less crucial that we agree on the right tag with which to label it. 19. Noteworthy are the studies by Wayne A. Meeks, “The Man from Heaven in Johannine Sectarianism,” JB 91 (1972) 44-72; R. Alan Culpepper, 7he Johannine School:An Evaluation of the Johannine-School Hypothesis Based on an Investigation of the Nature of Ancient Schools, SBLDS 26 (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1975); and D. Moody Smith, “Johannine Christianity: Some Reflections on Its Character and Delineation,” N7S21 (1976) 222-48. 20. For two very different hypotheses in this vein, see Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John: Translated with Introduction, Notes, and Commentary, AB 30 (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1982) 116-29, and Kenneth Grayston, The Johannine Epistles, NCB (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984) 3-4.

370

1, 2, AND 3 JOHN—INTRODUCTION

On the face of the evidence, 1 John is concerned with proclamation (1:1-3), exhortation (2:7-11), and encouragement (2:12-14). Frequently, all three activities are tightly entwined (e.g., 1:5-2:6). Like Hebrews, 1 John functions as a “word of exhortation” (kdyos Tis TapaKkAnoews logos tes parakleseos ; Heb 13:22; cf. Acts 13:15), though that term appears in none of the Johannine writings and should not be pressed as a hard-and-fast classification of 1 John. Provided that we bear in mind the limits of the traditional characterization, there is no harm in our calling 1 John a.“letter” or an “epistle,” as a matter of convenience and responsible alignment of that document with 2 and 3 John. Finally, while the Johannine letters manifest an appropriation of the Johannine tradition, it is less clear that 1 John is so closely patterned after the Gospel of John that the First Epistle was intended to serve as an extended commentary on the Fourth Gospel. First John’s affinities with John might be better conceived as functionally akin to those reflections on the biblical witness that are integral components of 7he New Interpreter’s Bible. Thatis to say, the elder engages his community’s tradition, drawing outsome ofits theological implications for the life of the church in a new day.

THE STRUCTURE AND STYLE OF THE JOHANNINE LETTERS Exhortations to communal life in Christian love and truth lie at the heart of the more general Second Epistle of John and the more pointed Third. Combined with the letters’ brevity, this hortatory core has made it rather easy for interpreters to articulate the structure of 2 and 3 John. Again, however, the First Epistle is more difficult to analyze. Thoughtful interpreters have long disagreed on this document’s organization. Some perceive in 1 John an intricately woven structure; others a pattern no more discernible than “the waves of the sea.””! Describing the argument of the First Epistle, John Calvin (1509-64) noted that “it contains teaching mixed with exhortations.” Many modern interpreters concur that an oscillation of proclamation with paraenesis (moral exhortation) distinguishes the framework of 1 John.22 Most commentators agree, further, that its thought does not adhere to a single, tightly reasoned line of argument. In musical terms, 1 John is not a Brandenburg Concerto that chugs relentlessly along a straight line from start to finish. The First Epistle is more like Ravel’s vertiginous Bolero, which repeats a few themes with increasingly complex orchestration. “The writer ‘thinks around’ a succession of related topics,” as C. H. Dodd observed. “The development of a theme brings us back almost to the starting-point; almost, but not quite, for there is a slight shift which provides a transition to a fresh theme; or it may be to a theme which had apparently been dismissed at an earlier point, and now comes up for consideration from a slightly different angle.” 21. Friedrich Hauck, Die Briefe des Jakobus, Petrus, Judas und Johannes: Kirchenbriefe, Sth ed., NID (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1949) 115. Brown tabulates over four dozen discrepant divisions of | John, proposed by as many commentators. See Brown, Epistles ofJohn, 117n. 269, 764. 22. Along this line, Theodor Haring, “Gedankengang und Grundgedanke des ersten Johannesbriefes,” in Theologisches Abhandlungen, ed. Carl von Weizsacker (Freiburg im Breisgau: Mohr, 1892) 171-200, has proved influential. Cf. John Calvin, The Gospel According to St John 11-21 and the First Epistle of John, ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961) 231. 23. C.H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, MNTC (New York: Harper and Bros., 1946)

371

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

The movements of thought within 1 John are held together by at least two devices. The author uses particular words or phrases to link clusters of thought—e.g., “sin” or “walks in darkness” (1:5-2:11/2:12-17); “born of God” and “children of God” (2:18-29/3:1-24); to “know the spirit of truth” and to “know God” (4:1-6/4:7-5:5). The elder also employs “hinge verses” whose themes pivot between the letter’s parts—e.g., 2:28-29 (“abide in him”/“born of him”) and 5:12-13 (“the Son of God”/“have [eternal] life”). Many commentators are less inclined than some of their early twentieth-century predecessors to regard conceptual tensions within 1 John as vestiges of a complex redaction of traditions or sources. While not inconceivable, such a process is largely if not entirely untraceable.” In pointing up its convoluted structure, an important and pervasive aspect of 1 John’s style comes into focus. The technical term for its circular redundancy is “amplification”: a rhetorical technique, based on patterns of parallelism, that suggested to ancient listeners a grandeur appropriate for the consideration of lofty, even divine, matters. Even to modern ears | John’s famous disquisition on love (4:7-21) registers with extraordinary gravity because of what the elder says and the sonority with which he says it. Yet the elder is not merely an accomplished stylist. His manner has a theological point, for the discourse in 1 John is unmistakably redolent of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel (cf. John 17:20-26). The rhetoric of 1 John “abides” in the speech of the Johannine Jesus, enacting the elder’s assurance, “This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you” (1 John 1:54 NRSV; cf. John 17:7-8).*° THE ADVERSARIAL CHARACTER OF 1, 2, AND 3 JOHN Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? (1 John 2:22 NRSV) Many deceivers have gone out into world... any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist! (2 John 7 NRSV)

Whoever does good is of God; whoever does evil has not seen God. (3 John 116 NRSV)

Since the Middle Ages most commentators have detected a polemical edge in John’s epistles. There has been considerably less agreement on the nature of the opposition challenged by the elder. Such a question is still worth pondering, for if we grossly misunderstand the elder’s points of resistance, we may vastly misconstrue the letters’ implications in our own day. Only broad dimensions of this critical issue can be sketched here, along with some reasons for the approach adopted in this commentary. 24. Nevertheless, Kysar considers 1 John “a hurried union of disparate pieces... a kind of anthology of bits of sermons patched together and rendered into a written form for circulation.” See Robert Kysar, /, IJ, I// John, Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1986) 16. 25. See C. Clifton Black, “ ‘The Words That You Gave to Me I Have Given to Them’: The Grandeur of Johannine Rhetoric,” in Exploring the Gospel of John in Honor of D. Moody Smith, ed. R. Alan Culpepper and C. Clifton Black (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996) 220-39.

372

by 2eAND 3 JOHN—INTRODUCTION

The Third Epistle patently revolves around the offer and refusal of hospitality among communities within the Johannine circle (see 3John 3, 5-8, 100, 12). As shall be considered in the Commentary and Reflections on 3 John, larger issues of authority may underlie this controversy (3 John 4, 9). The elder’s brush across theologically charged topics within Johannine tradition (“love,” 3 John 1, 6; “truth,” 3 John 1, 3-4, 8, 12) has prompted many interpreters to imagine a doctrinal component in this letter’s dispute over jurisdiction. The elder, however, neither nfakes that connection explicit nor elaborates any theological terms in 3 John. The issue of hospitality, particularly the basis for its denial, recurs in 2 John (vv. 10-11), though here the topic is eclipsed by a more obviously theological concern: the teaching of many deceivers that Jesus Christ has not come in the flesh (2 John 7-9). Similar worries apparently motivate some comments in the First Epistle. The nub of the dispute alluded to in 2 John 7 is echoed in 1 John 4:203. The elder insists, in addition, that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22), belief in which assures that one is born of God (1 John 5:1). Those who confess Jesus as the Son of God abide in God (1 John 4:15) and conquer the world (1 John 5:5). Jesus Christ came, not with the water only, but with the water and the blood (1 John 5:6). The denial of such claims is associated with “many antichrists,” “false prophets,” and “liars” (1 John 2:18-19, 22; 4:1, 30, 5; 5:10). Also considered a “liar” is one who claims sinlessness but disobeys the commandments (1 John 1:10; 2:4), who professes love for God but hates other Christians (1 John 4:20). First John indicates, furthermore, that certain dissidents have broken off relations with the elder and his audience (1 John 2:18-19; 4:1-3). On its face the evidence suggests that 1 John, like 2 and 3 John, has arisen from an adversial situation. Beyond this point any assessment of the elder’s opponents becomes deeply conjectural and impossible to verify with confidence. The position challenged by the elder appears to have an affinity with docetism (S0xeiv dokein, “to seem"), a second-century theological trend that, according to Ignatius (d. c. 110 CE), disavowed Jesus Christ as “flesh-bearing,"° claimed that Christ “merely seemed to suffer,"?” and rejected the saving significance of Christ’s death.”* In spite of ingenious attempts by some commentators to fill the gap,” the elder himself does not clarify the connection, if any, between his adversaries’ docetic leanings and their dubious conduct. While the Johannine letters bear real marks of contentious literature, we should beware of overinterpreting the evidence. Of the elder’s opponents we have no direct knowledge independent of his imputations, which are scant, vague, and partial. Moreover, some of 1 John’s refutations probably reflect their author’s dialectical style; he is not always 26. Ignatius Smyrn. 5.2. 27. Ignatius Trall. 9.1; 10. 28. Ignatius Smyrn. 7.1; Magn. 11. 29. See, e.g., John Painter, “The ‘Opponents’ in 1 John,” N7S 32 (1986) 48-71. Brown’s magisterial commentary (Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John: Translated with Introduction, Notes, and Commentary, AB 30 {Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1982] esp. 69-115) is predicated on his subtle reconstruction of contesting interpretations of Johannine thought and practice: Raymond E. Brown, The Community of the Beloved Disciple (New York: Paulist, 1979) esp. 93-167.

3/3

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

rebutting adversaries, but sometimes provoking friends to self-examination (see 1 John 1:6-7; 2:9-11; 4:7-8, 19-21; 5:12).°° One’s perception of these epistles’ whispered quarrels should be balanced, therefore, by confessing one’s ignorance of their depth, coherence, and precise profile. “The work of reconstruction is always fascinating,” A. E. Brooke mused. “But we have to remember how few of the necessary bricks are supplied to us, and how large a proportion of the building material we have to fashion for ourselves.”*!

MAJOR THEMES OF THE JOHANNINE EPISTLES The primary subjects to which the elder returns are tightly interwoven, though no more systematically coordinated than those of any NT author. Before engaging in commentary, it is vital that we take our bearings on these letters’ theology, with attention to its development beyond the Gospel of John. 1. “God is Light and in Him There is no Darkness At All”: The Nature of God. C. K. Barrett’s assessment of the Fourth Evangelist may also be pertinent to the author of the Johannine epistles: “There could hardly be a more Christocentric writer than John, yet his very Christocentricity is theocentric.”** If anything, this “theocentric Christocentricity” is clearer in the letters. For the elder, God is the standard of fidelity, of righteousness (1 John 1:9; 3:7), and of goodness (3 John 11), the agent of forgiveness (1 John 1:9; 2:12) whose essential character is light (1 John 1:5, 7), purity (1 John 3:3), truth (1 John 5:20), and, most especially, prevenient love (1 John 4:7-12, 16, 19). From this central understanding of God radiate most of the letters’ other themes. Jesus, God’s Son, has been sent by the Father as the Savior of the world (1 John 4:14). Through the Son (1 John 2:23; 5:20), who enables obedience to his commandments (1 John 2:3-5), all believers “have” or “know” God (1 John 2:23; 4:7-8; 2 John 9). They abide in or experience a fully reciprocal relationship with God (1 John 1:3; 2:24; 3:24; 4:13-16). Throughout the Johannine epistles (1 John 1:2-3; 2:1, 15-16, 22-24; 3:1; 4:14; 2 John 3-4, 9), the image of God as father is adopted by the elder to convey God’s personal and caring nature, not God’s gender. Much like John Wesley centuries later, the elder favors a model of God as

provider and loving parent. 30. 1979) 31. 1912)

See Pheme Perkins, The Johannine Letters, New Testament Message 21 (Wilmington, Del.: Michael Glazier, xvi-xxiii; Judith M. Lieu, “ ‘Authority to Become Children of God’: A Study of 1 John,” Nov723 (1981) 210-28. A.E. Brooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, 1CC (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, xxxix-xl.

32. “ ‘The Father Is Greater Than I’ John 14:28: Subordinationist Christology in the New Testament,” in C. K. Barrett, Essays on John (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1982) 32. See also the finely nuanced treatment by Paul W. Meyer, “The Father’: The Presentation of God in the Fourth Gospel,” in Exploring the Gospel ofJohn in Honor of D. Moody Smith, ed. R. Alan Culpepper and C. Clifton Black (Louisville: Westmisnter John Knox, 1996) 255-73. 33. On the language of God’s fatherhood in the Johannine tradition, see B. F. Westcott, The Epistles of StJohn: The Greek Text with Notes and Essays (London: Macmillan, 1909) 27-34; on the appropriation of that language in our day, see Gail R. O’Day, “John,” in The Women’s Bible Commentary, ed. Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992) 303-4. On Wesley’s characterizations of God, consult Randy L. Maddox, Responsible Grace: John Wesley’s Practical Theology (Nashville: Kingswood, 1994) 48-64.

374

1, 2, AND 3 JOHN—INTRODUCTION 2. “What we have seen and heard we proclaim to you”: The Traditional Context for Theological Understanding. If God is the magnetic north of the elder’s theological compass, then the Johannine kerygma (“proclamation”) shared with his readers is one pole of that magnetic field. Incisive interpretations of this tradition are not the elder’s forte, and its innovative reformulation is not his aim (cf. 2 John 9). Instead, the believing community is repeatedly driven back to “that which was heard from the beginning,” a primordial declaration of faith that still impinges forcefully on the church’s present experience (1 John 1:1-5; 2:7, 24; 3:11; 2 John 5-6). Although less overtly engaged with Scripture than is the Fourth Gospel (John 5:39, 45-47; 7:23), “the message we have heard and declare” remains wedded in 1 John with OT precept and example (1 John 2:2/Lev 16:16, 30; 1 John 3:12/Gen 4:1-6). The community’s faith is crystallized in remembered commandments of Christ (1 John 2:7-8; 2 John 5-6), the example of Jesus (1 John 2:6; 3:16-17), and Christian creedal affirmations (1 John 4:2, 5:6). For proper interpretations of that tradition, the elder recognizes the church’s experience of being anointed as “children of God” (1 John 2:20, 27; 3:1-2) and the necessity of “test[ing] the spirits” for their authenticity (1 John 4:1-6). 3. “Children, it is the last hour!” The Eschatological Context for Theological Understanding. The elder’s retrospection should not mislead us to think that he and his readers are stuck in the past. To the contrary, the Johannine epistles are attracted to an apocalyptically charged expectation. In this view—played down in the Fourth Gospel (cf. John 3:36; 5:24-29; 6:39-40; 11:23-26) though prevalent in NT documents early (1 Thess 4:13-5:11) and late (2 Peter 3:1-18)—history is hurtling toward its divinely appointed end. Confirmation of this belief lies, for the elder, in the coming of “antichrist” (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7). This expression, unique to the Johannine letters, personifies a cataclysmic evil that some expected to flare up before God’s final victory (cf. Dan 11:36-12:13; 2 Thess 2:3-9). Not fear, but confidence (tappnota parrésia), encouragement, and hope for the church flow from the prospect of Christ’s coming (tapovota parousia, 1 John 2:28; 3:2-3; 4:17-18; 2 John 8). This apocalyptic view of the future provides a lens through which the community’s present experience is viewed; the elder regards both confession and schism within the church, not as theologically neutral, but as indicators of a cosmic drama, played out under the direction of a provident God. 4. “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh”: Who Jesus Is. Since the christology of the Johannine epistles is not systematically presented, one can safely speak only of emphases in the elder’s portrayal of Jesus. Undeniably, Jesus is the Christ, “the anointed one” (1 John 2:22; 5:1). That identification of Jesus is exceeded by another: the Son of God (2:22-23; 4:15; 5:5, 10, 20), which, though apparently interchangeable with Christ (5:1, 5), accents his intimate relation with God the Father (1:3; 2:23-24; 4:13). This conjunction is so close that at many points in 1 John it is impossible to tell whether the pronouns “he” or “him” refer to Jesus or to God (see 1 John 1:9-10; 2:3-6, 27-28; 3:23-24; 4:17). This ambiguity may suggest a high christology, effectively equating Jesus with God; or it may 315

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

simply betoken a lack of precision in the elder’s wording. “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” (1 John 4:2 NRSV) is a confession that, for the elder, appears to have acquired the status of proper doctrine (8.8ax1 didache ; 2 John 7-10). That a claim so unobjectionable on its face requires such emphasis, and elicits such sharp repudiation of those who deny it, suggests that Christ’s incarnation had become a disputed point within Johannine Christianity at the time of these letters.“ 5. “He is the expiation for our sins”: What Jesus Does. In general, Jesus in 1 John deals with sin and its consequences. By his blood, believers are cleansed from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:76, 9), their sins forgiven for his sake (1 John 1:9; 2:12). Indeed, Jesus expunges the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2; 3:5; cf. John 1:29). These claims are related to the depiction of Jesus as a thaouds (hilasmos), an “atoning sacrifice” for sins (1 John 2:2; 4:10). This term is unique to 1 John in the NT, although Romans (Rom 3:25) and Hebrews (Heb 2:17; 9:5) contain cognates. Antecedents for the concept of vicarious expiation by one who is pure or without sin can be found in OT descriptions of cultic sacrifice (cf. Lev 4:1-35; 16:1-34 with 1 John 3:3, 5;'1 Pet 1:18-19), which later were broadened in reference to pious martyrs for the Jewish nation (4 Macc 6:28-29; 17:21-22). For any believer who sins, Jesus Christ the righteous is an advocate (tapdkAntos parakletos) before the Father (1 John 2:1; cf. John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7, where intercession is performed by the Holy Spirit). “Anointing” by “the Holy One,” which instructs the church and verifies its knowledge, is yet another expression of Christ’s (or the Spirit’s) benefits (1 John 2:20, 27). An interesting feature of all these models of salvation is that they are confined neither to Jesus’ past death nor to his future coming, but are considered perpetually effective in the church’s present experience. 6. “Beloved, let us love one another”: The Shape of Christian Existence. God’s activity in Christ establishes the context for Christian life and self-critical discernment. First John insists on the inseparability of religious experience from moral conduct, with reciprocal testing of the one’s soundness by the other’s vitality (1 John 1:6-7; 2:3-6, 9-11; 3:6-18, 24; 4:7-12, 20-21). Thus, being “born” of God (1 John 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18) or a “child” of God (1 John 3:1, 2, 10; 5:2), “knowing” God (1 John 2:3; 3:6) or “abidling] in him” (1 John 2:6, 10, 17; 3:6-10, 24; 4:16), do not describe an inward, mystical state but are concretely manifested by “doing what is right,” “keeping his commandments,” or “walk{ing] just as he walked” (1 John 2:3, 6; 3:10, 14a, 22; 5:3). By contrast, “the children of the devil,” who “abide in death” and falsehood, are recognizable by their unrighteousness, disobedience, and lack of love (1 John 2:4; 3:10, 140; cf. 3 John 11). Pulsing throughout the First Epistle is a tension, if not contradiction, between candid acknowledgment of persistent sin within the church (1 John 1:8-2:1; 5:16-17) and categorical denial that one begotten of God can sin (1 John 3:6, 9; 5:18). If 1 John does 34. See M. de Jonge, “The Use of the Word XPIZTO> in the Johannine Epistles,” in Studies in John Presented to Professor Dr. J. N. Sevenster, NovTSup 24 (Leiden: Brill, 1970) 66-74.

376

1, 2, AND 3 JOHN—INTRODUCTION

not resolve this theological dilemma, it effectively crystallizes it as a pressing question for subsequent Christian theology. The observation of Augustine (354-430) that 1 John commends nothing else but love is only slightly exaggerated.*° More than any other concept, love (aya agape )expresses the abiding nature of the unseen God (1 John 4:7 0, 80, 12, 16), whose initiative in sending his Son reveals that love (1 John 3:16; 4:9-10), evokes love as a possibility among us (1 John 4:11, 19), and specifies the practical pattern to which our responsive love should conform (1 John 3:17-18; 5:3; 2 John 6). God’s love for us (1 John 2:5; 3:1; 4:16-17) and our love for God (1 John 4:20-21; 5:1) are perfected in our sibling love for one another (1 John 2:10; 3:10-11, 14, 23; 4:7, 11-12, 20-21; 5:2; 2 John 5; see also John 13:34; 15:12, 17). While the world’s hatred belongs to the sphere of darkness and is not to be reciprocated (1 John 2:9-11; 3:13-15), the elder’s attention to love does appear intramurally preoccupied, the universal potential of the Johannine love command recognized (1 John 2:2; 4:14), yet left undeveloped.

Dae CETTERS OF JOHN IN CEE Eire OF THE CHURCH Just as for the rest of the NT, the church is the native habitat for 1, 2, and 3 John. These documents offer us, as it were, blurred snapshots of primitive Christian communities— congregations that grappled with some implications of their own religious tradition, appealing to doctrine, policy, and authority that were all at an embryonic stage. These epistles adapted the legacy of John for a new day, much as 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus appropriated the Pauline tradition. To characterize 1,2, and 3 Johnas “Johannine Pastorals” thus captures something essentially true to their aims and theological temperament.°*° In our own era John’s epistles have not wanted for scholarly commentary. The depth of their appropriation within the church is harder to gauge. The Revised Common Lectionary (1992) assigns six excerpts from 1 John (1:1—2:2; 3:1-7; 3:16-24; 4:7-21; 5:1-6; 5:9-13) as the epistle readings for the second through seventh Sundays of Easter (Year B), as well as 1 John 3:1-3 for All Saints (Year A). Neither 2 John nor 3 John appears in the Common Lectionary, which is not surprising; also missing are other NT passages that blaze with controversy, such as John 8:12-59; 1 Cor 4:6—5:5; Gal 2:1-14; 1 John 2:18-27; 4:1-6; and Jude. Regrettably, pitched conflict is as much a part of our past as it is of our present, no less in Christianity than in other religions. However we assess the responses

of early Johannine Christians, the issues that these letters raise—among others, the maintenance of confessional integrity and the potential for congregational self-destruction—must be faced by Christians in every age. 35. Augustine, “Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of St. John,” in Augustine: Later Works, selected and trans. John Burnaby, The Library of Christian Classics (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1955) 259-348, esp. 329. 36. The landmark statement of this idea is Hans Conzelmann, “ ‘Was von Anfang War,’ ” in Neutestamentliche Studien fiir Rudolf Bultmann zu seinem 70. Geburtstag, ed. Walther Eltester, BZNW 21 (Berlin: Topelmann, 1954) 194-201. The polychromatic picture of the church emerging from these documents is examined in C. Clifton Black, “The Johannine Epistles and the Question of Early Catholicism,” Nov7'28 (1986) 131-58.

Oi

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

Finally, this literature does not invite rendition in a minor Key. The Johannine letters assure Christians of their calling, grounded not in their own ability under stress but in God’s enduring, self-sacrificial love for them. First John’s confidence was abundantly clear to Martin Luther (1483-1546): “This is an outstanding epistle. It can buoy up afflicted hearts. Furthermore, it has John’s style and manner of expression, so beautifully and gently

does it picture Christ to us.”°” What Luther implies, Wesley states outright in a comment that for many readers of these epistles still rings true: “And in [addressing his contemporaries, the elder] speaks to the whole Christian church in all succeeding ages.” 37. Martin Luther, “Lectures on the First Epistle of St. John,” Luther’s Works, vol. 10. The Catholic Epistles, ed. Jaroslav Pelikan and Walter A. Hansen (St. Louis: Concordia, 1967) 219. 38. John Wesley, “Spiritual Worship” (sermon 77), in The Works ofJohn Wesley, vol. 3: Sermons 71-114, ed. Albert C. Outler (Nashville: Abingdon, 1986) 89.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Commentaries:

Brown, Raymond E. The Epistles ofJohn. AB 30. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1982. Comprehensive in scope, meticulous in detail. A benchmark in Johannine study.

Bultmann, Rudolf. 7he Johannine Epistles: ACommentary on the Johannine Epistles. Edited by Robert W. Funk. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973. A slender, somewhat idiosyncratic treatment by the twentieth century’s foremost Johannine interpreter. Dodd, C. H. The Johannine Epistles. MNTC. New York: Harper and Bros, 1946. Inevitably dated in its scholarship, but still glistening with theological discernment. Kysar, Robert. /, //, /// John. Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1986. Based on sound scholarship, a clear introduction from which laity may profit handsomely.

Schnackenburg, Rudolf. The Johannine Epistles: Introduction and Commentary. New York: Crossroad, 1992. A standard treatment since 1953, now in its seventh edition (German original, 1984). Unusually rich in theological exposition.

Smalley, Stephen S. /, 2, 3John. WBC 51. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1984. A technical commentary on the Greek text, written from a British evangelical perspective. Smith, D. Moody. First, Second, and Third John. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox, 1991. Concise, balanced, and acute; aimed at teaching and preaching within the church. Strecker, Georg. The Johannine Letters: A Commentary on 1, 2, and 3 John. Edited by Harold Attridge. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996; German original, 1989. Thorough, technical scholarship in the German tradition, closely attentive to the epistles’ syntax and religious background.

Other Studies: Brown, Raymond E. The Community of the Beloved Disciple. New York: Paulist, 1979. An ingenious reconstruction of the history of the Johannine community. Calvin, John. The Gospel According to John 11-21 and The First Epistle of John. Edited by David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961. A classic specimen of theological interpretation in the Reformed tradition. Lieu, Judith. The Second and Third Epistles ofJohn: History and Background. Studies of the New Testament and Its World. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1986. The two often-neglected letters receive careful scrutiny.

378

1, 2, AND 3 JOHN—INTRODUCTION . The Theology of the Johannine Epistles. New Testament Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. A synthetic account, based on perceptive and judicious exegesis.

OUTLINE OF 1, 2, AND 3 JOHN I. 1 John 1:1-5:21, The First Letter

A. 1:1-2:6, Introit for Eternal Life 1:1-4, What Was from the Beginning 1:5-10, Walking in Darkness or in Light 2:1-6, Walking Just as He Walked

B. 2:7-14, What |Am Writing 2:7-11, A Commandment Old Yet New 2:12-14, The Family Restored

C,2:15—3-10, Children, It Is: the Last Hour 2:15-17, The World Versus the Will of God 2:18-25, Endurance Amid Antichrist’s Coming 2:26-27, Anointing in Truth 2:28-3:3, Confidence at Christ’s Coming 3:4-10, Children of God, Children of the Devil

D. 3:11-5:12, The Message You Have Heard from the Beginning 3:11-18, By This We Know Love

|

3:19-24, By This We Shall Know That We Are of the Truth 4:1-6, By This You Know the Spirit of God 4:7-12, By This God’s Love Was Manifested Among Us 4:13-21, By This We Know That We Abide in God and God in Us 5:1-5, By This We Know That We Love God’s Children 5:6-12, The Testimony That God Has Borne to the Son

E. 5:13-21, Refrain: That You May Know That You Have Eternal Life 5:13-17, The Boldness in Our Asking 5:18-21, What We Know

II. 2 John 1-13, The Second Letter A. Verses 1-3, Saluting the Elect Lady and Her Children B. Verses 4-11, Requests, Benefits, and Cautions Verse 4, Rejoicing in Truth Verses 5-8, Follow Love and Spurn Deception Verses 9-11, Abide in the Teaching

C. Verses 12-13, Regrets, Hopes, and Greetings 379

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

Ill. 3 John 1-15, The Third Letter A. Verses 1-4, Salutation, Prayer, Rejoicing Verse 1, Saluting Gaius Verses 2-4, Praying for Health, Rejoicing in Truth

B. Verses 5-12, The Elder’s Recommendations Verses 5-8, Supporting God’s Missionaries Verses 9-10, Condemning Diotrephes Verses 11-12, Commending Demetrius

C. Verses 13-15, Regrets, Hopes, and Greetings

380

| JOHN 1:1-5:21 THE FIRST LETTER 1 JOHN 1:1-2:6, INTROIT FOR ETERNAL LIFE OVERVIEW e expect a letter, whether modern or ancient, to open with a clear salutation to a designated addressee. Yet nothing so pedestrian awaits us in the introduction to the First Epistle

of John. Instead, we are thrown headlong into the symphony of salvation, arranged and conducted by God. Stamped into our lives are the great Johannine themes, announced here for later development: the contest between sinful deceit and righteous truth, the triumph of light over darkness, the manifestation of eternal life, the realization of joy, the perfection of love. At first, in 1:1-4,

the author of | John sets us on a promontory and turns us to look backward, to scan the expanse of the church’s proclamation “from the beginnning.” Immediately, in 1:5-10, we are carried up to the community’s life in the present, to consider the moral implications of what the church has heard and proclaimed. Then 2:1-6 tightly knots the congregation’s proclamation and paraenesis—its message about Jesus Christ and its enactment of his way of life. The church lives What it preaches; it preaches what it has heard.

1 John 1:L-4, What Was from the Beginning NM ~ That which was from the beginning, which we

have heard, which we have seen with

our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. “We write this to make our? joy complete. a4 Some manuscripts your

NRSV ]

We declare to you what was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life— ?this life was revealed, and we have seen it and testify to it, and declare to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was revealed to us— *we declare to you what we have seen and heard so that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. 4We are writing these things so that our? joy may be complete. 2 Other ancient authorities read your

1 JOHN 1:1-4 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY seems to be different. Whereas John transports the listener out of time and space, to the beginning of creation (John 1:1-3; cf. 1 John 2:13-14; Gen 1:1), 1 John obliquely directs the reader to the One in whom the church’s message (ayyeAta angelia, v. 5) originates: Jesus, the font of that community’s tradition, to whom the church bears witness and in whom the church finds the springs for its continued existence (1 John 1:1-3; cf. 2:7, 24; 3:11). In this regard “the word of life” (v. 1) is ambiguous, possibly multivalent. While those who know the Gospel may be reminded of its presentation of Jesus, who is life John 14:6) and whose word gives life John 5:24), “the word” in 1 John seems at least as closely associated with the preached word—proclamation, by the author and others, of that life “that was with the Father and was made revealed to us” (vv. 2-3; cf. John 6:08" Acts. 5:20: Phil 2:16" Cel io. 2 “Time 1-1). Both prologues speak in allusive language about Jesus Christ, but with different accents. Whereas John highlights the pre-existent glory of the Word who indeed became flesh (John 1:1-3, 14-18; cf. John 6:51-58; 20:27-28), 1 John stresses the empirically verifiable reality of the Son, “which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched” (v. 1 NIV). Both of these shifts in Johannine focus—an emphasis on Jesus’ humanity and the movement of the church’s self-understanding into the theological foreground—are noteworthy throughout John’s letters. Some features of the internal syntax of 1 John 1:1-4 invite special comment. The main verb of the letter’s opening sentence, “we proclaim” (amayyédAovev apangellomen), is delayed until v. 3 (as suggested in the RSV but obscured, in different ways, in both the NRSV and the NIV). In Greek, unlike English, the emphasized element tends to gravitate to the beginning of the sentence. Front-loaded in 1 John’s serpentine introduction, therefore, is not “we who have declared” but the object of that declaration: “what was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes.” Structure and content are thus perfectly married; the one in whom indestructible life was tangibly revealed from the

1:1-2. Rumbling within the prologue of 1 John (vv. 1-4) are echoes from the prologue of John’s Gospel (John 1:1-18): 1 John “from the beginning” (v. 1) “what we have looked at [eSeaode8a, etheasametha|” (v. 1) “the word” (\Oyos logos, v. 1) “life” (v. 1) “with [tpds pros] the Father” (v. 2)

John 1 “in the beginning” (vv. 1-2) “we have seen lee aode8a etheasametha| his glory” (v. 14)

“the word” (\Oyos logos, v. 1) “life” (v. 4) “with [t1pds pros] God” {(v. 1)

The resonance between these books is in fact deeper than these points of correspondence suggest. The first four verses of 1 John seem to assume a reader’s intimate acquaintance with ideas and terminology that chime in distinctively Johannine ways. “What was from the beginning” (v. 1) vaguely recalls Jesus’ various descriptions of himself, the devil, and witnesses to Jesus “from the beginning” (John 8:25, 44; 15:27). Eternal life (1 John 1:2) and the fulfillment of joy (v. 4) are associated with Jesus throughout the Gospel of Jonm. (John, 3:15-16, 295303. S:245- 6:24, 68> 15:11; 16:22, 24: 17:2-3, 13), The Gospel of John also underscores the importance of testimony, to Jesus or to God, on the basis of what is “heard” and “seen” (1 John 1:1-3; cf. John 3:11, 32; 4:42; 19:35). That we should be launched so quickly and so tightly into a Johannine orbit at vv. 1-4 is consistent with the elder’s express concern for fidelity to the community’s origins. Without the Fourth Gospel’s more explicit articulation of Johannine Christianity’s basic testimony to Jesus, a modern reader might find the First Epistle’s roundabout, densely worded introduction nearly impenetrable. Equally perceptible here, however, is a refocusing of that Johannine tradition. For one thing, “the beginning” to which the two prologues refer

382

1JOHN 1:1-4 COMMENTARY beginning is the one proclaimed here, at the start of every clause. The author appears to have chosen with care the tenses of verbs in his opening remarks. The aorist (punctiliar past) tense is used to predicate “the life [that] appeared,” “which we looked at and... touched” (vv. 1- 2) at a particular point in history. What “we have heard” and “we have seen” (vv. 1-3) is cast in the peffect tense, which typically expresses an action in the past whose effects still obtain in the present. In this proclamation, therefore, two claims are being fused together: This life, which appeared at a precise moment in history, molds the audition and vision of those who currently testify to that life as eternally significant. Also in vv. 1-4 is the first of many instances of that letter’s chainlink unfolding of thought. Words are introduced, then repeatedly developed: among others, what “we have seen” (vv. lc, 20, 3a), the “life” (vv. 1f 2a, 2d), “we proclaim {and write] to you” (vv. 2c, 30, 4a). In effect, verbal batons are transferred from one clause or sentence to the next. The style is similar to that displayed in the Fourth Gospel’s prologue. Such a technique is especially apt for 1 John, whose author locates himself among those who are handing over primal testimony “to you,” the letter’s recipients (vv. 2c, 30). 1:3. In the first half of v. 3, the purpose of the elder’s declaration is expressed: “that you also may have fellowship with us.” The theological foundation of this fellowship is immediately pointed up: “and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.” While rare in the NT’s Johannine tradition (only here and in 1 John 1:6-7), Kkowwwvia (Koinonia) is used of “active [Christian] participation” in much the way

that we find in Paul’s letters (e.g, 1 Cor 1:9; 10506; 2°Cor 9132 18:0ae Ph 5221; Phim 6; the Greek term basically denotes partnership in a venture or joint ownership of a concern). Already in 1 John 1:3 there may be a whisper of an idea given forceful enunciation later (cf. 2:18-19): Christian fellowship is not only grounded in God’s activity through Christ but is itself proof of that grounding as well. With good reason John Wesley located Christian fellowship at the center of 1 John’s “apparent aim”: “to confirm the happy and holy communion of the faithful with God and Christ, by describing the marks of that blessed

Sisto.a 1:4. Some ancient texts of this verse read, “And these things we write to you, that your joy may be complete” (cf. John 15:11; 16:24). The manuscript evidence for these alternative readings is well supported and widely scattered; more likely original, however, is the well-attested, shorter, and somewhat more difficult reading favored by both the NIV and the NRSV. Interestingly, this verse inverts the sentiment, conventional in antiquity and expressed in 2 John (v. 12) and 3 John (vv. 13-14), that words on a page are a poor substitute for face-to-face communication. Here, the author’s joy is not frustrated but fulfilled by writing. And given the defensive posture adopted later in this document, we should note the vibrantly positive and edifying note on which its prologue ends: the fulfillment of joy in the declaration of that fellowship that demonstrably begins “with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ” (cf. Paul’s kindred comments in Phil 1:2-7; DAeZ) 39. John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament (1755) (London: Epworth, 1950) 902.

REFLECTIONS 1. First John 1:1-4 offers a cornucopia of theological considerations for those who “proclaim [to others] concerning the word of life.” For the elder, what shape does Christian preaching take? To declare to others (“the eternal life that was with the Father and revealed to us” (1 John 1:2) means, in the first place, faithful restatement of the Christian heritage, creatively addressed to the church that lives in a new situation. By adapting the Johannine tradition to the altered needs of Johannine Christians, the elder displays considerably more freedom than do some contemporary Christians who are not supple enough to bend. Yet he remains faithful to “that which was from the beginning.” By emphasizing the church’s durable fellowship with

1 JOHN 1:1-4 REFLECTIONS the God who has been revealed to us in Jesus Christ, the elder proves himself wiser than those in our day who idolize novelty. The gospel requires creative presentation and imaginative interpretation, if its intent is to be realized in a new day. But the gospel itself is not created anew every morning. As David C. Steinmetz wisely observes, the church’s teachers are not inventors but couriers: To be a minister is, to put it bluntly, to be a servant is not originality, but fidelity. Ministers have been not compose and that they dare not alter. They have but to fulfill a role prescribed for them by someone

and the virtue most highly prized in a servant ordained to transmit a message that they did been called, not to improvise their assignment, else.”

2. Also noteworthy in 1 John 1:1-4 is its language, exquisitely balanced and pitch-perfect for its proclamation. To declare nothing less than “the eternal life that was with the Father” (1:2 NRSV) invites, as Amos Wilder puts it, “an august exordium, and one which takes the reader immediately into the secrets of the divine counsels and the sharing of the divine life.”” The preacher of 1 John 1:1-4 will want to avoid muffling the loftiness of its cadence and phrasing, which still have power to penetrate the coarseness in which modern congregations live and to lift them beyond the banality of their everyday lives. Yet the style of this prologue does not encourage its listeners in flight from this world, for the very grandeur of 1 John’s discourse reminds the listening church of the voice of its Lord while on earth, as he is remembered in the Johannine tradition (cf. John 14-17). In other words, 1 John 1:1-4 spurs modern preachers to reach for a rhetoric that is at once supernal yet down to earth, a form of communication that meets congregations where they really are—the world into which Christ came—while at the same time inviting them to regard those circumstances from within the gospel’s liberating frame of reference. One way of approaching this challenge might be to align 1 John 1:1-4 with John 20:19-31, the Gospel lection with which | John 1:1—2:2 is paired for the Second Sunday of Easter (Year B). Like the risen Jesus in the Fourth Gospel, the prelude of 1 John evokes in its proclaimers and listeners a multidimensional faith that remembers what the church has heard, seen, gazed upon, and touched—a peculiar memory of the Son of God who transcended death without sloughing off the wounds of crucifixion. 3. The prologue does much more than express the church’s christological reflection. It re-presents Jesus Christ; that is to say, by 1 John’s proclamation, Christ is made present to a generation of Christians who no longer can see or hear him, except by the eyes and ears of faith (cf. John 20:29). Here the elder seems to anticipate Dietrich Bonhoeffer: “Christ is not only present in the word of the church but also as the word of the church, i. e., as the spoken word of preaching. .. . Christ’s presence is his existence as preaching. In preaching the whole Christ is present, [Christ] humiliated and [Christ] exalted... .It is the form of the presence of

Christ in which we are found and to which we must keep.”” That this is consistent with 1 John’s understanding is suggested by writing and the result expected from proclamation: the formation of completion of joy (1:3-4). The elder believes that the church is not merely (such as a club or party, which might get over its difficulties by a little

the reason given for communion and the “a human association politic give-and-take);

it exists by sharing the divine life embodied in Christ.” Nor does that existence depend on a coterie of seriously religious people who yearn for eternal life or who think that by their devotion they can make it happen. Authentic fellowship occurs only by declaration, by voice

and in deed, of that “word of life” to which 1 John bears witness; it is sustained only by the church that lives by that word and allows itself to be acclimatized into a new environment 40. David C. Steinmetz, Memory and Mission: Theological Reflections on the Christian Past (Nashville: Abingdon, 1988) 72. 41. Amos N. Wilder, “The First, Second, and Third Epistles of John,” in /B, ed. George Buttrick et al., 12 vols. (Nashville: Abingdon,

1957) 12:217.

42. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Christologie (Munich: Kaiser, 1981) 30. 43. C.H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, MNTC (New York: Harper and Bros., 1946) 8.

384

1 JOHN 1:1-4 REFLECTIONS that is conditioned by Christ (cf. 2 Cor 5:17). Therein lies the possibility of joy, which in the Johannine tradition should not be confused with momentary delight or contented resignation or wishful thinking. Joy is the beforehand experience of that communion with God and Christ, which is to be consummated in eternity (John 15:11; 16:20-24; 17:13), confident that Christ has already prevailed over this world’s tribulations (John 16:33).

1 John 1:5-10, Walking in Darkness or in Light NIV

NRSV

°This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. “If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. ’But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all? sin. 8If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. °If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10lf we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.

SThis is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light and in him there is no darkness at all. ‘If we say that we have fellowship with him while we are walking in darkness, we lie and do not do what is true; “but if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. *If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. °If we confess our sins, he who is faithful and just will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. ‘If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

a7 Or every

(COMMENTARY wicked, who think that their evil is thereby concealed from God (Job 24:13-17; Isa 29:15; Sir 23:18-19). By contrast, light is the Lord’s raiment (Ps 104:2). With light the Lord exposes evil Job 38:12-13)—a function that the Fourth Evangelist ascribes to Christ as “the light of the world” John G12 NRSV; 9:53°cl. 1. himy.6:15-16): The “handed-down,” traditional character of this message is patent: “we have heard... and declare to you” (cf. 1 Cor 11:23; 15:3). Murkier is the identity of the message’s sender. Is it from Jesus Christ (v. 4) or from God (v. 5)? Here as elsewhere (most immediately, see vv. 6-7), a third singular masculine pronoun is used without precise referent, an ambiguity that may indicate the author’s internalization of the Johannine confession that the Father is visible in and authentically revealed by the Son (John 1:18; 6:46; 8:19; 12:44-45; 14:9-10).

1:5. To this point, exactly what has been heard and proclaimed (vv. 1-4) has been left rather vague. In v. 5 “the message” is given greater content: “God is light and in him there is no darkness at all,” which is conceptually close to James’s claim of God’s constancy as “the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (Jas 1:17 NRSV; see also Pss 27:1; 36:9).“4 As vv. 6-10 verify, the author of 1 John construes light and darkness within a moratcontext, (cf. d)°Gor,4:5;2Cot-6:14), in accordance with a broad biblical tendency to regard darkness as the habitat of such sins as adultery and murder, the hiding place of the 44. Associations of “light” with “life” are commonplace in religious antiquity (note also 10S 1:9-10; 3:3, 20; 4:2-6, 9, 11; Philo On Dreams 1.75; T. Levi 19:1). See the discussion in Peder Borgen, “The Gospel of John and Hellenism: Some Observations,” in Exploring the Gospel ofJohn in Honor of D. Moody Smith, ed. R. Alan Culpepper and C. Clifton Black (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996) 98-122, esp. 114-16.

385

1 JOHN 1:5-10 COMMENTARY 1:6-10. In v. 6 the author introduces a series of observations that are tailored to the formula “If we profess certain things under particular conditions, then some disturbing consequences will follow.” The author may be thinking of real instances of moral failure in the community to which he is writing.* Here, nevertheless, the elder speaks universally, implicitly including himself among “we [who may] say” (vv. 6, 8, 10; cf. vv. 3, 5). In vv. 6-10 the potential for breakdown and its repair appears to be primarily in view— although anyone familiar with everyday life in the church knows that collapse and restoration do not remain merely hypothetical possibilities for long. Structurally, vv. 6-10 express variations on an antiphonal theme of sin (vv. 6, 8, 10) and restoration (vv. 7, 9). Although seemingly interchange-

Nor is it portrayed by the elder as some sterile, intellectual exercise, as though one could accept “the proclamation proclaimed” (v. 5) without further obligation. Such constructions tend toward a compartmentalized individualism that is foreign to the approach of this author for whom communion with God is proved by the quality of one’s communion with others (v. 7; cf. Lev 19:18; Deut 6:4-5; Mark 12:29-31). Both forms of fellowship are concretely manifested in conduct, by the way in which one “walks” (v. 6 [mepitateiv peripatein, 777 halak]; cf. Prov 8:20; Eccl 11:9; Isa 273%. Mic. 2:74:72 0:8; ROM OA Or Awl Alay Cor 4:2; Gal 5:16; 1 Thess 2:12; Barn. 18.1-21.9;

Did, 1.1=6.2). First John is by no means the only NT book that stresses the importance of “walking in the

light” (see also John 8:12; 11:9-10; 12:35-36; Rom 13:13; Eph 5:8-9; Rev 21:24; cf. Ps 89:1410; Isa 2:5; 1 Enoch 92:4-5). It is more pointed

able, the passage’s constituent claims about sin mount to a climax: from lying (v. 6), to deep self-deception (v. 8), to gross misrepresentation of God (v. 10). Moreover, these assertions, like those

than most in explaining the implications of that injunction; to “walk in the light as he himself is in the light” (v. 7) is not to pretend to flawlessness, but to own up to sins that rupture communion, both divine and human (vv. 8-9), and to acknowledge God’s Son as the agent of reconciliation (vv. 7, 9). Likewise, “truth” is not abstractly propositional; truth (v. 6), for the elder, is to be done (NRSV) or to be lived by (NIV; see also John

in vv. 1-4, are intricately interconnected. The first pair of claims (vv. 6-7), formulated in the imagery of “darkness” and “light” (v. 5), picks up from v. 3 the desire for “fellowship” and ends on the confession of “sin,” around which the next series of claims revolves (vv. 8-10). Another thread that runs through these comments is the dichotomy between “deception” or “lying,” whether to others (vv. 6, 10) or to oneself (v. 8), and “the truth” (vv. 6, 8) or “his word” (v. 10), which in context implies truthful exposure of sin and the promise of forgiveness (resumptive of v. 1, “concerning the word of life”). This interlocking pattern is more than aesthetically satisfying. It formally conveys the passage’s presiding concern for Christian integrity, within the believing community as well as between it and God.*° If the prologue (vv. 1-4) sets forth the traditional basis for communion with God and with one another, vv. 5-10 probe the proper understanding of that fellowship and unfold some of its practical conditions. Notably, communion with God is not described as a mystical experience.

3:19-21; 2 John 4; 3 John 3-4; cf. Tob 4:5-6). Precisely because the elder construes truth as activated integrity, truth’s opposite is not incorrecthess stemming from ignorance, but lying, a deceit for which those who do not live the truth are culpable and accountable (vv. 6, 8; cf. Prov 20:9; John 9:41; 15:22, 24). And because our deluded denial of sin effectively precludes our acknowledgment of the need and possibility for forgiveness, the logical if heinous outcome of such radical inauthenticity is to make God (or Jesus) out to be a liar (v. 10). By contrast, the integrity of that One who “is in the light” (v. 7), “he who is faithful [tuatés pistos] and just |8tkatos dikaios]” (v. 9; cf. Deut 7:9; Pss 36:5-6; 119:137-38; Heb 10:23), is demonstrated by his willingness to cancel the debts that we confess (v. 9) and by his making good on his promise to cleanse the full extent of our injustice (a5ikta adikia), or moral disintegration (vv. 7, 9; cf. Exod 34:6; Ps 32:5; Prov 28:13; Jer

45. See, among others, Pheme Perkins, “Kononiain 1 John 1:3-7: The Social Context of Division in the Johannine Letters,” CBQ 45 (1983)

631-41. 46. Similarly, Duane F. Watson argues that the repetitive style of 1 John bolsters the fellowship for which its author appeals. See Watson, “Amplification Techniques in 1 John: The Interaction of Rhetorical Style and Invention,” JSNT51 (1993) 99-123.

386

1JOHN 1:5-10 COMMENTARY 33:8; Mic 7:18-20; John 13:10-11). “Cleansing” is the first of 1 John’s several metaphors to de-

the giving of his life for the lives of others. This corresponds with the levitical understanding of blood as the seat of life and, for that reason, the appropriate offering for atonement of sin (Lev 17:11; cf. 1 Pet 1:18-19; Rev 1:5; 7:14), as well as with the thought, which found expression in intertestamental Judaism, that the self-sacrifice of devout martyrs had atoning value for Israel (2 Macc 7:37-38). More immediately, it squares with the elder’s own inextricable association of Jesus with the light, fidelity, and integrity of God (vv. 3, 5, 7, 9). On the meaning of sin in 1 John, see the Commentary on 3:4-10. (See Reflections at 1 John 2:1-6.)

scribe what, for those in Christ’s fellowship, has been done to sin; it has also been “forgiven” (v. Ov 2212; ch. John 20:23);; “expiated? (2:2;4:10), and “taken away” (3:5; cf. John 1:29). In v. 7 the means by which purification from sin is accomplished is “the blood of Jesus his Son,” a claim that harks back to the cultic imagery of Exodus (Exod 30:10) and Leviticus (Lev 16:15-19). The purifying power of Jesus’ blood is not explained here or elsewhere in 1 John. In the light of the elder’s imminent description of Jesus Christ as “the atoning sacrifice for our sins” (2:2 NRSV), the significance of Jesus’ blood most likely lies in

1 John 2:1-6, Walking Just as He Walked NIV

NRSV

My dear children, | write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. ?He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for? the sins of the whole world.

My little children, | am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. 3Now by this we may be sure that we know

3We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. “The man who says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. °But if anyone obeys his word, God’s love? is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: “Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.

him, if we obey his commandments. “Whoever says, “I have come to know him,” but does not obey his commandments, is a liar, and in such a

person the truth does not exist; °but whoever obeys his word, truly in this person the love of God has reached perfection. By this we may be sure that we are in him: °whoever says, “I abide in him,” ought to walk just as he walked.

a2 Or He isthe one who turns aside God's wrath, taking away our sins, and not only ours but also

65 Or word, love for God

(COMMENTARY which, according to the author, we are capable. The segment beginning at 2:1 reestablishes a theological equilibrium by wedding the confessional and ethical emphases of the preceding segments in a carefully balanced way. Thus 2:1-2 develop the christological claims of 1:3, 7, and 9; 2:4-5, the moral gravity of 1:6, 8, and 10. Both of the concerns are bridged in 2:3, 6 by the elder’s linkage of knowledge of Christ (= abiding in him)

In the preceding pericope a pair of disturbing possibilities for our estrangement from God (vv. 6, 8) was immediately answered by a pair of comforting alternatives for our reconciliation (vv. 7, 9). Verse 10 abruptly broke this pattern by conjecturing a negative possibility without its positive reversal. This formal asymmetry jolts readers or listeners of the text into contemplation of the depth of delusion, falsehood, and vapidity of

387

1 JOHN 2:1-6 COMMENTARY with obedience to his commandments (= walking the very way that he walked). 2:1-2. Sin is a besetting reality for the church, but it is certainly not the author’s objective to instill within his readers a sense of paralysis by their abysmal potential for depravity. Rather, he writes these things “so that you may not [commit] sin” (v. 1), much as Sirach cautions against compounding sin by presuming on God’s mercy (Sir 5:5-6) and Paul rebuts any license to sin in his elaboration of abounding grace (Rom 6:1-2). “God certainly forgives freely, but in such a way that the easiness of mercy does not become an entice-

ment to sin.”4” Addressed to the elder’s “little children” (texvia teknia), which in 1 John is consistently a term of endearment (2:12, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21; cf. Jesus’ address to his disciples in John 13:33), the tenor is tender, not reprimand-

ing. Jesus’ ability to deal with sin, an idea broached in 1:7,.9, is further explored in 2:1-2. Jesus is described as (a) an “advocate” (NRSV); (b) Christ, the righteous (one); and (c) the atoning sacrifice. Expressed as a title without additional comment, “Jesus Christ [the] righteous” appears to be a traditional formula (cf. Acts 3:14; 7:52; 22:14). The reassertion of Christ’s justice (8{kavov dikaion, cf. 1:9) aptly bespeaks a necessary qualification of the One who restores a radically deviant humanity to the norm of a just God (1:9; cf. / Enoch 38:2; 53:6, which attributes righteousness to the Messiah). This forensic imagery is extended by the claim that in Jesus “we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense” (NIV). The Greek term translated in this way is tapdkAntos (parakletos lit., one “called to [a friend’s] side”). In ancient jurisprudence the “advocate” was coun-

sel for the defense before the court.** In the Fourth Gospel that intercession is provided by the Holy Spirit, expressly described as “another Advocate” (John 14:16-17 NRSV), who is sent by the Father or by Christ John 16:7) to remind the church of Jesus’ instruction (John 14:26), to bear witness to Jesus (John 15:26), and to execute 47. John Calvin, The Gospel According to StJohn 11-21 and the First Epistle of John, ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance (Grand

judgment of the world (John 16:7-11). Within the New Testament only the Johannine tradition depicts Jesus (and the Spirit) as “advocate”; yet the image of Christ as intercessor between humanity and God is employed by both Paul (Rom 8:34) and the author of Hebrews (Heb 7:25; 9:24). The image of Christ’s cultic intercession in Hebrews may offer a clue for the elder’s conceptual move from Jesus as our advocate with the Father to Jesus as “the atoning sacrifice for our sins” (1 John 2:2). Common to the tasks of both the legal advocate and the priest is mediation. Whereas Hebrews develops dual understandings of Jesus as both the superlative high priest (Heb 4:14-5:10; 7:1-28) and superior sacrifice (Heb 9:11-10:18), 1 John zeros in on the second of these claims by characterizing Jesus as an expiation (\AkKaopds hilasmos), a sacrifice of atonement (“at-one-ment” or reconciliation) between human beings and God, by which sinners are cleansed of their. sins (1:70: ch °Z:1 2.212 Minn 2:5,0" Hep 9:14-15). The implied disposition of God toward human beings is one of merciful love, not displeasure that must be placated. This is suggested not only by the context of 1 John (2:5; 4:9-10), but also by the connotation of the term ihaopds; its verbal cognates ihao@ntt (hilastheti; in Luke 18:13) and iAdoKeo8at (hilaskesthai; in Heb 2:17) appear in contexts that emphasize God’s mercy toward sinners. It is not God’s anger with us that must be turned away, but our rebellion against God. Accordingly, expiation is not a human maneuver that changes God from furious to loving; expiation is an expression of God’s love, which removes sin from the sinner. The elder emphasizes that Jesus’ sacrifice is “not for ours [sins] only but also for the sins of the whole world” (2:2 NRSV; see also 4:14). For all of his preoccupation with the church, the elder’s vision of Christ’s saving sacrifice is universal, not parochial, in its intended effect. In this respect 1 John agrees with the Gospel of John (John 1:29; 3:16), with Colossians (Col 1:20), and with John Wesley: “Just as wide as sin extends, the propitiation extends also.”4° 49. Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament (1755), 905. Contrary to the suggestion offered above, but in line with the exegetical tradition of his day, Wesley interpreted “the atoning sacrifice” of 1 John 2:2 as that “by which the wrath of God is appeased,” a nuance retained by some modern commentators (e.g., I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles ofJohn, NICNT {Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978] 117-18).

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961) 241.

48. A. E. Brooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, \CC (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912) 23-27, documents a broad range of nuances for tapdkhntos in classical, Jewish, and Christian literature.

388

1 JOHN 2:1-6 COMMENTARY 2:3. Two

senses of “knowing”

(yivudoKew

tant to this author, the topic of love is not always treated with the clarity that we might wish, of which this first instance is a good example. What is perfected by obedience to his word: God’s own love (NIV)? Love for God (RSV)? Or “the divine love” (NEB)? “The love of God” (NRSV) may be the most apt translation, since it allows for multiple nuances in the Greek phrase and captures in English the ambiguity that grammar alone cannot decide. The elder’s comment in v. 5 obviously stands in balanced contrast to v. 4, which exposes as a liar the disobedient one who claims to know God (or Christ). Thus the immediate context may favor construing “the love of God” in v. 5a as the fulfillment, through obedience, of our love for God (see also 4:21; cf. John 14:15, 21, 24). The reciprocity of love in Johannine thought (4:12, 16; John 14:23) should restrain us, however, from pressing a distinction too rigorously here, even as the elder will later make abundantly clear that human love is essentially derivative of God’s initiatory love for us (4:7, 10-11, 19; cf. John 15:9-10; 17:26). Another aspect of v. 5 registers with much greater clarity and consistency: a con-

ginoskein) are detectable throughout 1 John, both of which are evident in this verse: “certainty” or “assurance” (see also 2:5, 18, 29; 3:19, 24; 4:2, 12-13, 16; 5:2) and “relationship,” usually with God or with Christ (see also 2:4, 13-14; 3:1, 6, 16, 20; 4:6-8; 5:20).°° Again, however, the elder refuses to leave theological claims at the level of mere intellectualization. Even as truth is to be done (1:6), knowledge of Christ is demonstrated by obedience to his commandments (cf. Matt 5:19; 7:21). This point is pressed both positively (2:3) and negatively (2:4). The latter assertion recalls the hypothetical statements in 1:6, 8, and 10, their sharp distinctions between truth and lie, and the tests by which “the truth” or “his word” may be found within us. 2:4. Interpretation of this verse is complicated by at least two things. First, compared with the conditional wording of 1:6, 8, and 10 (“if we say”), this verse indicates a possibility that is slightly more precise (lit., “the one who says”; see also 2:6). This may suggest that the elder has in mind a particular person whose words and deeds are incompatible; that suggestion is rendered less likely, however, by the indefinitely formulated rebuttal in v. 5: “but whoever keeps his word” (“obeys his word,” NIV, NRSV). A second difficulty presented by v. 4 is the unnamed content of the commandments to be kept. The parallel comment in v. 5—that obedience to his word is completed in love—suggests that in view here is the primary commandment to love (see also 3:23; 4:21; 5:2-3). This interpretation jibes with the teaching of the Johannine Jesus, who defines his disciples’ love for him as the keeping of his commandments (John 14:15, 21, 23) and who repeatedly commands them to love one another as he has loved them (John 13:34-35; 15:9-10, 12-13, 17). For the elder, as for the prophets Hosea (Hos 4:1-6) and Jeremiah (Jer 31:31-34), knowledge of God is assured only through obedience to God. 2:5-6. Verse 5 marks the first of fifty-two references to “love” (aydatn agape )within | John (with ten additional occurrences in the even briefer 2 and 3 John). Although obviously impor-

cern for the conditions under which love, and love alone, is perfected or reaches maturity (see

also-4:125-1/7-18).>) . “By this” (Ev TouTw en touto, v. Sc) is a favorite connecting phrase of the elder, occurring in 1 John a dozen times. Grammatically, it can point backward or—as it does here and in v. 3a—to the comment that follows (so NIV and NRSV). Verbally linking vv. 5-6 are two formulas of “immanence” or “indwelling”: “in him” (twice in v. 5) and “to abide in him” (v. 6).°? In Johannine thought the phrases “in the Son” (Ev TA viw en to hyio, 5:20) and “in him” (ev avta en auto, 2:5, 8; 5:20) usually function as metaphors of domain, referring to that sphere of divine truth or love, characteristic of God and of Christ, that anchors and gives shape to the believer’s life. As such, these formulas are akin to the elder’s previous mention of “fellowship with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ” (1:3, 6 NRSV) but richer in implication. They seem to approximate 51. By comparison, the Fourth Gospel speaks of the perfection or fulfillment of various things in addition to love (John 13:1): works (John 4:34; 5:36; 17:4), unity John 17:23), and Scripture (John 19:28). 52. For more detailed examination, see Edward Malatesta, /nteriority and Covenant: A Study ofeivat év and yévew €v in the First Letter of Saint John, AnBib 69 (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute Press, 1978).

50. See B. A. du Toit, “The Role and Meaning of Statements of ‘Certainty’ in the Structural Composition of 1 John,” Studies in the Johannine Letters: Neot 13 (1979) 84-100. 3

389

1 JOHN 2:1-6 COMMENTARY Paul’s conception of Christian existence “in the Spirit” (Rom 7:6; 8:9; 14:17) or, more often, “in Ghrist lesus|” (Rom 3:24>°6:23'8:1-2 -.393. 12:5; LO:35 Gor boro: 417518522: 2:Coro17; 120 - Gal. 2:4 175° 3:20, 285.5205, Phil, 2:522427, 19, 21; 1 Thess 4:16; Phim 8). The closely related Johannine expression “to abide in him” (“to continue” or “to remain” [uwévw meno]) adds a durative nuance to the metaphor, connoting the believer’s persistence in that realm defined by the character of God (1 John 2:24, 27-28; 3:6; 4:13; the number of occurrences of eévw in the Johannine corpus bespeaks its importance: forty in John, twenty-four in 1 John, three in 2 John, one in | Revelation). Characteristic of this abiding is a reciprocity between the believer and God, as 1 John 2:4-5 suggests: The truth that is God, or the love of God, is in the believer who keeps the commandments; that believer is also said to be in God, or to abide in God (similarly, 2:24; 3:24; 4:13, 15-16; John 6:56; 14:20; 15:4-7, 16; 17:2123; cf. Rom 8:9; Gal 4:19). Such reciprocity does not imply any dissolving or mystical interpenetra-

tion of God and the believer; though intimately bonded, those personalities remain distinct. Indeed, there exists within this abiding a definite “gravitational pull”: It is the Father or the Son who attracts the believer, not the other way around (4:13-19; cf. John 15:1-11). Finally, as v. 6 makes clear, the criterion for the believer’s endurance in the truth and love of God is irreducibly ethical. Returning to the metaphor of “walking” as moral conduct, introduced in 1:6-7, the elder amplifies the path that the believer should take: “Whoever says, ‘I abide in him,’ ought to walk just as he [lit., “that one”] walked” (cf. 3:16; 5:2-3; John 13:15; 14:21, 23; 15:9-10; 1 Cor 11:1; Phil 2:1-11; 1 Thess 1:6; 1 Pet 2:21). In this single, masterly stroke, the author does two things. First, he grounds the believer’s abiding in practical love. Second, the elder delineates the contours of love, not in the believer’s natural sympathies or inclinations, but in Jesus, whose life epitomizes fidelity and righteousness (1:9; 2:1; cf. 3:7), the very one who has visibly trod the way before us (1:1-3).

REFLECTIONS 1. The loftiness of the elder’s introductory claims (1:1-4) is matched by his down-to-earth recognition of sin within the church (1:6, 8, 10; 2:1, 4). For those whose ecclesiology is troubled by this reality, 1 John offers sound assessment and straight thinking. Whether in the elder’s century or our own, the church is not an assemblage of spiritually healthy people; the church is where the sick gather to be healed from the disease of sin. Notably within the Anabaptist movement of the Radical Reformation, but also in every era, Christians have been tempted to regard the early church as a golden age of purity, which, were it only recovered, could restore Christianity to its original flawlessness. Such nostalgic myopia is corrected by the Johannine letters and, indeed, by the NT in its entirety. “The primitive church,” Luther dryly commented, “wasn’t as holy as we believed it to be.”* It is not that we are so lamentably different from our forebears in faith; in fact, we resemble them far too closely. In the creedal affirmation of the holy catholic church, “the communion of saints” stands beside “the forgiveness of sins.” That conjunction is not accidental. The measure of sainthood is not human sinlessness but divine vocation. The community set apart in Christ lives continually by the gospel of God’s forgiveness, precisely because we are sick and need a physician (Mark 2:17). 2. Nevertheless, 1 John’s candor about sin may be more vinegary than most of us can swallow. From a survey of Christians across denominations in a Midwestern state, these interesting statistics emerged: “Although 98% said they believe in personal sin, only 57% accepted the traditional notion that all people are sinful and fully one-third allowed that they 53. Martin Luther, “Lectures on the First Epistle of St. John,” Luther's Works, vol. 10. The Catholic Epistles, ed. Jaroslav Pelikan and Walter A. Hansen (St. Louis: Concordia, 1967) 230.

390

1JOHN 2:1-6 REFLECTIONS ‘make many mistakes but are not sinful themselves.’ ”™ The elder protests: “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us” (1:8 NIV). In desperate flight from responsibility to God, the guilty heart will suborn a terrified mind into almost any sophisticated casuistry, self-serving rationalization, or conceptual incoherence, rather than admit to the sin at its seat. Much on 1 John’s wavelength, Soren Kierkegaard (1813-55) located the root of the gospel’s rejection in humanity’s denial of its own contingency, our refusal to acknowledge God as God: People try to persuade us that, the objections against Christianity spring from doubt. That is a complete misunderstanding. The objections against Christianity spring from insubordination, the dislike of obedience, rebellion against all authority. As a result people have hitherto been beating the air in their struggle against objections, because they have fought intellectually with doubt instead of fighting morally with rebellion.*

Unchecked, warns the elder, a headlong plunge into darkness sets the moral compass spinning without possibility of orientation. By denying the truth about ourselves, we criminally make into a liar the One who is truth (1 John 1:10; cf. John 8:44; Rom 1:18-32). Truth to tell, God is no vindictive tyrant, eager to punish, but the loving heavenly Father to whom self-acknowledged sinners may repair. “It is very important,” said Calvin, “to be quite sure that when we have sinned there is a reconciliation with God ready and prepared for us. Otherwise we shall always carry hell about within... [for] hell reigns where there is no peace with God.” Unlike human beings, who can be either heartlessly rigorous or loyal to a fault, in God fidelity and justice are one; forgiveness is offered us, not because we prove ourselves humble or well intentioned, but because mercy has been built into the structure of reality by its Creator and Judge, whose kindness toward us is utterly reliable (see 2 Tim 2:13). In this context the elder’s remarks about expiation (1 John 2:2; cf. 1:9; 4:10) fall into place, as well as pose for us some questions. First John joins with other NT documents, early (1 Cor 15:3) and late (Rev 1:5; 5:9), in articulating the belief that Jesus’ death atones for sins. In 1 John the cultic practice of sacrifice, familiar to the elder and his audience, is assumed, not explained.” The underpinnings on which the elder’s conviction rests are that (a) in a moral universe sin is real and lethally toxic; (b) the rupture created between sinners and God is real and in some sense demands the giving of our lives for its repair; and (c) Jesus’ merciful giving of his life for our own heals our estrangement from God. Owing to many religious and cultural influences, modern Christians appropriate such an understanding of atonement with varying degrees of ease. It is unquestionably the case, furthermore, that the NT incorporates a variety of views of Jesus’ death and its redemptive consequences.” Still, it is worth pondering what may be lost from a Christian theology that has no room for an understanding of expiation such as that which 1 John suggests. An ability to perceive among a sanctuary’s furnishings an altar, where sacrifice is offered, and not just a table for the Supper? A place for Golgotha beside the Sermon’s Mount? Perhaps one of the sins that the church needs perennially to confess is the assumption, often unvoiced, that we have within ourselves the capacity to mend our estrangement from God and to put the world to rights. By 1 John’s lights, that is nonsense of a very dangerous sort. When we delude 54. Cited by Marianne Meye Thompson, /—3 John, IVP New Testament Commentary (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1992) 46. 55. The Journals of Soren Kierkegaard, ed. and trans. Alexander Dru (London: Oxford University Press, 1938) 193. 56. John Calvin, The Gospel According to St John 11-21 and the First Epistle ofJohn, ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961) 240. 57. HowJesus’ death corresponds to, and supersedes, levitical regulations for sacrifice is a primary concern in the Epistle to the Hebrews; whyhis death atones for sin becomes a pressing issue for medieval Christian theologians. See Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., “The Meaning of Sacrifice,” in The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 1 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1994) 989-92; Barnabas Lindars, The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews, New Testament Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991) 86-98; and Colin E. Gunton, 7he Actuality ofAtonement: AStudy of Metaphor, Rationality, and the Christian Tradition (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989). 58. G.B. Caird, New Testament Theology, ed. and completed by L. D. Hurst (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994) 136-78, provides an instructive overview.

391

1 JOHN 2:1-6 REFLECTIONS ourselves into thinking that we can stand before God as our own advocate, when we believe and act as though human sin and divine reconciliation were no longer in the picture, we drive ourselves on a fast highway to despair and self-destruction. As Reinhold Niebuhr observed, “The sinner who justifies himself does not know God as judge and does not need God as

Saviour.” 3. Finally, a question to which 1 John and its readers shall repeatedly return: How do we know God? The answer, in this letter, is not the property of some élite corps of spiritual athletes. Its criterion is not intensity of religious experience or better education, even of a theological kind. The acid-test for our life in God is its conformity with the gospel’s moral imperatives and their fruition in love. Austrian zoologist Konrad Lorenz became famous for his demonstration of the process known as imprinting. By imitating the quacks of a mother mallard, he taught newly hatched ducklings to follow him as their foster parent. Put metaphorically, 1 John 2:5-6 asks: Do we bear the imprint of Christ? Is his stamp on us evident in the way we walk? 59. Reinhold Niebuhr, Zhe Nature and Destiny of Man, vol. 1: Human Nature (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1941) 200.

1 JOHN 2:7-14, WHAT I AM WRITING OVERVIEW This segment of 1 John offers much of what one might have expected to find at the top of the epistle: a thumbnail description of what its sender is writing (vv. 7-11) and of those whom he is addressing (vv. 12-14). Why have these matters been deferred until now? The answer lies within the material itself; no new commandment but rather an old one is being written (v. 7). “That which was from the beginning” (1:1) had to be recapitulated, at the letter’s beginning, before it

1 John 2:7-11,

could be properly epitomized here and considered in a fresh light. Similarly, the epistle’s addressees are identified, not by name, but as beloved members of God’s family (see 2:1: “my little children”; “the Father”), whose lives bear witness to those very aspects of salvation that have just been proclaimed: forgiveness of sins (also 1:7-9; 2:2), knowledge of the Father (1:2-3; 2:1, 3-4), persistent endurance of the word of God (1:1, 10; 2:5-6).

A Commandment Old Yet New

NIV

NRSV

7Beloved, | am writing you no new command-

‘Dear friends, | am not writing you a new command but an old one, which you have had since the beginning. This old command is the message you have heard. *Yet I am writing you anew command; its truth is seen in him and you, because the darkness is passing and the true light is already shining. °Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates

ment, but an old commandment that you have had from the beginning; the old commandment is the word that you have heard. *Yet I am writing

you a new commandment that is true in him and in you, because? the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining. °Whoever says, “T am in the light,” while hating a brother or

sister,? is still in the darkness. !Whoever loves a

his brother is still in the darkness. '°Whoever loves his brother lives in the light, and there is

@ Or that

392

© Gk hating a brother

1JOHN 2:7-11 NIV

NRSV

nothing in him? to make him stumble. 'But

brother or sister? lives in the light, and in such a person’ there is no cause for stumbling. ''But whoever hates another believer‘ is in the darkness, walks in the darkness, and does not know the way to go, because the darkness has brought on blindness.

whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness; he does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him. 210 Or it

4Gk loves a brother

: 6Or in it

¢ Gk hates a brother

(COMMENTARY The swing between affirmation and exhortation, begun in 1:5-10 and repeated in 2:1-6, is reestablished in 2:7-11. This pericope also returns to the parallel metaphors of “light” and “darkness,” introduced in 1:5-10. As in 2:1-6, the opening of 2:7-11 sets the stage with a built-in contrast (“no new commandment”/ “yet a new commandment,” vv. 7-8; cf. “so that you may not sin”/“if anyone does sin,” v. 1). Then follow three contrastive generalizations pertaining to hatred (vv. 9, 11) and love (v. 10) of one’s fellow Christian, “the brother” (tov aSeAddv ton adelphon, an inclusive term used with reference to a disciple, either male or female, in Hellenistic Judaism, Christianity, and other religions of that era). Like 1:6, 8, 10, and 2:4, 2:9 envisions a situation in which a claim of religious status (“if we say”; “the one who says”) is contradicted by the claimant’s moral failing (cf. 2:6 for a positive exhortation based on the same formula). The alternating current of indicative and imperative, which has pulsed throughout 1:1-4, 1:5-10, and 2:1-6, flows fully throughout 2:7-11. Every assertion in this passage is at once theological and ethical. Indeed, the author’s primary aim in this brief section is to insist that adherence to the commandment and dwelling “in the light” are inseparable sides of a single coin. 2:7-8. Once again (cf. v. 1), firm counsel is prefaced with tender address: “Ayatntot (agapetoi, “beloved” [NRSV] or “dear friends” [NIV]), a vocative that occurs ten times in the Johannine epistles KiMonnMaea2. 2) ae Jolt S-John 1-2, °5; 11). Here it is especially appropriate for introduc-

love. For the careful reader, vv. 7-8 raise at least three questions. What is the commandment to which the elder refers (cf. vv. 3-4, “the commandments”)? Why does the elder say that this commandment is not new but old (v. 7), then apparently reverse himself in the very next sentence (v. 8)? What is meant by the comment that this commandment “is true in him and in you” (v. 8)? The first of these questions may be the easiest to answer. As in vv. 4-5, in view here is the command that Christians love one another (see v. 10), the primary directive that embraces all other commandments in the Johannine tradition (3:2224; 2 John 4-6; John 13:34; 15:10, 12, 17). The truth of that commandment is brought into the Open (and thereby “seen,” NIV) “in him and in you” (v. 8; see also 2:4-6). In Christ (John 1:17; 14:6), who has issued the command (John 13:34; 15:12) and has patterned the way in which Christians walk (v. 6), the divine reality or authenticity of the love command is actualized. The love commandment’s realization in Christ accounts for its ambivalent description as both old and new. It is old because it harks back to the primal testimony of Jesus, “the word” that the church has heard “from the beginning” (v. 7; see also 1:1; 2:24; 3:11; 2 John 5-6).°! Whether the 60. Some later mss, including the “Received Text” on which the KJV is based, read “brothers” instead of “beloved.” The latter reading, however, appears in the earliest and best Greek texts of 1 John. “Beloved” is a frequent mode of address in the Pauline and Catholic letters (Rom 12:19; 1 Cor 10:14; 2 Cor 7:1; 12:19; Phil 2:12; 4:1; Heb 6:9; 1 Pet 2:11; 4:12; 2 Pet 3:1, 8, 14, 17; Jude 3, 17, 20). 61. Most of the later mss, referred to in note 60, repeat the words “from

the beginning” after “that you have heard” in 1 John 2:7 (so KJV). Absent from the oldest and best texts, this phrase is probably a scribal addition intended to balance the clause “that you have had from the beginning,” earlier in the verse, and to echo the elder’s phraseology elsewhere (1:1; DATS Nk

ing the author’s initial reflections on Christian 393

1 JOHN 2:7-11 COMMENTARY author refers to the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, to the community’s original formation, or to the first stirrings of faith among its individual members is not clear. For the elder these alternatives would probably not be mutually exclusive. Throughout the Greco-Roman world, old religious precepts were typically regarded as venerable, not obsolete;®? and the elder evidently thinks that he has good reason to distrust religious innovation (see 2 John 9). Yet because it crystallizes the ethic of an era newly inaugurated by God through Christ (4:910)—marked by the fading of darkness and the dawning of “the true light”—the love command may be viewed in another sense as fresh, much as Jesus characterized it (v. 8; see also 3:14; John 13:94 ech, 2UCor-S: 17; Ephas:8- 14). Thes com mandment is “not new as a phenomenon in the history of ideas, but rather as an eschatological reality.” In comparison to other eschatological literature of this era, including the Fourth Gospel, 1 John views the light of the new age neither as unseen but awaited, nor as fully ablaze John 1:9; 3:19; 7 Enoch 58:5), nor as liable to recession (John 12:35-36), but as “now shining in the world...for the darkness is beginning to lift” (JBP; see also 2:17; similarly, Rom 13:11-13).% 2:9-11. By framing a positive possibility of intramural Christian conduct (v. 10) with negative alternatives (vv. 9, 11), these verses recall the construction and thought of 1:5-10. Compared with that earlier statement, the present unit is, 62. Robert W. Wilken, 7he Christians as the Romans Saw Them(New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1984) esp. 94-125. 63. The Greek relative clause in 1 John 2:8 (6 €oTtv aAngés ho estin ale thes, “which is true,” with pronoun and adjective in the gramatically neuter gender) is rendered with precision in neither the NIV (“its truth is seen in him and you”) nor the NRSV (“a new commandment that is true in him and in you”), both of which predicate truth of the “commandment” (EvTo\n entole, a feminine noun). The clause “which is true” apparently modifies the preceding concept as a whole. 64. Rudolf Bultmann, 7he Johannine Epistles: A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973) 27. 65. T. Levi 18:3-4. 66. Although regrettably unavailable in English translation, an important article by Giinter Klein, “ ‘Das wahre Licht scheint schon’: Beobachtungen zur Zeit- und Geschichtserfahrung einer uncristlichen Schule,” 77K68 (1971) 261-326, remains helpful in clarifying this sequential aspect of 1 John’s eschatology.

however, both more explicit and more pointed, announcing a major theme to which the epistle will frequently return: the command to love within the household of Christian faith (see 3:1018, 23 A721 iS-2)eAS ie ssh Sand A:20e ee firm distinction is drawn here between “the one who loves” and “the one who hates” (a sharpness slightly dulled by the NIV and NRSV translations, “whoever loves”/“whoever hates”). Furthermore, the elder tightens the knot of ethical responsibility in an eschatological age, which was suggested in 1:6-7. The fundamental criterion for “living” or “perseverance” (Wévu meno; see the comments on 2:6) in the light, which is analogous to persistence in God’s domain (2:27, 28; 3:6, 24), is nothing other than love of the Christian brother or sister (see also 4:13, 16). Merely having the religious vocabulary down pat is no assurance of abiding in God’s radiance; as in 1:6-7, darkness is a moral condition to which a believer is susceptible “even yet” (2:9; similarly, see Rom 13:12; 1 Thess 5:4-8). Hatred is a stumbling block (oxdavdadov skandalon; cf. Lev 19:14; Ps 119:165; Hos 4:17; Rom 14:13), an entrapment of oneself (NIV, NEB, REB) or of others that properly has no place either in the light (RSV) or in the believer who loves (NRSV). (Obscure in Greek, the wording of v. 10 permits all of the alternative interpretations in the preceding sentence.) The elder’s comments here may be clarified by comparison with the Fourth Gospel. In John, “light” usually refers to Jesus’ gift of divine revelation, and “darkness” to human rejection of that gift and the refusal to follow Jesus (John 8:12; 11:9-10; 12:46). In other words, John uses the idiom of light and darkness to express a statement about the nature of faith and disbelief. In 1 John, by contrast, these metaphors are reworked to point up the dynamic, moral dimensions of that spiritual reality. Thus in v. 11, hatred so darkens the way to be walked that a benighted church literally cannot see where it is going (cf. 2:6; 3:10, 15; 4:20; Isa 6:10; John 12:35, 40),

REFLECTIONS 1. Modern readers may be troubled by the razor-edged distinction, whetted by the elder, between loving and hating. Many of us would prefer to soften that starkness with subtleties,

1 JOHN

2:7-11 REFLECTIONS

to allow for emotional nuances between the extremes—from cordiality to indifference to dislike, and so forth. Such a reaction reveals some notable things about the elder’s point of view and our own. First John, like the Fourth Gospel, inclines toward a radical dualism that resists gradations. There is light, there is darkness, and between them there is no place to hide. To love is to live in clear-eyed embrace of the light; to hate is to stagger blindly in the dark, cursing the light. In such a scheme a twilight zone of neutrality, whether in personal or societal relations, is not admissible. Although 1 John’s understanding has probably been influenced by hostility in the church’s environment (see 1 John 2:18-27), its theological basis lies ultimately in the elder’s view of God: God is light and love, and in God there is no darkness or hatred whatever (1:5; 4:8). Just here the Johannine perspective may clarify some differences in our own. Whereas we may almost reflexively reduce the essence of love to a feeling, whether of passion or of friendliness,” 1 John construes love eschatologically. Those who abide in God’s love live in a dynamic realm, a domain animated by the power of light, which struggles against the demonic power of hatred and darkness (see also John 3:19-21; 15:17-19). In 1 John 2:7-11, love and hate are not emotional states that can be triggered by sentimental greeting cards or demagogic propaganda. They are, rather, forms of characteristic conduct that reveal which of two radically discontinuous spheres humanity inhabits (cf. Matt 6:24 = Luke 16:13; Luke 14:26). “The polar alternatives with which the Johannine writings sketch the world should remind all of us who perceive the world in grays and shadows from the soft, indirect lighting of our comfortable dwellings that there are serious moral alternatives... which can make differences between life and death.” Like Paul (Rom 5:5; Gal 5:6) and John (John 13:31-38; 14:12-24), 1 John asserts that love is an aggressive expression of Christian faith, symptomatic of life that is renewed not by our own power but by God’s. 2. The preacher or teacher may join with commentators in debating whether the elder (like the Fourth Evangelist) has too narrowly circumscribed the arena of Christian love.” In contrast to Paul (Rom 13:9-10; Gal 5:14; cf. Lev 19:18) and Jesus of the synoptic Gospels (Matt 5:43-45; Mark 12:28-31; Luke 10:27-28, 36), John and 1 John do not counsel the love of neighbor or of enemies but, rather, love for one another within the Johannine community (e.g., John 13-34-3573 45:13; 17; 1 John 2:10; 3:11, 239 4:7). The question is not easily settled. On one side, the Fourth Gospel and the First Epistle are not the only documents in early Christianity, or in religious antiquity generally, for which intramural love is a salient concern (see Rom 12:10; Gal 6:10; 1 Thess 3:11-12; 5:15). Viewed from another angle, the Johannine letters stand at a considerable remove from the Dead Sea Scrolls, some of which counsel hatred of the Qumran community’s adversaries” in ways that the Johannine literature does not (although Rev 2:6 and 17:16 veer perceptibly in that direction). John and 1 John consistently speak of their audience’s being hated by others and not reciprocating that hatred (John 15:18-19; 17:14; 1 John 2:9, 11; 3:13, 15; 4:20). Still another factor to be considered, however, is 1 John’s ambivalence toward “the world” (shared with the Gospel though articulated differently there; see John 1:10, 29; 3:16-17; 4:42; 8:23; 12:25, 47; 15:19; 17:9, 14-18). Christ is the Savior and expiation for the whole world’s sins, not just for those of Johannine Christians (1 John 2:2; 4:14). Yet the things of the world are not to be loved (1 John 2:15-16); the world is diabolically hostile toward the community (1 John 3:1, 17; 4:1; 5:19; cf. John 15:18-19, 23-25) and is something to be overcome (1 John 67. Such interpretations, of course, have their ancient counterparts (Epws eros |cf. Plato Phaedrus 237, 242); bidta philia [cf. Sophocles Antigone 523}), which differ from 1 John’s understanding of love. 68. R. Alan Culpepper, / John, 2 John, 3 John, Knox Preaching Guides (Atlanta: John Knox, 1985) Sie (New York: Crossroad, 1992) 110-14, 178-79, 69. Cf. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: Introduction and Commentary who perceives in 1 John no constriction of scope for Christian love, and Wolfgang Schrage, The Ethics of the New Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988) 316-18, who arrives at precisely the opposite conclusion. 70. 10S 1:2-4, 8-11; 9:16, 21-23; CD 2:14-15; 10H 4:24; cf. also Ps 139:19-22.

395

1 JOHN 2:7-11 REFLECTIONS 5:4; cf. John 16:33; Rev 11:15). Given the sharp distinction between love and hate in | John 2:9-11, 15, it is hard to conceive of how “not loving” could ultimately be for the elder anything other than “hating,” even though the First Epistle itself never makes that equation. At this point it may be that the First Epistle, like the Fourth Gospel, contains some theological tensions that, even if logically compatible, have not been explicitly reconciled by the elder and the Fourth Evangelist within their respective works. What is clear, positive, and valid on its own terms is the Johannine stress on love within the circle of Jesus’ disciples, an emphasis that neither intentionally nor effectively repudiates the more general command to love the neighbor so much as it refocuses that commandment in a special and important way. If 1 John’s intense concentration on love within the church tends to leave undeveloped other necessary considerations of love for moral theology, those aspects may be informed by Paul, the synoptic evangelists, and other witnesses within both the OT and the NT. Assessed within its canonical context, 1 John offers an analysis of Christian love that, while perhaps incomplete,

is nonetheless vital in our own day as much as in the elder’s.”' 3. Often underestimated in the debate on the character of love in 1 John is the very thing the elder underlines in 2:7-11: that one’s fellows in the Christian congregation are to be loved as sisters and brothers. The unstated presupposition among some interpreters seems to be that, if 1 John does not speak of loving neighbors or enemies, then its formulation of the love command must be “soft.” This assumption is naive. It minimizes or overlooks the fact that most churches in the first century were not homogeneous associations for the religiously like-minded, having access to the myriad support systems of modern Western society. As Paul, James, and John remind us, the membership of early Christian communities was remarkably diverse, prone to factions, yet heavily dependent on one another for the fulfillment of basic needs (John 10:16;°21:15-17; 1 Cor 1:26; 11:17-22; 2 Cor 8:1—9:15- Jas'2:14-17). For the members of such churches to assume familial responsibilities for one another entailed considerable commitment. It still does. As anyone knows from experience with the wear and tear of real-life Christian community, to regard one’s neighbors within the church as Christ’s sisters and brothers, and to respond to them as God’s children (1 John 3:9-10; 5:2), is scarcely soft and rarely easy. In some churches, just as in some families, it can be much easier to love the homeless and the stranger, those with whom we have brief encounters, than to love those whom we know well and have promised to uphold over the long haul. “I could never understand,” mused Ivan Karamazov, “how one can love one’s neighbours. It’s just one’s neighbours, to my mind, that one can’t love, though one might love those at a distance. . . One can love one’s neighbours in the abstract, or even at a distance, but at close quarters it’s almost impossible.”” Ivan’s analysis is not overstated. Just ask the church that has fallen apart along any one of a hundred ideological fault lines. Maturation in Christian faith happens at close quarters, amid the church’s motley messiness and unredeemed sin. It is, as Augustine understood, “the walls of the church that make the Christian.”” First John invites us to view the church as the place where family is redefined and extended, where this world’s darkness is being illumined afresh, and often surprisingly, by God’s light. 71. See D. Moody Smith, “The Love Command: John and Paul?” in Theology and Ethics in Paul and His Interpreters: Essays in Honor of Victor Paul Furnish, ed. Eugene H. Lovering, Jr., and Jerry L. Sumney (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996) 207-17. 72. Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamzaov, The Novels of Fyodor Dostoevsky, vol. 1, trans. Constance Black Garnett (London:

Heinemann, 1912) 248-49.

73. Saint Augustine: Confessions, trans. R. S. Pine-Coffin, (New York: Penguin, 1961) 160 (8.2).

396

1 JOHN 2:12-14

1 John 2:12-14, The Family Restored NIV

NRSV

12] write to you, dear children, because your sins have been forgiven on account of his name. ‘ST write to you, fathers, because you have known him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I write to you, dear children,

'2] am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven on account of his name. '3] am writing to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I am writing to you, young people, because you have conquered the evil one. ‘41 write to you, children, because you know the Father. I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young people, because you are strong and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one.

because you have known the Father.

4] write to you, fathers, because you have known him who is

from the beginning, I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God lives in you, and you have overcome the evil one.

(COMMENTARY Interpreters have long been puzzled by this brief passage, which bristles with questions that are to some degree masked by the NIV, the NRSV, and other English translations. We may deal with these problems under three headings. (1) The section’s relationship to its context. First John 2:12-14 seems to interrupt the letter’s flow of thought. Admittedly, as observed up to this point, an argument fashioned with stairstep logic is hardly this author’s forte; on the other hand, the intrusiveness of 2:12-14 should not be exaggerated. This passage explicitly recalls much of the language and concerns of 2:1-6: the introductory clause, “I am writing” (vv. 1, 12-13); the elder’s address to his “little children,” followed by acknowledgment of their sin and its repair (vv. 1-2, 12); a concern for the knowledge of God (vv. 4, 6, 13-14) and the maintenance of his word (vv. 5, 14). This similarity is a clue to the function of 1 John 2:12-14. Like 2:1-6, it offers a positive, consolatory counterweight to some negative possibilities that have been raised in a pericope immediately preceding (cf. 1:5-10 with 2:7-11). (2) Structural and grammatical peculiarities of

397

1 John 2:12-14, The structure of 1 John 2:12-14 rhythmically balances two units, each including three statements with parallel forms of address:

Unit 1: 1 John 2:12-13 “to you, little children” (v. 12) “to you, fathers” (v. 134) “to you, young people” (v. 130)

Unit 2: 1 John 2:14 “to you, children” (v. 14a) “to you, fathers” (v. 140) “to you, young people” (v. 14¢)

With minor modifications, the second unit of comments basically repeats ideas expressed in the first. (Note especially 2:140, which reiterates almost verbatim the address to “the fathers” in 2:134) Judged by the stylistic conventions of its day, such repetition probably intends to amplify, with vividness, the

elder’s reassurance of his readers.” 74. Thus John Calvin, The Gospel According to St John 11-21 and the First Epistle ofJohn, ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961) 253; see also Duane F. Watson, “1 John 2:12-14 as Distributio, Conduplicatio, and Expolito: A Rhetorical Understanding,” /SN735 (1989) 97-110.

1JOHN 2:12-14 COMMENTARY

75. See Bent Noack, “On I John ii.12-14,” N7S6 (1959-60) 236-41. 76. Worth noting, though not belaboring, is the debate, as old as Augustine (“Second Homily: I John 2:12-17,” §§4-7), over how many groups are being addressed in 1 John 2:12-14. Is it one, designated by three names (“children,” “fathers,” “young people”)? Two (“fathers” and “young people”) as parts of a whole (“children”)? Or three at different stages of maturity? In the opinion of most commentators (e.g., Raymond E. Brown, Zhe Epistles of John, AB 30 [Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1982] 297-300), the second possibility seems less speculative and in conformity with the elder’s mode of address throughout 1 John. Following Hippocrates, Philo (On the Creation 105) reckoned seven seasons in a

familiar household codes of Ephesians (Eph 5:21— 6:9), Colossians (Col 3:18-4:1), and 1 Peter (1 Pet 2:18-3:7), and the instructions to various church leaders in 1 Timothy (1 Tim 3:1-6:2) and Titus (Titus 1:5-9; 2:2-10). Unlike those epistles, however, 1 John does not set forth detailed instructions for the conduct of discrete social groupings within the church, much less ascribe to them particular ministerial functions or duties. Rather, this form of address is an affectionate reminder of the familial character of the Johannine church. It is a community of the old and of the young, each group enjoying characteristic resources (the fathers, knowledge; young people, strength) but all regarded by the author as “dear children” (see also.2:1, 28+ 3:7, 10° 44-5321) beloved onac/, S222). Arle / ick Lee prothers and. Sisters..a(2.011; 3:13-14, 16-17; 4:20-21; 5:16), who universally share the blessings of a new age (see also 2:8). No image of the church is more dominant in 1 John than that of “the family of God.”7 In vv. 12-14 the elder does not precisely differentiate these groups; “knowledge of the Father [i.e., God],” tantamount to knowledge of him who is “from the beginning” (cf. 1:1), is expressly attributed to both “fathers” (vv. 13a, 140) and “children” (v. 14a; cf. Matt 11:25; Luke 10:21). Neither does 1 John elevate one group over another or play one off the others. None of them is inherently significant. The importance of each group derives from its members’ adherence to “him” (whether God or Jesus). Thus the “fathers” are commendable because they, like the “children,” have known the Father, a relational knowledge implying that both groups are keeping God’s commandments (see 2:3). The sins of these “little children” have been and continue to be forgiven for his name’s sake—that is, for his own sake (cf. 3:23;. 5213s: Ps. 25: PIStEzek. 20:8:0406:22-sionn 1:12; 3 John 7; Rev 2:3). The strength of the young, which prevails over personified evil (i.e., the devil; cf. 3:8, 10, 12; 5:18-19; John 6:70; 8:44; 12:31; 13:2; 17:15; Eph 6:16; 2 Thess 3:3), is linked with their abiding in the word of God (see also 1:1; 2:5-6, 10, 24, 27; 3:9). Although 1 John is not shy of reminders that the family of faith ought to abide in God or in Christ (2:56),

man’s life: the infant (mat8iou paidiou), the boy (tat86s paidos), the lad (etpaxtou meirakiou), the young man (veavioxou neaniskou), the man (av8pds andros), the elderly man (TpeoBUTou presbytou), and the old man (ye€povtos gerontos).

77. This point is explored by Dietrich Rusam, Die Gemeinschaft der Kinder Gottes: Das Motiv der Gotteskindschaft und die Gemeinden der johanneischen Briefe, BWANT 133 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1993).

Less obvious in English translation is a change of the verb “to write” from the present (ypadw grapho, vv. 12-13) to the aorist (past) tense (Eypabsa egrapsa, v. 14). This shift is clearer in the KJV (“I write”/“I have written”), more subtle in the NRSV (“I am writing”’/“I write”), and imperceptible in the NIV. The difference may be more stylistic than substantive. If a distinction between these tenses is registered, perhaps it should be one of emphasis, as though the author were saying, in v. 14, “What I just wrote [in vv. 12-13] I say to you again.” In the six subordinate clauses within vv. 12-14, the NIV and the NRSV agree with most English versions in translating the conjunction ott (hoti) as “because” (e.g., “because your sins have been forgiven”; “because you have known him who is from the beginning”). This rendering is supported by a similar use of that conjunction elsewhere in 1 John (e.g., 2:8, 21). If we accept this translation, the sense of vv. 12-14 would be that the church’s forgiveness, knowledge, conquest, and strength were the occasion or reasons for the elder’s writing to them. Yet Aoti can also be translated as “that.” If we adopt that rendering here, the effect of these verses is to bolster the readers’ confidence; accordingly, the elder writes (or declares) to the church’s members that their sins are forgiven, that they know (and so on). Although a minority option among modern versions (thus JB), this “declarative” rendering fits the substance and spirit of 1 John 2:12-14 very well, perhaps more logically than does the “causal” translation.’ (3) Exactly who is addressed in this passage? Verses 12-14 are aimed at “[little] children” (Texvia teknia, v. 12; tatdia paidia, v. 144), “fathers” (tatépes pateres, vv. 13a, 140), and “young people” (veavioxot neaniskoi, vv. 130, 14c).”° This mode of address faintly echoes the

398

1 JOHN 2:12-14 COMMENTARY here the elder encourages the church by acknowl- _ by Christians in the present is a recurrent theme edging that its members do indeed live in that in Revelation; see Rev 2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12; light and walk in that way—not because they 21; 12:11; 21:7; cf. Rev 11:7; 13:7). Even now have successfully worked their way through a the community’s knowledge of God is restored striver’s manual, but because their victory over (e835 31245 4:73 chalsacl 1:2)°9952:3-6; Jer S1:3134). evil is even now assured (see also 4:4; 5:4-5; cf. Isa 11:4; John 12:31; the conquest of evil forces

REFLECTIONS 1. Beyond dispute, the church is a flawed community, whose members too often do things that they should not and leave undone things that they should do. In such cases, reproof and correction in love are called for. But prophetic censure of the church’s sin deteriorates into a shrill, heartless harangue when unaccompanied by acknowledgment of the church’s identity as the restored family of God, with commendation for its “jobs well done” in keeping his commandments and overcoming evil. First John 2:12-14 reminds us that Christians grow into maturity, not by repeated verbal spankings or by being driven up a new wall every week, but through tender nurturance, with due praise, openhearted encouragement, and generous reminders of what they already know (see also 2:7). The church, after all, is God’s family. Its identity and security are assured by God’s action; it lives by the strength of God’s love. The church is the community of those who adhere to the proclamation of eternal life (1:2), and by that adherence are no longer victimized or captivated by evil (2:13-14). 2. That family is an intergenerational entity. It is easy for us to misconstrue 1 John’s sensitivity to this point, for in all likelihood the elder would be unimpressed by our ecclesiastical establishment’s facile recruitment of “baby-boomers” and patronization of their elders. While sensitive to social pressures (see 2:15-17), 1 John is not animated by the kind of sociological insecurities that tempt the modern church to forgo catechesis and to confuse worship with entertainment. In the Johannine community youth and age were not considered virtuous in themselves (cf. Job 13:26; Ps 25:7), much less institutionally beneficial. Both the young and the old occupied places of real importance in the Johannine church, because its youth were perceived to be vitally interrelated with their elders—both groups having known “him who is from the beginning” (2:13-14), for the sake of whose name their sins had been forgiven (2:12). Can Christian communities in our day move beyond both idolization of youth and repentance from ageism to the profundity of this very different kind of claim? In an age scarred by widespread rupture within natural families, can the church recover its blessedly integral experience as Christian children, youth, mothers, and fathers? With 1 John’s help, are we willing to reclaim our common birthright as forgiven children in the family of God?

1 JOHN 2:15-3:10, CHILDREN, IT IS nb AS. IOUR OVERVIEW What might be considered 1 John’s third move- _ righteousness, sin, the world, eternal life, abiding, “from the beginning,” being of God or born of ment is, like the letter’s other sections, constructed

from characteristic

God). Yet this entire section’s keynote, setting the

motifs (love, truth,

399

1 JOHN 2:15-3:10 OVERVIEW drawn between sin and righteousness, between the devil and God (3:4-10). As in 2:7-14, the placement of 2:15-3:10 appears to be an important indicator of the author’s theological perspective; the “last things” are not to be talked about last of all, because they have a/ready commenced and shape the reality in which the church now lives and leans into God’s future. The same point was made more concisely and more powerfully in 2:8: “the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining.”

tone for everything else, may be expressed most clearly in 2:18: “Children, it is the last hour!” This portion of the First Epistle is obviously eschatological in tenor, filled with a sense that ultimate stakes have been raised. The world is to be rebuffed, because it is passing away (2:1517). Now many antichrists have come (2:1825). The anointing received by the church preserves it against “the big lie” (2:26-27). Though what we shall be is not yet manifest,

the church may be confident at Christ’s coming (2:28-3:3). Firm lines of demarcation must be

1Jord215-1 (9: The gs Versus the Will ofepee :

ae NRSV

> the world or ariythine in the

15Do not love hoe ae ‘things in the

world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 'For everything in the

world. The love of the Father is not in those who love the world; or allthat is in the world—the d—the cravings of sinful man, the lustofhis — desire of the 1e desire of the eyes, the

and the boasting of what he has and does—

pride in riches—comes not from the Father but

comes not from the Father but from the world. — from the world. '7And the world and its desire: '7The world and its desires pass away, but the ~ care passing away, | but those who do the will of

man who does the will of God lives forever.

yd live forever. lesire for it

(COMMENTARY Having reiterated confidence in his readers’ knowledge of the Father (2:12-14), the elder moves abruptly to his first explicit directive: Do not love the world or anything in it. By this the author is surely not commending retreat from everyday life into self-preoccupation. If that were his intent, it would be practically impossible to fulfill the old, yet new, commandment to love one’s brother or sister (2:7-8, 10). So against what does 1 John 2:15-17 inveigh? 2:15. This passage itself indicates what, in the elder’s view, is problematic about the world. We can locate those comments within a larger context provided by the Fourth Gospel. By setting in mutual opposition “love for the world” and “the love of the Father,”’® 1 John recalls the Gospel’s

view of the world (kéop0s kosmos) as, at once, the theater of God’s salvation (John 3:16-17; 4:14; 11:27; 12:47; 17:18; 18:37) and a deluded realm that is enslaved to wickedness (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 1 John 5:19) as well as radically opposed to Christ, the world’s illuminator, judge, and redeemer (John 7:7; 8:12; 9:5; 12:46-48; 15:18). In Johannine thought the world was created by God through the Word, which ultimately became flesh. Because the world did not recognize Jesus as God’s agent for its salvation (John 1:10-11), the world thereby showed that it did not know God (John 17:25). As Jesus has been sent into the world by God (John 3:17; 10:36; 12:46; 16:28), his believers are sent into the world by Jesus (John 17:11, 18). But neither Jesus nor his disciples are of the world in the sense of belonging to it or deriving from it their identity or existence (John 8:23; 15:19; 17:14, 16; cf.

78. As rendered in the NIV and the NRSV, “the love of the Father [n aya Tov Tatpds he agape tou patros)” preserves the ambiguity of the Greek phrase, which suggests “the Father’s love” (NEB), “love [for] the Father” (REB), or both.

400

1 JOHN 2:15-17 COMMENTARY 1:12-13). In Johannine perspective, to love the world (1 John 2:15) is to embrace an illusion that has rejected Christ and, therefore, to show oneself hostile to God {cf. Jas 4:4). 2:16-17. These verses underscore the kind of distance that, in the elder’s opinion, should exist between the believer and the world. From the world there bubbles up a boiling desire for things “of the flesh” (2:16; see also’ Prov 27:20). In Johannine thought, as elsewhere in the NT (Rom S244; Gale S2173)Eph. 2:33" laPets27 11). “flesh” (odp€ sarx) does not equal sex. It refers, rather, to the entire domain of humanity, which is distinct from God (see John 3:5-6; 8:15). Not from God, but from the world originates an arrogant pretension (akaCoveta alazoneia), inflated by the conspicuous consumption of worldly goods (see also Wis 5:8; Jas 4:16; Philo On the Virtues 162). The elder is not counseling rejection of material

experience as such or an ascetic denial of normal appetites (to the contrary, see 1:1-2; 3:17; 4:2). What he rejects is an absorption with things “of the flesh” and visible “to the eyes”: a preoccupation with matters of “everyday life” (Bios bios) that runs counter to the Spirit, undermines seeing by faith, and is hostile to eternal life. What he repudiates are lust and boastful presumption alazoneia— impulsive, self-aggrandizing desire for this world’s ephemeral allurements that would unseat God as the sovereign center of one’s existence (cf. Matt 6:24 = Luke 16:13; Rom 8:7). Such cravings are as ridiculous as they are wrongheaded, for their object, this world, is passing away (1 John 2:17; ch Rem 12-250 Gort 7:31; 15:50) Only the fulfillment of God’s will is eternally enduring (1 John 2:17; cf. Matt 7:21; 4 Ezra 4:11; 6:20; 7:96; 2 Apoc. Bar. 21:19; 31:5; 40:3).

REFLECTIONS Where does the Christian self find its center?

Worldly wisdom proposes for each of us a triumphant autonomy, of the sort immortalized by William Ernest Henley: It matters not how strait the gate, How charged with punishments the scroll, I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul.”

Here is a stalwart courage that most of us would admire—but also a boastful presumption of which we should beware. Lacking from such a credo is any acknowledgment of our dependence on a power beyond ourselves to whom we are accountable. What is missing, in a word, is God, whose captaincy outranks our own and claims final disposition of our destiny and souls. As the elder recognizes, the relationship between boastful presumption and lust is intimate, for when we forget or deny that God is God and we are not, invariably we relocate our identity in “all that is in the world” (1 John 2:16 NRSV). And because the core of the human self is neither independent nor incorruptible, as we may delude ourselves into thinking, we end up being defined by “the world.” When God is factored out of our life’s equation or relegated to the extraneous role of a cosmic coach, our identity becomes radically confused. We become what we do and how much we earn. We become the clothes we wear and the baubles we buy. We become the neighborhoods we live in, the schools our children attend, and the clubs we belong to. But an identity constructed from our ravenous cravings for the transitory is hopelessly unstable and doomed to disappointment. “You can in no manner be satisfied with temporal goods,” said Thomas a Kempis (1379/80-1471), “for you were not created

to find your rest in them.” Was Thomas correct? Ask anyone who has ever lost a job. First John denies the commonplace assumption that human beings create themselves or are competent to assume final responsibility for their individual and collective well-being. In the 79. “Invictus” (1888), in The New Oxford Book of English Verse, 1250-1950, ed. Helen Gardner (New York: Oxford University Press,

1972) 792.

e

80. Thomas & Kempis, 7he /mitation of Christ, ed. Harold C. Gardiner, S.J. (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1955) 128.

401

1 JOHN 2:15-17 REFLECTIONS elder’s view, we are radically contingent beings whose loyalties and identities are molded by our inhabitation of one sphere or another. We are either “of the world” or “of God.” Ultimately we do not define ourselves; ultimately our selves are defined by the domain in which we live. Either we are defined by our materialism and delusions of grandeur, or we are defined by our obedience to God’s will, formed by God’s affections rather than by our own egoism (cf. Deut 6:4-5; Mark 12:29-30 par.; John 3:5-6).”! To what do we ultimately entrust ourselves? To this world’s bogus promises of salvation by beauty, financial security, and creature comfort? Or to God’s guarantee of our full restoration through the love of Jesus Christ? First John 2:15-17 is a passage of admonition, a barbed reminder that we have to make this radical choice on which hinges nothing less than our eternal destiny. But the elder’s exhortation has been immediately prefaced by encouragement (2:12-14), unmitigated assurance that we are empowered to decide wisely and to stick to that decision. On what does that consolation rest? On nothing less than the confidence that we have already been chosen as God’s beloved children. Our desire to know the God who is our selves’ genuine center, our will to commit our lives to God, is more than matched—indeed, is energized—by God’s powerful desire to claim us with a love that will never let us go. In that light the bulk of 1 John could be considered an extended meditation on what it means to have been given “power to become children of God... who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:12-13 NRSV). 81. See Leander E. Keck, “Derivation as Destiny: ‘Of-ness’ in Johannine Christology, Anthropology, and Soteriology,” in Exploring the Gospel ofJohn in Honor ofD.Moody Smith, ed. R. Alan Culpepper and C. Clifton Black (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996) 274-88.

1 John 2:18-25, Endurance Amid Antichrist’s Coming NIV

_ NRSV

'8Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. '°They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none

18Children, it is the last hour! As you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. From this we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they did not belong to us; for if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But by

going out they made it plain that none of them belongs to us. But you have been anointed by

of them belonged to us. °But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth.? 2'I do not write to

the Holy One, and all of you have knowledge.?

211 write to you, not because you do not know

you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth. ?Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the anti-

christ—he denies the Father and the Son. “No who denies the Son has the Father; whoever knowledges the Son has the Father also. 24See that what you have heard from the ginning remains in you. If it does, you also remain in the Son and in the Father. *°And

the truth, but because you know it, and you know

that no lie comes from the truth. 22Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ?° This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. #2No one who denies the

one ac-

Son has the Father; everyone who confesses the Son has the Father also. “Let what you heard

bewill

from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, then you

this

will abide in the Son and in the Father. 25And

is what he promised us—even eternal life.

this is what he has promised us,° eternal life.

220 Some manuscripts and you know all things

Other ancient authorities read you know all things Messiah ¢ Other ancient authorities read you

402

6Or the

1 JOHN 2:18-25 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY Perhaps no segment of 1 John is more troubled than 2:18-25. Troublesome to clarify and somewhat troubling in its implications, this pericope bespeaks a Christian community undergoing deep disturbance. 2:18. From the passage’s opening its language is portentous, like lowering clouds over a rocky landscape. The elder’s “children” have heard of antichrist’s coming, which suggests that avtTixptotos (antichristos; lit., a “counterchrist” or “opposing christ”) was some figure expected within the community addressed in 1 John. It is remarkable to learn from the elder that antichrist has come—more than one, in fact. Thus described, this figure is unprecedented in the apocalyptic literature of 1 John’s day, surprisingly absent from the Revelation to John, and rare in early Christian writings.°* Most commentators assume a conceptual kinship between antichrist and “the lawless one,” or “man of sin,” in 2 Thess 2:3-9 and “the abomination that makes desolate” in Dan OF Miest (2 leMacce 1:54; and the synoptic Gospels (Mark 13:14 par.). All of these anonymous images are associated with evil’s last massive assault before God’s final victory. Likewise, in 1 John the coming of antichrist confirms that the church is living in a final hour (v. 18; cf. John 5:28; Mark 13:32; Luke 12:40, 46; Rom 13:11; Rev 3:3). Lying, attributed by the elder to this counterchrist (1 John 2:22), recalls the Fourth Gospel’s characterization of the devil as “a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:44 NRSV). Deceit, perpetrated by “false Christs and false prophets” in the last days, is also forecast by Jesus in the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24:5, 23-24; Mark 13:6, 21-22; Luke 21:8; cf. Acts 20:29-30; Rev 16:13; 19:20; 20210);,°° 2:19. According to 1 John, exactly what does this opposing christ do? Although two other comments in these epistles supply a bit more informa-

tion (1 John 4:3; 2 John 7), here antichrist’s coming is evidenced by only two things: a secession of some Christians from the Johannine community and a denial of Jesus that entails a denial of God. The first of these activities appears clearer than the second: A schism has occurred within the Johannine fellowship shared by the author and his readers (1:3; see Introduction, “The Adversarial Character of 1, 2, and 3 John”). From the elder’s point of view, the secessionists were not expelled (contrary to the reading of Augustine, who likened them to “bad humors” whose vomiting out relieved the body of Christ).°4 It appears, rather, that the dissidents voluntarily walked out (cf. John 6:66-67; 13:30). 2:22-23. The second indication of antichrist is much harder to interpret: “the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ” and by so doing “denies the Father.” The problem lies in ascertaining precisely what was being denied. Did some conclude that not Jesus, but rather someone else, is God’s anointed agent, the Messiah? It is hard to imagine how such a conclusion could have been drawn by a party within Johannine Christianity, sharing with the elder

82, See Polycarp Letter to the Philippians 7.1, which refers to 1 John

14:6-9; 15:23; cf. Matt 10:32-33; 11:27 and par.).®

the same traditions that we know from the Fourth Gospel’ (see John) 1:17).415- 115275--97:35; 20:31): Could some have denied that (the incarnate, earthly) Jesus is the (exalted, heavenly) Christ? This possibility seems more likely in the light of 1 John 4:2 and 2 John 7, both of which attribute a repudiation of Jesus’ coming in the flesh to the deception of antichrist. Nevertheless, the controversy underlying y. 22 remains ill-defined, because the author does not clarify it. Whatever its causes, a chasm of some kind has opened up between the schismatics’ understanding of Jesus and their construal of him as the Christ, a rupture that for the elder is all the same as a lie that “denies the Son.” If the Son is denied, so too is the Father who sent him, since, in Johannine thought, one’s response to Jesus is equivalent to one’s response to God (v. 23; see also 1 John 4:15;-5:1; 2 John 9; John 5:23; 12:44-15;

4:2-3 and 2 John 7. 83. On the notion of “antichrist” in antiquity, see A. E. Brooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, ICC (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912) 69-79, and Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Johannine Epistles: Introduction and Commentary (New York: Crossroad, 1992) 135-39. On the concept’s evolution in the history of Christian thought, see Bernard McGinn, Antichrist: Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1994).

84. Augustine “Third Homily: I John 2:18-27,” §5. 85. Some later mss omit, apparently by accident, the second half of 1 John 2:23: “Everyone who confesses the Son has the Father also” (NRSV; cf. KJV). In this verse, as in 2 John 9 (cf. 1 John 5:12), “having God” suggests, not ownership, but the believer’s firm connection with God (cf. 3 Macc 7:16; 7. /ss. 7:7).

403

1 JOHN 2:18-25 COMMENTARY 2:20-21, 24-25. How does the elder advise those left behind to regard the church’s breakup? (1) He identifies the trauma as an expected, critical moment of decision: “Children, it is the last hour! As you have heard...” (2:18). This is the only occurrence of “last hour” (EoxaTn wpa eschaté hora) in the NT. John’s Gospel, however, refers to Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection/ascension as the eschatological “hour” of his glorious return to the Father (John 2:4; 7:30; 12:23, 27). Although 1 John may imply a link between the victorious hour of Jesus’ glorification and the climactic hour of schism within the Johannine church, the elder does not clarify or develop that connection. Rather, he interprets the character of the Johannine community in the light of its fracture. The split now reveals those who have really belonged to the church from the beginning and exposes those who have not (2:19; cf. John 3:19-21; 1 Cor 11:19). (2) The elder writes not for the purpose of reproving his readers, but of ratifying the soundness and basis of their own judgment. Here his comments are couched in language associated with ancient Jewish rituals of consecration and authorization for a task (see Exod 24:7; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16). Specifically, “an anointing from the Holy One”—which may refer either to God (Hab 3:3) or to Christ (John 6:69)—has endowed all of the church with the capacity to discern the truth (v. 20; cf. 2 John 1).8° That

anointing, moreover, enables Christians to distinguish the truth from a lie (v. 21) and to utter truthful confession about both the Son and the Father (v. 23; “anointing” will be discussed in the Commentary on 2:26-27). (3) The elder urges his readers to do exactly what the secessionists have not: allow the community’s original proclamation (see 1 John 1:1; 2:7, 13-14; 3:11; 2 John 5-6) to “persist” (weveTw meneto) among them, that they may also continue in the Son and in the Father (v. 24; the root verb pévw [meno] prominently refers in John’s Gospel to the mutual indwelling of God, Christ, and the Christian believer [John 6:56-58; 15:1-10; 17:21-23]; see also Commentary on 1 John 1:3; 2:5-6). The outcome promised “to us”®” by him (probably Christ; cf. John 3:15; 6:40) is “eternal life.” Such life is not of infinite duration in some utopian future. It is, instead, life possessing a radically indestructible quality that even now transcends this world’s evanescence (see also 1:2; S15; S211): 18;-20; John 3:3656:472 1010023; VS). 87. Avaried and considerable majority of ss read “to us” (hiv hemin) in 1 John 2:25, though a few have “to you” (Upiv Aymin, pl.). The word Hutv, which in Greek sounds very similar to vpitv, may have been copied into this verse by scribes thinking of the pronouns in 2:24 and the phraseology of 1:2-3.

86. The Greek mss evidence for 1 John 2:20 is evenly divided between

two readings: “you know all things [tavta panta]” (KJV), and “you all [tdvtes pantes] know” (GNB, JB, NAB, NEB, NIV, NRSV, REB, RSV). The second alternative best fits the context: The author affirms the truth that all his readers know. He has nothing to add to it (2:21), and neither do the schismatics, whose claims are fraudulent (2:19, 22). The first alternative may have been created by scribes who thought the clause “you know” needed an object.

REFLECTIONS Some preachers or teachers of 1 John 2:18-25 may find aspects of this material disquieting, even repulsive. Images like “antichrist” and “the last hour” enjoy a more receptive hearing in some modern congregations than in others. A few commentators argue, with more tenacity than persuasion, that 1 John has already begun the process of “demythologizing” those images. Moreover, the elder’s branding of his opponents as liars and antichrists may strike some readers as exemplifying the tendency of a lamentable kind of religious behavior: the demonization of those with whom we disagree. An early and important step in reflecting on this material, therefore, is a candid acknowledgment of its difficulty. 88. See, among others, C. H. Dodd, Zhe Johannine Epistles, MNTC (New York: Harper and Bros., 1946) 49-50, and Rudolf Bultmann, The Johannine Epistles: A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973) 36-38.

1 JOHN 2:18-25 REFLECTIONS Compounding these troubles are the intensity of the controversy in which the elder was embroiled and our distance from it. Behind the pained rhetoric of 1 John 2:18-25 is a harrowing reality: For the first time in the NT record, a church has fallen apart over a matter of critical importance, a division that must surely have been experienced with shock by those whose tradition accentuated the church’s unity in Christ (John 10:16; 17:11, 21-23; 1 John 1:3). At the time of this letter’s composition, that wound was fresh, gaping, and raw. To expect the elder’s comments to be evenhanded under these circumstances would be as unrealistic as to generalize the relevance of a cri de coeur in all times and places. The wail of betrayal in 1 John 2:18-25 is very likely proportionate to just how much the elder and the secessionists once shared; had they not been so close, he could have regarded their departure with indifference. If we were fully able to appreciate the factors precipitating that congregation’s collapse, we might be surprised by the coolness with which the author was trying to lead his readers in reasoning their way through it. Jane Austen wrote wisely, “Nobody, who has not been in the interior of a family, can say what the difficulties of any individual of that family may be.”*’ That observation is acutely pertinent to the families in the Bible, whose affections and quarrels are so remote from us in time and culture. It is especially illuminating to read the elder’s rhetoric within the ancient context of slander, which was commonly used by the adherents of other Hellenistic religions. Colotes, a student of the Epicurean school, assailed rival philosophers as “buffoons, charlatans, assassins, prostitutes, nincompoops.”” The Jewish historian Josephus castigated hostile Gentiles as “frivolous and utterly senseless specimens of humanity . . . filled with envy... folly and narrow-minded-

ness.”*' Priests at Qumran prayed that the wicked—Jews as well as Gentiles—“be accursed, without mercy... and sentenced to the gloom of everlasting fire.” Such examples could be multiplied, but the point should be clear: The author of 1 John wrote in an era when polemic—hurled by both Gentiles and Jews against each other and even among one another— had assumed a conventionally strident, typically overwrought character that makes the occasionally harsh language of the Johannine epistles seem, by comparison, surprisingly mild.” None of these reflections suggests that 1 John 2:18-25 should be written off as a museum piece or disdainfully ignored. After we have raised hard questions about this text, it responds with some others aimed straight at us.

1. Does the way in which Christians regard Jesus matter as much as the elder thinks? Modern congregations that lean toward social activism, readily approving of 1 John’s insistence on practical love for the sister and brother, may find quaint or puzzling the same letter’s commitment to orthodoxy (“straight thinking”; see also 2 Tim 4:3-4). But for 1 John there can be no distinction between “obedience to the commandment” and “abiding in the word,” no separate compartments for morality and theology. God’s truth requires of Christians confession in faith and activation in love. Failure to proceed both morally and confessionally in the light of that truth is, as the elder baldly puts it, lying—whether to others, to ourselves, or to God (1 John 1:6, 10; 2:4, 21-22, 27; 4:20; 5:10). That last possibility is the most frightening of all, for in 1 John 2:18-25 the elder’s primary point is that if we get Jesus wrong, then we shall surely misconstrue the God who saves us; and if our understanding of God is corrupted, then the way we live will inevitably be deformed. The old saw, “It doesn’t matter what you believe, so long as you’re sincere,” is an idea far more naive and dangerous than any the elder puts forward. It is also more cowardly, for, as Richard Lischer has perceptively 89. Jane Austen, Emma, in The Complete Novels ofJane Austen, vol. 2 (New York: Modern Library, 1992) 107. 90. Plutarch Moralia-1086E. 91. Josephus Against Apion 1.25.225-26. 92. 10S 2:7-8. 93. Fora perceptive, richly documented survey, see Luke T. Johnson, “The New Testament’s Anti-Jewish Slander and the Conventions of Ancient Polemic,” JBL 108 (1989) 419-41. 94, Richard Lischer, “The Sermon on the Mount as Radical 1 Pastoral Care,” Int41 (1987) 157-69; see esp. 166.

405

1 JOHN 2:18-25 REFLECTIONS observed, “What often passes for ‘tolerance’ in the modern congregation is in reality excommunication through indifference.”” First John compels us to consider that some beliefs we may hold about Jesus are intolerably divergent from God’s norm, that some activities in which we may engage are inescapably at odds with the One in whom Christians have known atonement. 2. For all the gloom of 1 John 2:18-25, the elder writes with remarkable conviction (see also 3:21; 4:17; 5:14). Although his tone is sure, he never pretends to possess any truth that his readers do not also enjoy. The author confidently attests to the knowledge that Christians already have as the result of their own anointing (1 John 2:20-21). We know what we need to know, not merely to hang on but to thrive faithfully in this troubled world. Our hope rests not in ourselves but in God, who is master over every hour, from first to last (1 John 2:14, 24). The elder is certain that those who persevere in the community’s originating affirmation of faith will remain united with Christ and with God (1 John 2:24). Amid excruciating breakdowns within and beyond the church, in what does our own Christian assurance rest? In a skeptical and often cynical age, does the modern church believe that its witness receives what for Calvin was “the highest commendation”: “that it unites us to God and contains whatever belongs to the true enjoying of God”?” Do our ministries, in substance and style, express the elder’s hope that, despite all appearances to the contrary, God can and will make good on the promise to us of an indestructible life (1 John 2:25)? 95. John Calvin, The Gospel According to St John 11-21 and the First Epistle ofJohn, ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961) 262.

1 John 2:26-27, Anointing in Truth NIV

NRSV

61 am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. 27As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.

261 write these things to you concerning those

who would deceive you. ?7As for you, the anoint: ing that you received from him abides in you, and so you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, abide in him.? a Or it

(COMMENTARY Once more (cf. 2:7, 12-14, 21) the author stresses that he has not written® to inform his

“the anointing [xpioya chrisma] that you received from him” (see v. 20), which keeps the congregation from straying. Tightly compressed within v. 27 are six claims about this anointing: (1) It is something given to the elder’s readers (“as for you”). A contrast between them and their potential deceivers is implied. (2) The readers have received this anointing (chrisma) “from him”: either from God or from Christ, God’s anointed one (Xptotés Christos).

readers of new matters or to correct their mistakes, but to clarify the threat posed by “those who are

trying to lead you astray” (tTav TAavedvTWY

ton

planonton, a participle whose root idea is that of “wandering”). The elder’s thought returns to 96. Although conjugated in the past tense (an “epistolary aorist”), the verb in 2:26 refers to the present letter (so NIV and NRSV), whose composition would have been completed by the time the original readers received and read it.

406

1 JOHN 2:26-27 COMMENTARY (3) Their anointing “abides” or “dwells” (uévet menezt) in them (cf. 2:14). (4) The community’s anointing by him” teaches its members as regards all things. They need no one to teach them. They certainly need no instruction from those who would mislead them or even, by implication, from the elder himself (see also vv. 20-21; cf. Rom 15:14-15; 1 Thess 4:9). Z (5) That anointing is “real, not counterfeit” (NIV). It is thus, by implication, as utterly reliable as instructions from would-be misleaders would confuse. (6) Because Johannine Christians are directed by this anointing, they are encouraged by the elder to reciprocate its persistence in them, not by straying, but by abiding (wéevete menete) in it or in him. (The grammar permits either interpretation, or both; see also 2:6, 10, 24.) These comments do not specify what this chrisma is or under what circumstances the elder envisions its bestowal on his readers. They would surely have Known to what he was referring and would have needed no explanation. For us, however, vv. 26-27 are almost as obscure as they are illuminating. Medicinal anointing of the sick with oil was widely practiced in antiquity (see Mark 6:13; Jas 4:14-15; Josephus The Jewish War 1.657; Antiguities of the Jews 17.172), but in 1 John there is no hint of such a chrisma. A more plausible suggestion is that anointing refers here either to baptism (cf. Acts 10:38) or to the community’s tradition affirmed at baptism.°® That interpretation is not, however, problem free; while we find some heavily veiled allusions in 5:6-8 (perhaps also in 1:9), 1 John makes no explicit reference to baptism. Moreover, the author speaks of this anointing as something experienced only

by his readers, those who have not broken away from the community. Presumably, however, the Johannine secessionists (2:18-19), who appear to be “the deceivers” in v. 26, would also have been baptized. A third possibility is grounded less securely in 1 John than in the Gospel of John: The anointing to which the elder refers is the coming of the Holy Spirit.°° In John, Jesus speaks of the Spirit in many of the same terms that the elder in 1 John uses to express the church’s anointing. The Spirit, which is of truth John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13), is bestowed by God (John 14:16, 26) and by Jesus John 16:7; 15:26) upon his disciples, in order that the Spirit may abide (uévw meno) among them forever (John 14:16-17). Of particular relevance to 1 John 2:26-27, the Spirit sent by God in Jesus’ name will teach the disciples all things, reminding them of all that Jesus said to them (John 14:26; 15:26; 16:14-15). Although 1 John does not expressly connect the sending of the Spirit with the church’s anointing, consecration with “the spirit of the Lord” is a venerable biblical image (1 Sam 16:13; Isa 61:1; cf. 2 Cor 1:21-22), and the elder does comment directly on the Spirit later in 1 John (3:24; 4:1-3, 6, 13; 5:6, 8). The Spirit’s presupposition in 2:26-27 is not, therefore, unreasonable. Like the Fourth Gospel, the First Epistle assumes the closest possible relationship among the Father, the Son, and the Spirit sent by them to dwell among those who believe in Jesus (see 1 John 3:24; 4:1-6, 13; 5:7-8). Both John (John 15:1-11) and 1 John (2:20, 27) also assume the unmediated access of every believer to that Spirit and to Christ, to whom the Spirit bears authentic witness. By its own anointing, the Johannine church is and should remain bonded to Christ, the anointed one.

97. Weakly supported in the Greek textual tradition of 1 John 2:27 is the phrasing “but as his anointing itse/fteaches you” (NRSV; cf. KJV: “but as the same anointing teacheth you”). While appropriate in the present context, this wording is uncharacteristic of both the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine letters. 98. Thus Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, 62-63; Kenneth Grayston, The Johannine Epistles, NCB (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984) 87-88.

99. At least as old as John Calvin (7he Gospel According to St John 11-21 and the First Epistle ofJohn, ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961] 263), this interpretation is proposed by a majority of interpreters; see especially J. C. Coetzee, “The Holy Spirit in 1 John,” in Studies in the Johannine Letters, Neot 13 (1979) 43-67.

REFLECTIONS 1. Except for communities in the Pentecostal tradition, pneumatology (reflection on the character and activity of the Spirit) may be one of the most undernourished elements of theological reflection in the modern church. Across denominational lines, within local congre-

407

1 JOHN 2:26-27 REFLECTIONS gations as well as seminaries, spiritual formation is earnestly sought, though with little consensus among the seekers on what it means to be spiritually formed. First John 2:26-27 offers help in allaying the hunger of present-day Christians as they consider the Spirit’s role in their life as the church. For instance, the elder’s insistence that the community’s anointing is God’s gift, not the church’s attainment, ought to relax Christians’ anxious tension to “make it” in a driven culture that grinds by the rule of salvation by works. In many churches language about the Spirit sprawls across the religious map, from investigation of different forms of prayer, to demonstration of extraordinary speech or other abilities, to cultivation of artistic tastes or social responsibilities. Into this conversation 1 John injects a critical factor that all of these approaches may overlook: a concern for the lasting integrity of the church’s witness to God’s restorative activity in Jesus Christ. The community that joins with 1 John in claiming that God has anointed the whole church, the laity as well as its ordained leaders, is liberated for robust cooperation with its pastor or priest. The leader who shares that confidence is freed from the tyranny of a dysfunctional congregation.

2. Radically egalitarian by inclination, the elder’s view of the church’s anointing has been sharpened by a dire threat of deception. Some acute questions linger: What happens when the anointed Christian fails to “abide in him”? Although the believer should know all and need no instruction from anyone, may not one’s anointing become tainted? And if so, how will it be restored, if not with the help of one’s sisters and brothers—including the assistance of Scripture and tradition, the record of the family of faith? Without some objective standard beyond ourselves, how can we confirm that the instructional voice we hear is indeed the Spirit’s and not merely the echo of our own? In reply, the elder—who in 1 John is plainly offering counsel—would ultimately point his readers back to “what you heard from the beginning” (2:24) as well as to those practical tests of religious experience that dot the landscape of 1 John (1:6; 2:3-6, 9-11; 3:4, 7-10, 14:15; 4:7-8, 20; 5:2).'°° Without working out the problem of spiritual confirmation, 1 John does suggest a pattern for deliberation within the church that remains well worth pondering: a dynamic interaction between the community’s verbal witness to the word and the practical appropriation of that word by every believer, at

the Spirit’s prompting.’ 100. The classic study of this subject is Robert Law, The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of St. John (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1909). 101. For further discussion, see Ignace de la Potterie, “Anointing of the Christian by Faith,” in The Christian Lives by the Spirit, ed. Ignace de la Potterie and Stanislas Lyonnet (Staten Island, N.Y.: Alba House, 1971) 79-143.

1 John 2:28-3:3, Confidence at Christ’s Coming NIV

NRSV

78And now, dear children, continue in him, so that when he appears we may be confident and unashamed before him at his coming. 2°lf you know that he is righteous, you know that everyone who does what is right has been born of him. How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did

28And now, little children, abide in him, so that when he is revealed we may have confidence and not be put to shame before him at his coming. 29If you know that he is righteous, you may be sure that everyone who does right has been born of him.

ee

'See what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God; and that is what we are. The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him.

408

1 JOHN 2:28-3:33 NIV

NRSV

not know him. *Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears,* we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. *Everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as he is pure.

will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is this: when he? is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as he is. *And all who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.

a2 Or when it is made known

Beloved, we are God’s children now; what we

.

—@Orit

(COMMENTARY Although its train of thought moves in no clearly deductive fashion, this segment recapitulates many ideas previously announced: the elder’s encouragement of those “beloved” (3:1, 2; see also 2:5, 7, 10, 15) to “abide in him” (i.e., God Of tchrst: 2:76. see also. 2:0,.10, 14,17, 24.27) who is “righteous” (2:29; see also 2:1); the church’s assured knowledge (2:29; see also 2:3, 5, 13-14, 18) and its separation from the unknowing world (3:1; see also 2:15-17). First John 2:28— 3:3 differs from what has preceded in its decided look ahead. To this point the elder has spoken of the church’s heritage (1:1-3) or current condition; here he points his readers forward to the future, to the time of Christ’s return (2:28; 3:2). This adjustment of perspective is consistent with the eschatological shading of the author’s remarks in 2:18-25. The community’s present experience of the coming of Christ’s opponents is now placed alongside the sure expectation of Christ’s own appearance. All of the preceding ideas are melded in several closely related themes: Present Endurance as Preparation for the Future. In comparison to the Gospel of John, which places heavier stress on the present realization of eternal life in Christ (John 3:36; 5:24; 6:47, 54; 17:3; cf. John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 54), 1 John’s eschatological vision is more obviously bifocal. The community of faith is encouraged to dwell for now in that domain that has been climactically defined by Christ, so that later, when he is revealed at his (or God’s) regal coming (tapovota parousia), the church may stand before him, boldly confident (mappnotav parrésian) and unashamed (1 John 2:28; 4:17; cf. Mark 8:38; LukeuO:765 Col 3:5) immediate, more direct context for understanding: We should “be on the watch against false gods” NEB)

(NEB)

if we

abi

;

;

+

175. Thus Wesley’s sermons, “Spiritual Worship” and “Spiritual Idola-

bide in the One who is authentic

try,” in The Works ofJohn Wesley, vol. 3: Sermons 71-114, 88-114. Most

commentators favor this interpretation, there is no consensus. See Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John, AB 30 (Garden City, N.Y.: Dou-

174. A rebuttal is presented by Julian Hills, “ ‘Little children, keep yourself from idols’: 1 John 5:21 Reconsidered,” CBQ51 (1989) 285-310.

4

bleday, 1982) 627-29.

REFLECTIONS

The crucial issue before us in 1 John 5:18-21—the Christian’s conjunction with Christ, who for the believer is “the true God and eternal life’—-may be the hardest for the modern church to grasp, because our interpretive framework is so different from 1 John’s. We typically talk of membership in a church or participation in Christian belief and practice; the elder speaks of begetting from God and dwelling in Jesus Christ. Put differently, our reflex is to view things sociologically and anthropologically, whereas 1 John speaks ontologically and theologically. That difference is important, for in the elder’s view God is not jockeying for a place among our everyday affairs, to add something useful to our Btos (bios; see 2:15-17). Through Jesus Christ, God is reconfiguring life itself into Coin atwivios (zoe aionios (5:20), life that dispels this world’s illusions and conforms us with the indestructible reality that is God. The elder’s claims about life in Christ seem strange to us, preposterous really: We who are of God do not sin (5:184a, 19a); the evil dominating this world does not touch us (5:18¢, 190). First John is not an exercise in apologetics, which tries to prove such things. Even less is the message diluted, so that more might swallow it. The elder’s interest is radically epistemological: to remind the church how it knows what it knows. In 1 John, such knowledge does not have its origin in more effective politics, extended therapy, better education, improved commentary, or anything else whose creation is of this world. To regard such provisional resources as definitive of eternal life is, as the elder knows (5:21) and as Paul Ramsey reminds us, to court idolatry: “absolutizing something finite, and in so doing seeking the interests of self.”’” Knowledge of eternal life issues only from trust in the one who is eternal life: the Son of God, Jesus Christ (5:20). Like a new program that reformats a computer’s hard drive, Christ reformats us—the way we live and think, what we know, and how we know it. Testimony to Christ is offered, whether in the first century or the twenty-first, not with vaporings, lambastings, or longings for a dream come true. The tenor of 1 John is one of serenity under fire, confidence not in ourselves but in the One who gave us birth and will never desert us. Eternal life is where the church really is, because the life and truth that we know are nothing other than what the real and living God is. 176. Paul Ramsey, Basic Christian Ethics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1950) 299. See Ramsey’s acute analysis of “Idolatry: The Work of Self-Love,” in ibid., 295-306.

447

2 JOHN 1-13 THE SECOND LETTER OVERVIEW This format is modified in 2 John. Its salutation is more theologically developed. Its opening and closing adopt the language of family letters, another common epistolary type in antiquity. The request in 2 John has positive and negative elements, specifying the benefits of compliance and the liabilities of disregard.

In the NT only the Third Epistle of John © is briefer than the Second, whose Greek text contains 245 words. Either of the two smaller Johannine letters could have been accommodated on a single papyrus sheet of standard size (about 8" x 10". By modern standards, 2 and 3 John are more postcards than letters. In length and presentation, 2 John exemplifies a common epistolary type in antiquity: the letter of petition, whose primary function was to request something of its addressee.'”” Ancient petitionary epistles adhered to a conventional format:

Ie Ile

Ill.

I

Opening Body A. Background for the request B. The request itself C. How the addressee may benefit from complying Closing

Ill.

Opening (vv. 1-3) Saluting the Elect Lady and Her Children Body (vv. 4-11) A. Background: Rejoicing in Truth (v_ 4) B. Requests: Follow Love (vv. 5-6); Spurn Deception (vv. 7-8) C. Benefits and Cautions: Abide in the Teaching (vv. 9-11) Closing (vv. 12-13) Regrets, Hopes, and Greetings

(For further discussion of 2 John’s authorship, religious setting, historical context, and major themes, see the Introduction to 1, 2, and 3 John.)

177. For more information, see John L. White, Light from Ancient Letters, FFNT (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 194-96.

ZAOTINGT 34 SALU TING THE ERE AND HER CHILDREN NIV

aby.

NRSV

'The elder,

1The elder to the elect lady and her children, whom | love in the truth, and not only I but also

To the chosen lady and her children, whom | love in the truth—and not | only, but also all who know the truth— “because of the truth, which lives in us and will be with us forever:

all who know the truth, because of the truth that abides in us and will be with us forever: 3Grace, mercy, and peace will be with us from

God the Father and from? Jesus Christ, the Fa-

3Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father

ther’s Son, in truth and love.

and from Jesus Christ, the Father’s Son, will be with us in truth and love.

@Other ancient authorities add the Lord

448

2 JOHN 1-3 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY Verse 1. The sender of this note (and, apparently, of 3 John [1]) is “the elder” (6 tpecBitepos ho presbyteros). In texts of the NT era, this noun, inflected in the masculine gender, can refer either to a man of advanced years (Acts 11:30; 14:23; 15:2; 1 Tim 5:1-2) or to a “presbyter,” a holder of administrative or juridical power, irrespective of age.'”® Although the second of these alternatives is not impossible for the author of the Johannine letters,'”° it is unlikely. There is no evidence to suggest that 2 and 3 John were written by a member of a local presbytery; both letters imply an author who is not confined to a formal judicatory within a particular congregation. Moreover, this elder’s influence appears to be largely moral and closely associated with the tradition to which he testifies (2 John 5, 9-10). While he speaks as one with authority to advise (vv. 5, 8, 10-11; 3 John 60, 9a, 11-12), even to threaten (3 John 10), there is no indication that he is an officeholder able to enforce his wishes or understanding of the tradition. Probably he was not in that position at this still early stage in Johannine Christianity. In the Fourth Gospel the only recognized teacher is the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, who bears witness to Jesus (John 14:26; 16:13). First John acknowledges the bestowal of knowledge on the entire congregation, through its anointing by the Spirit (2:20, 27). What of “the elect lady” (n €kAexTH kupia he eklekte kyria)? In the Greek texts of the NT, there is no differentiation between upper- and lowercase characters to denote a person’s name; so it is not inconceivable that 2 John is addressed to “the chosen Kyria”!®° or even “the Lady Electa.”!8! Still, the substance of 2 John, like that of 1 John, is clearly aimed, not at an individual, but at a Christian community apparently meeting in someone’s home (see v. 10; cf. Rom 16:5; 1

Cor 16:19; Col 4:15; Phim 2).!8? This leads most commentators to regard “the lady chosen”’—by God or by Christ (John 15:16, 19; cf. Mark 13:20, 22, 27; 1 Pet 2:9; 5:13)—as a literary conceit for a local congregation (€xkAnota ekklesia, a noun declined in the feminine gender), similar to the personification of Jerusalem as a woman in various biblical traditions (e.g., Isa 54:1-8; Bar 4:30—5:9; Gal 4:21-31).'®° From this inference it follows that the lady’s “children” are members of that church. Even as most of the primary concerns in Paul’s epistles are announced in their salutations and statements of thanksgiving (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:1-9), the initial comments of 2 John serve as an overture for this letter’s themes. Of these the two most prominent are “love” (aydtn agape) and “truth” (dAjseta aletheia), which in vv. 1-3 are presented as realities that bind the elder with this church. As in 1 John (3:23; 4:7, 11-12; see also John 13:34; 15:12, 17), the command to love one another is prominent in 2 John (vv. 5-6). Not surprisingly, the letter’s salutation expresses love for “the lady and her children” (v. 1) and an assurance that love is the realm in which, along with truth, they all will exist (v. 3). Truth is the distinctive sphere within which the elder’s (and others’) love for this church is activated (v. 1; see also 3 John 1; John 17:17, 19), the medium through which they all will continue forever (2 John 2; see also John 14:17). More than a reference to the elder’s honesty or sincerity, truth is that vital Christian force that empowers all who love (or “know,” 2 John 1; see also 1 John 2:3, 13-14, 21; 4:6-7; John 8:32). Life “in the truth” is the elder’s equivalent for Paul’s understanding of “life in Christ” (e.g., Rom 8:2, 10-11; 9:1; 1 Cop: lS: 2 Gortl:21; 12:19: Gal 3:26-26). In 2 John 4 (also 3 John 3-4, 8) a different nuance of truth will be intimated by the elder’s concern for enduring instruction, contrasted with the decep182. David C. Verner, The Household of God: The Social World of the Pastoral Epistles, SBLDS 71 (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1983) 27-81, explores the critical position of the household in Hellenistic and Roman

178. See Ignatius Eph. 2.1; 4.1; Magn. 2; Trall. 2.2; 13.2; Smyrn. 8.1. 179. As argued by Karl Paul Donfried, “Ecclesiastical Authority in 2-3 John,” in L’Evangile de Jean: Sources, rédaction, théologie, ed. M. de Jonge, BETL 44 (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1977) 325-33. 180. This is how Wesley interprets the wording (Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, 921). 181. In the Latin version of his Outlines, Clement of Alexandria(c. 150-215) suggests that 2 John was addressed to “a Babylonian woman \ named Electa who signifies the Catholic Church.”

society.

183. Brown theorizes that kupia (kyria) may be intended to recognize this congregation’s intimacy with “the Lord” (kuptos kyrios). That christological title does not occur in our best mss of the Johannine epistles, though it is used with reference to Jesus more than fifty times in the Gospel of John. See Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles-of John, AB 30 (Garden

City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1982) 680.

449

2 JOHN 1-3 COMMENTARY 2 Got. b2erGal 123% 6216; Phil ts2.o1y Thess tet; Phim 3), and in other NT epistles (Eph 1:2; Col 1:2:°2° Thess 2 Titus G4" toper 2 uderz |: The elder’s particular triad of spiritual gifts occurs elsewhere in the NT only in 1 Tim 1:2 and 2 Tim 1:2. Unlike Paul’s letters (e.g., Rom 3:24; 5:15-21; 11:31), the term “grace” (ydpts charts) occurs in the Fourth Gospel infrequently (John 1:14, 16-17); “mercy” (€Xeos eleos) appears nowhere else in Johannine literature but in 2 John 3. “Peace” (eipfyvn eirene), however, is an important Johannine term that characterizes eternal life: the life of God, presently and permanently shared by those who believe in Jesus (John 14:27; HO23o7 20719, 21220). One other aspect of 2 John’s salutation is noteworthy: its emphasis on the church as family. Not only the elect lady but also her “children” are addressed (v. 1; see also 1 John 3:1-2; 5:2; 3 John 4); grace, mercy, and peace will be from “God the Father” and Jesus Christ, “the Father’s Son” (v. 3; see also 1 John 1:2-3, 7; 2:1, 22-24; 4:14-15; 5:12), The same familial language recurs in 2 John beyond its salutation (vv. 4, 9, 13), cohering with the letter’s emphasis on love (vv. 1, 3, 5-6) and its concern that “the home” not be poisoned (v. 10). As in 1 John, the family of believers in 2 John forms the backdrop for indications that some of the children are harshly at odds with one another (2 John 7, 10-11; cf. 1 John 2:18-25; 4:1-6). (See Reflections at 2 John 12-13.)

tion of unnamed impostors (2 John 7, 9-10; cf. 1 John 2:21-24),!8 Verse 2. Closely related to truth’s permanence is truth’s “abiding” (uévovucav menousan) among the elder and his addressees. Variations of this idea (the dwelling within the believer of God, Christ, God’s word, or the Spirit) are found in John John 5:38; 15:4) and extended in 1 John (2:14, 24, 27; 3:9, 24; 4:12, 15-16). The reciprocal notion, that the believer should dwell in truth (understood as truthful teaching), appears in 2 John 9. The continuance of divine reality with the church “forever” (eis Tov aidva eis ton aiona) is not developed further in 2 John, though this idea has echoes in the Fourth Gospel (John 4:14; 0:5 1,58} 85152; 10:28. 1:1-26;" 14:16) andthe First Epistle (1 John 2:17). Verse 3. As in most NT and early patristic letters, the salutation of 2 John is more theologically elaborate than anything to be found in the first century’s business correspondence, which typically opens with the “banal Greeting” (Acts 23:26; cf. Acts 15:23; Jas 1:1). While its constituent ideas do not appear elsewhere in 2 John, the elder’s assurance—not merely a wish—that “grace, mercy, and peace will be with us” (cf. 3 John 15) recalls benedictions in Revelation (Rev 1:4; 22:21), in Paul’s letters (Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:3; 184. While his argument probably outruns the evidence, with good reason R. Bergmeier, “Zum Verfasserproblem des II und III Johannesbriefes,” ZNW 57 (1966) 93-100, perceives in 2 John a tendency toward doctrinal orthodoxy.

2 JOHN 4-11, REQUESTS, BENEFITS, AND CAUTIONS

|

2 John 4, Rejoicing in Truth NIV

NRSV

‘It has given me great joy to find some of your

AI was overjoyed to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we have been commanded by the Father.

children walking in the truth, just as the Father commanded us.

450

2 JOHN 4 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY The confidence of the salutation is maintained by the elder’s expression of rejoicing, another term with a Pauline ring (1 Cor 16:7; Phil 4:10; 1 Thess 5:16) that also recalls the character of Christian life as described in the Gospel of John

by the elder’s next comment; “walking in truth” coincides with the comprehensive command that he and the church received from God (v. 4). First John associates that command with faith in Jesus Christ (1 John 3:23) and love for God and one another (1 John 3:23; 4:21; 5:2-3). Intriguingly, the elder has found this way of life exhibited by “some”—by implication, not all— “of your children.” Such reserve may suggest his caution of saying no more than he can verify. Alternatively, it may be this letter’s first intimation that all is not well among communities within the Johannine circle. (See Reflections at 2 John 12-13.)

(John 3:29; 14:28; 16:20, 22). “Walking in truth,” the cause for that great joy, is an expression not found in John or 1 John, though it is repeated in 3 John 3-4.'® On its face the idea appears similar to “walking in the light” (1 John 7 Ch. Jon 1 1-9:* 12:35) which in” |. John-is equivalent to a life imitative of Jesus’ love (1 John 2:6). The convergence of these ideas is reinforced 185. See also 7.Judah 24:3.

2 John 5-8, Follow Love and Spurn Deception NIV

NRSV

°And now, dear lady, I am not writing you a new command but one we have had from the begin-

‘But now, dear lady, I ask you, not as though | were writing you a new commandment, but one we have had from the beginning, let us love one another. °And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment just as you have heard it from the beginning—you must walk in it. 7Many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh; any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist! °Be on your guard, so that you do not lose what we? have worked for, but may receive a full reward.

ning. I ask that we love one another. °And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. As you have heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love. 7Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. "Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully.

aOther ancient authorities read you

(COMMENTARY tence and the next is curiously clumsy, however. Before the encouragement to mutual love is expressed, the elder moves immediately to reassure his readers of its venerable antiquity, using language that practically duplicates his clarification in 1 John 2:7. Thus, while his petition substantiates the church’s life in mutual love, the elder’s emphasis rests on that prescription’s

Verses 5-6. Adopting a rhythm established in the First Epistle, the elder moves from a joyous statement of fact to an exhortation, framed as a request (v. 5). When finally articulated, that appeal seems unexceptional and thoroughly Johannine: that we “love one another” (see John 13:34-35; 15:12, 17; 1 John 3:11, 23; 4:7, 11-12). The construction of this sen-

451

2 JOHN 5-8 COMMENTARY confessional context—namely, the community’s original experience of faith (see also 1 John 1:1; 2NS-14. 24-3711). This accent persists in v. 6, which exemplifies the elder’s tendency to link thoughts in a circular chain. From “truth and love” (v. 3), the connection between “truth” and “commandment” has been forged (v. 4), followed by the identification of the “commandment” with “love” (v. 5; see also 1 John 2:3-5a; 3:11-18). With the completion of one conceptual loop, another immediately opens and closes; “love” is defined as walking in God’s commandments, and the command is that you “walkein it” (ef. Johms14:15 23-24). This translation (KJV, NRSV) captures the ambiguity of the Greek; it is unclear whether the church is commanded to walk in love (NIV, RSV), which inverts the ideas in v. 6a, or whether the church is commanded to walk in the commandment (Phillips, NAB), which is utterly tautologous! One aspect of vv. 4-6 becomes clearer when compared with 1 John. The latter usually defines “love” theologically and christologically, with reference to God’s sending of the Son (1 John 4:10), who laid down his life for us (1 John 3:16). Second John describes love ecclesiologically, as the church’s Obedience to God’s commands (v. 6), which is tantamount to “walking in truth” (v. 4). These approaches to love are not miles apart; 1 John also interprets love as the performance of God’s orders (1 John 3:23; 5:3), and 2 John is definitely interested in Jesus Christ (vv. 7-9). It is a subtle difference in emphasis. In 2 John the language of love is used for the purpose of clarifying what it means to walk in truth, as God has commanded and as the church has heard “from the beginning.”!®° (See Reflections at 2 John 12-13.) Verses 7-8. Beginning in v. 7, the rupture of love and a threat to truth become evident. Here the fog enshrouding much of 2 John begins to lift, and the elder permits us to discern some of the real-life problems lending urgency to this letter. The terminology of v. 7 is instantly recognizable from 1 John: 186. Urban C. von Wahlde, “The Theological Foundation of the Presbyter’s Argument in 2 Jn (2 Jn 4-6),” ZNW76 (1985) 209-24, arrives

at a similar conclusion along a different exegetical route.

2 John 7 Many deceivers

1 John Those misleaders

(TOAAOL TAGVOL polloi planoi)/the deceiver (0 TAdVOS ho planos) the antichrist,

(TOV TAAVUVTWW ton planonton, PIAS a8 RN Id oye of 4:6), [who are] many (2:18),

went out into the world, those who do not confess

Jesus Christ, coming (= has come)!®” in flesh.

the antichrist (2:22; also 2:18; 4:3), went out (2:19; also 4:1) into the world (4:1; 3; chS:19), the one who does not confess (4:3; also PRIL THi Behe9) Jesus Christ (4:2; also 2:23; 4:3, 14) having come in flesh (4:2).

Second John 7 consolidates salient aspects of 1 John 2:15-25 and 4:1-6. A schism has erupted, turning on some unclarified issue involving the incarnation of Jesus Christ; the secessionists have defected into “the world,” the realm of hostile delusion that rejects “the truth.” (See the Commentary on those passages, as well as the Introduction, “The Adversaries Behind 1, 2, and 3 John.”) Significantly present in the First Epistle, but absent from the Second, is a specification of the church from which the deceivers exited: “They went out from us” (1 John 2:19 NRSV, italics added). Although the elder may reserve judgment on how uniformly the church addressed by 2 John has cleaved to the truth (v. 4), it is not clear that 2 John’s “elect lady” has experienced the schism that 1 John implies. The elder’s comments in the Second Epistle suggest that he is trying to head off another breakdown before it happens (vv. 8, 10). 187. Reviving a venerable interpretation in the history of 2 John’s exegesis, some commentators think that this participle carries a future connotation: the expectation of Jesus’ second coming in flesh. See Georg Strecker, 7he Johannine Letters: ACommentary on 1, 2, and 3 John, ed. Harold Attridge, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996) 233-36; Charles H. Talbert, Reading John:A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine Epistles, Reading the New Testament (New York: Crossroad, 1992) 10-11. Most interpreters, however, regard the position challenged by 2 John 7 as similar to that underlying 1 John 4:2: a depreciation of Jesus’ humanity during his first advent. The present tense of the participle of 2 John 7 may be considered another example of the convergence of multiple temporal perspectives on Jesus in Johannine theology (see John 3:31; 6:14; 11:27). See D. Moody Smith, 7he Theology of the Gospel of John, New Testament Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995) 101-3.

2 JOHN 5-8 COMMENTARY In this light, what course of action does the elder recommend? First, “Continue to stay on your guard, lest you lose [or wipe out] the things that we worked’ for, but rather that you may receive full compensation” (v. 8, author’s trans.). The textual transmission of this verse is marred by pronoun problems, which account for its varied translations in different English versions. Along with the alternative proposed kere and in the NRSV (thus also NEB, REB, NAB, GNB), v. 8 was copied by scribes as “that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully” (NIV, RSV, Moffatt) and “that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward” (KJV). Though weakly attested in the manuscript tradition, the reading favored by the NRSV is the most difficult and, therefore, the most likely to have been reworded into one of the others. Clear enough, the sense of this admonition in v. 8 may be filled out by John 6:29, where “the work of God” is “that you believe in him [Jesus] whom [God] has sent” (NRSV). In 2 John 8, the elder implies that he and others “who know the

truth” (v. 1) have played a formative role in the development of these children’s faith (similarly, see 1 John 1:1-4; cf. Gal 4:11). Still, mediators of the Johannine tradition do not constitute a magisterium, or teaching authority, to which the elect lady and her children are accountable. Rather, those in that church should keep on looking to themselves (an imperative in the ongoing present tense). This advice is consistent with that offered in 1 John 2:20-22, 26-27, which reminds another community that their anointing by the Holy One has bestowed on them all knowledge and resources necessary for them to “abide in him.” That persistence may not be presumed upon, however, as though its fulfillment were a foregone conclusion. What was wrought by the elder within the church can be lost; that congregation’s present reward may not be completely “paid out.” This idea, which holds in tension the church’s present election with its future reckoning by God, corresponds with 1 John 3:2 and is found throughout the NT (e.g., Matt 25:31-46; 1 Cor 3:14-15). (See Reflections at 2 John 12-13.)

2 John 9-11, Abide in the Teaching NIV

NRSV

°Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 'If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. ''Anyone who wel-

°Everyone who does not abide in the teaching of Christ, but goes beyond it, does not have God; whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. '°Do not receive into the house or welcome anyone who comes to you and does not bring this teaching; ''for to welcome is to participate in the evil deeds of such a person.

comes him shares in his wicked work.

(COMMENTARY one who confesses the Son also “has” God (1 John 2:23a). To these ideas v. 9 adds some new ones. Appearing for the first and only time in the Johannine literature is the word 0 Tpodywv (ho proagon), “one who goes ahead” (RSV), “a progressive” (NAB) without proper restraint. Such a one is negatively contrasted with “the one who abides” (6 wévwv ho menon). Although the elder does not pinpoint the belief of those who are

Verse 9. The elder’s second recommendation is almost an aphorism, barbed with tacit exhortation (cf. John 8:31). Once again, we hear echoes of 1 John. “Abiding” is, of course, the primary way in which the First Epistle expresses the enduring, reciprocal relationship that exists be-

tween the believer and God or Christ (1 John

2:24; 3:24; 4:15-16). “Having life” depends on “having the Son of God” (1 John 5:12), which is equivalent to believing in God (1 John 5:10). The

453

2 JOHN 9-11 COMMENTARY friends and strangers (see Matt 25:35; Heb 13:2; 1 Pet 4:9; see also the Commentary on 3 John 5-8). Early Christians were directed to receive one another as they would receive Jesus or God, who sent Jesus (Matt 10:40; Mark 9:37). Accordingly, Paul, an itinerant apostle, commended the extension of hospitality to strangers and hinted that he would welcome such support for himself (Rom 12:13; 15:23-24). Hospitality is one of the attributes specified by the Pastoral Epistles for a “bishop,” or overseer (1 Tim 3:2; Titus 1:8-9). Interestingly, the Pastorals couple that qualification with apt teaching or the ability to foster wholesome instruction. By urging the refusal of hospitality to such “progressives,” the author of 2 John apparently hoped to prevent the spread of aberrant teaching and the contamination of Chris-

inappropriately advanced, the context suggests a refusal to confess Jesus’ coming in flesh (v. 7). Another fresh contribution to these considerations is 2 John’s triple reference to “the teaching [Su8axn didache| of Christ,” in which the one who “has” or “holds on to” God or Jesus should abide (vv. 9-10). Although the elder may mean by this phrase “Christ’s own teaching” (thus Phillips, JBP; cf. John 7:16-17; 18:19), “the teaching about Christ’—namely, his coming in flesh— probably captures the elder’s primary intention. More so than modern interpreters, however, the elder would probably have equated, not distinguished, the church’s proclamation about Jesus with Jesus’ own (see 1 John 1:1-4). It is also debatable how heavily the elder would weight the term didache—whether it is best translated here as “teaching” (NIV, NRSV, REB, GNB), roughly synonymous with “the instructional anointing” that dwells in believers (1 John 2:27), or as “doctrine” (KJV, Moffatt, RSV, NEB) with a recognized, corrective authority among some Johannine churches. The context of 2 John suggests that the elder intends, or at least hopes for, the latter (cf. Jude 3, “the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” [NRSV]). Verses 10-11. The elder’s final counsel is to refuse hospitality or even greeting to anyone who comes not bearing this teaching (didayn didache|).The Greek wording suggests that the possibility of such an “invasion” is more than hypothetical. If accepted, the elder’s prescription would have had serious consequences at the time of 2 John’s composition. Travel was much more hazardous then than it is now; travelers, including missionaries, were dependent on the kindness of

tian fellowship (kotvwvia koinonia; cf. 1 Tim 5:22; 1 John 1:3, 6-7) with “wicked works” (tots EPYOLs TOLs ToVvnpols tois ergois tois poneérois; cf. 1 John 3:12). Similar concerns motivate directions by Paul (Rom 16:17) and writers in the Pauline tradition (Eph 5:11; 2 Thess 3:6, 14-15; Titus 3:10-11). The elder’s recommendation for dealing with spurious teaching by itinerants is even more precisely paralleled in the letters of

Ignatius of Antioch (d. c. 100)!®* and in the Didache,'®’ an important manual of church discipline that may have been contemporaneous with 2 John. While the elder writes as though he expected his advice to be taken, there is no indication of his ability to enforce it. (See Reflections at 2 John 12-13.) 188. Ignatius Eph. 7.1; 8.1; 9.1; Smyrn. 4.1; 5.1; 7.2 189. Did. 11.1-12.5.

2 JOHN 12-13, REGRETS, HOPES, AND GREETINGS NIV

NRSV

'2] have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete.

12Although I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink; instead | hope to come to you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete. 13The children of your elect sister send you their greetings.

The children of your chosen sister send their greetings.

a Other ancient authorities add Amen

454

2 JOHN 12-13 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY The epistle closes conventionally, with Johannine embellishments. Typical in letters of this period are acknowledgments of the inadequacy of paper (actually, papyrus) and ink to convey an author’s message and the superiority of a personal visit in which one can talk face to face (lit., “mouth to mouth”; see also Num 12:8; 3 John 13-14). Although customary, the elder’s remarks are not necessarily pro forma. The hope attached to a real visit with this church—“that our joy may be fulfilled”—closes a ring opened by the elder’s earlier expression of joy {v. 4). Verse 12 also

recalls the conclusion of 1 John’s prologue (1 John 1:4) as well as Jesus’ express intention, in the Farewell Discourses, that his disciples’ joy be fulfilled (John 15:11; 16:24; 17:13). The relay of greetings from “the children of your elect sister” (cf. 1 Pet 5:13) nicely complements the metaphor with which 2 John opened (v. 1), again emphasizing the family feeling that exists for the author with his “cousins” (vv. 1, 3-5) and contrasts with greetings that are not to be offered to those who go beyond “the teaching of Christ” (vv. 9-11).

REFLECTIONS Second John is one of the usually neglected stepchildren in biblical interpretation. It occupies no place in the Revised Common Lectionary; one imagines a congregation going for years without ever hearing a lesson or a sermon on it. Among biblical scholars, 2 John is often regarded as slight and derivative. In fairness to pastors and professional exegetes, it must be said that the Second Epistle of John is scant and does reiterate themes more extensively considered in 1 John, itself hardly the church’s most overworked scripture. (Reflections on the following topics in 2 John may be found in the ancillary treatment of 1 John: intramural love [see Reflections on 1 John 2:7-11], “the world” [1 John 2:15-17], Christian confidence [t John 2:18-25], obedience and reassurance [1 John 3:19-24], the identity of Jesus Christ and Christian identity [1 John 4:1-6 and 5:1-5], and Christian love [1 John 4:7-21].) More’s the pity that the church so little exercises its intellectual muscles with 2 John. For the sheer challenge of serious theological conversation, few texts of its size will repay a congregation greater dividends. Curiously enough, the clue to its value in this respect may be found in many commentaries. While the First Epistle predictably and rightly elicits more painstaking examination than does the Second, no segment of 1 John has drawn more pained evaluation among interpreters than has 2 John, particularly its notorious prescription of Christian shunning (vv. 7-11). If ever a scriptural passage exposed the assumptions and commitments of its interpreters, surely 2 John 7-11 is such a text. Impressed by its exclusionist tendency, one commentator concludes that the fact that 2 John “found a way to acceptance by the wider church within its canon of Scripture remains one of those enigmatic ironies which must continue to stretch the imagination of both historian and theologian.”'” Simpler and sharper is the view of another scholar: “This passage... has, on any showing, an ugly look,” and on

closer inspection “it is even more drastic and unfortunate.”’”’ And this from another interpreter: “Perhaps the unique feature of this letter is best left unheeded... . There is a sufficiency of bigotry and intolerance about, so that we do not need the Second Epistle to encourage it.” Let the record show that these are the evaluations of some of this text’s friendliest, most perceptive exegetes! If they find themselves stretched by this letter, then surely we fail the 190. Judith Lieu, The Second and Third Epistles ofJohn: History and Background, ed. John Riches, Studies of the New Testament and Its World (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1986) 165. In context, Lieu’s assessment also includes 3 John. 191. J. L. Houlden, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, HNTC (New York: Harper & Row, 1973) 146. 192. D. Moody Smith, First, Second, and Third John, Interpretation (Louisville: John Knox, 1991) 146-47. Smith does not, however, allow this pejorative assessment to stand without qualification. :

455

2 JOHN 12-13 REFLECTIONS church of our day by not arranging at least an occasional interview between it and 2 John. If, after our exegesis of this letter, we determine its message so repugnant that we refuse to engage it, then we shall be practicing the very intolerance of which the elder stands accused. Critical for our understanding of this text is its historical location. The impression that 2 John 7-11 counsels a provincial, seemingly unchristian response is based not only on modern sensibilities of civility and liberality, but also on the church’s remembrance that Jesus preached kindness toward sinners (Matt 5:43-48; Luke 6:27-36) and himself fraternized with society’s despised (Matt 9:10-13 and par.). Yet we tend to forget that the early church, like other religious communities in antiquity, did practice exclusion under certain conditions. By putative order of Jesus, a house that proved unworthy of his missionaries was to be firmly rejected (Matt 10:11-15). Recalcitrant offenders within the church, whose sins tore the community apart, were to be excommunicated (Matt 18:15-17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; Titus 3:10-11). Sometimes the door should be opened; sometimes it should be shut (Matt 18:18; John 20:23; 2 Thess 3:14-15). Such decisions were not to be made capriciously or based on idiosyncratic taste; the nature of the offense, especially if committed by a fellow Christian, was to be carefully assessed and weighed against the maintenance of the church’s integrity in Christ. Negatively, these principles were translated into an intolerance for self-styled apostles who, upon testing, were found to be practicing evil within the Christian community (see Rev 2:2). Underlying the welcome of someone as though he or she were Christ is the express assumption that the visitor is really a disciple, righteous as Jesus is righteous (Matt 10:40-42) and genuinely delegated by Christ John 13:20). We should read 2 John within this context. Admittedly, we are hampered by how little we know of the facts prompting the elder’s comments. Moreover, we have only his view of things. Whether those against whom the elder inveighs would have recognized themselves in his description of them remains a good question to ponder. If, however, we give its author the benefit of the doubt, at least some matters in this letter are clear and still pertinent to the church in our day. 1. In 2 John we have what the elder reckons to be a pervasive emergency touching on the fundamental confession of the Johannine church: the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh (v. 7), on which depends the Christian’s relationship with God (v. 9). To acknowledge this at once limits and enhances the relevance of this text in another era. The crisis addressed by 2 John was apparently precipitated by habitual propagandists whose spurious claims about Christ were mangling one Johannine congregation after another. Although we are not able to verify the elder’s reading of the situation, we can understand why “the elect lady,” portrayed here as a protective mother, would be counseled to slam the door on such incursions. What pastor, charged to exercise supervision of the people committed to his or her care, would deliberately invite into the pulpit someone bent on undermining their faith? A predicament of such magnitude, however, does not happen every day. Presupposed in the elder’s comments are not those disagreements—some quibbling, others serious—that perennially arise among well-intentioned, faithful Christians. To the give-and-take of ordinary, though painful, conflict within a church still maturing, 2 John is not directed and may not be responsibly applied. It is true, as Raymond Brown observes, “that almost every dispute in church history has been judged by one of the parties as involving an essential question, and

that almost every drastic action has been justified as done for the sake of the truth.”' The fact that Christians remain susceptible to such self-delusion and smallness of heart reminds us of our continual need for repentance, discernment, and wisdom (see 1 John 4:1-6). It does not absolve the church of the responsibility of distinguishing those matters that strike at the root of Christian faith from the thousand other concerns, however deeply felt, that do not. 193. Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles ofJohn, AB 30 (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1982) 693.

456

2 JOHN 12-13 REFLECTIONS 2. In the elder’s estimate, the thing that has been put at risk is the identity of Jesus Christ, apart from whom the Christian cannot know the truth about God (see 2 John 1-3). Most. Christians today would agree that this really is a matter of primary concern. As in 1 John 4:1-6, the theological controversy addressed by 2 John 7 turns in some way on the incarnation of Christ. Apparently the elder would have shared Luther’s view of Jesus: “I begin with the swaddling clothes and accept the one who came, and seek for the one that is in heaven; but I haven’t got a ladder to climb up to heaven!”'™ That ladder, in the Johannine tradition, is none other than Jesus (John 1:51), the Word who became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14). Evidently this consideration has not gone cold for Christians living under modernity’s pressures, as suggested by the fact that a quest for the Jesus of history has been renewed every forty or fifty years over the past two centuries. Whenever the acknowledgment of Christ’s humanity is eclipsed by the confession of his exalted glory, the church risks substituting in place of Jesus someone or something else as the Messiah. One could argue, for example, that the loss of a meaningful confession of “Jesus, come in the flesh” among many Christians in the 1930s abetted the seduction of German Protestantism by Hitler’s National Socialism. To this emergency, less remote for us than the one faced by the author of 2 John, Martin Niemodller and Karl Barth responded with another “exclusionary” testimony: the Barmen Declaration (1934), which asserted the loyalty of the German Confessing Church to the lordship of Jesus and not of the Nazi state. Jesus Christ, as he is testified to us in the Holy Scripture, is the one Word of God, whom we are to hear, whom we are to trust and obey in life and in death... . We repudiate the false teaching that the church can turn over the form of her message and ordinances at will or according to some dominant ideological and political convictions.'®

3. The most problematic and least accessible aspect of the elder’s advice may not be its defense under attack, but its defensiveness. This stance is partly attributable to a religious outlook, known to us also from Paul’s letters, that feared contamination by demonic spirits (cf. 2 John 11 with 1 Cor 10:14-22). Such an assumption is aggravated by John’s generally dualistic view, inclined to regard the world, even though under Christ’s restorative conquest, as an evil and perilous place John 15:18; 16:33; 17:14; 1 John 2:2; 3:13; 5:4-5). The ‘fear that seems to animate 2 John 10-11 is that error, if given but a foothold, will drive out truth. That is a questionable assumption, assent to which is likely, in the long run, to retard truth’s advance. Even if we do not accept it as our own, we can nonetheless understand the elder’s alarm for an infant church, which did not enjoy the many religious and theological support systems that modern congregations take for granted—among others, a New Testament, the church’s creeds and liturgy, judicatory guidelines, and professionally trained gatekeepers.

4. Finally, has the author of 2 John “incautiously expressed himself in terms which might seem to stigmatize any kind of ‘advance’ as disloyalty to the faith, and to condemn Christian theology to lasting sterility”?'”° Such an assessment overstates the case. The elder does not fault as faithless “any kind of advance.” The risk of losing God is incurred, rather, by “anyone who is so ‘progressive’ that he does not remain rooted in the teaching of Christ” (v. 9). An automobile must have both a driving gear to propel it anda steering wheel to keep it on the road. The chemist in research and development makes new discoveries that enlarge our understanding—but not by ignoring or pretending to reinvent the periodic table of elements. 194. Martin Luther, Weimarer Ausgabe: D. Martin Luthers Werke 20 (1883-) 727.7-8, cited in Christof Windhorst, “Luther and the ‘Enthusiasts’: Theological Judgements in His Lecture on the First Epistle of John (1527),” JRH 9 (1977) 399-48 (here, 346). 195. For the complete text of the Barmen Declaration, see Creeds of the Churches: A Reader in Christian Doctriune from the Bible to the Present, ed. John H. Leith, 3rd ed. (Atlanta: John Knox, 1982) 517-22. 196. C. H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, MNTC (New York: Harper and Bros., 1946) 150. Dodd is among many commentators to be troubled by this possibility; his articulation of their uneasiness may be the clearest. 197. Translated by Brown, The Epistles ofJohn, 645. i

457

2 JOHN 12-13 REFLECTIONS So, too, for the church. It is always a question of balancing theology (the exploratory reach of Christian self-criticism) with doctrine (the consensus grasp of the church’s self-understanding).'* Without theology, tradition, “the living faith of the dead,” would calcify into

traditionalism, “the dead faith of the living.”'”? The elder emphasizes something else: Christians would be unable to move forward without a tradition to remind them of who they are, whose they are, and where they have been. 198. Thomas A. Langford, “Doctrinal Affirmation and Theological Exploration,” in Doctrine and Theology in The United Methodist Church, ed. Thomas A. Langford (Nashville: Kingswood, 1991) 203-7. 199. Jaroslav Pelikan, The Vindication of Tradition (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1984) 65.

458

5 OTe THE THIRD LETTER ;

OVERVIEW

\]ith only 219 words in its Greek text, the Third Epistle of John is the shortest document in the NT. Like the Second Epistle, 3 John corresponds closely, in conventional length and presentation, to an ancient private letter. Whereas 2 John appears to be a letter of petition, 3 John exemplifies another type of epistle in antiquity: the letter of introduction and recommendation. Such a communication was, intended to acquaint the addressee with a creditable friend of the sender, even as letters of reference are used today in business or educational settings. Paul refers to this kind of letter in 2 Cor 3:1-3; recommendations of colleagues appear in his and other epistles in the NT (Rom 16:1-2; 1 Cor 16:3; Col 4:7-8; see also Acts 18:27). Ancient letters of recommendation adhered to a standard format:

ih II.

Opening Body A. Identification of the one recommended

III.

B. The sender’s recommendation C. Acknowledgment of the addressee’s favor and the sender’s promise to repay Closing

Third John deviates slightly from this convention. Its opening and closing are heavily personalized and theologically elaborated. The body of 3 John has been modified in two ways: by withholding the identification and recommendation until near the end and by expanding, qualifying, and theologically formulating the recommendation’s rationale, which has been moved to the first position:

I.

II.

Opening (vv. 1-4) A. Saluting Gaius (v. 1) B. Praying for Health, Rejoicing in Truth (vv. 2-4) Body (vv. 5-12) A Supporting God’s Missionaries

(vv. 5-8)

Ill.

.

B. Condemning Diotrephes (vv. 9-10) C. Commending Demetrius (vv. 11-12) Closing (vv. 13-15) Regrets, Hopes, and Greetings

(For further discussion of 3 John’s authorship, religious setting, historical context, and major themes, see the Introduction to 1, 2, and 3 John.)

3 JOHN 1-4, SALUTATION, PRAYER, REJOICING 3 John 1, Saluting Gaius NIV

NRSV

1The elder,

1The elder to the beloved Gaius, whom | love in truth.

To my dear friend Gaius, whom I love in the truth.

3 JOHN 1 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY and “the friends” (v. 15c; see also John 15:13, 15). In this respect 3 John resembles Paul’s letter to Philemon, which is further addressed “to the church in your house” (Phim 2 NRSV). If they held prominent positions in households where Christians met, at a time before the construction of buildings for Christian religious activities, then Gaius and the elder would likely have exercised influence on and responsibility for the believers

Third John opens like a Hellenistic personal letter, while differing in some obvious ways. First, its sender does not identify himself beyond the ascription, 0 tpeoBitepos (ho presbyteros), “the elder.” This recreates the interpretive problem in 2 John 1: whether the author (presumably the same as that of the First and Second Epistles) is a church official (a presbyter) or simply a figure of venerable age. Assumed throughout the letter (vv. 4, 9-10, 12) is an authority that is evidently informal and unofficial, since the author’s appeals rest on little more than theological and moral suasion. Particularly at 3 John’s beginning and end, the elder speaks in the first-person singular (vv. 1-4, 9-10a, 13-14). In the epistle’s central section he purportedly represents the point of view of others (see v. 7), who are referred to as “the brothers” (vv. 5, 100), “the friends” (v. 150), “the church” (v. 6), “such people” (v. 8), “all” (v. 12a), and at times simply “we” or “us” (vv. 9b, 10a, 120). We cannot establish the identity of the letter’s recipient, since “Gaius” was a very common name in antiquity (see Acts 19:29; 20:4; Rom 16:23; 1 Cor 1:14). An associate of the elder, possibly one of his converts, Gaius appears to be affiliated with another Christian community within the Johannine circle, perhaps in the same or a neighboring locality. Matters of concern are addressed not only to Gaius (vv. 1-3, 5-7, 11, 120-15), but also to “the children” (v. 4), “the church” (vv. 9, 100),

in their care.?° Third John’s salutation is further distinguished from secular letters of the period by its overtly theological formulation. Gaius is “the beloved,” whom the elder “loves in truth.” Duplicating the elder’s greeting of “the elect lady” in 2 John 1-2, this expression evokes the Johannine stress on love (aydtn agape) and truth (dAndeta aletheia), which define the sphere of Christian existence (see John 17:17-19, 23-26; 21:15-16; 1 John 3:18-19; 4:7-21; 2 John 2-6). Brief though it is, 3 John will return to the topics of love (vv. 2, 5-6, 11) and truth (wv. 3-4, 8, 12). Just as “walking in the light” means the same as “walking as [jesus] walked” in 1 John 1:7; 2:6, so also “truth” may be 3 John’s oblique way of referring to life in Christ, who curiously goes unmentioned in this letter. 200. See Edwin Arthur Judge, The Social Pattern of Christian Groups in the First Century: Some Prolegomena to the Study of New Testament Ideas of Social Obligation (London: Tyndale, 1960).

3 John 2-4, Praying for Health, Rejoicing in Truth NIV

NRSV

“Dear friend, I pray that you may enjoy good health and that all may go well with you, even as your soul is getting along well. “It gave me great joy to have some brothers come and tell about your faithfulness to the truth and how you continue to walk in the truth. “I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth.

2Beloved, I pray that all may go well with you and that you may be in good health, just as it is well with your soul. *] was overjoyed when some of the friends? arrived and testified to your faithfulness to the truth, namely how you walk in the truth. “I have no greater joy than this, to hear that my children are walking in the truth. 2 Gk brothers

460

3 JOHN 2-4 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY Verse 2. In place of 2 John’s benedictory hope for “grace, mercy, and peace” (2 John 3 NRSV)

is 3 John’s more conventional wish that its recipient is enjoying good health. That wish is couched as a prayer (cf. Acts 26:29; 27:29; Rom 9:3; 2 Cor 13:7, 9; Jas 5:16). The elder’s prayer, or wish,”°! is that Gaius’s soul may be proceeding as well and as soundly as Gaius is in all other respects. While “soul” (buxn psyche) can mean essentially the same thing as “life,” neutrally understood (see 1 John 3:16), here the elder may be subtly differentiating the complementary physical and spiritual dimensions of Gaius’s life (cf. Matt 10:28; John 12:27) in order to express the hope that each will be as whole and healthy as the other. Verses 3-4. The elder adopts the familiar phraseology of 1 and 2 John in these verses. “To be overjoyed” that the “children are walking in the truth,” or living out their Christian calling, repeats 2 John 4a almost verbatim. Both there and here great rejoicing accompanies an experience characteristic of eternal life John 3:29; 15:11; 16:20-22, 24; 17:13; 1 John 1:4); “truthful walking” refers to the integrity of the believer’s conduct (John 8:12; 11:9-10; 12:35;. 21:18; -1 John 1:6-7, 2:6, 11). Also renewed in these verses is the elder’s use of the family as a metaphor for the church: “some brothers” (see 1 John 2:9-11; 3:10-17; 4:20-21; 5:16) and “my children” (cf. 1 Jolin eorle2e 10.5:25 2 John 1, 4p-13)) “My children” appears to be the elder’s affectionate expression for acquaintances who are younger than he. While the reference to Gaius (and by implication the Christians in his home) as “my children” could imply that the elder founded that church (Gi Cor 4s'4s 2Cor6:135"1 “Thess 257; 1; Phim 10), the author of 3 John never confirms, much less exploits, such a relationship. This is significant, when viewed in the context of the Roman institution of patria potestas—the legal system in which the father exercised full household dominion, with exclusive title to the family’s 201. “Ipray” acquires in some texts of this era a weaker, more secularized connotation. See Henrich Greeven, “evyopat,” TDNT2 (1964) 775-808.

461

property and ultimate power to discipline, to penalize, and to dispose of his wife and children. In the Johannine epistles the elder’s approach stands in the sharpest possible contrast; no one exercises patriarchal dominion over an essentially egalitarian Johannine community (1 John 2:20, 26-27), whose only Father is God (1 John 1:2-3; 2:1, 13-16, 22-24; 3:1; 4:14; 2 John 3-4, 9; see also John 15:1-17). Though absent from 2 John, the importance of “testimony” (aptuptov martyrion) is highlighted in 3 John 3 (see also vv. 6, 12; 1 John 1:2; 4:14; 5:6-7, 9-11). Obviously significant in Johannine vocabulary,” “testimony” acquires in this letter a distinctive nuance. In John (e.g., John 1:7-8, 15, 19, 32-34), 1 John 5:7-11, and Revelation (e.g., Rev 1:2, 9), witness typically has Christ as its object. In 3 John, testimony is ecclesiologically oriented; it is offered for a church (v. 3) or for individual Christians (vv. 6, 12) with regard to their truth or love. Witness that will be offered on behalf of Demetrius (v. 12) is mirrored here by the testimony of fellow Christians to Gaius’s fidelity “to the truth” (v. 3). In these ways, 3 John exemplifies the ancient custom of public testimonials to a benefactor.?° The elder’s reference to associates who have repeatedly come bearing this kind of testimony touches on another of the letter’s recurrent themes: the mobility of early Christians, characteristic of the Roman world in which they lived. There is, as Houlden notes, “an abundance of coming and going between the Johannine congregations.”2°* In these verses we see one advantage of that mobility: the mutual encouragement of the elder and Gaius, prominent members of loosely affiliated congregations within a region (see also Acts 14:24-28; 2 John 12-13). (See Reflections at 3 John 13-15.) 202. The verb and its cognates occur 47 times in John, 18 times in Revelation. 203. Frederick W. Danker, Benefactor: Epigraphic Study of a GraecoRoman and New Testament Semantic Field (St. Louis, Mo.: Clayton,

1982) esp. 442-47. 204. J. L. Houlden, A Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, HNTC (New York: Harper & Row, 1973) 152. Inflected in the present tense, the two participles in 3 John 3, Epxopévwv (erchomenon, “coming”) and yLapTupovv Tw (martyrounton, “testifying”), imply more than one visit.

3JOHN 5-12

3 JOHN 5-12, THE ELDER’S RECOMMENDATIONS 3 John 5-8, Supporting God’s Missionaries NIV

NRSV

‘Dear friend, you are faithful in what you are doing for the brothers, even though they are strangers to you. “They have told the church about your love. You will do well to send them on their way in a manner worthy of God. “It was for the

5Beloved, you do faithfully whatever youdo for the friends,? even though they are strangers to you; °they have testified to your love before the

church. You will do well to send them on in a

sake of the Name that they went out, receiving no help from the pagans. ®We ought therefore to

manner worthy of God; ‘for they began their journey for the sake of Christ,® accepting no. support from non-believers.° Therefore we ought

show hospitality to such men so that we may work together for the truth.

to support such people, so that we may become co-workers with the truth. 4 Gk brothers

© Gk for the sake of the name

¢ Gk the Gen-

tiles

(COMMENTARY tinguishing “works of the law”—human religious performance, by which no one may be justified to God—from grace: God’s unmotivated goodness, which cannot be earned but can only be trusted (Rom 6:14; 11:5-6; Gal 2:16-21, 3:2-5). The distance between Paul and the Johannine elder may seem to be greater than it really is; in both Gal 5:6 and 3 John 5 love is the means by which faith is activated. The beneficiaries of this faithful work in 3 John are itinerant Christians, “brothers—strangers as they are” (author’s trans.). They may have been emissaries from other congregations, perhaps including the elder’s own. Although they could claim no social status within their hosts’ tightly knit households, in the elder’s view they should be accepted as extended members of one Christian family (see also Matt 10:40-42; Acts 21:1516; 28:7; Rom 12:13; Phim 22; Heb 13:2; 1 Pet 4:8-10). Doing well by such strangers entails financial aid: “to send them on their way [TpoTrE Lbas propempsas|” connotes, not merely a polite farewell, but assistance in bearing their travel expenses (see also Acts 15:3; 20:38; 21:5; Rom15:24; 1: Cor 16:6, 116.2 ‘Cor 1:16;itus 3:13-14). Verse 7. On what basis do strangers receive such help? “They set out for the sake of the name”

Verses 5-6. Taking up a topic that was briefly, and ominously, treated in 2 John 9-11, 3 John sketches a theological understanding of hospitality among Johannine congregations.2° How should Christian missionaries and their hosts be regarded? Two principles inform the elder’s remarks. First, whatever work is done for siblings in the faith is an expression of love by their benefactors, who are themselves beloved (see also John .13:34-35; 15:9-17;:.1 John. 3:11-245 437-21). Second, there is no distinction between loving work done for a fellow Christian and the activity of faith: “whatever work you perform for the brothers, you do faithfully [miotdv piston|” (author’s trans.). The seeming contradiction between the views of the elder and those of Paul may be attributed to the different theological frameworks within which each understood “works.” Johannine theology considers belief in Christ to be a “work” of God (John 6:29). In principle, Paul would not dispute this point, because he viewed faith as a response to God’s prior act for human salvation through Jesus Christ (Rom 10:17; see also. Rom. 1:5; 1,.Cor-12:9;.Phil=1-0k “Often, however, when Paul speaks of “works” he is dis205. John Koenig, New Testament Hospitality: Partnership with Strangers in Promise and Mission, OBT (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), provides a good general survey.

462

3 JOHN 5-8 COMMENTARY (author’s trans.), presumably, the name of Jesus Christ (see Acts 4:17; 5:41; Rom 1:5; Phil 2:9-10; 1 Pet 4:14-16; 1 John 3:23; 5:13), though God was just mentioned in v. 6. Either way, this activity entitles these strangers to generous support, “in a manner worthy of God” (v. 6; cf. 1 Thess 2:12). That these missionaries received nothing from “the Gentiles” is probably not the ethnic slur that at first it may appear.

Verse 8. The conclusion naturally follows that it is our duty to undergird such people. Significantly, hospitality and financial aid are not offered in order that we may install ourselves in a position of leverage over those who, by our benefactions, have been made beholden to us. Such was the typical “patron-client” mentality of the ancient world.” To the contrary, the real benefit accrues to the hosts, “that we may become co-workers with the truth” (NRSV) or “that we may work together for the [cause of] truth” (NIV; cf. JBP; GNB). In addition, hospitality stimulates its recipients to bear witness, before another Christian assembly (€xx\nota ekklesia), to the benefactors’ love (v. 6). Wherever such hospitality is practiced, a binding of congregations occurs, a synergism of assistance. Appearing only here in the Johannine literature, ovvepydos (synergos, “fellow-worker”) is one of Paul’s favorite epithets for his colleagues in faith (Rom 16:3, 9, 21; 1 Cor 3:9; 2 Cor 8:23; Pil? 7-757 4:3: l= Thess. 3:2; ‘Phim. 1.24). (See Reflections at 3 John 13-15.)

(Given their names, Gaius [v. 9], and Demetrius |v. 12] would likely have been Gentiles.) Rather, these approved missionaries have refused any external assistance that might compromise the integrity of the gospel entrusted to them (cf. 1 Cor 9:1-27). Accordingly, their message is free from pollution by pagans or nonbelievers (cf. Matt 5:47; 6:7; 18:17; Gal 2:14). Such views, which for modern readers may seem standoffish, should be located within their historical context. As Abraham J. Malherbe observes, “When they spoke of ‘outsiders,’ early Christians revealed their minority group mind-set. They believed that they had been called to a higher quality of life than could be expected of their society, and they took measures

to safeguard it through their communities.”

207. Fora full discussion of the subject, see Richard P. Saller, /mperial Patronage Under the Early Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982).

206. Abraham J. Malherbe, Social Aspects of Early Christianity, 2nd ed. (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) 69.

3 John 9-10, Condemning Diotrephes NRSV

NIV I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will have nothing to do with us.

QI have written something to the church; but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority. '°So if I come, | will call attention to what he is doing in spreading false charges against us. And not content with those charges, he refuses to welcome the friends,? and even prevents those who want to do so and

10So if I come, | will call attention to what he is

doing, gossiping maliciously about us. Not satisfied

with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers. He also stops those who want to do so and puts them out of the church.

expels them from the church. a Gk brothers

(COMMENTARY In this section we encounter 3 John’s burn and bite. The elder begins mysteriously: “I have written something to the church.”°° For those over-

hearing it centuries later, this comment clarifies nothing about what he wrote or the church that he addressed. The elder might be referring to

208. Some Greek texts delete the indefinite particle “something” (rt ti), which to some scribes may have sounded unbecoming of an author thought to be an apostle (thus NIV, REB, NAB). Other manuscripts read, “I would have written,” perhaps trying to eliminate the suggestion that

an earlier apostolic letter was lost, destroyed, or ineffectual. The most broadly attested reading in the Greek, which also best explains the others, is that underlying the NRSV.

463

3 JOHN 9-10 COMMENTARY to tickle the commentators’ imaginations. Who is this Diotrephes? What lies behind this controversy? There is no consensus on the answers, though several possibilities have been suggested. One explanation is theologically oriented, envisioning a doctrinal dispute. Along this line the usual interpretation assumes that the elder is a defender of Johannine orthodoxy and that Diotrephes is a heretic—though a provocative variant of this proposal reverses the roles for these characters!?°° The weakness of such theories is that they explain too much; unlike 2 John 7-9, 3 John 9-10 contains no clear evidence of doctrinal contention between Diotrephes and the elder. Other exegetes favor a sociopolitical explanation of vv. 9-10. The elder and Diotrephes are at odds over the reach of their respective jurisdictions and the failure of each to recognize the other’s authority.?'° This sort of explanation risks reading into 3 John a later institutional hierarchy. In addition, these hypotheses explain too little; they do not account for the elder’s characteristic theological motivations, not only in 1 and 2 John, but also in 3 John 3-8. Perhaps we can compensate for the inadequacies of these theories with an explanation that consolidates them: Diotrephes may have refused hospitality to the elder and his associates out of the fear (unwarranted, in the elder’s view) that his community’s doctrinal standards might be contaminated.?!! The credibility of such a hypothesis is enhanced by the elder’s concerns in 2 John 9-11, which yoke ecclesiological policy with theological integrity. If similar concerns underlie 3 John 9-10, then the irony is stunning: Diotrephes may have practiced a rigorous form of the elder’s own doctrinal and communal discipline, preached in 2 John! (See Reflections at 3 John 13-15.)

what we know as 1 or 2 John; their content, however, does not obviously jibe with his comments here. The church alluded to in v. 9 may be the very one addressed by 3 John. But if Gaius were a member of that assembly, why would he need briefing on the matters recounted in vv. 9-10? Alternatively, let us imagine a network of Johannine churches: The elder may be updating Gaius, who lives in a community neighboring the elder’s, on happenings in a third congregation, of which Diotrephes is a part. A reasonable hypothesis—and as sturdy as a house of cards. The exact circumstances, from here to the letter’s end, are opaque. Against Diotrephes, the elder registers five complaints. (1) Diotrephes is “the lover of preeminence” within a particular church. (2) Diotrephes does not “receive” or “accept” us, the elder and his sympathizers. (The NRSV translation, “[he] does not acknowledge our authority,” depends not on the Greek wording but on a particular exegetical assessment of the overall situation.) (3) If the elder comes to Gaius’s church, he aims to bring to mind what Diotrephes is doing—namely, “spreading evil nonsense about us” (NAB). This rendering captures the sense of the Greek—which indicates a misrepresentation of the elder by Diotrephes that is false, malicious, and slanderous—without importing a more vivid characterization than we can verify, whether “gossiping” (NIV) or “lay[ing] baseless and spiteful charges” (NEB). Thus, in contrast with Gaius’s faithful works (v. 5), Diotrephes is accused by the elder of works and words that are evil (tovnpds poneros; see also 1 John 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18-19; 2 John 11). (4) In addition, Diotrephes withholds hospitality from “the brothers,” delegates of the elder (vv. 5-8). (5) Diotrephes hinders those willing to receive the elder’s associates and throws these hospitable ones out of the church. How Diotrephes was capable of such draconian measures is undisclosed. Expulsion (€xBdd\er ekballei) of members from a Christian assembly is a power never claimed by the elder in 3 John or elsewhere. Not even Jesus excommunicates those whom the Father has given him (John 6:37; cf. John 9:34-35). Presented from the elder’s perspective, this dispute is just sharp enough, and vague enough,

209. Ernst Kasemann, “Ketzer und Zeuge: Zum johanneischen Verfasserproblem,” Z7K48 (1951) 292-311. 210. Thus Burnett Hillman Streeter, The Primitive Church: Studies with Special Reference to the Origins of the Christian Ministry (London:

Macmillan, 1930) 83-89; Abraham J. Malherbe, “The Inhospitality of Diotrephes,” in God’s Christ and His People: Studies in Honour of Nils Alstrup Dahl, ed. Jacob Jervell and Wayne A. Meeks (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1977) 222-32. 211. See the careful examination in Judith Lieu, The Second and Third Epistles ofJohn: History and Background, Studies of the New Testament and Its World (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1986) 148-65.

464

3 JOHN 11-12 3 John 11-12, Commending Demetrius NIV

NRSV

"Dear friend, do not imitate what is evil but what is good. Anyone who does what is good is

11Beloved,

do not imitate what is evil but

from God. Anyone who does what is evil has not

imitate what is good. Whoever does good is from God; whoever does evil has not seen God. !?Eve-

seen God. '*Demetrius is well spoken of by everyone—and even by the truth itsélf. We also speak

so has the truth itself. We also testify for him,?

ryone has testified favorably about Demetrius, and

well of him, and you know that our testimony is

and you know that our testimony is true.

true.

2Gklacks for him

COMMENTARY The writer appeals to the beloved Gaius that he adopt the elder’s appraisal of this affair and, accordingly, accept the testimony of one whom the elder supports. Verse 11 combines what appear to be maxims, the first of which is couched in terms not especially Johannine: “imitation” (only here in the Johannine literature); “evil” (to kakov to kakon, instead of the usual Johannine synonym, To tovnpds [to poneros]; 3 joan 0 though ch lohm, 18:23, 30); the good” (to aya8ov to agathon; only here and in John 1:46; 5:29; 7:12). Obviously Johannine in expression are “[being] of God” (see John 8:47; 1 John 3:10; 4:4-7), characteristic of those who are righteous, and “not having seen God” (see John 1:18; 1 John 3:6; 4:12a, 20), which is associated with sin. These aphorisms are honed by the context in which they are set: against Diotrephes, in favor of Demetrius. The elder’s quiet reminder of the general resources of Johannine tradition contrasts with the aggressive, targeted action taken by Diotrephes against his adversaries. In the face of the challenge mounted by Diotrephes, the elder’s advocacy for a certain Demetrius emerges as 3 John’s clearest motive. Although the

elder does not exactly say it, by implication Demetrius is his envoy to the church with which Gaius is associated. (Demetrius may also have been the courier of this letter.) In the elder’s opinion Demetrius bears the kind of Christian witness that deserves Gaius’s hospitality (vv. 5-8), not Diotrephes’ repudiation (vv. 9-10). Again it is interesting that the elder appears in no position to enforce Demetrius’s reception. The elder most vigorously appeals to the tradition of authentic testimony (yaptupia martyria), so familiar to us from John, 1 John, and Revelation (see Commentary on 3 John 3). Accreditation of Demetrius comes from many sources: from the elder and his circle, “by all” (who know him), and “by the truth itself.” The latter may refer to the coherence of Demetrius’s witness with the Johannine understanding of truth as God’s self-revelation in Christ, (Jonn TTA 17: TAO et 77-19). ine elder’s own testimony is validated by its alignment with Johannine tradition: “Our testimony is true,” even as it was said of Jesus’ Beloved Disciple that “his testimony is true” (John 19:35 NRSV; 21:24; see also 1 John 1:1-4). (See Reflections at 3 John 13-15.)

465

3 JOHN 13-15

3 JOHN 13-15, REGRETS, HOPES, AND GREETINGS NRSV

NIV

131 have much to write to you, but I would

13] have much to write you, but I do not want.

rather not write with pen and ink; instead | hope to see you soon, and we will talk together face to face.

to do so with pen and ink. '4I hope to see you soon, and we will talk face to face.

15Peace to you. The friends send you their greetings. Greet the friends there, each by name.

Peace to you. The friends here send their

greetings. Greet the friends there by name.

(COMMENTARY Verse 15 is a more complicated closing than that of the Second Epistle. In 3 John, the wish for peace (see also Eph 6:23; 1 Pet 5:140; 2 John 3) is joined with greetings to Gaius from “the friends” of the elder, coupled with the elder’s hope that his regards will be relayed individually, “name by name,” to each of “the friends” with Gaius (cf. John 10:3; Jesus also departed from his disciples with “peace” for his “friends” [John 14:27; 15:14-15;- 16:33; 20:19; 21, 26]). Obviously, the elder is paving the way for his own favorable reception, someday, by Gaius and others in that community. Among Johannine churches whose tradition stressed love for one another, it is equally manifest that hospitality cannot now be simply assumed. It must be deliberately cultivated.

The conclusion of 3 John is similar to 2 John 12-13, though with enough variation in word selection and verb conjugation to suggest that these verses are the product, not of a copycat, but of one author closing two letters written at different times. Again the elder concedes the insufficiency of “ink and reed” (“pen and ink,” we would say) to convey his thoughts, which he hopes to express “mouth-to-mouth” when he sees Gaius (“you” [sing.]). As noted in vv. 5-8, Christians expected to be received hospitably by other Christians. That customary hope acquires poignancy in this letter, which reveals the rupture of hospitality among Christians. Viewed in that light, the elder’s express plans to visit Gaius may also imply a challenge to the inhospitable Diotrephes.

REFLECTIONS 1. Like the Second Epistle, 3 John has attracted little attention among the church’s teachers and preachers and has gotten a frosty reception among commentators who find it shallow. While the document does not exhibit the theological profundity of Romans or even 1 John, to denigrate or ignore 3 John hardly seems fair. The letter is not lacking a theological substructure, even if those premises are largely undeveloped. Viewed on its own terms, 3 John is concerned with some practical implications of the NT’s Johannine testimony. In that sense it is a natural mate for 2 John, which offers a synopsis of some important issues in Johannine theology. Read in the light of the Christian canon, 2 and 3 John exemplify in tandem the dynamic that marks the structure of 1 John: God’s begetting of those in Christ’s fellowship, which impels them to “show forth in their lives what they profess by their faith.”*’ By documenting moments in the continuing life of early churches molded in the Johannine tradition, all three letters are illuminating companions for the Fourth Gospel. They complement the NT’s Johannine witness, even as the other catholic and deutero-Pauline epistles complement the testimony of Paul. 212. Collect for the Second Sunday of Easter, The Book of Common Prayer, 173.

466

3 JOHN 13-15 REFLECTIONS 2. Another notable aspect of 3 John may be so obvious that at first it blinds us: its unfeigned human frailty. This letter addresses familiar tensions among ordinary Christians who quarreled mightily yet shared much. Reading 3 John is a bit like studying a cracked, sepia-tinted photograph in a family album. Although at first we do not recognize the faces of Gaius, Demetrius, Diotrephes, or the elder, and while their braided histories are long forgotten, slowly we perceive traces of ourselves in their affections and petulance, their grudges and gratitude. In particular, 3 John holds a mirror to the church of our own day, inviting us to consider the sometimes divisive consequences of deep religious convictions. For its part, Johannine Christianity was permeated with a strong dualistic current. While its adherents did not withdraw from the world (John 17:6-19), they could not comfortably occupy the shadowlands between light and dark (1 John 1:5-2:10). Accordingly, they kept their doors tightly shut to perceived wickedness. This tendency may have been given unfortunate expression by Diotrephes (3 John 9-10), whose inhospitality to the elder and his envoys was formally justifiable on the elder’s own terms (2 John 10-11). The elder does not identify Diotrephes as the antichrist (cf. 1 John 2:220; 4:30); yet he seems but a whisker away from ascribing to Diotrephes an evil that is not “of God” (3 John 110), thereby practicing the same exclusion of which he accuses his adversary. Although a balanced assessment of this controversy is denied us by our ignorance of all its facts, perhaps we can sympathize with both the elder and Diotrephes. Since their time we, too, have found ourselves caught in the ambiguities of human experience, ensnarled by tensions within our own tradition, guilty of the very sins that we perceive so clearly in others within our Christian family. Like Johannine Christianity, most of our denominations have been wrenched and occasionally split by arduous questions of freedom and fidelity in Christian self-understanding. When ought the church that is loyal to the truth of Jesus Christ stand firm? When should it bend? Where should the lines of faith and practice be drawn sharply? Where should they be relaxed? For these questions, there can be no easy answers, because living as a Christian in this world remains inherently difficult for Christ’s fallible followers. Like Diotrephes and the elder, Christians of conviction in our generation will sometimes land in places diametrically opposed. Our reach for the truth of Jesus Christ exceeds the grasp of any of us. To recognize this is not to commend indifference; we must wrestle with major questions, for they often run to the root of our understanding of what it means to be Christian. With such questions we should strive to grapple in covenant with one another, for nothing so stains the integrity of our witness to God’s reconciling peace as the disintegration of the church. And we should conduct our controversies with Christian humility, heeding Oliver Cromwell’s entreaty to the General Assembly of the Kirk of Scotland: “I beseech you, in the

bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.””” 3. Third John also raises thorny questions about the shape of authority within the church. The elder speaks, and Diotrephes acts, as though each were, or thinks he ought to be, in a position to decide some fundamental matters of community discipline. On its face the elder’s position appears more creditable; it is hard to square Diotrephes’ practice of excommunicating Christians with a church whose leaders were commissioned to tend and feed Christ’s lambs (John 21:15-19). By what authority could a servant of Jesus expel any of those who came to him, those whom even Jesus would not cast out? The hunger for power of which Diotrephes is accused chimes with those tyrannical modes of ancient Roman governance that Jesus was remembered as criticizing: “the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them” (Matt 20:25 NRSV = Mark 10:42). In its most wrong-headed moments, even American ecclesiastical politics is tempted to engage in such malignant self-promotion, 213. The Writings and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, vol. 2: The Commonwealth 1649-1653, ed. Wilbur Cortez Abbott with Catherine D. Crane (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1939) 303 (letter from Musselburgh, August 3, 1650).

467

3 JOHN 13-15 REFLECTIONS though it conforms not at all to a love like Christ’s. Jesus, after all, knelt to wash his followers’ feet John 13:12-16; see also Matt 20:24-28 and par.; 1 Pet 5:2-3). It would be simplistic, however, to judge as problem-free the elder’s view of church order. Lacking a better articulated principle of authority than what we find in the Johannine letters, the elder can summon little for his position’s support beyond insult of his adversary (3 John 9-10), in which vituperation Diotrephes also traded, and reassertion of the truth of the elder’s own testimony (v. 12), which Diotrephes doubtless claimed as well. The confidence that all Christians enjoy knowledge that needs no human instruction (1 John 2:20, 27) harmonizes splendidly with an image of the church as branches of Christ, the one true vine (John 15:1-11). Such a defense, nevertheless, proved manifestly inadequate against “the action of a high-handed autocrat”’”* like Diotrephes. By his overt reliance on “what was from the beginning” and his self-presentation as a reliable guarantor of that tradition {1 John 1:1-4), the elder appears to have been reaching for some authoritative coordinates for reorienting the life of a church gone off-course. Somewhat later in patristic thought, such guidelines would gel into a doctrine of apostolicity, which gave clear expression to the church’s hope for its own integrity across time. The Johannine epistles have not yet arrived at that point, as evidenced by the fact that the elder was unable to adjudicate some basic matters of doctrine and discipline in Johannine congregations. A principle of apostolicity probably could not have been grasped as normative within Johannine Christianity until after its consolidation with other Christian traditions into the church of the patristic era, to whose canon, creeds, and polity all Christians of the present day remain indebted for their variously inflected understandings of the church and its

ministry.”” Like the First and Second Epistles of John, 3 John thus testifies, inadvertently, to the need for a theologically responsible ordering of the church and its ministry, while it expressly demands of all preachers and teachers an accountability to the self-sacrificial love that God has bestowed.

4. Remarkably, in spite of all its introversion and avowed estrangement from the world, the Johannine church is summoned in this letter to welcome the stranger—the one who comes for the sake of the Name, who needs equipment for the next leg of the journey, who bears witness to the church’s love and the truth in which the church walks (3 John 3, 6-7). No one knew better than did the elder that opening the door to the stranger carries risks, for the same road that brings to our door genuine need, worthy of support, also brings disturbance and even danger. But the elder also realized, and testifies to us, that the church that keeps its door locked cannot possibly be faithful to the truth or instrumental for love. In the Third Epistle of John, hospitality is not talked about generally. It is fixed with a name: Demetrius. For us, too, the call for Christian hospitality is attached to specific names, special faces, particular pleas. In the face and voice of the Demetrius at our door, we recognize our own homelessness, our own hunger, our own ambivalent cries for help. And we remember, as clearly as we recall our last visit to the Lord’s Table, those moments when the love of Christ beckoned us and welcomed us home: Love bade me welcome; yet my soul drew back, Guilty of dust and sin. But quick-eyed Love, observing me grow slack From my first entrance in, 214. Judith Lieu, The Theology of the Johannine Epistles, New Testament Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991) 10. 215. On the strengths and weaknesses of Johannine ecclesiology, see Eduard Schweizer, “The Concept of the Church in the Gospel and Epistles of St. John,” in New Testament Essays: Studies in Memory of Thomas Walter Manson, ed. A.J. B. Higgins (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1959) 230-45. The concept of apostolicity and its relevance for the widespread acceptance and eventual canonization of the four Gospels are considered in C. Clifton Black, Mark: Images of an Apostolic Interpreter, Studies on Personalities of the New Testament (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1994) 251-59.

468

3 JOHN 13-15 REFLECTIONS Drew nearer to me, sweetly questioning

If I'd lack’d anything. ‘A guest,’ I answer’d, ‘worthy to be here:’ Love said, ‘You shall be he.’ ‘I, the unkind, ungrateful? Ah, my dear, I cannot look on Thee.’ Love took my hand and smiling did reply, "Who made the eyes but I?’ ‘Truth, Lord, but I have marr’d them: let. my shame Go where it doth deserve.’ ‘And Know you not,’ says Love, ‘Who bore the blame?’ "My dear, then I will serve.’ ‘You must sit down,’ says Love, ‘and taste my meat.’

So I did sit and eat.?"°

Like the beloved Gaius, we do well to receive Demetrius at our doorstep, for the church Knows, firsthand and repeatedly, what it means to have been a lonely stranger, embraced by God’s sheer goodness and tender mercy. We are able to make a home for others because, through Christ, love first bade us welcome (1 John 4:19). 216. George Herbert (1593-1633), “Love,” in The Oxford Book of Prayer, ed. George Appleton (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985) 266.

469

intihePhin, Cpiete :

at Lentesa meeek

i Be: 4eta, Phe walt tele Ceiitig cenit Sais

i these end

sete a the —_

% dipmcitesbale gt

:

;yee “anges ty meen

ES, PAS: ) aa

iL

en aoe

THESE

ER OOP IUIDE

INTRODUCTION, COMMENTARY, AND REFLECTIONS

BY DUANE F. WATSON

THE LETTER OF JUDE

INTRODUCTION AUTHORSHIP, ORIGIN, AND DATE othing definite can be said about the author, origin, or date of the Epistle of Jude.! The author calls himself Jude Judas), brother of James. For the author to have identified himself through his brother James indicates that both Jude and James were well-known to the letter’s addressees. The only brothers with the names Jude and James mentioned in the New Testament are the brothers of Jesus (Matt 13:55; Mark 6:3). Although several other men from the first century named Jude have been suggested as the author of this letter, the most likely reference is to the brother of James and Jesus, the

leader of the church in Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 15:13-21; 1 Cor 15:7; Gal 1:19; 2:9).? Jude did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah during Jesus’ lifetime (Mark 3:21, 31; John 7:1-5). However, he came to faith after Jesus’ resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:14), and probably became a missionary for the gospel (1 Cor 9:5). The question is whether “Jude” is Jesus’ brother’s self-reference or a pseudonym used by someone within Jewish Christian circles, in which the memory of Jude and his brother James was prominent. On the one hand, the letter writer’s familiarity with Jewish literature and traditions, as well as the Jewish Christian apocalyptic stance of the argumentation, supports Jude, Jesus’ brother, as author. On the other hand, a pseudonymous author may have wished to use the name and authority of Jude to counter the false teachers in the 1. For a discussion of the introductory issues of Jude, see R. J. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, WBC 50 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983) 3-17, and Jude and the Relatives ofJesus in the Early Church (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1990) 134-78. 2. For a list of other identifications of Jude, see Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, WBC, 21-23.

473

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

post-apostolic era. It is often argued that a pseudonymous author would have claimed to be the brother of Jesus rather than the brother of James, but claiming membership within the holy family offered considerable status to the writer. Eusebius mentions that many persons traced their ancestry to the holy family. Several prominent arguments in support of the author’s pseudonymity can be readily countered. (1) The content of the letter requires a late date because it either reflects early Catholicism or combats gnosticism of the post-apostolic era. However, these assumptions are unlikely (see “The Stance and Rhetorical Approach of the Letter,” below). (2) The author excludes himself from the apostles, whom he presents as belonging to a previous generation (v. 17). However, he is only excluding himself from the apostles who founded the church(es) he addresses, and not from the apostolic era. (3) The brother of Jesus, a Galilean peasant whose native language would have been Aramaic, could not have produced this letter. The author appears to have had a scribal background, because he is able to write a letter, he uses literary Greek in which to write it, he possesses knowledge of Jewish tradition and writings and has access to those writings (e.g., Testament ofMoses, 1 Enoch), and he is skilled in the use of rhetoric.* However, having an elementary education (which included some rhetorical training), hearing weekly exposition of the Old Testament in the synagogue, living in Galilee (an area dotted with Greek-speaking cities), and needing to increase proficiency in Greek to effectively preach to Greek audiences would have gone a long way toward explaining how Jesus’ brother could come to possess competency in these skills. Thus there is really no strong reason to argue that the author could be anyone other than Jude, the brother of Jesus and James. Decisions about the date of the writing of the letter depend on those for authorship and the nature of the false teachers involved. Dates offered range from the early apostolic age (50s CE) to the mid-second century CE. If the letter was written by the brother of Jesus, then a date in the mid-first century is warranted. If it is pseudonymous, a date in the latter part of the century of the post-apostolic era is logical. The letter’s implication that the original converts of the church were still living (vv. 17-18), its use of a Jewish-Christian apocalyptic argumentative stance, and the use of the Epistle of Jude as an authoritative document by the author of 2 Peter (around 80—90 CE) indicate a date closer to the mid-first century. This places the letter’s writing during the lifetime of Jude, Jesus’ brother. A late first- or early second-century date loses still more appeal once it is recognized that the letter takes neither an early catholic nor an anti-gnostic stance of that period, nor does it necessarily look upon the apostolic era as being past (see “The Stance and Rhetorical Approach of the Letter,” 476-77). 3. Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 1.7.14. See J. H. Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, AB 37C (New York: Doubleday, 1993) 45. For more on the holy family and Jude, see Bauckham, Jude and the Relatives ofJesus in the Early Church, 5-133. 4, See Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 29, 35.

A474

JUDE—INTRODUCTION

RECIPIENTS, OPPONENTS, AND HISTORICAL SITUATION The letter is not a tract against heresy or a “catholic” letter addressed to all Christians, but a letter addressed to an unspecified church or group of churches. Jude did not found the church that he addresses, for it had learned the gospel from the apostles (v. 17). The church is probably Jewish Christian, for Jude quotes and alludes to Jewish documents and traditions without explanation, assuming the people’s familiarity with them. The geographical location of the church is unknown. The antinomian character of the false teachers’ doctrine and their ability to influence the church indicate a predominantly Gentile context lacking the presence of strong Jewish moral teaching. Scholars have proposed Palestine, Syria, Egypt, or Asia Minor as the location of the recipient church(es). If the letter was written by Jesus’ brother, then Palestine is the most likely candidate for the recipients’ location, since Jude himself can be located there. If it is pseudonymous, then Asia Minor is a good candidate, for it boasted large Jewish populations within a Gentile environment, or Egypt, where the letter was popular with Clement of Alexandria and Origen. Syria is not likely because the letter was not accepted as canonical in churches there until the sixth century.° The occasion of the letter is the infiltration of the church by a group whose doctrines and practices are at variance with the apostolic tradition the church had received (vv. 4, 17-19). The group is sectarian, having divided the church by rejecting its leadership (v. 8) and gathered a following of its own (vv. 19, 22-23). Their motivation is partially financial gain (vv. 11-12, 16). The description of them in v. 4, “certain intruders have stolen in among you” (NRSV), indicates that they may be itinerant prophets or teachers, who were common in early Christianity. Itinerant prophets and teachers could rely on the hospitality of their host church (1 Cor 9:4; Did. 13:1-3) and thus were in a position to misuse this privilege for financial gain (Rom 16:18; Did. 11:3-6, 12). The contorted doctrines of some of these itinerants, coupled with their desire for gain, often posed problems for the churches they visited (Matt 7:15; 2 Cor 10-11; 1 John 4:1; 2 John 10; Did. 11-12; Ign. Eph. 9:1). The doctrine of these false teachers is antinomian—that is, they understand the gospel of freedom in Christ to relieve a Christian of ethical responsibilities, an understanding that “perverts grace” (v. 4). They deny the authority of the law of Moses (vv. 8-10) and of Christ himself (vv. 4, 8). This denial may be based on a claim of prophetic revelation (v. 8; cf. v. 19), a problem in early Christianity (Col 2:18), or it may be an overly realized eschatology that stressed that judgment was past rather than future for those in the Spirit. As acorollary of this rejection of authority, they are immoral, especially in sexual behavior (vv. 4, 6-8, 10, 16). They corrupt the church (vv. 22-24), even tainting the love feast, which is at the core of the fellowship (v. 12). Such antinomianism is akin to that faced by Paul (Rom 3:8; 6:1, 15; 1 Cor 5:1-8; 6:12-20; 10:23; Gal 5:13), but there is no firm support for thinking that the false teachers were of the ilk encountered by Paul. Neither do the false teachers seem to be the gnostics 5. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, WBC, 16-17.

~

ATS

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

of later times. Their reviling of angels who guard the law of Moses (vv. 8-10) is not part of a cosmic dualism in which angels are demigods of the material universe. Their indulgence in sin does not originate in the emphasis on spirit and knowledge to the disparagement of anything material (like the body). If gnosticism were involved, Jude would best have attacked the doctrine of the false teachers, not emphasized their immorality.° Jude believes the situation may be spiritually fatal and, therefore, seeks immediate, drastic action. The presence of the false teachers, their teaching, and their behavior are precursors of the parousia, and they and their following will be destroyed with its coming (vv. 14-15, 17-18, 23). To save members of the church from destruction, Jude wants to convince them that the false teachers are the ungodly of prophecy (vv. 14-19) and that they are headed for destruction (vv. 5-16). The church is to cling to traditional doctrine (vv. 3,5, 17, 20), bolster its spiritual life (vv. 20-21), and actively convince those persuaded by the false teachers to abandon them and their ways (vv. 22-23). =

THE STANCE AND RHETORICAL APPROACH OF THE LETTER Many interpreters have classified the Letter of Jude as an “early catholic” document. This designation refers to a reconstruction of early Christianity (needing serious rethinking) that postulates that beginning with the second generation of Christians there was a movement away from a hope in the imminent return of Christ and toward institutionalization of church offices and the understanding of faith as a body of doctrine rather than a personal commitment. This movement was fostered by the delay of the parousia and the encounter with heresy, which necessitated the creation of a central authority and clearly articulated doctrine. Yet Jude should not be classified as early catholic. The parousia hope in the letter is strong. Jude tried to persuade the church to see that the false teachers of their day are those prophesied to appear in the last days. They are precursors of the parousia and designated recipients of its approaching judgment (vv. 4, 14-19). Their followers must be snatched quickly from the impending fire of judgment (v. 23). Jude does not address any church officers, but assumes that the church as a whole will respond as suggested. Jude also affirms that faith is not a set body of orthodox teachings but the gospel itself, which demands faith and which the church members received at the time of their conversion and instruction by the apostles (vv. 3, 17-18).’ As the use of Jewish sources, apocalyptic texts, and tradition (e.g., /Enoch, Testament of Moses) indicates, Jude was working within the confines of Jewish Christianity, which had a vibrant apocalyptic outlook,* and this outlook underlies his rhetorical 6. Ibid., 11-13. 7. Ibid., 8-9, 32-33; J. D. G. Dunn, Unity and Diversity in the New Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977) 341-66. 8. For a thorough study of Jude’s use of Jewish traditions and source materials, see J. D. Charles, Literary Strategy in the Epistle ofJude (Scranton: University of Scranton Press, 1993); Bauckham, Jude and the Relatives ofJesus in the Early Church , 179-280.

476

JUDE—INTRODUCTION

approach.’ The letter is predominantly deliberative rhetoric, which, by proofs and advice, tries to persuade an audience to embrace what is advantageous, necessary, and expedient and dissuade it from the opposite. The letter specifies that it aims to persuade the church “to contend for the faith” (v. 3)—that is, not to heed the false teachers’ message and practice and thus come under like judgment at the encroaching parousia. In its effort to persuade the church, the letter also relies upon epideictic rhetoric, which both praises and blames. The aim of such rhetoric is to uplift what is honorable and to cast down what is dishonorable, especially with a view to increasing audience assent to honorable values. Verse 4 refers to the letter as a “condemnation” (to kpiya to krima). The false teachers are denounced as being (a) comparable to great sinners of the past and (b) the subject of prophecies of judgment. The denunciation of the false teachers is meant to strengthen the church in the faith received from the apostles and to preserve its members from impending judgment.

LITERARY GENRE, COMPOSITION, AND CONTENT Jude is a genuine letter of the mixed variety. Its deliberative rhetorical style classifies it as a paraenetic letter meant to advise and dissuade.’° The petition in vv. 3-4 classifies it as a letter of request or petition.'’ Jude’s stated purpose is to persuade the church to “contend for the faith” (v. 3). The letter occupies a middle ground between documentary letters (e.g., personal, business) and literary letters written according to rhetorical conventions and meant for public consumption. Thus it contains both epistolary and rhetorical conventions, and its structure is best described by discussing both genres.!2 The letter begins with a typical Jewish-Christian letter prescript, introducing the sender and the recipients, followed by a blessing (vv. 1-2). Verses 3-4 are the body opening of the letter, which establishes common ground between the sender and the recipients and informs the recipients of the main reason why the sender wrote the letter. In v. 3, the reason for writing is stated as a petition that the recipients “contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.” The background of, or reason for, the petition follows in v. 4: Ungodly false teachers have appeared in the church, as was foretold in prophecy. Verse 3 corresponds to the rhetorical convention of exordium and v. 4 to narratio. The exordiumworks to obtain the audience’s goodwill and introduces the reason for an address. The narratio gives the facts to explain the need for that address and to outline the main point(s) the remainder of the address will develop. Verses 5-16 are the body middle of the letter, which develops the material of the body

opening. It begins with a typical disclosure formula, expressing the sender’s desire that 9. For a rhetorical analysis of Jude, see D. F. Watson, /nvention, Arrangement, and Style: Rhetorical Criticism of Jude and 2 Peter, SBLDS 104 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988) 29-79. 10. Cf. Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 44. 11. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, WBC, 28. 12. For a concise discussion of the ancient Greek letter genre, see John L. White, “Ancient Greek Letters,” in Greco-Roman Literature and the New Testament, éd. David E. Aune, SBLSBS 21 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988) 85-105.

477

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

the recipients know something: “Now I desire to remind you...” (NRSV). The body middle corresponds to the rhetorical probatio, which presents proofs to verify the claims and propositions of the narratio. In Jude, the body middle proves that the false teachers in the church are ungodly and that they are the very ones foretold in prophecy. To make this assertion, the body middle uses proofs from example (vv. 5-10) and from prophecy (vv. 11-16) respectively. Verses 17-23 are the body closing of the letter, which underscores the main reason for writing by reiterating and amplifying what has already been stated in the body of the letter. The body closing often urges that responsibility be taken for the matters discussed. Like the body middle, the closing begins with a disclosure formula: “But you, beloved, must remember...” (NRSV). It corresponds to the rhetorical device called peroratio, which reiterates the main points of the probatio and appeals to the emotion of the audience to persuade it to respond as desired. The repetition occurs in vv. 17-19, and the emotional appeal by exhortation is repeated in vv. 20-23. The letter ends in vv. 24-25 with a doxology for a postscript. In proving that the false teachers are ungodly and that they are the ungodly of prophecy (v. 4), Jude uses Jewish types and prophecies sacred to the church as well as Christian instruction previously delivered to the church by apostolic missionaries (vv. 3, 5, 17-18). This material includes three OT narrative types (vv. 5-7), an OT prophecy (v. 11), a prophecy from / Enoch (vv. 14-15), and a prophecy from the apostles (vv. 17-18). Each prophecy or narrative type is applied to the false teachers in order to identify them as ungodly and subject to judgment, those who were prophesied would appear in the end times (vv. 8-10, 12-13, 16, 19). The alternation of types and prophecy with interpretation is carefully constructed to underscore that the types and prophecies find counterparts and fulfillment in the false teachers. This alternation is accentuated by alternating verb tenses. The past tenses (vv. 5-6, 9), prophetic aorists (vv. 11, 14), and a future tense (v. 18) in the types and prophecies are juxtaposed with present tenses in the interpretations. Also, the interpretations are preceded with the Greek word “these” (otto houtoi) or “these are” (ourot elo.v houtoi eisin), which clearly distinguishes them (vv. 8, 10, 12, 16, 19). The entire letter is linked with the repetition of topics (sometimes called catchwords) in rhetorically strategic places. Take, for example, the topic of “keeping” (tnpéw téreo: dviacow phylasso ). In the letter’s prescript, the addresses are said to be kept for Jesus Christ (v. 1), and in the closing doxology God is the one said to be doing the keeping (v. 24). The saints are to keep themselves in God’s favor (v. 21). In contrast, the angels and false teachers who have not been able to keep their place will be kept in deepest darkness (vv. 6, 13). The letter is characterized by a rich vocabulary and many rhetorical figures of speech and thought. One particularly noteworthy feature is the appearance of triplets that amplify the message (vv. 1, 2, 5-7, 8, 11, 19, 20-21, 22-23, 25). For example, three types of ungodly persons are described, who find counterparts in the false teachers (vv. 5-7); and 478

JUDE—INTRODUCTION

the application of these descriptions to the false teachers is a triplet (v. 8). In addition, words are carefully chosen for their associated imagery. Noteworthy are the images of the prophecy and the interpretation of vv. 11-13, which provide a strong negative characterization of the false teachers.

LE

LEE OLOGY OF TUDE

Jude is not concerned solely with doctrinal issues. Rather, the author is concerned with the moral implications of errant doctrine. This false teaching denies the parousia and judgment, thus removing moral constraints and, in effect, licensing immorality. In the light of this challenge, Jude’s theological approach is to stress the need for adherence to the proclamation of the gospel as received from the apostles (vv. 3, 5, 17). This doctrine and the behavior it espouses are normative and can be used as the measure of new teaching

that may be proposed in the church.’ Jude works with a vital eschatological expectation. He believes that the parousia and judgment will occur within the lifetime of the letter’s recipients, and he points to the presence of the false teachers as an indication that they are, indeed, living in the end times (vv. 17-18). He affirms the reality of the divine judgment that will accompany the parousia. As surely as God acted in history to judge sinners, God will so judge sinners at the consummation of history (vv. 5-13). However, faithful Christians will be extended mercy and eternal life (vv. 2, 21, 24). The faithful themselves are to try to save sinners from the fire of judgment by pulling them away from the false teachers (v. 23). Jude strongly affirms the lordship of Christ (vv. 4, 14, 17, 21, 25), a lordship based on his work of salvation, his current position of sitting at God’s right hand, and his future role as Savior and Judge. Christians owe obedience to Christ as Lord for his work for their salvation, a salvation whose completion is based on a lifetime of obedience (v. 21). By contrast, immorality perverts the moral order of creation, which Christ enforces, and denies his lordship, leaving the person who sins vulnerable to judgment (vv. 4, 8-16). In the light of eschatological expectation and the lordship of Christ, Jude provides ethical instruction for Christian living. Christians are to make a concerted effort to advance their individual and corporate spiritual lives (v. 3). The Christian life is sustained on two interdependent fronts. One is remaining in the love of God through one’s own moral effort and obedience (v. 21), and the other is God’s working for us to keep our salvation safe until it is complete (vv. 1, 24). Christians are to work for the spiritual good of all, to pray with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to obey God in order to remain in God’s love, and to live in the expectation of the impending parousia (vv. 20-21). The faithful are to extend mercy to the errant, while remaining cognizant of the real danger of possibly being influenced by their doctrine and practice (vv. 22-23). 13. For discussion of the theology of Jude, see R. J. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, WBT (Waco, Tex.: Word, | 990) 11-37; A. Chester and R. P. Martin, Zhe Theology of the Letters ofJames, Peter, and Jude, New Testament Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994) 65-86.

479

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bauckham, Richard J. Jude, 2 Peter. WBC 50. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983. The most comprehensive commentary in English that both summarizes previous scholarship and makes many new and helpful advances; places Jude within its Jewish, Christian, and Greco-Roman literary and theological contexts. —. Jude, 2 Peter. WBT. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1990. A companion to the preceding commentary; discusses the theological themes of Jude. . Jude and the Relatives ofJesus in the Early Church. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1990. A thorough discussion of background issues, the holy family and its role in the early church, as well as Jude’s exegesis, use of sources, and christology.

Charles, J. D. Literary Strategy in the Epistle ofJude. Scranton: University of Scranton Press, 1993. In-depth look at the literary strategy of the letter from its Palestinian Jewish apocalyptic context. Chester, Andrew, and Ralph Martin. The Theology of the Letters ofJames, Peter, and Jude. New Testament Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. One of the finest discussions available on the theology of Jude within its context. Neyrey, Jerome H. 2 Peter, Jude. AB 37C. New York: Doubleday, 1993. An excellent commentary that breaks new ground by incorporating a social-science perspective; places the authors and audiences of these letters within their social world by using various social-science models or perspectives. Watson, Duane F. /nvention, Arrangement, and Style: Rhetorical Criticism ofJude and 2 Peter. SBLDS 104. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988. Demonstrates how the writer of Jude used Greco-Roman rhetorical conventions to persuade his audience to take a course of action deemed necessary to remain faithful in the face of the influence of false teachers.

OUTLINE OF JUDE I. Jude 1-2, The Letter Prescript II. Jude 3-4, A Petition to Contend for the Faith III. Jude 5-16, Proof That the False Teachers Are Ungodly and Subject to Judgment

A. Jude 5-10, Proof from Old Testament Examples B. Jude 11-13, Proof from Prophecy

C. Jude 14-16, Proof from the Prophecy of 7 Enoch IV. Jude 17-23, An Apostolic Prophecy and Instruction on How to Respond to False Teachers

V. Jude 24-25, The Letter Closing as a Doxology

480

JOD Esl-2 “HE LET EER=PRESCRIPT NIV

NRSV

‘ude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother

Jude, a servant? of Jesus Christ and brother of James, To those who are called, who are beloved‘ in?

of James, To those who have been called, who are loved by God the Father and kept by? Jesus Christ:

God the Father and kept safe for? Jesus Christ:

2May mercy, peace, and love be yours in abundance. LW

2Mercy, peace and love be yours in abundance. a1 Or for, or in

aGk Judas d Or by

5 Gk slave

¢ Other ancient authorities read sanctified

(COMMENTARY 2 Pet 1:1). In this regard “servant” adapts the title “servants of God” used of great leaders of Israel (Exod "32:13" Deut -9727;--34:5" Ps38923)F “The extended title “servant of Jesus Christ” implies that Jude exhibits the servant leadership that Christ exemplified. The recipients are given a threefold theological identification: “those who are called, who are beloved in God the Father and kept safe for Jesus Christ.” This identification is intended in part to obtain the goodwill of the recipients by showing in what high esteem they are held. It describes the church in terms applied to Israel, especially in Isaiah 40-55.'4 That they have been “called” is a reminder of God’s calling of Israel (Isa 41:8-9; 42:1, 6; 48:12, 15; 49:1, 7). The church has been called by God to be the new Israel. “Beloved in God the Father” recalls God’s love for Israel (Isa 43:4; 54:8). Israel became known as the “beloved” in the Septuagint (Ps 28:6; Isa 44:2 LXX), a love now the privilege of the church as the new Israel. The NIV’s “beloved by God the Father” draws out the idea of God as the agent of love, an idea implicit in the participle “beloved.” However, the NRSV’s translation, “beloved in God the Father,” is more accurate, although harder to understand. The Johannine

ude begins with the three-part letter prescript typical of Jewish and early Christian letters: (1) identification of the sender and (2) the recipient(s), each often described theologically in relationship to God, to Christ, and to each other, and (3) a greeting (here a blessing) that originates in the Jewish wish for peace and prosperity for the recipients. Through the theological description and greeting the letter prescript functions rhetorically to establish by what authority the sender addresses the recipients and to obtain their goodwill so that the content of the letter may be heard (the letter would have been read aloud in a church setting) as well as to introduce topics to be discussed in the letter. Verse 1. Jude identifies himself theologically as “a servant of Jesus Christ” and familially as the “brother of James” (see the section “Authorship, Origin, and Date” in the Introduction). Both identifications help to establish the writer’s authority and honor. “Brother of James” identifies Jude as the brother of James, the leader of the church of Jerusalem, and indirectly as a brother of Jesus. “Servant” (SodAos doulos) is a title for any Christian, identifying him or her as one whom Christ has bought out of servanthood to sin and who

now serves him (1 Cor 7:22-23; Eph 6:6; 1 Pet 2:16). As a self-designation, “servant” also denotes a Christian leader, especially when used in letter openings (Rom 1:1; Phil 1:1; Titus 1:1; Jas 1:1;

14. As explained in R. J. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, WBC 50 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983) 25-26.

481

JUDE 1-2 COMMENTARY Peace is needed because the love feasts of the church are being disrupted by the false teachers (v. 12). They grumble (v. 16) and divide the church (v. 19). Love was an addition to the Jewish blessing of mercy and peace. Jude’s blessing is that God (indicated by the divine passive) provide the recipients mercy, peace, and love in abundance. The letter’s opening also introduces topics that will be developed in the body of the letter and reiterated in its closing. One such topic is “keeping” (Tnpéw tereo; bvidoow phylasso).Whereas God keeps the recipients safe for Jesus Christ (vv. 1, 24), the recipients are to do their part to “keep” themselves in the love of God until the parousia (v. 21). This is in contrast to the angels, who did not “keep” their designated place in the universal order when they had sexual relations with women (Gen 6:1-4), and as a result are now “kept” in deepest darkness for judgment (v. 6)—a fate awaiting the false teachers as well (v. 13). As the topic is developed it provides the recipients with comfort in their status with God, instruction for how to resist the threat of the false teachers, and a warning of the consequences of not remaining steadfast.

literature speaks of Christians’ relationship with God as being “in God,” especially when they are obedient and abiding in love (John 17:21; 1 John 2:24; 3:24; 4:13, 15-16). “Beloved in God the Father” underscores the need to obey God in order to experience God’s love. This idea is expressed by Jude in the command to “keep yourselves in the love of God” (v. 21 NRSV). The phrase “kept safe for Jesus Christ” (dative of advantage, NRSV) is preferred over “kept by Jesus Christ” (dative of agent, NIV). In v. 24, a verse that, along with vv. 1-2, frames the letter, God keeps Christians safe from losing their salvation until it has been completed at the parousia of Christ. This idea was common in early Christianity John 17:11-12, 15; 1 Thess 5:23;.1 Pet 1:5). God will keep the church safe from the deceptive teachings and practices of false teachers, which lead to destruction at the parousia. Verse 2. This threefold blessing also increases the recipients’ goodwill. Mercy and peace were part of the Jewish blessing, and in the context of Jude their use connotes mercy in Christ and peace with God through Christ. This mercy will come to completion at the parousia (v. 21); in the meantime, mercy and grace should be extended in kind to those wavering in the faith (vv. 22-23).

REFLECTIONS 1. As a standard part of the opening, Jude identifies himself in such a way as to bring his authority to bear upon his letter. His authority and honor reside in his being the brother of James and of Jesus—and thus a member of the holy family—and in his servant leadership, which the Lord exemplified. As the letter was being read to the church, the authority of Jude would have transformed it into a powerful word of exhortation. As was the expectation of his era, Jude did not assume that the church members would automatically lend him their ears and heed his message; rather, his aim was to demonstrate his worthiness to address them. When approaching the pulpit to preach, we cannot assume that we should be or will be heard simply because we preach the gospel. We are at a disadvantage because of the all too common television and movie stereotype of clergy as bald, middle-aged men who are out of touch and have no backbone. We also have to contend with the disheartening examples of televangelists who have publicly fallen from grace. Preaching is most effective when we bring authority or ethos to the pulpit that merits the attention and goodwill of our congregation. This authority may derive from association with a denominational body, from formal education, or from personal example of servant leadership and Christian virtues as witnessed and experienced by the congregation. This interdependence between the preacher’s authority and the authority of the message is a reminder of how important one’s own preparation and public walk are to the health of one’s ministry.

482

JUDE 1-2 REFLECTIONS 2. In a time of challenge by false teachers who could lead his church to destructive judgment, Jude pastorally reminds the church of the basics of its spiritual status as the new Israel, the new people of God. He stresses how much of that spiritual status results from God’s initiative, for it is God who called them, loves them, and keeps their salvation safe. Jude also prays that the blessings of mercy, peace, and love will be granted by God in abundance. Before he approaches the main problems, he gives the members of the church the broadest possible perspective or vision. He helps them to see their spiritual status and its blessings, to affirm who they are, and to muster their resources before discussing the threat posed by the false teachers. Jude provides us with a model for dealing positively with demoralizing situations in the church. Whether the church is faced with declining membership, infighting, or financial woes, we should affirm the spiritual blessings that are the bedrock of the faith and the mission to which that faith calls us. 3. Being called by God demands obedience in order to experience God’s love and to enable God to keep our salvation sure until its completion after this life. Being called is not a matter of sitting back and letting God shower us with love and serve us by working for our salvation. Rather, being called mandates our being obedient servants of Jesus Christ. Such obedience keeps us from falling in our ethical walk (v. 24) and keeps us within the love of God (v. 21) so that God can and will provide us with the blessing of a sure salvation (v. 2).

483

JUDE 3-4 A PETITION TO CONTEND FOR THE FAITH NRSV

NIV 3Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, | felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.

‘For certain men whose condemnation was written about? long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny

3Beloved, while eagerly preparing to write to

you about the salvation we share, I find it necessary to write and appeal to you to contend for

the faith that was once for all entrusted to the _ Saints. “For certain intruders have stolen in among you, people who long ago were designated for this condemnation as ungodly, who pervert the

grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.?

Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord. a4 Or men who were marked out for condemnation

aQOr the only Master and our Lord Jesus Christ

(COMMENTARY ude 3-4 is the body opening of the letter “in which the sender establishes common ground with the recipients and informs them of the main reason for writing. Here the common ground is the “salvation we share.” The main reason for writing is related as a petition, something common to Greco-Roman letter openings: “contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (v. 3). The writer petitions the church to remain faithful despite the presence of ungodly false teachers, who were foretold in prophecy (v. 4). From a rhetorical perspective, v. 3 is the exordium and v. 4 is the narratio. The exordium is an introduction that is designed to grab the attention and goodwill of the audience and to introduce the reasons for writing. The narratio follows the exordium and explains why the address is needed and outlines the main point(s) that the remainder of the letter will develop. Verse 4 presents the two main propositions to be developed: (1) The false teachers are ungodly and subject to judgment, and (2) they are the ungodly ones whose appearance and judgment in the last days have been foretold.

Verse 3. In his petition, the writer of Jude underscores the urgency of the situation presented by the false teachers. He mentions that he had intended to write (or perhaps had already begun to write) a letter about the salvation he shares with the church in the corporate body of Christ. Instead he has found it necessary to petition the church to contend for the faith, for the content of the gospel as preached and believed (Rom 10:8;

Gal 1:23). In the petition, “contending” (€TaywviCopat epagonizomai) and related metaphorical words in early Christian literature were borrowed from the jargon of Greek athletic events to compare the struggles of the moral life to an athletic contest (1. ‘Cor 9:24-27;-1 Vim Or12.°2 Tim, 4e7)\e Paul uses this athletic metaphor to describe his apostolic mission as a contest against opponents (Rom 15:30; Col 1:29-2:1), as well as to describe the mission of his co-workers (Phil 4:3; Col 4:12-13) and of all Christians against opposition (Phil 1:2730).!° Like Paul, the writer of Jude uses the contending metaphor to describe (1) the struggle 15. V. C. Pfitzner, Paul and the Agon Motif, NovTSup 16 (Leiden: E.

J. Brill, 1967).

484

JUDE 3-4 COMMENTARY between the gospel and the teachings of false teachers and (2) the moral contest that the antinomianism of these teachers has made more dif: ficult. The faith was entrusted to the saints, the first generation of Christians converted at the preaching of the apostles (vv. 17-18). “Entrust” (Tapadsidwpt paradido mi) and the reciprocal term “receive” (TapakapBdavw paralambano), which is not found here, are technical terms for handing on tradition. That tradition includes the apostles’ initial preaching of the gospel to a congregation as well as its initial instruction (1 Cor 11:2, 23; 15:1, 3; Gal 1:9; Phil 4:9; 1 Thess 2:13; 2 Thess 3:6). The faith was “once for all” entrusted to believers because its content cannot change. God’s action in Christ is once for all (Rom 6:10; Heb 9:12, 26-28; 10:10; 1 Pet 3:18) and need not (and in fact cannot) be presented in any other fashion (like that of the false teachers). Tradition was highly respected in both the Greco-Roman world and Judaism. The traditions of the group provided guidance for living in the present and gave the group its identity. Jude’s reference to contending for the apostolic preaching (which should be held sacrosanct) sends a strong signal that his petition is in response to a serious threat to the church and its identity. Verse 4. Here Jude gives the reason for his petition. Certain people have “stolen in” (NRSV) or “secretly slipped in” (NIV; tapetodv [v]w pareisdy[n/o ) to the church, which connotes that these people have something to hide. Their having come from outside the church suggests that they are itinerant prophets or teachers, who were common in the early church and who often caused confusion on doctrinal and ethical matters. Jude affirms the power and foreknowledge of God by identifying these infiltrators as the subject of ancient prophecy. The false teachers have not taken God by surprise, but “long ago were designated for this condemnation.” Jude may refer to preChristian prophecy, which he uses in the forms of OT types (vv. 5-7), and to apostolic prophecy (vv. 17-18; cf. Acts 20:29-30; 1 Tim 4:1-3; 2 Tim 3:13), to the prophecy of 7 Enoch 1:9 attributed “long ago” to Enoch (vv. 14-15), or to a Christian prophecy of unknown origin (v. 11). The “condemnation” (to kptya to krima) for which the false teachers have been designated is

485

given in vv. 5-19. This section uses OT types or examples and prophecies to condemn the false teachers as being ungodly and as perverting the grace of God, denying Jesus Christ, and thus subject to judgment. Within this condemnation the topics of being ungodly and being subject to judgment are central. As used in Jewish-Christian literature, to be “ungodly” (aceBeis asebveis) is to be irreverent toward God (manifested in immoral behavior and the rejection of the moral commandments), and to be subject to judgment (Rom 1:18). The false teachers are ungodly and condemnable for two related reasons. First, they pervert the grace of God into “licentiousness” (NRSV) or “license for immorality” (NIV; doédyeva aselgeia)—that is, immoral sexual excess. Apparently they interpret the grace of God to mean that they are free from the bonds of sexual morality. This “perverts” God’s grace; it moves it beyond accepted traditions (2 Macc 7:24; Gal 1:6). Second, the false teachers deny “our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.” “Master” (or “Sovereign,” NIV) may refer to either God or Jesus, but the latter is more likely, since Jude has presented himself as a slave of Jesus in v. 1. Second Peter 2:1, which depends on this verse, understands Jude’s referent to be to Jesus as-a master. The term “master” (Seomdtns despotes), a metaphor that would understand Jesus as a master who has bought Christians as his slaves (presumably through the shedding of his blood), was used to refer to the head of the Roman household, rulers like the Roman emperor, Greek deities, and God. By adding “only Master” to the title, Jude stresses the irony of the false teachers’ denial of Jesus Christ. If Jesus Christ is the only Master and Lord, how can anyone claiming to be Christian deny his authority? In the Mediterranean culture of Jude’s day, masters compelled honor from their slaves. A slave’s disobedience brought shame to the slave and dishonor to the master. Since the false teachers were accepted as Christians in the church being addressed, they probably did not explicitly deny Jesus Christ with some doctrinal formulation, but did so implicitly through their libertine behavior, which dishonored both them and Jesus (cf. Titus 1:16). These circumstances are indicated in v. 8, where Jude accuses them of both defiling the flesh and rejecting authority.

JUDE 3-4 REFLECTIONS

REFLECTIONS 1. Jude’s appeal to this church to contend for the faith is not a call to denigrate or abuse the false teachers or to form committees to discuss the problems they create. Such approaches cannot change the false teachers or prevent their teaching from taking further spiritual toll on the church. Rather, the church is to take the positive action of contending for the faith. Contending involves commitment to living according to what that faith proclaims, with the same dedication and drive that an athlete trains to win a sporting event. Contending involves building up the church in the faith (v. 20) and proclaiming the faith to those who are no longer contending for it in order to rescue them from judgment (vv. 22-23). Contending for the faith occurs in private and public prayer, in Bible study, in worship, and in outreach of any kind. Through these activities the truth and strength of the faith are established as faith transforms individuals, groups, and institutions. 2. Jude’s approach to dealing with false teachers also reminds us that a community of faith needs to be fully informed and aware of its faith if it is to contend for it. Jude’s primary reference to faith involves the apostolic preaching and the tradition based on that preaching that was taught to new converts in the early church. Today “the faith” includes the Bible and an enormous array of resources provided by church councils, the church fathers and mothers, theologians, scholars, and laity through the last two millennia. What portions of this material are held authoritative and to what degree and just how it helps to define “the faith” are understood differently by each Christian and by each Christian group. Christians should become familiar with what they and their affiliations affirm to be “the” faith. Such investigation will make living the Christian life an aware, informed, and purposeful walk. Such familiarity is a primary resource for living the Christian life and prevention for being led astray by attitudes and teachings promoted by a great variety of modern media outlets. Jude’s intolerance for what varies from the core of tradition cautions us in a relativistic and pluralistic age to be discriminating. Tolerance for variation from traditional doctrine and practice should not be extended without examining how these different teachings measure up to Scripture and to church tradition (as reinterpreted as much as possible without gender and cultural bias) and evaluating what impact they will have on the life and spiritual health of the faith community. The teaching ministry of the church does not have just an optional and ancillary role, but is especially vital to the witness and spiritual health of the church. 3. Jude also reminds us that the grace of God can be perverted when the moral precepts of the gospel are disregarded, especially those pertaining to sexual conduct. We can delude ourselves into thinking that sexual libertinism is compatible with salvation, when in reality it is a concession to the flesh and cultural attitudes and practices that are incompatible with a faith commitment. We may not be perverting the grace of God with any teachings that denigrate the value of moral behavior. However, our behavior may be perverting the grace of God, presuming that grace easily covers behaviors that we do not desire to submit to the scrutiny of the gospel because we do not want to forsake those behaviors and let Christ be Lord. 4. The opposite of confession is denial. Like the false teachers, we will probably not verbally mouth any denial of the lordship of Christ, but also like them, we may deny his lordship by our attitudes, words, and actions. The implication of denying Jesus Christ as Lord and Master is that we serve other lords and masters. Such denial places the person once more under servitude to sin, be it materialism, self-absorption, power, or a host of other common masters (Matt 6:24; Rom 6:12-23; Gal 4:3, 8-9; 2 Pet 2:19). At the time of judgment, a life lived in denial of Christ will receive his denial, because those who serve sin do not deserve the rewards of serving him (Matt 10:33; 2 Tim 2:12; cf. Mark 8:38).

486

JUDE 5-16 PROOF THAT THE FALSE TEACHERS ARE UNGODLY AND SUBJECT

TO JUDGMENT OVERVIEW

Je 5-16 forms the body middle of the ‘letter, which develops the topics and propositions of the body opening as well as introduces new material. It begins with a disclosure formula, “I desire to remind you.” The body middle develops two interrelated propositions: The false teachers are ungodly and subject to judgment, and they are the same ungodly teachers whose presence and judgment in the last days were foretold in prophecy (v. 4). The first proposition is developed with proofs from example (vv 5-10) and from prophecy (vv. 11-13), and the second is developed with a proof from prophecy (vv. 14-16). Jude reminds the church of previous

instruction delivered “once for all” by the apostles—that is, they are not in need of being supplemented by the teachings of the false teachers (vv. 3, 5, 17).!© He tries to persuade the church of the disadvantage, dishonor, and danger of following the false teachers, thus destroying their credibility. The body middle corresponds to the rhetorical probatio, which presents proofs to verify the facts and propositions of the narratio. 16. Inv. 5, some mss place “once for all” (amaé hapax) after “Lord” as if it pertained to the first example, the Israelites: “the Lord, who once for all saved a people” (NRSV). But the placement before “Lord” (“you are fully informed once for all”; cf. NIV) is more likely the original reading. It parallels v. 3, where faith was “once for all” (Aapax) entrusted to the saints. See Carroll D. Osburn, “The Text of Jude 5,” Bib 62 (1981) 107-15.

JUDE 5-10, PROOF FROM OLD TESTAMENT EXAMPLES NV

NRSV 5Now I desire to remind you, though you are fully informed, that the Lord, who once for all saved? a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. °And the angels who did not keep their own position, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal

5Though you already know all this, | want to

remind you that the Lord? delivered his people

out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe. ‘And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home—these he has kept indarkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. 7In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment

chains in deepest darkness for the judgment of the great day. 7Likewise, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

of eternal fire.

aOther ancient authorities read though you were once for all fully informed, that Jesus (or Joshua) who saved. 6Gk went after other

a5 Some early manuscripts Jesus

flesh

487

JUDE 5-10 NRSV

NIV

8Yet in the same way these dreamers also defile the flesh, reject authority, and slander the glorious ones.? °But when the archangel Michael contended with the devil and disputed about the body of Moses, he did not dare to bring a condemnation of slander? against him, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!” !°But these people slander whatever they do not understand, and they are destroyed by those things that, like irrational animals, they know by instinct.

8In the very same way, these dreamers pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings. °But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him, but said, “The Lord re-

buke you!” 'Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and

what things they do understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals—these are the very things that destroy them.

aOr angels, Gk glories

6Or condemnation for blasphemy

(COMMENTARY 4:11). The wilderness generation was also used as an example that disbelief expresses itself in disobedience (Deut 9:23-24; Ps 106:24-27; Heb 3:16-19). This example implicitly teaches that Christians, like the wilderness generation, can lose their salvation and become the object of judgment for their unbelief and disobedience. This is the counterpart to being “kept” by God until salvation is completed at the parousia (vv. 1, 24) by “keeping” in his love through obedience (v. 21). By not “keeping” in God’s love through obedience, Christians work against God’s effort to keep them for salvation and thereby expose themselves to judg-

Jude 5-10 is a proof that the false teachers are ungodly and thus subject to judgment. It is composed of three OT examples or types of the ungodly, their sins, and their judgments (vv. 5-7), a threefold application to the false teachers (v. 8), and amplification of the proof by comparing the false teachers with the ungodly actions of the devil (vv. 9-10). Verses 5-7. The three examples are the Israelites in the wilderness (v. 5), the fallen angels or watchers (v. 6), and Sodom and Gomorrah (v. 7). These three examples were often used together in Jewish and Christian writings as proof that ungodly behavior brings God’s judgment (Sir 16:710; CD 2:17-3:12; 3 Macc 2:4-7; 2 Pet 2:4-104). Early Christianity also often compared false teachers with the sinners of the OT (2 Tim 3:8-9; Rev 2:14, 20). The examples are given out of chronological order, illustrating Jude’s love of climax. The punishment increasingly becomes more specific and more intense—from destruction in this life by natural death to being captured in chains until final judgment to being punished in eternal fire. The first example of the ungodly who were judged is the Israelites in the wilderness, who, hearing the report of the spies on the power of the inhabitants of Canaan, refused to enter the land because they did not believe that God had the power to fulfill the promise to give them the land. Those persons twenty years old and over died in the wilderness, except Joshua and Caleb, who believed (Numbers 14; 26:64-65; Heb 3:7—

ment. The second example of the ungodly who were judged are the evil angels of Gen 6:1-4. These angels became known as the “watchers” in Jewish tradition. They left their heavenly places of rule in order to have sexual union with human females, thus corrupting humanity with their teachings and precipitating the flood (cf. 1 Pet 3:19-20; 2 Pet 2:4). Jude depends on this tradition as developed in / Enoch 6-19 (especially chap. 10), where the watchers are bound by the archangel Michael and are placed in darkness under the earth until the day of judgment, when they will be transferred to the fires of Gehenna. Jude’s message is that the false teachers also corrupt the faithful with illicit sex and false teachings (vv. 8, 18); and like the evil angels, they will be so judged. Verse 6 is reiterated and amplified in v. 13, where the false teachers are explicitly compared to the evil angels {i.e., “wandering stars”)

488

JUDE 5-10 COMMENTARY and are said to share the same judgment of deepest darkness. The third example is the premier example of sin and divine judgment in Jewish and Christian literature: Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 19:1-29). For Jude’s audience, these cities would still have served as an example of the judgment for sin, not only because they had become part of tradition, but also because they were thought to be observable. The hot springs and sulfur deposits of the region south of the Dead Sea were considered to be the smoldering ruins of those cities.!” At least three interrelated sins are involved in the example of Sodom and Gomorrah. One is the sin of inhospitality through attempted violence. In the ancient world, hospitality was a virtue with many social implications. The attempt of the men to rape Lot’s two guests was an obvious and grave violation of hospitality. Rabbinic tradition also emphasized inhospitality in its interpretation of the text. Jesus partially interpreted the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah as the sin of refusing to accept those bearing God’s Word, which involves neglect of hospitality as well (Matt 10:14-15; 11:23-24; Luke 10:12). A second sin is that of homosexual practice and rape. The male inhabitants of the city were seeking to rape the two angels, who appeared as men, and even threatened Lot himself with the same (Gen 19:5, 9). Homosexual practice is forbidden in the holiness code of Leviticus (Lev 18:22; 20:13). Jewish pseudepigraphical writings emphasize this aspect of the behavior of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah. The author of 2 Peter, who depends on this passage of Jude, emphasizes the lawlessness of the inhabitants (2 Pet 2:8). A third sin, and the one most in view here, is that of humanity’s seeking sexual intercourse with angels—that is, members of another level of creation. Jude says that the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah were “going after different flesh” (“pursued unnatural lust,” NRSV; “perversion,” NIV). This does not refer to other human flesh, male or female, for that would not be different in kind. Also, this sin is indicated by the contrast Jude makes with the previous example. In the previous example, angels lusted after humans, and here humans lust after angels. Both examples teach

that violating the order for creation established by God leads to the judgment of eternal fire. This is a real concern for Jude, for in v. 23 he urges the church to “snatch from the fire” those who follow the false teachers and violate God’s established moral order, subjecting themselves to the judgment of the parousia. Verse 8. The three examples of the ungodly who were judged are summarized and applied to the false teachers in order to prove that they “in the very same way” are ungodly and subject to judgment. There is a note of disbelief here that even with these examples of sinners and judgment the false teachers continue to act the same way! Like the watchers and the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, the false teachers defile the flesh (sexual impurity). Like the wilderness generation, the watchers, and the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, the false teachers reject divine authority (cf. vv. 4-5). Like the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, they slander the glorious ones (angels), probably those who gave, guard, and watch over the observance of the law of Moses and uphold the created order (Acts 7:38, 53; Heb 2:2). Perhaps these angels are pictured as accusing the false teachers of antinomianism.

In making his application Jude calls the false teachers “dreamers” (EvutvidCowar enypniazomai). This term refers to the prophetic experience of receiving revelatory dreams and is usually used of false prophets in the OT (Deut 13212274,70-LXX Isa 56:10 EXX: Jer 23:25:-36:8 LXX). Apparently the false teachers grounded the authority for their antinomian behavior in personal revelations. However, Jude claims that their behavior clearly shows that their revelations are false (cf. v. 19). Verses 9-10. Jude magnifies his application with a strong contrast. As told in the lost Jewish pseudepigraphical work the 7estament of Moses, the devil disputed with the archangel Michael for the body of Moses. The devil accused Moses of murdering the Egyptian (Exod 2:11-12) and thus claimed that Moses was undeserving of an honorable burial by Michael. The archangel Michael did not dare act on his own authority to rebuke the devil for slandering Moses; rather, he invoked God’s authority as the only one who could judge 18. See also Jub. 1:27-29; Josephus Antiquities of the Jews 15.136; Herm. Sim. 8:3:3.

17. See Josephus The Jewish War 4.483; Philo Moses 2.56.

489

JUDE 5-10 COMMENTARY ior is outrageous in the light of the reticence of the vastly more powerful archangel Michael to accuse the devil. Jude implies that the false teachers must answer to God’s authority and to those, like the angels, who have been entrusted to uphold it. Defiling the flesh based on the authority of one’s own personal revelation is akin to an irrational animal’s acting upon instinct, which will result in its destruction.

the devil for slander (v. 9). This Michael did by quoting Zech 3:2, “The Lord rebuke you!” which comes from God’s rebuke of the devil’s accusation of the high priest Joshua. In contrast, by rejecting divine authority and slandering the good angelic guardians of the Mosaic law who accuse them of antinomianism {v. 8), the false teachers flagrantly act illegitimately as independent authorities. Such arrogant behav-

REFLECTIONS 1. When presented with teachings and behaviors at odds with the standards of apostolic tradition, Jude does not hesitate to confront them, because they pose a threat to the spiritual lives of his church. However, he does not confront them primarily with his authority as a pastor. His authority might be challenged, as the false teachers no doubt had already done in gathering a following from within the church. Rather, Jude confronts the false teachers and their doctrine with the authority of the Old Testament, with traditions held authoritative by the church, and with apostolic preaching and tradition. These are the authorities that convinced the church members to make a faith commitment in the first place. These are the authorities that point to the judgment of God upon the ungodliness of the false teachers. Again we see the importance of grounding a faith community in biblical traditions, upon which faith commitment has been made, and upon the traditions that have established the church as a faith community. These are vital resources that help a church to maintain perspective in a world of competing allegiances, doctrines, and behaviors. 2. Although the three examples of ungodly persons in this section prove mainly that the ungodly are in the end judged, there is another implicit message in the example of the wilderness generation. Membership in the people of God depends on obedience and keeping the faith. There is such a thing as being thrown out of the family of God, of being disinherited. “Once saved, always saved” is not the motto of Jude. Those “once saved, once for all instructed” can stop relying on the promises of God and God’s power to fulfill them. The “once saved” can reject divine authority, can disbelieve, and can transgress the order of creation with sexual impurity and violence, guided by mere instinct. They can become subject to divine judgment, like the watchers and the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. 3. This passage, especially v. 7, has been an important element in the ongoing discussion of the Christian response to homosexuality. As the commentary points out, homosexual practice is at least one of the sins in view in Jude’s use of the example of Sodom and Gomorrah. It is currently argued that sex between members of the same sex is not at variance with Christian teaching on morality. Proponents point to the model of homosexuality in the Greco-Roman era as oppressive—telationships between an older, powerful man who dominated a younger, powerless man. This type of relationship, it is claimed, is the target of biblical prohibitions against homosexuality, and not the mutual, loving relationships one might think of today. On the one hand it must be acknowledged that the sexual practice in view in Jude is on one level rape, which is always a sin. On the other hand, Jude uses the example of the behavior of Sodom and Gomorrah in general as worthy of judgment. The threat of the similar illicit sexual behavior of the false teachers is one reason why Jude rallies the churches to contend for the faith. As a scriptural text, Jude is part of the bedrock upon which Christian ethics have been based and should not be lightly dismissed from theological debates about homosexuality.

490

JUDE 11-13

ohn ba 11-13, PROOF FROM ee Sele N RSV

a

- “Woe to then They.have taken the way of Cain; ‘they hhave rushed for profit into Balaam’s error, they have been es in Korah’s ee — - 12These men are hemshe at your love 1a eating with you without the slightest qualm— shepherds who feed only themselves. They are

Clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted—twice ‘dead. They are wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shame; wandering stars, for whom black-

est darkness has been reserved forever.

"Woe to them! For theyg go the way of Cain,and abandon themselves to Balaam’s error for the sake of gain, and perish in Korah’s rebellion. These are blemishes? on your love- feasts,while they feast with you without fear, feeding themselves.° They are waterless clouds carried along by the winds;

autumn trees without fruit, twice dead, uprooted; \3wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of

their own shame; wandering stars, for whom the : deepest. darkness has been Teserved forever. — 4aOr reefs themselves

Or without fear. Theyare® shepherds who care onlfor

(COMMENTARY The second proof that the false teachers are ungodly and subject to judgment is found in wv. 11-13. Like the first proof (vv. 5-10), three examples of ungodly persons are presented (here as a prophecy, v. 11), followed by application to the false teachers (vv. 12-13). Verse 11. Whereas in the first proof the false teachers are compared with three groups of ungodly persons, here they are portrayed in terms of individual ungodly persons from the OT. This makes the accusation of ungodliness more specific. This verse is a prophecy in the form of a woe oracle, a form used by OT prophets to specify sins and to pronounce God’s judgment upon them. That it is an actual prophecy and not simply a denunciation in the form of a woe oracle is indicated by the use of verbs in the past tense (aorist). The prophet used the past tense because he was so sure the prophecy would be fulfilled. The origin of this prophecy is unknown, whether an early Christian prophet or Jude himself. On the one hand, Jude is proving that the condemnation of false teachers was “long ago designated” (v. 4), which indicates that the prophecy may have originated with an early Christian prophet from the past. On the other hand, this prophecy has no preface, and Jude usually prefaces prophecies that he quotes from others (vv. 14, 17). This points to the prophecy’s having eo nated with Jude.

The prophecy presents three OT examples of ungodly persons who led others into sin: Cain, Balaam, and Korah. Cain is portrayed as a murderer in the OT (Gen 4:1-16), and in Jewish tradition he is the archetypal sinner, exemplifying the sins of envy, greed, and hatred. By his sins

he taught others to sin.!? “Walking in the way” is a metaphor for the ethical life. Depending on which traditions he is drawing upon, by acknowledging that the false teachers “go the way of Cain” or have “taken the way of Cain,” Jude may be claiming that they are ungodly, greedy, lustful (as in vv. 16, 18), and instructors of others in sin. Although in the biblical account Balaam refuses Balak’s temptation to curse Israel for money (Num 22:18; 24:13), Jewish tradition assumed that he was a greedy false prophet who did set out to curse Israel and later persuaded Balak to lead Israel into sexual sin and idolatry (Rev 2:14).2° By describing the false teachers as hoping to profit from Balaam’s error, Jude accuses them of being false prophets (cf. vv. 8, 19) who lead the church into sexual sin (vv. 4, 6-8, 10, 15-16, 18-19) for financial reward (cf. v. 16). Korah led a rebellion against the authority of Moses. His punishment was to be swallowed by 19. Josephus Antiquities of the Jews 1.52-66; Philo On the Posterity and Exile of Cain 38-39. 20. Philo Moses 1.266-268. See also Philo Moses 1.295-299; Josephus Antiquities of the Jews 4.126-30.

49]

_ JUDE 11-13 COMMENTARY the heavens. They are derived from / Enoch 2:1-5:4, where nature, which follows the laws God has established for it, is contrasted with the wicked, who do not, and / Enoch 80:2-8, in which nature transgresses those laws and misleads the wicked in the last days. These metaphors point out that the words and deeds of these teachers show them to be false. “Waterless clouds carried along by the winds” alludes to Prov 25:14: “Like clouds and wind without rain/ is one who boasts of a gift never given” (NRSV). The metaphor implies that the false teachers cannot deliver on their teachings or promises. “Autumn trees without fruit, twice dead, uprooted” relies on the common biblical metaphor of a tree and its fruit, often extended to describe the fate of those who do not bear spiritual fruit. Here the extended metaphor implies that the false teachers will not produce any benefit for the church. Like trees that do not produce good fruit, the wicked will be uprooted and destroyed (Prov 2:22), here by the second death (“twice dead”). The second death is the fate of those who do not have Christ as their advocate at the final judgment (Rev 2:11; 20°01 4: 2120): The metaphor “wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame” is an allusion to Isa 57:20:

the earth, going down to Sheol alive (Num 16:135; 26:9-10). In tradition he is portrayed as a schismatic?! and the primary example of an antinomian heretic who tried to modify the law of Moses.”* By declaring that the false teachers will “perish in Korah’s rebellion,” the writer of Jude is probably accusing them of having rebelled against the authority of the Mosaic law (cf. v. 8, where they rebel against the angelic guardians of the law) and of Christ himself (v. 4), and of being schismatic (cf. v. 19) and subject to judgment. To be in chronological order, the example of Korah should precede that of Balaam, but Jude may have placed it last because it is such a striking example of punishment that follows judgment. Verses 12-13. The application of the prophecy is composed of six metaphors that emphasize the sinful nature of the false teachers and undermine their claims to be leaders and teachers. First, they are blemishes or spots (omtAddes_ spilades) at the love feasts, or agape meals (cf. 2 Pet 2:13). They pollute the holiness of the fellowship meals because their participation amounts to feasting without reverence or fear or “eating with you without the slightest qualm,” an outgrowth of their functioning on the level of animal instinct and solely focusing on satisfying their hunger {v. 10; 1 Cor 11:20-24, 33-34). “Blemish” may also be translated metaphorically as “reef” with the understanding that the false teachers are as dangerous to the spiritual well-being of the church as reefs are dangerous to ships. Second, they “shepherd themselves.” The idea of “feeding” that is present in the NRSV and the NIV translations is inadequate, for it brings out only one aspect of shepherding. Shepherding was a commonly used metaphor for leadership in Judaism and Christianity. The writer of Jude, then, may be alluding to Ezek 34:2, which holds the leadership of Judah (“shepherds”) accountable for enjoying the benefits of leadership, but not aiding the people (cf. Isa 56:11). While the false teachers claim leadership status, they do not tend to the church’s welfare but their own gain (cf. v. 16). The remaining four metaphors are drawn from the four regions of creation: sky, earth, sea, and

But the wicked are like the tossing sea that cannot keep still; its waters toss up mire and mud. (NRSV)

Like the sea, which tosses up debris on the beach, the false teachers produce only what is shameful. “Wandering stars, for whom the deepest darkness has been reserved forever” alludes to 7 Enoch 18:13-16; 21:1-6; 83-88 (esp. 1 Enoch 88:1-3) and compares the false teachers with the watchers of Gen 4:1-6 (cf. v. 6), who are represented as wandering stars who disobeyed God and were cast from heaven down into the dark abyss. Confinement to “deepest/blackest darkness” (0 Cobos Tod akdtous ho zophos tou skotous) is, along with consignment to fire, a form of eternal judgment in Jewish tradition (Tob 14:10; 7 Enoch 63:6).

21. 1 Clement 51:1-4. 22. Bib. Ant. 16:1.

492

_JUDE 11-13 REFLECTIONS |

REFLECTIONS 1. The use of extra-biblical Jewish tradition in the prophecy of Jude 11 may be disturbing to some readers because the accounts of those mentioned from the OT have been elaborated in Jewish tradition without any corroboration from the OT. Such use of extra-biblical sources from tradition has various origins. For example, biblical narratives can be connected with extra-biblical sources and then interpreted in the light of shared words or themes. Sometimes the use of extra-biblical tradition is.extensive. For example, in the book of Revelation, the idea of the antichrist arose from extra-biblical tradition spanning millennia. The image incorporates the legends of Leviathan the chaos monster from Mesopotamian myth and Jewish accounts of the deeds of Antiochus IV Epiphanes of the Maccabean era and the Roman Emperor Nero, both of whom were portrayed as the epitome of evil. For the writer of Jude and other writers to have relied on extra-biblical traditions may seem to some readers today to detract from the truth of the Bible. Yet we need to remember that the elaboration of the received tradition by these Jewish writers was governed by the usefulness of this in understanding God’s nature and will for a covenant people. The same governing principle was used for the gathering and preservation of the biblical tradition itself. We need to look beyond the elaborated tradition to determine the point that those appropriating it, like the writer of Jude, were trying to make about God. The canonization of the Epistle of Jude indicates that its contents are authoritative regardless of its sources. 2. The agape meal was a fellowship meal held by the first-century church, of which the eucharist was the final portion (Acts 2:46-47). It was patterned on the Passover meal, which Jesus celebrated with his disciples. There Jesus instituted the eucharist as a final element of the meal. As Paul found out, the agape meal was subject to abuse if the entire affair was used only to satisfy hunger or to display wealth and status (1 Cor 11:17-34). Jude reminds us that the purity of a church can be compromised by those who no longer place themselves under the lordship of Christ and have no concern about the spiritual lives of others with whom they commune.

3. This passage provides a synopsis of just what it means to fail as a leader in the church: a personal life characterized by envy, jealousy, and lust; the motivation for ministry rooted in the love of money and material gain; rebellion against scriptural and legitimate church authority; posing a threat to the spiritual well-being of the church by corrupt personal teaching and example; focusing on physical gratification rather than spiritual nourishment; picking up the paycheck without benefit to the church providing it; making great promises and never delivering on them; and producing no spiritual fruit within one’s personal or church life. This type of destructive leadership is ultimately rooted, as it was for the false teachers of Jude, in resisting the lordship of Jesus Christ and making personal and natural inclinations the sole authority in one’s life.

Wee 14-16, PROOP PROM THE PROPHECY ORGPENOCH NIV

NRSV

'4Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: “See, the Lord is coming with

14It was also about these that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, say-

__ing, “See, the Lord is coming? with ten thousands

thousands upon thousands of his holy ones “to

of his holy ones, '°to execute judgment on all,

judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of

all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly — «Gk came 493

JUDE 14-16 NIV .

:

way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” '“These men are grumblers and faultfinders; they follow their own evil

desires; they boast about themselves and flatter others for their own advantage.

NRSV and to convict everyone of all the deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that

ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” ‘oThese are grumblers and malcontents; they indulge their own lusts; they are bombastic in speech, flattering people to their own advantage.

(COMMENTARY Verses 14-16 are proof that the false teachers are the ungodly prophets who were prophesied to appear and who will be subject to judgment in the last days. The proof is comprised of the prophecy of / Enoch 1:9 (vv. 14-15) and the application of that prophecy to the false teachers (v. 16). Jude now provides a prophecy that the false teachers, with their rebellious words and licentious deeds, were designated for condemnation “long ago” (v. 4). First Enoch portrays Enoch, in the seventh generation since Adam (Gen 5:2124), as prophesying the judgment of the false teachers for all their deeds and words against the Lord. The prophecy originally referred to God’s coming with an army of angels (“holy ones”) in apocalyptic judgment, but by inserting the term “Lord” (ktp.os kyrios), Jude has made the prophecy refer to Christ’s parousia, when he will return with his angels to execute judgment. The fourfold occurrence of the word “all” (or “everyone” [11a@s pas]) in the quotation effectively emphasizes the complete scope of judgment: It is upon all the false teachers for their rebellious words and ungodly acts. In v. 16 the application of the prophecy explicates both the rebellious words and the ungodly

deeds of the false teachers, making it clear how easily they can be identified as the ungodly of prophecy. Their designation as “grumblers,” “malcontents,” and “faultfinders” recalls rebellion against divine authority. “Grumblers” characterizes the wilderness generation (Exod 16:1-12; 1 Cor 10:10), both for the incident at Kadesh, referred to in v. 5 (Num 14:2, 27, 29, 36), and Korah’s rebellion, referred to in v. 11 (Num 16:11). These teachers “indulge their own lusts” and “follow their own evil desires,” like the Sodomites (v. 11). The description that “their mouths speak bombastic words” (“boast,” NIV) may be derived from / Enoch 1:9 or 5:4, which pertains to the ungodly who speak against the commandments and authority of God. This would be Jude’s attempt to tie prophecy and application together and define the nature of rebellious speech. “Flattering people to their own advantage” is probably a reference to teaching what others want to hear (i.e., freedom from moral constraint) in order to remain in their favor and retain their financial support.”° 23. R.J. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, WBC 50 (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983) 99-100.

REFLECTIONS 1. One question that frequently arises is, “Why does Jude quote a prophecy that was not in the Old Testament, especially one that did not originate with the writer to whom it is attributed?” By quoting a prophecy and understanding it as having been fulfilled in the false teachers, Jude understands that prophecy to have been inspired. It must be remembered that our current canon of Scripture did not exist in Jude’s day. Both Jewish and early Christian communities valued literature that was held to be authoritative, but not all such works eventually were judged to be canonical. Also, Jude’s modifications of the text of 7 Enoch to

__ JUDE 14-16 REFLECTIONS make it apply to Jesus is akin to a common practice in Jude’s time of making Old Testament texts originally referring to God’s coming in the day of the Lord in judgment refer to the coming of Jesus at the parousia. 2. The judgment that Jude sets forth is against both word and deed. These ungodly words are not limited to insults spoken against Jesus directly, but include any speech that is not held subject to his lordship and authority. Grumbling against the direction God may be providing (like the wilderness generation), speaking and teaching to please others rather than being faithful to the commandments of God, and following personal desires (often sexual) wherever they lead are actions that in essence say to God, “I am my own authority; I am my own god.” Such spurning of Christ may be motivated by greed and power, as in the case of the false teachers here, or simply by ignorance of God’s claims on our lives. In many cases, spurning Christ’s lordship boils down to fear of what he has in store for us if he is truly Lord of our lives. Any lessening of our control over our lives frightens us. We often find ourselves saying that we have to “get our lives under control,” and not that “our lives are under too much control.” The unknown adventure on which Christ will lead us according to the plan he has for our lives, in which we are not the guide, may take us outside the comfortable, the familiar, and the enjoyable. But under his lordship our lives will be under control, even if we cannot always see where his directions will lead us. We may leave the comfortable and the familiar, but we will experience what is purposeful and fulfilling, not only for ourselves as we exercise our gifts, but also for the working of the kingdom on earth.

495

JUDE 17-23 AN APOSTOLIC PROPHECY AND INSTRUCTION ON HOW TO RESPOND TO FALSE TEACHERS NIV

NRSV

“But, dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. '*They said to

17But you, beloved, must remember the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; '8for they said to you, “In the last time there will be scoffers, indulging their own ungodly lusts.” 'It is these worldly people, devoid of the Spirit, who are causing divisions. ?°But you, beloved, build yourselves up on your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit; ?'keep yourselves in the love of God; look forward to the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to? eternal life. #And have mercy on some who are wavering; **save others

you, “In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.” !°These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit. But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the Holy Spirit. 21\Keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life. 22Be merciful to those who doubt; *%snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.

by snatching them out of the fire; and have mercy on still others with fear, hating even the tunic defiled by their bodies.° aGk Christ to Gk by the flesh. The Greek text of verses 22-23 is uncertain at several points

(COMMENTARY fold application to the false teachers (v. 19). At that time the most outstanding resource in argumentation was often kept until the closing of an address, and this prophecy of the church’s apostles is perhaps the strongest of Jude’s resources. The summary of apostolic prophecies is similar to other summaries found throughout the NT concerning the appearance of false teachers and false prophets in the last days (Matt 7:15-20; 24:11 par. Mark 13:22; Acts 20:29-30; 1 Tim A:1-3; Z Tim’ 3:1: 4:3-4; 2 Pet:3:3)), Inthe: last time there will be scoffers, indulging their own ungodly lusts” (v. 18). “Scoffers” (Euttatktat empaiktai) is a strong derogatory term denoting mockery of religion or of the righteous by attitude, word, or deed. It describes the false teachers’ rejection of divine authority and dismissal of ethical constraints, which are manifested in indul-

Verses 17-23 comprise the letter’s closing as indicated by the direct address and the disclosure formula beginning in v. 17: “But you, beloved, must remember.” The closing reiterates and emphasizes what has been said and urges the recipients to attend to and take responsibility for the matters discussed. The letter closing corresponds to the rhetorical peroratio, the closing of an address, which both repeats the main points that have been made and appeals to the emotion of the recipients to help ensure that they will act as desired. Verses 17-19. Jude’s reiteration takes the form of a strong proof that the false teachers are ungodly. It is comprised of a “summary” prophecy from the preaching of the apostles to the church at its founding that in the last days ungodly people will appear (vv. 17-18) and the prophecy’s three-

496

JUDE 17-23 COMMENTARY gence in ungodly lusts or desires (vv. 4, 6-8, 10-49! 15-16). In the threefold application of the prophecy, the

Second, they should “pray in the Holy Spirit,” which refers to prayer under the inspiration and control of the Holy Spirit, including charismatic prayer in which the Holy Spirit supplies the

statement “They are those causing divisions” recalls the example the Israelites “who follow immediately

of Korah, who incited division among (v. 11). “Worldly people” or those mere natural instincts” are described as being “devoid of the Spirit.” The

words.** This exhortation contrasts the church

false teachers have physical life without the gift of the Holy Spirit (cf. 1 Cor 2:14). The identification reiterates Jude’s claim that the false teachers are “dreamers” and further refutes their claim that their visions derive from the Spirit (v. 8). This combination of being denied a claim to the Spirit and creating divisions implies that the factions the false teachers create are also devoid of the Spirit. Verses 20-23. Jude has worked to persuade the church that the false teachers are ungodly and

that they are the ungodly of prophecy (vv. 4-16), and he has reiterated his message (vv. 17-19). Here he turns to elaborate just what it means “to contend for the faith” (v. 3)—that is, how to work as a church against the ungodly influence of the false teachers. His strategy for contending for the faith is found in seven exhortations. The first four, common to early Christian instruction, exhort the faithful to do what they can for themselves (vv. 20-21). The remaining three, which allude to Zech 3:2-4, exhort the faithful to aid those who have fallen prey to the false teachers (vv. 22-23). In these exhortations, Jude clearly believes that he and the church are living in the last days, for the presence of the false teachers fulfills eschatological prophecy. This expectation adds urgency to the exhortations, for the time to act is short before the parousia judgment transpires. In the four exhortations to the faithful to do

what they can for themselves (vv. 20-21), Jude first advises them to “build yourselves up on your most holy faith.” He pictures the faithful church as a temple where members are a holy priesthood offering spiritual sacrifices to God (Eph 2:20-22; 1 Pet 2:5). The “holy faith” includes moral instruction, and is in sharp contrast to the antinomian teaching of the false teachers, which produces an ungodly life-style. Members of this church build up one another on faith by looking out for their spiritual welfare, in contrast to the false teachers, who divide and tear down the church (v. 19).

that is able to pray in the Spirit with the false teachers, who may claim to possess the Spirit but are, in fact, devoid of it (vv. 8, 19). Third, he exhorts, “Keep yourselves in the love of God.” This refers to God’s love for us (NIV), and not to our love for God (v. 21). Our proper response is to obey God and remain in God’s love (John 15:9-10; 1 John 4:16). Our moral effort works in conjunction with God, who keeps the Christian spiritually safe until the parousia (vv. 2, 24). This stands in contrast to the false teachers, who, like the watchers, are kept for deepest darkness (vv. 6, 13). The fourth exhortation is for them to “look forward to the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life.” Here Jude provides the community with the basis for eschatological hope—the imminent parousia when Christ will bestow the mercy of eternal life upon the faithful (vv. 2, 21) and judgment upon the ungodly (vv. 14-15). The remaining exhortations are to the faithful and to those who follow the false teachers (vv. 22-23). First, they should “have mercy on some who are wavering” or who “doubt.” The faithful are to offer those who have followed the false teachers the same mercy that they themselves expect to receive at the parousia (vv. 2, 21), with the hope of saving them from judgment {v. 23). Besides “waver” or “doubt,” the verb Stakptvw (diakrino )may also be translated “dispute”; thus translated, this exhortation would refer to those who defend their newly accepted doctrine when confronted by the faithful. That the faithful should “save others by snatching them out of the fire” (cf. Zech 3:2) implies that the false teachers and their followers are in danger of the punishment of eternal fire (v. 7), which will befall the ungodly at the imminent parousia (vv. 10, 12-13, 14-15). 24. J. D. G. Dunn, Jesus and the Spirit (Philadelphia: Westminster,

1975) 246. 25. Verses 22-23 have numerous textual variants. The variants generlly refer to either two or three parties, the three-party reading being referred because ofJude’s predilection for triple expression. This reading as been followed by both the NRSV and the NIV. For a clear, thorough iscussion, see Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, WBC, 108-11; Sakae Kubo, 2 ap'd “Jude 22-23: Two-division Form or Three?” in New Testament Textual Criticism, ed. E.J. Epp and G. D. Fee (Oxford: Clarendon, 1981) 239-53; S. C. Winter, “Jude 22-23: A Note on the Text and Translation,” H7R 87 1994) 215-22.

497

JUDE 17-23 COMMENTARY that contrasts the false teachers’ fearless attitude toward God (v. 12). The faithful must take as much care in dealing with false teachers as they would in avoiding contact with clothing soiled by human excrement. At baptism, early Christians put on new linen clothes to symbolize purity and were not expected ever again to don the soiled clothes of the flesh, which symbolize sin (Rev 3:4).

Third, the exhortation to “have mercy on still others with fear, hating even the tunic defiled by their bodies” (NRSV; “clothing stained by corrupted flesh,” NIV; cf. Zech 3:3-4) warns the faithful that, while associating with the false teachers and their followers, they must be fearful of being spiritually polluted by them (vv. 8, 12), especially by the tempting sins of the flesh, which these people indulge (vv. 6-8, 10, 16, 18). More broadly, they are to fear God, who judges—a fear

REFLECTIONS 1. A major strategy in the struggle against antinomian and immoral attitudes and behavior is not simply to denounce them, but to fortify personal and community holiness and promote spiritual growth. The plan is to keep within the love of God through obedience (v. 21) and not fail in the moral walk (v. 24). The desire to remain in the love of God and to obtain the full measure of salvation in eternal life through the mercy of Jesus Christ is a motivating factor in obedience to God’s commandments. 2. Jude combines a strong condemnation of sin with a concern for the restoration of fallen Christians. He points out that mercy should pour forth from the community toward those Christians who have strayed. This mercy is rooted in the mercy that faithful Christians themselves enjoy from God (v. 2) and expect to receive in full at the parousia (v. 21). Having experienced the mercy of God, Christians should be willing to extend that mercy to others. The extension of mercy is motivated by concern for the eternal status of erring brothers and sisters. 3. Jude is concerned about the contagion of sin and remaining pure from it (vv. 12, 23-24). Being prepared for the judgment of Christ requires moral purity, being spotless and blameless (Eph 1:4; Phil 2:15). False teachers are impure because they follow the path set for them by their instincts (v. 10) and passions (vv. 16, 18). In helping those who follow the false teachers, the faithful must be careful not to be contaminated by sin themselves (vv. 23-24). We cannot underestimate the temptation posed by sin because it appeals to the strong forces of our natural drives and passions, which always seek expression. 4. We all try not to stick our noses in other people’s business, but Jude reminds us by his admonitions in vv. 20-23 that looking out for the welfare of other Christians is our business. This may be the positive business of building one another up as a community in which each is looking out for the other as well as for self, but it may also include stepping in to help those who have veered from the path of faith in word or deed. The motivation for our commitment to the spiritual welfare of others is in part our concern for their eternal status and the purity of the community as a whole. The New Testament teaches us to lovingly confront brothers and sisters who have strayed (Luke 17:3; 2 Thess 3:14-15; 1 Tim 5:20; Jas 5:19-20), even instructing us on the procedure (Matt 18:15-17; Titus 3:10-11) while warning us to be careful not to fall into sin ourselves in the process (Gal 6:1).

5. Several questions arise here. If Jude is assuming from prophecy, both here and in wv. 14-16, that he and his community are living in the last days, did he falsely apply those prophecies? Was he wrong? In the company of the Christians of the early church, Jude was working with a vital expectation of the imminent, dramatic, and visible return of Christ. This

498

JUDE 17-23 REFLECTIONS expectation was based in part on sayings of Jesus that can be understood to infer that the parousia would occur within the lifetime of the apostolic generation (e.g., Mark 8:38-9:1; 14:62). Even though this expectation proved to be overly optimistic, our need to conduct our lives in the light of the judgment of the parousia remains vital. This is because Christian ethics are founded on the revealed nature, will, and promises of God, which are not affected by the timing of the parousia.

499

JUDE 24-25 “PAE erTER’CCLOSING”"AS ‘A POXOLOGY. NIV

NRSV

24To him who is able to keep you from falling

24Now to him who is able to keep you from falling, and to make you stand without blemish

and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy— *to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.

in the presence of his glory with rejoicing, to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, power, and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.

(COMMENTARY ather than conclude his letter with the _ usual letter closing, personal greetings, or benedictions, typical of other NT letters, Jude uses a doxology. This is appropriate, considering that the letter would probably have been read to the people gathered for worship. The doxology reminds the church of God and Christ and of the Christian’s future hope. It provides a perspective for the entire letter and motivation to respond as Jude has advised. It functions like the rhetorical peroratio of a speech in reiterating topics (keeping, ethical purity, and authority of God and Christ) and appealing to audience emotion. Verse 24. This verse portrays the final goal that Jude has been steering the community toward: Do not fall into sin, but stand blameless in God’s presence. “Keep you from falling” alludes to the metaphor of stumbling over rocks to speak of God’s power to keep the faithful from falling into sin and death (Pss 56:13; 121:3). Jude assures the church members that God can protect them from falling prey to the ungodly ways of the false

teachers and thus losing their salvation (v. 2; cf. v. 21), so that they will not end up like the false teachers in being kept for deepest darkness (v. 13; cf. v. 6). The phrase “to make you stand without blemish in the presence of his glory with rejoicing” recalls the church’s ultimate state of being pure and spotless sacrifices presented to God (1 Cor l:6; Eph 5:27; Col’ 1:22" 14 Thess 3:13) as well as the rejoicing of God’s people when God’s purposes are fulfilled (1 Pet 4:13; Rev 19:7). Verse 25. This verse is ambiguous. It may mean either that God is the Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord or that through Jesus Christ our Lord, glory, majesty, power, and authority go to God our Savior (the usual usage in Christian doxologies); but perhaps both meanings are to be inferred. These are the attributes that Christ gives to God, but that the false teachers, by their actions, deny of God. These attributes were God’s “before all time and now and forever” in spite of the false teachers’ temporary challenge.

|

REFLECTIONS The doxology attributes our salvation as a people of God completely to God. God is our Savior through Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ revealed the true nature of God as Savior to humanity as a being of glory, majesty, power, and authority (John 14:8-14). To stand rejoicing in the presence of God is the ultimate hope that God provides us (Matt 5:8; Rev 7:15; 22:3-4). It represents the consummation of our salvation, when we are free of sin and can stand before a holy God without fear of destruction. Assurance of this hope lies in the fact that God is the One able to keep us from falling into sin to stand sinless before the throne of grace.

500

dle OOK ORY

ELA LION

INTRODUCTION, COMMENTARY, AND REFLECTIONS

BY

CHRISTOPHER C. ROWLAND

You say that 1want somebody to Elucidate my Ideas. But you ought to know that What is Grand is necessarily obscure to Weak men. That which can be made Explicit to the Idiot is not worth my care. The wisest of the Ancients consider’d what is not too Explicit as the fittest for Instruction, because it rouzes the faculties to act. —William Blake, Letter to Dr. Trusler, 23 August 1799.

THE BOOK OF REVELATION

INTRODUCTION . The Apocalypse of Jesus Christ John, the Gospel of John, and the Revelation to John . The World of the Apocalypse . Contemporary Apocalyptic: 4 Ezra and Revelation Oe A History of the Interpretation of the Apocalypse Ao . The Early Christian Context: Apocalyptic Tradition in the New Testament . The Patristic Period . The Joachite School . The Reformation . William Blake and His Contemporaries . The Eschatological Synthesis of Modern Fundamentalism . Historical Criticism and Modern Exegesis . The Apocalypse and Art . An Apocalyptic Tone in Recent Theology and Philosophy . Conclusion —SN) SS Or Ox (Coy Conte

THE APOCALYPSE OF JESUS CHRIST Apocalypse, revelation, promises comprehensibility and freedom from opacity, with no need for an intermediary to interpret what is immediately available to disclosure. Yet in 503

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

the Apocalypse of Jesus Christ “a host of perceptions suddenly come together to form a dazzling impression (to dazzle is ultimately to prevent sight, to prevent speech),”' provoking instead fear, awe, and even distaste, leading to avoidance and incomprehension rather than to understanding. John’s book demands attention, but its arresting manner cannot mask the fact that it, too, is only indirectly related to that awesome apocalyptic experience that took place on Patmos. We would not have John’s vision unless he had been obedient to the command to write down what he had seen. It may momentarily seem to beckon us into the visionary’s unconscious, but, whatever the sophistication of our psychoanalytic tools, that path into the mind of the prophet is barred to us. All that we have are traces of history and biography woven into the fabric of vision and transformed by it, no longer readily available as a means of explaining what now lies before us. In its emphasis on revelation, apocalyptic can seem to offer easy solutions whereby divine intervention, by offering insight to unfathomable human problems, can cut the knot of those intractable problems. It can be an antidote to a radical pessimism whose exponents despair of ever being able to make sense of the contradictions of human existence except by means of the revelation of God. The kinds of answers offered by the apocalypses are by no means uniform, however. There are apocalypses (or at least parts of them) that use the concept of revelation to offer a definitive solution to human problems. For instance, in the book of /Jubilees, an angelic revelation to Moses on Sinai, there is a retelling of biblical history following the sequence of what is found in Scripture. But there are also significant divergences, especially when halakhic questions emerge. The fact that the book is a revelation to Moses functions to vindicate one side in contentious moral matters in Second Temple Judaism and to anathematize opponents. In this situation the text’s meaning is transparent and is promulgated as the final, authoritative pronouncement. Not all apocalypses offer unambiguous and exclusive answers that seem to brook no dispute, however. They certainly offer revelation, much of which is, in effect, what was traditionally believed already. The horizon of hope is reaffirmed by revelation and the historical perspective of salvation supported. But sometimes the form of the revelation is such that it can produce as much mystification as enlightenment. There is frequently a need for angelic interpretation of enigmatic dreams and visions (e.g., Rev 7:14; 17:15). Even these angelic interpretations are not without problems. It proved necessary for revelations coined in one era to be the basis of “updating” and application in the different political circumstances of another. Thus the symbolism of the fourth beast of Daniel 7 was given new meaning in the Roman period when it ceased to refer to Greece and began to refer to Rome (a process that continued, as the history of the interpretation of Daniel 7 shows). Examples of this interpretive change may be found in both Revelation 13 and 4 Ezra 12. So some apocalypses do not provide answers through revelation and offer nothing more than the refusal of a complete answer as being beyond the human mind to grasp. Instead there is a plethora of imagery or enigmatic pronouncements that leaves the reader with either no possibility of ever knowing the mind of God or tantalizing glimpses into the 1. Roland Barthes, A Lover’s Discourse: Fragments (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1990) 18.

504

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

enigmatic symbols of dreams and visions. In 4 Ezra, the seer wishes to know why Israel has been allowed to suffer and why God seems content to allow the bulk of humanity to perish. The role of revelation, akin to God’s answer in the final chapters of the book of Job, is to stress the puny nature of human understanding in the face of the transcendence of God, to stress the ultimate victory of God’s righteousness and to urge the need for those committed to the ways of God to continue in the narrow way that leads to salvation. No solution to the problem is posed by the human seer. The only enlightenment offered is the need to struggle, a theme paralleled in Revelation’s demand for “the endurance of the saints” (14:12 NRSV). The book of Revelation—paradoxically the most veiled text of all in the Bible—makes great demands on those who read or hear it in pursuit of the blessing it offers. Always there is the temptation to move too quickly to interpret or translate its imagery into a more accessible mode of discourse. But then it ceases to be apocalypse, whose distinctive blend of strange symbols and oscillating narrative confronts and engages the reader, and it becomes explanatory, more prosaic discourse, dependent on the enlightened interpreter to distill (and thereby reduce) the welter of images to the prosaic and accessible. That is what we find contained within Daniel, the other apocalyptic text in the Bible. There the perplexity of the apocalyptic seer is relieved by an enlightened, angelic, rather than human, interpreter, who explains the mysterious visions Daniel has seen. The images of statue, beasts, clouds, and thrones are reduced to historical prediction, less suggestive and more tied to specific events in the past. Daniel’s images, however, and not historical prediction, are included in Revelation and become part of a new disclosure, here transformed as a catalyst of new visionary wisdom. But this time no Key is offered to unlock their meaning. There have been several ways of interpreting Revelation. First, the book has been treated as a relatively straightforward account of the end of the world. In such an interpretation it is usually linked with other prophetic and eschatological texts, like Daniel, Ezekiel, and 1 Thess 4:16ff. to produce a coherent eschatological chronology. Second, the visions are related to their ancient first-century context (the so-called preterist method of interpretation). Here questions are concerned with the meaning for the original author and readers and with the need to decode the complex symbolism and its relationship to (ancient) contemporary historical realities. Third, the images are regarded as an account of the struggles facing the journey of the soul to God. Fourth, the book has been used as an interpretative lens through which to view history. With this approach, one reads a text like Revelation as a gateway to a greater understanding of reality, both divine and human, spiritual and political, that not only includes, but also transcends the understanding offered by the human senses. “What must happen soon” refers to the apocalyptic disclosure, a way of illuminating the nature of politics and religion in every age. Some interpreters of Revelation relate the text to a single set of events, whether historical or eschatological, while other interpreters allow the possibility of a multiplicity of reference. There is also a distinction between those who regard prophecy as prediction and those who regard it as pronouncement. For the former, the apocalyptic imagery is a code that can be translated 505

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

into another (usually historical) discourse and in which an alternative account can be offered of the various ciphers contained in the apocalyptic texts. We assume that we are in a less fortunate position than were the original readers. There may be some force in the suggestion that, like the modern political cartoon, related as itis to a very particular context, Revelation’s imagery may have struck home in ways that are difficult, if not impossible, now that the original situation that provoked the images is no longer the case. But there is no evidence that the ancient readers found it any easier to understand than we do. The only difference is that they were probably less resistant to using, and being challenged by, this kind of literature than we are. To decode Revelation, as if it were like Morse code—a language whose only function is to conceal and is a means to an end, namely, the communication of something that has to be kept secret—fails to take seriously the apocalyptic medium. John, as the recipient of a revelation from Jesus Christ, has bequeathed to us an apocalypse, a prophecy, not a narrative or an epistle, a text requiring of its readers different interpretative skills—imagination and emotion, for example. Like a metaphor, it startles, questions, even disorients before pointing to a fresh view of reality by its extraordinary imagery and impertinent verbal juxtapositions.? However difficult it may be for us, we must learn to exercise those faculties that are needed to engage such a medium. Throughout the history of interpretation it has proved impossible to resist the temptation to decode, whether in the imaginative reconstruction of Revelation’s past situation or in the distillation of its symbols into a historical program, past, present, or future. As soon as the interpreter does this, the images are left behind and the peculiar ethos of the apocalyptic narrative, the story, with all its abrupt transitions and allusive quality, is lost. To put it another way, the literal gives way to the allegorical as the other story, the “translation” of those images becomes the meaning of apocalypse rather than the interweaving of image and movement of the text itself, interacting with the reader’s own social location and the mysterious action of the Spirit. Succumbing to the temptation to offer what the text really means, in another genre, can in fact mean intellectual and spiritual laziness, demonstrating a failure of nerve and a refusal to allow the imagination to be engaged by the letter of the text. It is impossible in interpreting to avoid some kind of decoding (Rev 17:9ff. pushes us in this direction); yet the force of Revelation depends on the ability of the reader to allow its images to inform by means of a subtle interplay of text, context, and imagination. The words of Revelation do not offer a view of things in any kind of literal way. A word used frequently in the book is ws (hos), “as” or “like,” suggesting the world of metaphor, the juxtaposition of words and ideas that connote a mind groping for adequate expression, rather than precise, uncomplicated depiction. Apocalyptic imagery beckons us to suspend our pragmatism and to enter into its imaginative world. That means being prepared to see things from another, unusual, point of view and being open to the possibility that difference of perspective will enrich our view and lead to difference of insight. The Apocalypse, not 2. See D. Cooper, Metaphor (Oxford: Blackwell, 1986); J. M. Soskice, Metaphor and Religious Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985); P. Ricoeur, 7he Rule of Metaphor (London: Routledge, 1978); N. Wolterstorff, Divine Discourse (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994) 193-99.

506

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

itself biblical interpretation but Scripture commissioned by Christ, presents the symbols and myths of what was Scripture in a new visionary form, much as Blake was to do in his mythic writings. The visions of Revelation do not provide the currency of our everyday exchange of ideas and patterns of existence. Yet in the ancient world (and today in non-Western cultures) visions and dreams are regarded as important. The world of dreams is akin to that less ordered imaginative part of us that becomes active only when our dominant intellectual equipment itself lies dormant. When it comes to the imagination, we are like people who, having had little exercise, find themselves severely taxed by strenuous physical effort. Our imaginations are out of condition; we lack the skills to exercise our imaginations. So we are in no fit state to read Revelation with real insight. Like those who fail to see the point of the mysterious in the material, we need to cultivate imaginations that can grasp profound truths: “What,” it will be Question’d, “When the Sun rises, do you not see a round disk of fire somewhat like a Guinea? O no, [responds William Blake] no, I see an Innumerable company of the Heavenly host crying, ‘Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty.’ I question not my Corporeal or Vegetative Eye any more than I would Question a Window concerning a Sight. I look thro’ it & not with it?

Apocalyptic offers us no excuse for resorting to a life based solely on fantasy; however, an understanding of what apocalypse is can lead to a more informed and obedient life. As Revelation itself indicates, to live in this way may be controversial, costly to ourselves and to our public esteem, because to live such a life is to refuse to conform to the expectations of the world unless those demands are compatible with Christ’s teaching. We cannot underestimate the extent of resistance required of us. And we must be wary of hermeneutical strategies that would prevent us from making full use of a resource that would enable us to understand what to resist. For example, the whole scope of demythologizing is really linked with the decoding mentality that has a long history in Revelation’s interpretation. Demythologization was intended to enable strange texts to keep their value by getting at their “spirit” or —a typical strategy of Christian hermeneutics down the centuries. The letter of “essence” the text seems to kill, and this seems to be particularly true in the case of Revelation. The spirit, the essential message of the myth, however, can live on. But the cost of such a reading is that the literal, the medium of the message, is lost and with it the message, too. Is it a coincidence that the demythologization project got off the ground in 1942, at the height of Nazi tyranny and the most diabolical perversion of the millennial hope in the Third Reich and the unspeakable horror of the Holocaust? Bultmann’s seminal essay was published then, offering a modern explanation of the gospel.* In one respect, such a project marked a challenge to the way mythology had been appropriated for such demonic ends. 3. William Blake, A Vision of the Last Judgment, in Blake: Complete Writings, ed. G. Keynes (London: Oxford University Press, 1966) 617. A. R. Bultmann, “The New Testament and Mythology,” reprinted in Kerygma and Myth, ed. H. W. Bartsch (London: SPCK, 1964). .

507

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

What passed as rationality needed a critique that could interpret the horror and effects of evil, a perverted millennial dream destructive in its scope.° But demythologizing, which at its heart sought to explain the words and images of myth in other terms, also reduced its power by its individual focus. The church’s suspicion of the Apocalypse did not help, epitomized by Bultmann’s description of the book as “weakly christianized Judaism,” an assessment, echoing Luther’s negative opinion of 1522, that Revelation is “neither apostolic nor prophetic.” Dietrich Bonhoeffer, on the other hand, exhorted fellow church men and women to be “a community which hears the Apocalypse .. . to testify to its alien nature and to resist the false principle of inner-worldliness” and so to be at the service of “those who suffer violence and injustice.” In his view “the Church takes to itself all the sufferers, [all] the forsaken of every party and status. ‘Open your mouth for the dumb’ (Proverbs 31:8).”° That witness and countercultural character of the church, so well exemplified by the dualistic contrasts of the Apocalypse, challenged church people to raise their voices in protest at the treatment of Jews. It is one thing to admit the importance of apocalyptic and Revelation for the understanding of the New Testament and to see it as the “mother of Christian theology”;’ it is rather different to allege that such ideas have a continuing resonance in contemporary life. Contemporary interpreters of the book of Revelation are in a treble bind. First of all, they are confronted with an authoritative text that claims to reveal and turns out to be, at best, enigmatic and, at worst, off-putting. Second, a century and a half of historical exegesis has only served to underline the strangeness of the text and its distance from the sophisticated discourse of the First World. Third, Revelation has a reputation for fomenting an apocalyptic, irrational attitude of a catastrophic end for humanity or of fantasies about escaping from the problems and contradictions of life. In contrast to the situation of our ancestors, and many readers of this text in developing nations, Revelation has ceased to be a significant part of our linguistic currency. We are relieved that secularism and historicism have enabled us to tame the Apocalypse and subordinate its angularity to a liberal, apparently less threatening and more inclusive spirit by decoding its message and situating its significance in a previous, more credulous age. This text, which, despite its ambiguity and transgression of boundaries, is in large part about chaos, the loosening of the bands of historical order. It bears witness to aspects of our world that we fear. Ordering, and taming, the text enables us to avoid engaging our emotions and imaginations and, eventually, our wills and thereby evacuates the text of its power to change us. If there is a text that required a reading “against the grain”® of what is accepted as normal in our current situation, it is Revelation. Read “against the grain,” it may put us 5. 6. 7. 8.

N. Cohn, The Pursuit of the Millennium (London: Paladin, 1984). Dietrich Bonhoeffer, No Rusty Swords (London: Collins, 1965) 324-25. E. Kasemann, New Testament Questions of Today (London: SCM, 1969). W. Benjamin, “Theses on the Philosophy of History,” in /d/uminations, ed. H. Arendt (London: Collins Fontana,

1978).

508

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

in touch with “utopian hopes and critical energies” as “a necessary corrective to the repetition of the ever-the-same in the guise of the new, the return of the seemingly repressed even amidst apparent enlightenment.”® It can put us in touch with a subversive, apocalyptic memory “that seems so out of place against the more frequent hopes of bleak despair” that can characterize everyday life. The “unmasking of Babylon” and the truth about empire can enable us to see, perhaps to our discomfort and sadness, that “the cultural monuments celebrated by official, establishment history could not be understood outside the context of their origins, a context of oppression and exploitation.” Apocalypse offers a fleeting glimpse of an alternative, the “involuntary memory of a redeemed humanity which contrasts with convention and false tradition.”!° It beckons us to rescue tradition from convention and to wrest it away from a conformity that is about to overpower it. Walter Benjamin’s words, written at the end of his life, as he contemplated persecution and death, offer an eloquent description of the hermeneutics of the book of Revelation. Revelation, and the apocalyptic tradition generally, has often been linked to the projects of agents of social change; yet it can be found buttressing the projects of those whose quest for utopia is firmly rooted in conventional values and the nostalgic yearning for a golden age of moral perfection based on hierarchy and subservience. In this nostalgic quest, apocalyptic symbolism serves to undergird a view of the world that supports the conviction of a comfortable elect that they will ultimately be saved. This outlook, with its alternative horizon beckoning toward a different future, enables a group to maintain clearly defined lines between the godly and the godless. On the other hand, apocalyptic symbolism can serve to enable the oppressed to find and maintain a critical distance from an unjust world, to claim the hope of a reign of justice. There is little new in this struggle over the language of apocalypse; apocalyptic symbolism has never been the sole preserve of the oppressed and the poor. Even in post-exilic Israel, in the very years when eschatological hope was being formed, there was a common stock of images that both sides in a struggle for power used to achieve pre-eminence for their own positions."’ In our time, the rhetoric of the “evil empire” is as likely to be found in the corridors of economic and political power as in the grassroots Bible study groups of developing nations. In the last century, we have labored to reconstruct an original historical context with care and precision, thinking it would enable us to hear the message as itwas heard originally. But we cannot achieve that aim, in spite of the sophistication of our endeavors and the extent of our knowledge. Few of us are either a frightened minority or a people saturated with the images and outlook of apocalypse (some may say, though, that those of us in the

West or in the “North” are “Laodiceans” or “Ephesians,” who are lukewarm or have lost our first love), desperately and unwittingly compromised in our allegiance to the beast and 9. Ibid., 255ff. 10. On the importance of the church as a place of alternative and healing memories see W. Benjamin, Memory and Salvation (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1995). 11. P. Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic sh his Fortress, 1974); cf. O. Pléger, Theocracy and Eschatology (Oxford: Blackwell, 1968).

509

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

Babylon. We are resistant to a text that confronts our particular interests and the power structures in which we are so deeply implicated. So we either avoid it or simply cannot hear “what the Spirit says to the churches.” We fulfill the pessimistic prophecy of Isaiah and become more deaf rather than more receptive. Our deafness is increased as we treat the text as marginal to most churches or simply ignore it. It is a telling fact that few people may, in fact, hear this text in the nomnal course of Christian worship. 7he Revised Common Lectionary prescribes ten readings from Revelation over the three-year cycle. Of these ten readings, five are from Revelation 21-22, four from two passages (1:4-8; 7:9-17), and one from chapter 5. That what we read in the church is a matter of ecclesiastical politics is evident from the fact that for centuries the Church of England allowed only small parts of the book of Revelation to be read at morning and evening prayer.'? In churches that assert in their formularies that the Scriptures contain everything necessary for salvation, this is a remarkable phenomenon. To paraphrase Bonhoeffer’s words, we have ceased to be a community that hears the Apocalypse, for the simple reason that we do not allow ourselves the opportunity of hearing, let alone keeping, its words. Any commentary can go only part of the way to enabling readers and hearers to become what Bonhoeffer describes as a community of the Apocalypse. What follows is divided into sections on “Commentary” and “Reflections.” The Commentary sections will provide resources for reading the text, with attention given to vocabulary and textual and translation problems,'° connections with other parts of the text, and, where appropriate, other biblical texts. It is intended to facilitate reading and to aid reflection on the book of Revelation. Commentary cannot replace reading, hearing, and keeping the words of this book, however. Neither is the particular experience of the commentator in the Reflections the last word.on the meaning of this profound text. Indeed, often it is those who have been in Bonhoeffer’s predicament or who more recently have had to be prophets against the injustice of empire nearer our own day who can find resonances in the images of the book.'* A commentaryis an ancillary tool; itshould never stand in the way of the imaginative engagement provided by the text. Indeed, its very prosaic character may itself pose a problem: It cannot do justice to the character of apocalyptic discourse in the manner of picture or poem, for a pedestrian explanation, however suggestive and allusive, reduces and diminishes the power of symbolism and myth. Those images may be more allusive and less precise, but better able to stimulate those aesthetic faculties that enable us to read apocalyptic literature. In lieu of poem or vision, therefore, we must recognize the possible “scandal” caused by prosaic comments about our understanding and the tendency to mask rather than to unveil the meaning of the vision. 12. F. E. Brightman, 7he English Rite (London: Rivingtons, 1915) 1:51. In 1661, lessons from Revelation were to be read only on certain feasts. The situation changed later when Revelation (except chaps. 9; 13; and 17) was prescribed to be read in the month of December. 13. On the text of Revelation, see H. C. Hoskier, Concerning the Text of the Apocalypse (London: Quantch, 1929). 3 14. uha Boesak, Comfort and Protest (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1987); P. Richard, Apocalypse (Maryknoll, N.Y.: rbis, ;

510

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

Hearing “what the Spirit says to the churches” is a complex interaction of text and interpreter at a particular time and place. It is the commentator’s job to enable that interaction and not to pre-empt it by suggesting that the meaning of the text is readily available—if only one has the expertise to extract it. Commentators cannot avoid reflecting their own concerns and prejudices, whether academic or political, however. Commentary and reflection, therefore, are inevitably intertwined, and any commentator who has studied the text will be able to report on the way the constellation of text, reader, and social context has engendered meaning. Such particular readings of what I have discerned in Revelation have /argely been explored in the Reflections sections. A necessary check in our quest for understanding is to pay attention to the way the text has been interpreted in different theological and socioeconomic settings. Such a diachronic perspective ensures that the contemporary commentator’s line is placed firmly in the broader context of the experience of a cloud of witnesses, whose insight is an essential context of any contemporary crystallization of meaning. Short of writing a commentary that included all strands of interpretation of this text in a vast compendium, there is the need to be selective, and so to constrict. So determining the meaning of the text is always a contextual enterprise that cannot avoid an individual and social dimension. That will require of us discipline and self-critical awareness of what we bring to our reading. If we are going to seek to understand God’s Word, we need honesty about ourselves, whether individually or socially. Like the biblical writers, we have a story to tell that we would do well not to avoid lest it reappear as a kind of unseen and, perhaps, unwelcome guest at our interpretative feast. We cannot put our experience to one side. Too often, unfortunately, the welter of concerns and opinions about matters religious, political, and psychological is unseen, but all too pervasive. We bring to our interpretation who we are, our personal and psychological history, and where we are, whether we approach the text from an inner-city community or a wealthy suburb, from a prosperous Western nation or from a poor shanty town of a developing nation." It is helpful when we read any biblical book, but particularly one like Revelation, where the opportunity for variety of interpretation and application is much greater, to read with heightened awareness of ourselves and our own concerns. Feminist and liberationist perspectives in particular have pointed out how much we can miss in our reading. Recognizing what we most have to lose by taking the challenge of the text seriously or what it is we might need to learn to support or justify by reference to Scripture will help us to have ears to hear what the Spirit says in the text. Although there are some peculiarities about the exegesis of Revelation, as with any biblical book, it is necessary to acknowledge the importance of the interaction of three dimensions in the hermeneutical process: text, context, and reader. The interaction constantly demands the highest level of awareness of self and of circumstance on the part 15. See the general articles on reading the Bible from particular social locations in The New Interpreter’s Bible, 12 vols. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1994) 1:150-87. .

old

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

of the interpreter. Space is created to reflect, so that the interpreter can explore the extent to which self-interest is projected onto the text or whether one is resistant to it. It is necessary for interpreters to distance themselves from the text in order not to make facile assumptions or to be controlled by unstated commitments to a particular tradition’s reading of the text. Strategies of distancing can also call attention to the reasons for resistance to or too-ready acceptance of a text. We shall want to ask ourselves why we allow ourselves to be carried along by a text or a particular way of reading and what the resistance to a text says about us. Also, and most important, we must avoid treating texts as a problem that we as enlightened, modern interpreters can solve. Part of the process of reading is that critical self-awareness and attentiveness that may mean a reversal of roles in which interpreters in humility recognize that they need to become the ones who in some sense are being interpreted by the text. In the Commentary, I attempt to avoid prematurely pushing the reader into any particular meaning for the text. A commentator on Revelation struggles to find ways to enable interaction with the text as we have it, thereby engaging the imagination, so that the book, with its peculiar network of imagery, may begin to pervade the reader’s consciousness so that prejudice can be challenged. It is this text, these images that we need to read, not an explanation, however politically or theologically acceptable it may be. Revelation summons us into an apocalyptic world to be confronted by, infused with, and, perhaps, overpowered by (for good or ill) its images. Like John, we are called to “come up here, and I will show you what must take place”—not as interpreters or calculators of a precise eschatological program so much as co-participants in mental agony that wrenches us from our prejudice. The door of perception lies open, and we can experience apocalypse, just as John found himself reading or recalling, meditating upon, seeing again, writing, and being formed by the images of Ezekiel, Daniel, Isaiah, and the prophets. John sees the vision as Ezekiel would have seen it had the exilic prophet been inspired in John’s circumstances. John repeats Ezekiel’s experience in seeing the heavens opened (4:1; cf. Ezek 1:1) and seeing the awesome divine throne and the eating of the scroll (10:9; cf. Ezek 3:1ff.}; like Daniel, John sees a divine figure who is the author of the revelations of

what is to come (1:13ff.; cf. Dan 10:5-6).'° The way Revelation engages us and transforms us is as much a story of how apocalypse takes place with every reading, every “digesting” of this text, as an interpretation or commentary.'’ A new moment of unveiling occurs through the images and the configuration of visions that John has bequeathed to us, and not in spite of them. We may be curious about the meaning of symbols or perhaps distracted by the odd historical reference, but we need to remember that our fundamental task is to read, to hear, and to appropriate, in whatever way our faculties allow us, the contents of this book, having thereby our perspective transformed and our imagination engaged. What we have in Revelation is the 16. D. Halperin, Faces of the Chariot (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1988) 71. 17. See G. Loughlin, Telling God’s Story: Bible, Church and Narrative Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).

Diz

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

opening of an interpretative space for readers or hearers to be provoked, to have their imaginations broadened, and to be challenged to think and behave differently. The words

of the book resist neat encapsulation and the precision of definition. It is a classic example of art that stimulates rather than prescribes. Readers do not require explanation so much as the encouragement to explore its words and images, so that they may be able to see and behave differently. The point is put very succinctly by William Blake in response to a request for the elucidation of his images: You say that I want somebody to Elucidate my Ideas. But you ought to know that What is Grand is necessarily obscure to Weak men. That which can be made Explicit to the Idiot is not worth my care. The wisest of the Ancients consider’d what is not too Explicit as the fittest for Instruction, because it rouzes the faculties to act.!8

From time to time in the Reflections, Blake’s words and images are called upon. The most important reason for my doing so is that Blake was a visionary and thought of himself as a prophet. In this respect, he differs from most of us who are exegetes, who, whatever our desire to exercise a prophetic ministry, cannot pretend to have the kind of call that Blake had and that he shared with John, whose words were such a fundamental part of his life and writing. Apocalypse is not a manual of eschatology, ethics, or theology, and yet it enables all of these. By refusing the predictable and by demanding that suspension of what counts for normality, we may perceive where the beast and Babylon are to be found. Whether as a result of reading and hearing the words of this prophecy we will see, understand, and repent of our allegiance to Babylon and to the beast—whose power over our minds and our social and economic structures is revealed to John in Revelation—and so choose to stand with the Lamb. What Revelation offers is the hope of a time when “the war of swords departed now” and “the dark Religions are departed & sweet Science reigns.” '° JOHN, THE GOSPEL OF JOHN, AND THE REVELATION TO JOHN External evidence concerning the apostle John and his relationship to Revelation comes relatively early in the Christian tradition. In commenting on Rev 20:4, Justin talks of John as one of the apostles of Christ who prophesied of the apocalypse that came to him.” Papias is reputed to have attested to the worth of Revelation,”' though earlier Eusebius had a low opinion of Papias because of his millenarian views, as also did Melito of Sardis.” According to Tertullian, Marcion rejected Revelation as being a Jewish text,” and in the 18. Oxford 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

William Blake, Letter to Dr. Trusler, 23 August 1799, in Blake: Complete Writings, ed. G. Keynes (London: University Press, 1966) 793 William Blake, The Four Zoas, in ibid., 855. Justin Dialogue 81:4. See W. G. Kiimmel, /ntroduction to the New Testament (London: SCM, 1975) 470. A commentary on Revelation is listed among the works of Melito. See Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 4.20.2. Tertullian Against Marcion IV.4.

513

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

aftermath of the Montanist movement, Dionysius of Alexandria denied that Revelation

was written by John the apostle.” Traditionally the date of the book’s writing has been set toward the end of the reign of Roman Emperor Domitian (the mid-90s), who took action against some members of the imperial household for their atheism; that may be a reference to Christianity, but equally could have been Judaism.”° That may have been part of a much wider attempt to impose a tax on Jews and Jewish sympathizers (Christians would have fallen into that category). In that situation, there may have been a wave of sporadic persecution or harassment, but it is uncertain whether it was empire-wide in scope. Evidence from Revelation itself suggests that an earlier date is equally likely. This derives from the most obvious reading of Rev 17:9-10. After Nero’s death in 68 CE, there were four claimants to the throne in one year. So it may have been during the period of great upheaval in the empire while the power struggle was going on that John saw his vision. But the events of the 60s could easily have dominated the visionary horizon if he had his vision thirty years later (see the Commentary on 17:9).”° We know little other than what the book tells us about how John received this revelation. We will never know whether, like a poet, he exercised that mixture of imagination and attention to form that is characteristic of poetry, or whether he offers in the book the account of a true visionary experience. Many commentators suppose that Revelation is a conscious attempt to write an apocalypse, much as Paul would have written an epistle. Such an assessment is unsatisfactory, however. There are signs in the book of that dream-like quality in which the visionary not only sees but alsous: involveds(e.gy bl Zel7) 5:47 Foe Tl eh7 Seek lO 2a0 eA ershould pay John the compliment of accepting his claim—unless we find strong reasons for denying it. There is in it a semblance of order, that, whatever the reservations of commentators, does yield a coherent pattern and deserves to be made sense of unless the juxtapositions seem totally contradictory. In some respects, Revelation differs markedly from a Jewish apocalypse like / Enoch, which is a collection of heterogeneous material. The ordering in Revelation, however, need not exclude the possibility that

it contains the visions that John saw, either on one single occasion or over a long period of time. It has become something of a commonplace in New Testament scholarship to suppose that the Gospel of John represents the antithesis to the apocalyptic spirit of the Apocalypse. The Gospel of John at first sight seems a strange companion to Revelation, not least because its form and content are so markedly different. It has been so linked with Revelation because Christian tradition almost entirely asserts common authorship for the two works. 2” 24. Eusebius Ecclesiastical History vii.25.1ff. 25. Dio Cassius Histories 67-68. 26. See the discussion in Leonard L. Thompson, The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990); and C. Rowland, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (London: SPCK, 1982) 403-13. 27. See M. Hengel, The Johannine Question (London: SCM, 1989).

514

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

The tradition that John the son of Zebedee ended his life in Ephesus offers an important connection with Revelation’s setting in Asia Minor.” Obviously the narrative form of the Gospel places it at a significant distance from the Apocalypse. The Gospel contains few of the elements of an apocalypse, with the word dtokddusis (apokalypsis, “revelation” being used. The Gospel of John is apparently the least apocalyptic document in the New Testament. It has frequently been regarded as an example of that type of Christianity that firmly rejected apocalyptic. By that is often meant that there is no imminent expectation of the end but rather the necessity of preparing for an unexpected and uncertain future for the church devoid of an apocalyptic horizon. Yet the main thrust of the message of the Gospel of John appears to have aremarkable affinity with apocalyptic. John Ashton rightly calls the Gospel of John “an apocalypse in reverse,”*’ for the heavenly mysteries are not to be sought in heaven but in Jesus, “the one who has seen the Father” (5:37) and makes the Father known. Admittedly, the mode of revelation stressed in the Gospel differs from that outlined in the apocalypses. The goal of apocalyptic is the attainment of knowledge of the divine mysteries, in particular the mysteries of God. Much of what the Fourth Gospel says relates to this theme. Jesus proclaims himself as the revelation of the hidden God (1:18; 14:8). The vision of God, the heart of the call experiences of Isaiah and Ezekiel and the goal of the heavenly ascents of the apocalyptic seers, isin the Fourth Gospel related to the revelation of God in Jesus. All claims to have seen God in the past are repudiated; the Jews are told: “You have never heard his voice or seen his form” (John 5:37 NRSV; cf. Deut 4:12). Even when, as in Isaiah’s case, Scripture teaches that a prophet glimpsed God enthroned in glory, this vision is interpreted in the Gospel of John as a vision of the pre-existent Christ (John 12:41). No one has seen God except the one who is from God; he has seen the Father (John 6:46). So the vision of God reserved in the book of Revelation for the fortunate seer (4:1) and for the inhabitants of the new Jerusalem, who will see God face to face (22:4), is found, according to the Fourth Evangelist, in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. Possibly in the Fourth Gospel an attempt is made to repudiate the claims of those apocalyptists who claimed to have gained divine knowledge by means of heavenly ascents to God’s throne when Jesus says to Nicodemus: “No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man” (John 3:13 NIV). In the Gospel of John, the quest for the highest wisdom of all, the knowledge of God, comes not through the information disclosed in visions and revelations but through the Word become flesh, Jesus of Nazareth. Thus, even if there is a rejection of any claim to revelation except through Christ, there is presupposed a claim to revelation with many affinities to Revelation. John’s narrative seems, on the face of it, totally devoid of the apocalyptic symbolism of the cosmic struggle. There is nothing ofJesus’ struggles with the powers of darkness, familiar to us from the synoptic exorcisms, or the eschatological discourse of Mark 13 and 28. Irenaeus Against Heresies iii.1.2. Cf. Eusebius Ecclesiastical History v.20.4. 29. J. Ashton, Interpreting the Fourth Gospel (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991) 381-406.

ogi)

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

parallel texts; John’s Gospel seems to be devoid of the prophetic message of institutional judgment and cosmic upheaval. It is striking how apparently matter-of-fact the account of the passion of Jesus appears to be in the Fourth Gospel. There are no portents like the rending of the veil or the darkness that attends Jesus’ death. Yet telling the merely human story is insufficient to give an adequate impression of its significance, perhaps hinted at in Jesus’ words to Pilate in John 19:11. The confrontation between darkness and light, between truth and the lie, between God and Caesar is all bound together and acted out in the discussion with Pilate. These machinations of the political powers cannot be understood apart from the apocalyptic struggle—a moment of eschatological judgment is going on behind the scenes (e.g., John 3:19), which is not confined to individual members of humanity (as 12:31; 14:30; and 16:11 make clear). The advent of Christ effects a cosmic judgment in which the dominance of the rule of the present is both called into question and brought to an end. In John 12:27ff. there is a rare appearance of apocalyptic discourse epitomized by the heavenly voice, for which the crowds, faced with the characteristic ambiguity of the heavenly revelation, offer differing interpretations. Jesus then asserts: “Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out” (John 12:31 NIV, italics added). There is a link with the cross (e.g., John 12:33; cf. 13:1; 17:1). But the emphatic “now” in John 12:31 suggests that the triumph is not solely focused on the cross. Indeed, according to John 3:19 the eschatological judgment has already been brought into effect by the coming of the Son into the world. The life of Jesus, therefore, is a struggle that reaches a decisive moment in John 12:31. In Rev 12:7, the battle in heaven leads to Satan’s ejection from heaven to earth with the consequent threat to its inhabitants and their corruption by the evil empire. It is then followed in Revelation 13 by the specific embodiment of the diabolical threat in the beasts of political power. In John 12, the moment of the judgment of the world comes shortly after the declaration of the ruler of the world’s ejection and just before the reference to the devil’s/Satan’s entering Judas (John 13:2, 27; note the eschatological role of humans in 1 John 2:19-20; 3:12ff.) and the beginning of the political maneuverings that lead to Jesus’ death. The apocalyptic struggle is acted out on the plane of human history and reaches its climax in the cross. We can go further and note that in Revelation 12 there is the juxtaposition of Satan’s ejection and the snatching up of the messianic child to heaven, similar to the juxtaposition of Satan’s ejection and the lifting up of the Son of Man in John 12. As in Rev 11:5 and 12:7, there is a decisive moment at the end of John 12, suggesting that a moment of decision has come and passed. There is now division between those who follow Jesus and those who, like Judas, find themselves permeated by darkness, and follow the ruler of the world. Yet the diabolical initiative that leads to the crucifixion is in reality the moment of the lifting of the Son of Man to heaven. To put it in the language of the Apocalypse, it is the moment when the Lamb opens the heavenly book of judgment and takes a place in the throne of glory. In the “ordinary” world of narrative 516

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

(with only the barest hints of the apocalyptic scenario acted out, as it were, behind the scenes), the crisis in John 12 reverberates throughout the universe. However much the Gospel seems to offer hope only to that small remnant of perceptive people (John 17:24), that wider vision of the decisive shift in the fundamental nature of things, symbolized by the fracture of the power of all that is opposed to God, is not lost completely. Those who identify with Jesus bear witness to that shift in power, which demands of them public and costly witness, much as is required of those who refuse to conform to the demands of the beast in Revelation. In this they are accompanied by the cosmic role of the Spirit, whose function is not merely ecclesial but social and cosmic also (John 16:9ff.). According to Revelation 14:7, the hour of judgment will have come when God’s just and true judgments are revealed (cf. 16:7; 18:10). That true judgment is stressed by the Johannine Jesus inJohn 8:16. The judgment is focused on the fact that “the light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil” John 3:19; cf. Rev 9:20; 16:9). Judgment comes through believing the Son (3:18) who is not sent as judge (3:17; 8:15; 12:47; cf. 8:50); the one who does not believe is judged already (3:18). Yet elsewhere it is for judgment that Christ came into the world (9:39) and exercises judgment as the Son of Man (5:27; cf. 12:10; Dan 7:13-14). Father and Son are linked together like the Lamb and the one seated on the throne in 7:17. In Revelation, the judgment belongs to God but is exercised, too, by the rider on the white horse (19:11). John 5:24 echoes the blessings of Revelation on those who hear and keep the words of the prophecy (Rev 1:3; 22:7, 14). Judgment is in the past tense for the one who “hears my word and believes him who sent me” (John 5:24 NRSV), just as in Revelation the martyr who participates in the millennium does not come to judgment and the second death that is linked with it (20:6; that judgment is described in John 5:28 in terms remarkably similar to Rev 20:13). These similarities of theme cannot mask the difference of perspective that an apocalypse gives. Here the veil is removed, and the reader glimpses what goes on behind the scenes. This is only hinted at in the Gospel of John. Readers’ attention is focused not on the “beyond” but on the Word become flesh: “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9 NRSV). We shall never know whether the Gospel and the Apocalypse were written by the same author. Yet the ancient tradition that links the two has, on closer inspection, something to commend it and suggests that more than merely superficial similarity that may offer by connection and contrast fruitful interpretative avenues for the exegete.

THE WORLD OF THE APOCALYPSE There are other works that offer revelations of divine secrets similar in form and content to the New Testament apocalypse; indeed, they derive their generic description “apocalypse” from Rev 1:1.Itis not the way in which the writers of these works, which are formally so similar to Revelation, describe their writings, however. The use of the words DIE

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

“revelation” (atoKddusis apokalypsis) and “reveal” (atokadktT7Tw apokalypto) to describe a vision from God or a revealing of divine secrets is relatively rare in literature written around about the time of Revelation.*° They include a work heavily interpolated by a Christian editor, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs’' and Joseph and Aseneth, a work written probably in Egypt around about the beginning of the Christian era (16:7; 22:9). The words are more common in the New Testament. In the Gospels, apokalypsis is found at Luke 2:32 in Simeon’s song in a context in which already the revelation of a mystery, which angels desire to look upon, had been celebrated (Luke 2:13; cf. 1 Pet 1:11-12). The salvation is described by Simeon as light and glory, suggesting a mystery revealed “for the Gentiles” (cf. Eph 1:17; Col 1:26). Elsewhere, apokalypsis appears in contexts dealing with the eschatological revelation of secrets (Matt 11:25 // Luke 10:21; Matt 11:27; 16:17; in the quotation of Isa 53:1 in John 12:38 [see also John 1:31; 2:11; 7:4; 9:3; 17:6; 21:1, where phaneroo is used]; and of the day of the Son of Man in Luke jy oO) Apokalypsis is central to Paul’s self-understanding (Gal 1:12). It is both something past and a future hope as well (1 Cor 1:7; cf. 2 Thess 1:7; 1 Pet 1:7; Rev 1:13; 4:13). Such revelations could be experienced both by him and by members of the church (1 Cor 14:26; 2 Cor 12:2ff.; Gal 2:2; Eph 1:17; Phil 3:15). The enigmatic passage in 2 Cor 12:2ff. is closest to what we find in Revelation. There Paul writes of an ascent to heaven and “visions and revelations” (adtokadtibets apokalypseis). The former (optasia) is used of angelic appearances in Luke 1:22 and of Paul’s conversion experience in Acts 26:19. It is the word used for the translation of the Hebrew word m7 (mar’eh), the chief term for the visions in Daniel 10 (in Theodotion’s Greek translation of the Old Testament, apokalypto is introduced in passages where the earlier Greek versions used other words, e.g., Dan 2:19, 47; 10:1; 11:35). Apokalypto is used of the present manifestation of God’s wrath (Rom 1:17-18) and the divine mystery {1 Cor 2:10). Paul writes of the gospel as that which is made manifest (Rom 3:21), echoing the way he speaks of Christ’s impact on him (Gal 1:16). The mystery of hidden things made manifest is found in Col 1:26 (phaneroo; cf. 3:4; Eph 3:3, 5) and in the doxology that concludes Romans (Rom 16:25). The terminology is used of eschatological unveiling as well. The coming of Antichrist has still to be revealed (2 Thess 2:3), as do the judgment of human works (1 Cor 3:13) and the demonstration of the identity of the children of God (Rom 8:18-19; a usage evident also in 1 Pet 1:5; 5:1). “Apocalyptic” has passed into common parlance as a way of speaking of a doom-laden 30. The evidence is set out in M. Smith, “On the History of atoxahimtTw/atoKdAuisis,” in Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and Near East, ed. D. Hellholm, 2nd ed. (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1989) 9ff. See also F. Mazzaferri, The Genre of the Book of Revelation from a Source Critical Perspective (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1989); M. Bockmuehl, Revelation and Mystery (Titbingen: Mohr, 1990); M. Freschkowski, Offenbarung und Epiphanie (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1995-97); D. Aune, Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983); J. C. VanderKam and W. Adler, The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1996). 31. See Reuben 3:15; Judah 16:4; Joseph 6:6; Levi 1:2; 18:2; Benjamin 10:5.

518

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

outlook on life or a pattern of thought replete with the symbols and imagery of Revelation, and it can often be found in discussions of contemporary economic, social, and political affairs.°* There- has been much confusion in the discussion of apocalyptic, in particular regarding its relationship to eschatology. Indeed, the two are often closely related and used virtually interchangeably. A distinction is usually made in contemporary scholarly discussion between apocalyptic (or apocalypticism) and the apocalypse. Indeed, it is important to note that apocalyptic is used by modern interpreters as an interpretative device to explain certain features of Second Temple Jewish prophetic texts.** Apocalypse is used to describe a particular literary type found in the literature of ancient Judaism, characterized by claims to offer visions or other disclosures of divine mysteries concerning a variety of subjects. Usually in Jewish and early Christian texts, such information is given to a biblical hero like Enoch, Abraham, Isaiah, or Ezra, so pseudonymity is characteristic of these writings. The apocalypse is to be distinguished from apocalyptic, a cluster of mainly eschatological ideas having to do with the secrets of heaven and God’s plan for the cosmos. Apocalyptic ideas may also be found in a variety of texts that are not revelatory in form or intent. In the New Testament, the book of Revelation is an obvious example of an apocalypse. But passages like Mark 13, where Jesus speaks of the future, and 1 Thess 4:16 have been regarded as examples of apocalyptic, with their descriptions of the irruption of the Redeemer into history and (in the case of Mark 13) the cosmic catastrophes that must precede the coming of the heavenly Son of Man (indeed, Mark 13 is often misleadingly called “the little apocalypse”). We may best understand the enormous variety of material in the apocalypses if we consider them not merely as eschatological tracts satisfying the curiosity of those who wanted to know what would happen in the future but as revelations of divine secrets whose unveiling will enable readers to view their present situation from a completely different perspective. So, in the case of Revelation, the letters to the churches offer an assessment of the churches’ worth from a heavenly perspective: The vision of the divine throne room in Revelation 4 enables the churches to recognize the dominion of their God; in Revelation 5, the death and exaltation of Christ are shown to mark the inauguration of the new age; and in chapters 13 and 17 the true identities of the beast and Babylon are divulged. The origins of the apocalyptic genre are much disputed. In their concerns with the mysteries of God and the fulfillment of the divine purposes, these works have a close affinity to the prophetic literature of the Old Testament. That only one apocalypse is included in the canon of the Old Testament, the book of Daniel, should not be taken as an indication that the compilers of the canon did not have much interest in the apocalyptic tradition, as there seems to have been a lively apocalyptic oral tradition in Judaism that had a long history. The discovery of fragments of the Enoch apocalypse at Qumran have 32. See Rowland, The Open Heaven; J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1985). 33. J. Barton, The Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel After the Exile (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1986). :

519

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

pushed the date of this particular text back well before the second century BCE—back, in other words, into that obscure period when the prophetic voice began to die out in Israel.

Apocalyptic continued to play a vital part within Jewish religion throughout the period of the Second Temple, and even in rabbinic circles it persisted as an esoteric tradition that manifested itself in written form in the much later Hekalothtracts and later on in the Kabbalah.** There is a paucity of references to apocalyptic matters in early rabbinic literature,* and apocalypses like the books of Enoch are not quoted or thought of as authoritative. During the period of the Second Temple and immediately after its destruction in 70 CE, there existed a mystical tradition among several prominent rabbis that was based on the startling description of the throne-chariot in the first chapter of Ezekiel and the account in Genesis 1. While there was considerable suspicion of this tradition among the rabbis, there is also evidence that many treasured apocalyptic ideas. It is likely that some of the rabbis who occupied themselves in the study of texts like Ezekiel 1 actually experienced ecstatic ascents to heaven to behold the divine throne-chariot, similar to that described by John in Revelation 4. The resort to apocalypticism by visionaries and writers took place in a variety of circumstances. While many of the apocalypses written during the Second Temple period in their present form are products of careful editing, it is possible that actual experiences may lie behind them, and this possibility should not be ruled out in the case of the New Testament apocalypse. The discovery of apocalypses in the Gnostic library at Nag Hammadi may indicate some relationship between apocalyptic and gnosticism, particularly in the light of their common concern with knowledge. As far as one can see, apocalyptic did not reach a stage where its revelation was of itself salvific, but at times it comes very close to being so.°° In the study of the antecedents of apocalyptic literature and its ideas, there have been significant differences of opinion about those origins. On the one hand are those who consider apocalyptic to be the successor to the prophetic texts of the Old Testament, and particularly to the future hope of the prophets.*” The concern with human history and the vindication of Israel’s hopes in Revelation all echo themes from the prophets, several of whom have contributed widely to Revelation’s language, particularly Ezekiel, Daniel, and Zechariah. Some, on the other hand, see a subtle change taking place in the form of that hope in the apocalyptic literature as compared with most of the prophetic texts in the Bible. Itis suggested that the future hope has been placed on another plane, the supernatural and otherworldly (e.g., Isaiah 65-66; cf. Revelation 21; 4 Ezra 7:50). But evidence for such a change from the earthly to the supramundane is not, in fact, widespread. More important is the subtle change of prophetic genre in the later chapters of Ezekiel, with its 34. G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (New York: Schocken, 1955); D. Halperin, The Faces of the Chariot (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1988). 35. In the Mishnah, Hagigah 2.1 is a solitary example. 36. I. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1978); and From Apocalyptic to Gnosticism: Studies in Apocalypticism, Merkavah Mysticism, and Gnosticism (Frankfurt: Lang, 1988) 37. E.g., P. D. Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974), though note the critical comments of R. Carroll, “Twilight of Prophecy or Dawn of Apocalyptic,” JSOT 14 (1979) 3ff.

520

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

visions of a new Jerusalem; the highly symbolic visions of Zechariah’s early chapters and the cataclysmic upheavals of its last chapters; and the probably late eschatological chapters of Isaiah 24-27; 55-66. Also important is the emergence of the apocalyptic heavenly ascent, evident in texts like / Enoch 14 (See Excursus: “The Fall in / Enoch,” 645). The glimpse into heaven, which is such a key part of John’s vision from chapter 4 onward, has its antecedents in the call visions of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1; 10) and Isaiah (Isaiah 6) as well as the parallel glimpses of the heavenly court of 1 Kings 22 and Job 1-2. Antecedents of apocalyptic literature have been found in the wisdom tradition of the Old Testament as well, with its interest in understanding the cosmos and the ways of the world. Apocalyptic is concerned with knowledge, not only of the age to come but also of things in heaven (e.g., / Enoch 72ff.) and the mysteries of human existence, akin to features of the wisdom literature. While it is the case that the concern with the destiny of Israel, so evidentin parts of some apocalypses, is hardly to be found in works like Ecclesiastes and Sirach, both of which seem to discourage the kind of speculation found in the apocalypses (see Sir 3:21ff.), the activities of certain wise men in antiquity were not at all dissimilar from the concerns of the writers of the apocalypses. This includes interpretation of dreams, oracles, astrology, and divine mysteries concerning future events. There is some trace of the role of such figures in the Old Testament, for instance, in the Joseph stories in Genesis and in the book of Daniel. But the most obvious apocalyptic moment in the wisdom corpus is the opening and dramatic climax of the book of Job. The latter enables Job’s entirely reasonable stance to be transcended and for Job to move from an understanding based on hearsay to one based on apocalyptic insight (Job 42:5). A comparison of Revelation with Daniel reveals differences as well as similarities. In certain visions, Revelation is clearly indebted to Daniel (e.g., Daniel 10 in Rev 1:13ff.; Daniel 7 in Revelation 13; 17). Both books are eschatologically oriented. Unlike Revelation, however, Daniel is pseudonymous (probably written in the second century BCE at the height of the crisis in Jerusalem under the Seleucid king Antiochus IV, see 1 Maccabees). John’s authority resides primarily in his prophetic call (1:9ff.) rather than in any claim to antiquity or apostolicity. The form of the visions differs also. Daniel’s dream vision followed by interpretation is almost completely lacking in Revelation (chap. 17 isa solitary exception in which contemporary historical connections are most explicitly made). A significant part of the book of Daniel has to do with the royal court in Babylon, and Daniel 2 offers an interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. Here are men who are comfortable, cosmopolitan Jews who have a good reputation in the land of their exile, though they are nostaligic for Zion (Dan 6:10) and there are limits on what they will compromise. As in Revelation, idolatry is a problem for the Jews (Daniel 3). The fiery furnace and the lions’ den are the terrible consequences for those who refuse to conform to Babylonian worship. Yet Nebuchadnezzar (unlike Belshazzar) is depicted sympathetically; there is evidence of admiration on the part of the king for the young Jewish men (cf.

the signs of that in Rev 11:13) and of his reluctance to see these significant courtiers die. 521

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

And these men who resist the imperial system, and are thus prepared to face suffering, miraculously escape. This story contrasts with Revelation, where religious persecution is expected to include suffering and death (2:11; 6:9; 7:14; 11:7; 13:10; 12:11). In Revelation, there is the promise of vindication (11:7-8), but at the same time a clear recognition that there can be no escape from the great tribulation (7:14). There is in Revelation a more distanced and antagonistic attitude toward empire. Although Revelation 18 briefly reflects on Babylon’s fall from the perspective of the kings, the mighty, and the merchants, the position of the writer is that of vigorous rejection of the power and purposes of empire and satisfaction at the ultimate triumph of God’s righteousness (14:11; 19:3). Whereas Daniel presents persons who are immersed in the life of the pagan court, Revelation countenances no such accommodation. The only acceptable stances are resistance and withdrawal (18:4). Accommodation may be a sign of apostasy (2:20ff.). Pagans react with awe (6:15), with fear (11:10), and with anger toward God (6:10; 9:20). In the New Testament, Mark 13 and 1 Thess 4:16-5:11 have affinities with eschatological sections of Revelation, but particular attention should also be given to the many New Testament passages that refer to the importance of visions and revelations. Mark 1:10 records at the outset of Jesus’ ministry a private vision, reminiscent of the apocalypses and the call visions of the prophets; the reference to the open heaven is a typical feature of visionary accounts (cf. Isa 49:1; Jer 1:5; Gal 1:12, 16). Matthew’s Gospel gives an often missed but significant role to dreams and revelations (Matt 1:20; 2:12-13, 19; 27:19; 11:25-26; 16:17; 17:9). But it is Luke’s account of the origins of the church that has most of the references to visions. Even allowing for Luke’s special interest in the divine guidance of the church and its mission, the vision of the tongues of fire at Pentecost (Acts 2), the martyr Stephen’s vision of the heavenly Son of Man (Acts 7:56-57), the twice-told decisive vision of the sheet descending from heaven, which preceded Peter’s preaching to Cornelius (Acts 10:11), and the thrice-told account of Paul’s conversion (Acts 9; 22; 26) all indicate the importance Luke attached to visions and revelations. The polemic of Paul against false teachers at Colossae (e.g., Col 2:18) indicates that they may have had an interest in visions of the activity of the angels in heaven and needed to be pointed to the centrality

of Christ. Outside the New Testament, figures like Elchesai, * Cerinthus,°° and the Shepherd of Hermas,” as well as the Montanist movement*! may be mentioned. Spatial categories form an important part of apocalyptic thought.’ Such categories are 38. Hippolytus Refutation of All Heresies IX. 13.1ff. 39. Eusebius Ecclesiastical History Ill. 281-82. 40. E.g., Shepherd of Hermas Visions III.1.6ff. 41. Eusebius Ecclesiastical History V.16.6. 42. L. Thompson, The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990); P. Minear, “The Cosmology of the Apocalypse,” in Klassen and Snyder, Current Issues in New Testament Interpretation (London: SCM, 1962) 23-27; Andrew T. Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul’s Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981) 198.

228

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

presupposed by several New Testament writers; indeed, they form part of the argument of one or two documents. In Ephesians, for example, the author speaks of a heavenly dimension to the church’s existence; by his use of the phrase “in the heavenly places,” he links the church with the exalted Christ (Eph 2:6). An important part of the argument of the Letter to the Hebrews concerns the belief that the superiority of Christ’s sacrifice is that his offering of himself enabled him to enter not the earthly shrine, but heaven itself, into the very presence of God (Heb 9:11, 24). This framework of contrast between the world below and the world above facilitates the writer’s presentation of the saving work of Christ. Christ the heavenly pioneer has entered into the inner shrine, behind the veil (Heb 6:19-21). He has entered into not a sanctuary made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself to appear in the divine presence on behalf of God’s people.® The book of Revelation fails to satisfy the desire for an unambiguous, final utterance on faith and morals. Revelation never allows the reader complete certainty. There is no simple division between the church and the world. There are no grounds for complacency—only watchfulness (3:3) and the constant endeavoring to keep one’s robes clean (22:14). The practice of the church is confused and compromised. Despite the authoritative status it claims for itself, the book of Revelation hardly offers a definitive prescription of the religious life. There is in it an implied intense suspicion of the values of the surrounding culture and institutions, but nowhere does it set down precise rules of how one should exemplify the divine wisdom. We are not offered a detailed and immediately applicable code of laws but the revelation of divine mysteries that bemuse and perplex and seem to veil as much as they reveal. And unlike the interpretations of the visions in Daniel (see Dan 2:7), rarely is there an angelic interpreter on hand to tell readers what the imagery means. To discern the true nature of a culture in thrall to war and virtue “calls for wisdom” (13:18 NRSV; see also 17:9). This means more than astute observation of the world. What is required is a recovery of imagination as a necessary complement to all-conquering reason. In / Enoch 2-5, the wisdom deriving from observation of the world is juxtaposed with apocalyptic, revelatory, wisdom. Apocalyptic wisdom does not offer unambiguous and unequivocal answers. The appeal to revelation may seem to promise solutions to intractable human problems through divinely bestowed insight. Apocalypses produce as much mystification as enlightenment, however, revealing the extent of the problem of human

perception and the complex strategies needed to compel an uncomprehending humanity to begin to see things differently. That is how apocalyptic visions function. We should not ask of apocalypses, What do they mean? Rather, we should ask, How do the images and designs work? How do they affect us and change our lives? The intellectual asceticism of 4 Ezra, the opacity of Revelation’s symbolism, and the tantalizing parables of God’s reign in the Gospels all indicate that until “sweet Science reigns” those whose minds are darkened 43. See further C. Rowland, “Apocalyptic, Mysticism, and the New Testament,” in Geschichte Tradition Reflexion: Festschrift fiir Martin Hengel, ed. P. Schafer (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1996) 405ff.

523

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

will need a variety of ways to open their intellects to glimpse the mystery of apocalyptic wisdom.

CONTEMPORARY APOCALYPTIC: 4 EZRA AND REVELATION Revelation’s imagery and its hope in the messianic vindication and defeat of Rome parallels in many ways the roughly contemporary 4 Ezra (2 Esdras 3-14). This work has for centuries been an important resource for understanding the milieu of the New Testament. It has a place in the Vulgate, and some Christian traditions have placed it among the books of the Old Testament. Its similarity of outlook in regard to human sinfulness with the Paul of Romans and Galatians sets it apart from other Jewish texts. Its messianic vision in chap. 13, dependent as it is on Daniel 7, has often been used as a resource for the discussion of the Son of Man in the canonical Gospels. The book of 4 Ezra is an apocalypse that emerged in the dark days of despair after the fall of the Second Temple in 70 CE. It offers “a fountain of wisdom” (4 Ezra 14:47) in its secret books. In the dialogues between Ezra and the angel, which occupy the first part of the book, the contrast between human and divine wisdom and the inability of even the most righteous humans to understand the divine purposes are repeated themes (echoes here of Isaiah 40:21 ff.). Ezra’s words embody an enlightened, commonsense position with regard to the lot of humanity, the injustices of the world, and the perplexity at the fate of the chosen people in the wake of the destruction of the Temple. He is concerned for the majority of humanity whose unrighteousness seems to be about to consign them to perdition (4 Ezra 7:02ff.). The divine perspective is uncompromising, however, and only partially understandable. The dialogue between Ezra and the angel indicates the contrast between human and divine wisdom. At times it appears that Ezra’s concerns are more merciful than the divine reply. Despair is dealt with by urging the righteous to concentrate on the glory that awaits those who are obedient to God (4 Ezra 8:52; 9:13). God’s patience is not for the sake of humanity, but because of divine faithfulness to the eternal plan, which was laid down before creation (4 Ezra 7:74). Throughout the book, the ways of God, the Most High, are vindicated (parallels here with Paul’s agony in Romans 9-11). God is the one who orders the times and the seasons, and God alone will bring about the new age (4 Ezra 6:5). Just as in the book of Job,* where the divine answer stresses the inadequacy of human wisdom, so here, too, the impossibility of understanding the divine purposes in the midst of the old order is stressed (4 Ezra 4:1ff., 21; 5:36). Ezra cannot presume to be a better judge than God or wiser than the Most High (4 Ezra 7:19). Humanity’s problem is that despite being given a mind to understand, they have sinned. So torment awaits them (4 Ezra 7:72; cf. 4 Ezra 9:20), sentiments reminiscent of Paul’s description ofa benighted humanity in Romans 1. All speculation and argument are irrelevant compared 44. M. Stone, Fourth Ezra, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990). 45. M. Knibb, “Apocalyptic and Wisdom in 4 Ezra,” Journal for the Study ofJudaism 13 (1982) 56-74.

524

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

to the eschatological concerns that should occupy the attention of the righteous (4 Ezra 9:13). In 4 Ezra 6:11ff., Ezra is shown the signs of the end of the present order. These visions involve a dreadful period of disease and deprivation (4 Ezra 6:20ff.; see Excursus: “The Tribulations of the Messianic Age,” 635-36). In 4 Ezra 7, there isa much longer and more explicit description of the future purposes of God. The hidden city and land will appear (presumably a reference to the fulfillment of the hidden purposes of God, vouchsafed to the seer and soon to be made manifest on earth). The Messiah also will be revealed, and those who are left on earth will reign with him for four hundred years. This will come to an end with the death of the Messiah and all humanity, with the world returning to primeval silence for seven days. Only after that will the world, which is not awake, be roused; whatever is corruptible will perish (4 Ezra 7:32), and the resurrection will take place as a prelude to the judgment of all humanity, confronted by the furnace of hell and the paradise of delight. What emerges in the work is a perceptive insight into the pervasiveness of evil, which makes difficult the attempts of men and women to fulfill the divine command. There is free will (4 Ezra 3:8; 8:50-51), but Adam’s sin has had devastating effects on human life and understanding (4 Ezra 3:20; 4:30; 7:118). A blessed place is reserved for those who persevere to the end. The message is uncompromising. There is little of the arresting symbolism that permeates virtually the whole of the book of Revelation (though 4 Ezra Off. marks a change of mood). The effect of reading the early chapters of 4 Ezra is to disinfect the mind of any presumption of being able to fathom the wisdom of God and to warn against flights of metaphysical fancy. What the righteous need do is view all things in the light of the end rather than concentrate on the apparent injustices of the present time (4 Ezra 7:16). Eschatology offers the hope of final resolution. Those who, like Ezra, continue in obedience, a way of life that seems so pointless to the majority of humanity, receive reassurance that faithful endurance ultimately will pay off. If there can be any answer to human questioning in 4 Ezra, that is the only one on offer. The stark message is that the righteous need to view all things in the light of eschatological salvation and to persist in obedience to God rather than allow themselves to become depressed or allow their reason full rein to seek explanations to the apparent injustices of the present (4 Ezra 7:16).“° The mystery that offers salvation is perseverance in the righteous way of life, whatever the apparent contrary indications (cf. Mark 13:13). Revelation has several parallels with 4 Ezra and with Daniel. The beasts from the sea and land in Revelation 13 are dependent on the opening verses of Daniel 7 and, like 4 Ezra 11, focus on one beast only, which is an epitome of the awfulness and oppression of tyranny. Like the messiah in 4 Ezra 13, the Lamb can stand on Mount Zion (Rev 14:1); and at the dramatic parousia in Rev 19:11, the rider on the white horse is described in language reminiscent of Dan 10:6, with the same capacity as the messiah in 4 Ezra 13 to 46. Note the similarities with Ludwig Wittgenstein’s understanding of religion as outlined by Ray Monk, Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius (London: Vintage, 1990) 409-10.

525

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

take effective action in judgment (here there is a sharp sword rather than a stream of fire, 19:15). Both 4 Ezra and Revelation agree in separating the political critique (the opening verses of Daniel 7, dealing with the beasts emerging from the sea) from the “messianic solution” focused on in Dan 7:13. So Revelation 13 focuses on the critique of empire, whereas Revelation 14 and 19 (though the latter is not formally dependent on Dan 7:13-14) present us with a contrasting scene in which the dominion of the Lamb under God is outlined. In 4 Ezra 11-12 the eagle vision is a critique of and prediction of the destruction of the last empire, while 4 Ezra 13 is a messianic vision. Both Revelation and 4 Ezra concentrate on the fourth beast of Daniel, a preoccupation that was to feature in a wide range of apocalyptic scenarios down the centuries.*” The vision in 4 Ezra 1 1--12 is a complicated account of an eagle with twelve wings and three heads that rises out of the sea. The complexity of this vision has often prompted the suggestion that it is an artificial construction reflecting recent Roman history. That assessment is entirely understandable, but needs to be set alongside the difficulties commentators have had in offering a historical explanation of the various details. The wings of the eagle spread over the whole earth. The eagle reigns over the earth with all things subjected to it. Out of the wings, eight rival small wings emerge. The first twelve wings rise and fall, and of these none rule as long as does the second (v. 16). Eventually the twelve large wings and two of the eight little wings disappear. Nothing remains except three heads, which are at rest, and six of the little wings. Two little wings separate from the six and remain under the head on the right side, while four little wings plan to rule. Two set up their kingdom and then disappear, leaving the two who plan to reign together. In v. 29 the head in the middle awakens and with the two remaining heads devours the little wings that are planning to reign. The head gains control over the world and oppresses its inhabitants. Eventually the head in the middle disappears, and the two remaining heads rule until the head on the right side devours that on the left. Then the focus of interest changes. In v. 37 a lion is roused from the forest; it speaks to the eagle, the last of four beasts that were made to reign in the world and the sign that the end of time has come. This fourth beast conquers all that have gone before and holds sway in an oppressive manner. It is condemned in 4 Ezra 11:41-42: “You have judged the earth but not with truth, for you have oppressed the meek and injured the peaceable; you have hated those who tell the truth, and have loved liars; you have destroyed the homes of those who brought forth fruit, and have laid low the walls of those who did you no harm.” Its destruction is “so that the whole earth may be freed from violence.” The remaining head disappears, leaving two wings to set themselves up to reign, after which follows a period of tumult until they vanish; the body of the eagle is burned, and the whole earth is left terrified. This vision, with its far-fetched multiplications of the wings of the eagle, demands an 47. D. Brady, The Contribution of British Writings Between 1560-1830 to the Interpretation ofRevelation 13:16-18 (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1983).

526

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

explanation. As we might expect from an apocalypse, the seer is offered an interpretation of this complicated vision by an angel. In 4 Ezra 12:11, we are told that the eagle from the sea is the fourth kingdom that appeared in Daniel’s vision. This is more terrifying than all the kingdoms that came before it. This fourth kingdom will be ruled by a series of twelve kings, the second reigning the longest. After the second king’s death there will be great conflicts. and the empire will be on the verge of collapse. Of the eight kings whose times will be short, two will perish; four will be kept for the time when the end approaches, but two will be kept until the end. According to 4 Ezra 12:22, the culmination of its dominion will come when three kings represented by the three heads raised up by the Most High in the last days will rule the earth more oppressively. They will sum up the wickedness of the regime. One of the kings dies in his bed; one will fall victim to the sword of another; and the last one will fall by the sword as well. The lion who appears is the Messiah, the offspring of David, kept for the end of days to execute judgment and bring about the liberation of the “remnant of my people” and to “make them joyful until the end comes.” | Whereas in 4 Ezra the eagle is Daniel’s fourth beast, in Revelation the beast that arises from the sea incorporates characteristics of the previous empires. The imagery of 4 Ezra 11-12 is more complicated than anything in Revelation, though something approaching that complexity is to be found in Revelation 17, where the seven heads of the beast upon which the woman is seated are both kings and hills (Rev 17:9). The Messiah in both texts is symbolized by a lion (Rev 5:5; 4 Ezra 12, probably dependent on Gen 49:9). Revelation lacks the pessimistic tone of 4 Ezra, though it, too, contemplates a world that is seduced by the power and brilliance of the Beast. The interpretation of the eagle vision suggests that the reign of the Messiah precedes the end and so is part of a two-stage eschatology. This twofold scheme of a messianic reign followed by a new age, possibly used for the first time in such an explicit form, is evidence in a Jewish apocalypse of the hope for a new age that is transcendent. It appears, however, alongside the conventional hope for a this-worldly reign of God (4 Ezra 7:28-29; cf. 4 Ezra 6:1 8ff.). In this it parallels Revelation, where the vision of the new heaven and new earth is preceded by the millennial messianic reign. This particular pattern represents a significant development of late first-century eschatology, when political despair may have contributed to the emergence of a transcendent eschatology alongside the hope for a messianic kingdom on earth. For all their differences, a scheme of woes, messianic kingdom, resurrection, judgment, and new age is clearly discerned in both works. Revelation uses much more vivid imagery as compared with the prosaic prediction found in 4 Ezra (and the contemporary Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch). The role of the redeemer figure is much more obvious in Revelation. There is little sign in any of these works of the warrior role found in the Psalms ofSolomon (and in 4 Ezra 13). Indeed, the Messiah’s reign on earth in 4 Ezra 7:28-29 lasts only four hundred years, at the end of which he dies. Eschatological concerns in 4 Ezra are to some extent eclipsed by another concern: the S27

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

evil of humanity, the wrestling with the apparently merciless character of the divine purposes and human frailty in the face of God’s inscrutable purposes. The issues raised are what we would have expected Jews to have struggled with after the traumatic experience of 70 CE. There was an inevitable reappraisal of attitudes with the need for more precise definitions of what was required of the people of God and an emphasis on the centrality of the law. The burning question in 4 Ezra is not so much, When will the end be? but, How can one make sense of the present and ensure participation in the kingdom of God? Apocalyptic insight is part of the way in which the impoverished character of existence and the injustices of the world are given a different perspective.

A HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION OF THE APOCALYPSE The Early Christian Context: Apocalyptic Tradition in the New Testament. We cannot regard other New Testament texts as interpretations of Revelation, because most were contemporary with Revelation. Yet there are connections between them that should be noted.” Eschatological passages in the Gospels (esp. Matthew 24—25; Mark 13; Luke 21) all have connections with passages from Revelation.*” Luke’s Gospel in particular, perhaps surprising given its reputation as the one least in touch with apocalyptic ideas, shows several points of contact. Thus whereas Mark’s Gospel talks of the sea as the destination of the demons (Mark 5:13) in the struggle with Legion, Luke’s version of the story uses the same Greek word as does Revelation (Luke 8:33; cf. Rev 19:20; 20:14).°° Contacts between Luke’s Gospel and Revelation deserve particular attention. Verbal connections between the two texts are quite striking (e.g., cf. Luke 16:19 with Rev 18:12 and 17:4; Luke 10:19 with Rev 9:3; Luke 4:5-7 with Rev 13:7-8; Luke 21:27 with Rev 14:14; and, most striking of all, Luke 12:8 with Rev 3:5). Several of these connections are apparent in Luke’s version of the eschatological discourse (Luke 21). The features are distinctive and suggest that Luke has a broader horizon to the prophecy more in keeping with that found in Revelation. Thus in Luke 21:28 the reference to liberation suggests that more could have been said, but there has instead been concentration on the time of distress preceding it (Luke 21:23; cf. 1 Cor 7:26, 28). What Luke predicts are days of vengeance (picking up on Isa 61:2, but omitted from the quotation of these verses in Luke 4:19). The tribulation in Luke 21:25 reminds us of the chaos in Rev 6:8-9, as also does the reaction of humanity in Luke 21:26 (cf. Rev 6:15ff.) in the face of the time of wrath (cf. Luke 23:30). The allusive reference to the trampling of Jerusalem by Gentiles (Luke 21:24) recalls John’s vision in Rev 11:1ff. Elsewhere in the story of Jesus, it is Luke who 48. See the surveys in A. Wainwright, Mysterious Apocalypse (Nashville: Abingdon, 1993); E. B. Allo, L’Apocalypse de Saint Jean (Paris: Lecoffre, 1921); W. Bousset, Die Offenbarung Johannis (Gottingen: 1906); R. H. Charles, Studies in the Apocalypse (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1910); G. Maier, Die Offenbarung Johannis und die Kirche (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1981). 49. Survey in R. Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993) chap. 3. 50. K. Wengst, Pax Romana and the Peace ofJesus Christ (London: SCM, 1988) 65-66.

528

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

reports the absence of Satan from the life of Jesus (Luke 4:21; cf. Luke 22:3 with Rev 7:22 and 13:16; see also Rev 20:2ff., where Satan is bound and removed from the earth). It is the Gospel of Luke that portrays Jesus as offering an interpretation of the mission of the seventy and their triumph over the powers of darkness, which is linked with the vision of Satan’s fall from heaven (cf. Luke 10:18 with Rev 12:7ff.). The critical moment of Jesus’ death is marked by an eclipse (there is an explicit reference in Luke 23:45; cf. Rev 8:12; 160)>! ; Paul’s doctrine of the parousia (see Excursus: “The Parousia in the New Testament,” 703-706), the allusive eschatological description in Rom 8:18ff., with the tribulations of the messianic age, and, of course, the manifestation of God’s wrath (Rom 1:17-18) and the gospel (Rom 3:21) all connect with the apocalyptic way Paul speaks of Christ’s impact on him (Gal 1:16). Paul includes in the gospel message the revelation of God’s justice and of God’s wrath (Rom 1:16-17). Itis a juxtaposition that is very much akin to the revelation of God’s salvation and judgment (as is the case in Deuteronomy 28ff.) as interlocking manifestations of the divine purpose in Revelation.** As in Revelation, in Romans 1 the wrath mentioned is God’s eschatological wrath against impiety and injustice, particularly evident in idolatry. In Rom 1:17ff. there is a repeated stress on revelation. The refusal to acknowledge God leads to a determined response from God. There is a threefold assertion that “God gave them up” (Rom 1:24, 26, 28 NRSV), a more direct assertion of divine judgment than the string of passives in Revelation suggesting the same thing (e.g., Rev Oz, 4). Humanity did not give God the glory (Rom 1:21). It is the proclamation of the eternal gospel in Rev 14:6 that humanity should fear God (cf. the quotation of Ps 35:2 in Rom 3:18) and give God the glory and worship God the Creator (cf. Rom 1:25). Idolatrous behavior leads to a perverted outlook on the world (Rom 1:21) and a failure to recognize the ways and acts of God (cf. Rev 9:20). Idolatryisthe problem in Revelation, both generally in 9:20 and specifically in the context of worship of the Beast in 13:8, 12. “Uncleanness” (Rom 1:24; cf. Rom 6:19) is the mark of the dragon (Rev 16:9) and of Babylon (Rev 17:4; 18:2). The sexual immorality of Rom 1:25 parallels the warning to be ready and not to be found naked and “exposed to shame” in Rev 16:15. The concern with the natural and the unnatural in sexual activity in Rom 1:26 corresponds to that frame of mind seen so often in Revelation, where the clarity of boundaries is sharply defined and transgression of those boundaries that result in one’s becoming “lukewarm” (Rev 3:14-16) is resisted. This state of mind is one of deceit, the heart of the activity of Satan and the beast (e.g., Rev 12:9; 13:14); in Revelation, it is focused on idolatrous practices (Rev 2:20). The “lie” (Rom 1:25; cf. Rev 2:2; 21:8; 22:15) and false service (Rom 1:25) need to be 51. On Luke and apocalyptic traditions, see S. Garrett, The Demise of the Devil (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989) 128; M.E. Boismard, “Rapprochements littéraires l’évangile de Luc et l’Apocalypse,” inJ.Schmid and A. Vogtle, Synoptische Studien (Munich: Mohr, 1953) 53-63. 52. See further G. Bornkamm, “The Revelation of God’s Wrath,” in Early Christian Experience (London: SCM, 1969) 47-70.

529

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

replaced with the true service of those who are priests in the new world (Rev 7:15; cf.

Rom 12:1). That threefold “giving up” by God covers three areas: the desires of the heart, shameful passions (Rom 1:26), and the undiscerning mind, which does that which is unbecoming; then follows a list of vices that result in disrupted and inharmonious living. We may compare Paul’s focus on sexual misdemeanors in Romans 1 with the characterization of the offense of “fornication” throughout Revelation (e.g., Rev 2:20). This also includes behavior that contributes to society’s malfunctioning, all of which is a consequence of idolatry. In Romans, it is God who consigns the impious to particularly distorted patterns of behavior, just as in Revelation the source of the crisis for a disordered cosmos is in the divine book with seven seals, preserved in God’s presence. The cataclysmic effects may not be immediately apparent in the list of consequences in Romans 1. What we are offered in Romans is a prose description of a world marked by deceit and human selfishness. Stripped of the apocalyptic symbolism, its message is much the same as that of Revelation 6 and 8-9, however. In Rev 6:4, the second horseman removes peace from the earth, so that people slay one another; here is the consequence of the strife, envy, and covetousness that Paul had spoken of in Rom 1:28. While Paul’s extant writings include no apocalypse, the opening chapters of 1 Corinthians reflect an apocalyptic perspective, access to which comes through revelation through the Spirit. The divine mystery precedes and is then backed up by Scripture (e.g., Rom 11:25-26). Paul describes himself and his companions as apocalyptic seers who are entrusted the privilege of administering the divine secrets (1 Cor 4:1). In 1 Cor 2:6-7, Paul talks of the content of the gospel itself as a mystery hidden from the rulers of the present age. The success of the saving act of God results from the inability of those who are dominated by the present age and its gods to see the significance of what they were doing in crucifying the Lord of glory (1 Cor 2:9). The cross, the sign of failure in human estimation, turns out to be the very heart of the divine mystery for the salvation of the world. It points to an apocalyptic mystery hidden before all ages and revealed only in the last days (cf. Luke 10:23-24; | Pet 1:11-12). The divine wisdom to which the true apostle has access is a mystery taught by the Spirit, and it can be understood only by those who have the Spirit (1 Cor 2:10). The divine wisdom is something revealed rather than something immediately clear and compelling to those whose minds are darkened and cannot understand its significance. It remains hidden until the veil is removed (2 Cor 3:14-15). The cross is a sign that transcends the plethora of apocalyptic imagery. Like every sign, it is ambiguous. To some it remains foolishness (1 Cor 1:18). Like the Lamb, which forms the centerpiece of the apocalypse, the cross stands at the fulcrum of history and is the determinant of a true understanding of reality. In continuity with the Jewish apocalyptic tradition, Paul thinks of another dimension of human existence, normally hidden from sight but revealed to those with eyes to see. His apocalypse of Jesus Christ is the basis for his practice, not the least that of admitting Gentiles into the messianic age without the law of Moses. His relegation of the Sinai covenant to a subordinate position to the new 530

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

covenant in the Messiah contrasts with the firm subordination of the disclosures of the apocalyptic spirit to the Sinai theophany in the rabbinic traditions. The contrasts in Hebrews between the sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifices of the levitical system have been taken as indications of Greek platonic influence. But the likelihood is that the apocalyptic tradition, with its contrasts between the heavenly world above and the earthly world below, may explain the distinctive soteriology of Hebrews.*? The author seeks to understand the work of Christ as the important moment in the piercing of that barrier between heaven and earth that is so familiar to us from the apocalyptic literature. The climax of history has now occurred in Jesus, and he is the first to enter the heavenly sanctuary, which is at the same time the sign of the new age. Jesus, the pioneer, has gone into the innermost part of heaven and has sat down with God. He is behind the veil. Calvary becomes the moment when the unmediated access to God becomes a possibility. Paradoxically, the death outside the camp (Heb 13:12) becomes the place where heaven and earth coincide in that the sacrifice of Jesus opens up the way into the heavenly shrine. The cross has become a meeting point between heaven and earth. The place of reproach and rejection turns out to be the very gate of heaven. In Hebrews (and in the Letter to the Ephesians also), apocalyptic categories are taken up and utilized in the expression of convictions about Christ’s exaltation and its consequences. The cosmology of apocalyptic and the notion of revelation found in the apocalypses and the mystical literature was a convenient starting place for reflection on the understanding of revelation, which Christian writers believed had been inaugurated by the exaltation of Christ. The glory of the world above, which was to be manifested in the future, had now become a present possession for those who acknowledged that the Messiah had come and had already made available the heavenly gifts of the messianic age. The Patristic Period.’ There is a close link between the closing invocation in Rev 22:20 and the “maranatha” of Didache 10:6 (cf. 1 Cor 16:22): Let grace come, and let this world pass away. Hosanna to the Son of David. Whoever is holy, let them come; whoever is not, let them repent. maranatha. Amen.

The priority given to the prophetic in Didache 11-13 echoes what we find in Revelation 2710; 10'0;°16-20, 24) 19:10222:2)-0-7,, 9-108 18-19), (ciehevieo12-20- LOst tga suggesting that distinguishing true from false prophecy is an issue in both writings. In the struggle with gnosticism, insistence on the materiality of the doctrine of the resurrection and on this-worldly eschatology played their part in the writings of both Justin® and Irenaeus,® though Justin recognized that not all share his hope for a messianic 53. L. D. Hurst, The Epistle to the Hebrews: Its Background of Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990) 199. 54. B. Daley, The Hope of the Early Church (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991); C. Helms, “The Apocalypse in the Early Church, Christ, Eschaton, and the Millennium” (D. Phil. diss., Oxford University, 1991). 55. Justin Dialogue with Trypho 80. 56. Irenaeus Against Heresies V.26.1—-36.3. *

301

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

reign on earth. Elsewhere in the earlier books of Against Heresies, however, Irenaeus regards Revelation as primarily about the first coming of Christ and the witness of the church. Thus the enmity between humanity and the devil is related to the advent of

Christ viewed through the lens of Rev 20:2.°” What is also evident in Against Heresies V is an integration of eschatology and creation. What began with creation, Adam, and the fall ends with the new creation, the new Adam, and the final temptation and overthrow of Satan. Irenaeus periodizes history into seven ages.°® The parousia inaugurates the seventh millennium, when the sabbath rest comes (cf. Gen 2:2). The events of Genesis 1-3 are seen as archetypes of the last days. When Irenaues comes to discuss the Beast and its number in Rev 13:18,°° he thinks that Lateinos or Teitan or Evanthus may be intended and so affirms an anti-imperial reference. Hippolytus, in his treatise on Antichrist, reads Revelation 12 as being of the church and the struggle to bring the gospel to a hostile world.® Revelation is seen as the completion of the journey of God’s people, of which the exodus is a type, and there is a link between the Christ of Rev 1:13ff. and the prophets of old.°! Rome and the kingdom of Antichrist merge;™ and there is a Jewish dimension to the Antichrist figure, because he will come from the tribe of Daniel (see Daniel 14—15) and will rebuild the Temple. The two witnesses of Revelation 11 are identified with Enoch and Elijah. Hippolytus uses the cosmic week to show that only five and a half of the six periods have elapsed before the millennium (note the emphasis on the penultimate here, which we shall have reason to comment on in the context of the commentary), though he does not dwell on the delights of that age as Irenaeus had done. Origen’s reading of Revelation (he wrote no commentary on it) is decidedly anti-chiliastic— that is, he rejects the belief in a messianic reign on earth. His interpretation is christological. He sees Rev 19:13, for example, as an image of the victorious Logos (Word) marked by the signs of crucifixion. The prophecies of chaps. 12-22 are linked with the life of Christ and the church, and the millennium is seen as past. The defeat and binding of Satan (Rev 20:3) has already occurred.“* The heavenly Jerusalem is a spiritual reality, made possible by the resurrection; the new heaven and new earth began with Christ’s resurrection.© The earliest extant commentary on Revelation, used by Jerome, is by Victorinus of Pettau (c. beginning of the 4th cent.). His work is thoroughly contextual and relates the text to the circumstances of his day. The seven churches represent the universal church and are not intended for John’s area alone. Although Victorinus was a chiliast, his method included a typological reading, which presented Revelation as a series of events recurring 57+ Ibid, 1.23.7 58. Ibid., V.28.3. 59. Ibid., V.30.3. 60. Hippolytus Antichrist 61.

Ola 62. 63. 64. 65.

bids 12: Ibid., 25ff. Origen On Prayer 27:13. Origen Commentary on John 1.27.97. Ibid,; 10:35:22;

a2

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

in sacred history. So the trumpet blasts of Revelation 8ff. relate not only to the period after the coming of Christ but also to both the Babylonian exile and the period of Antichrist, whose malevolence can be seen in the actions of Roman emperors as well as in the figure of the last days. His interpretive approach blends the christocentric and ecclesiological with the eschatological. He uses an exegesis that blends present relevance and eschatological prediction. Thus the two witnesses (Rev 11:3) represent the deaths of prophets, both those of the past and the ones to come under Antichrist,°° and the sixth king is Nero, past and future persecutors of the saints. The book of seven seals is the Old Testament, a legal document sealed until the death of its testator, Jesus Christ. The unsealing of the seals reveals that the Old Testament has been fulfilled in the person of Christ. In the Son of Man vision in Rev 1:1 3ff., the two-edged sword indicates that Christ uttered both the law and the gospel. Victorinus explains the images of Revelation 4—5 as symbols of the old and the new economies.*’ Just as Revelation 4 is seen as a résumé of salvation history, so also the seals fulfill the old and reveal the totality of the new. The repetition of the sequence of seven is the means whereby the Spirit provides the opportunity for fuller appreciation of the mystery of God. In Revelation 6 the white horse and its rider are the Holy Spirit and the gospel message: “after the Lord ascended to heaven .. . he sent the Holy Spirit, whose words the preachers sent forth as arrows reaching to the human heart . . . and the crown on the head is the promised Holy Spirit.”°° Whereas the white horse signifies the Christian revelation from Christ to eschaton, the other horses are primarily eschatological. In Revelation 11, Elijah is both the witness and the precursor of Antichrist. He is the angel of Rev 7:2” and the eagle of Rev 8:13. The woman in chap. 12 is both an Old and a New Covenant figure. The devil’s attempt to devour the child is a reference to the temptation and passion of Christ. The flood of water from the dragon’s mouth is the persecution of the church. The war in heaven in Rev 12:7 is the beginning of the eschaton, which then becomes the focus for the rest of the commentary. Antichrist is Nero redevivus.” Victorinus follows earlier commentators in seeing in the number 666 the Greek word Teitan or the Latin Diclux. The seven heads of the dragon refer to the seven emperors who reigned near the beginning of the Christian era, from Galba to Nerva.”! Antichrist is associated with civil and religious corruption. Rome is Babylon, but the false prophet is associated with Judaism. He will cause an image of Antichrist to be set up in the Jerusalem Temple.” Antichrist sums up all evil in himself so that the condemnations of Babylon refer to one final embodiment of evil already partially

glimpsed in earlier history. Victorinus stresses the concrete character of the new Jerusalem and the life enjoyed by the saints,’? in a way similar to earlier evocations of the earthly 66. Victorinus Commentary on the Book of Revelation 102:1 6ff. 67. Ibid., 46ff. 68. Ibid., 66. 69. Ibid., 82. 70. Ibid., 120. 71. Ibid., 110. T2EMIES ZS. 73e Weide; 152:

533

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

eschatological delights in Papias and Irenaeus. Victorinus picks up on the element of inclusivism in the final vision and suggests that the gates are always left open because saving grace is always available. Tyconius’s (c. 400) reading of the book of Revelation, now no longer extant,” has been reconstructed from various sources. Its importance is great, because it had a profound influence on the mature Augustine and thence on later Christendom.” In his exegesis of Revelation, he uses the book to interpret contemporary reality. His work epitomizes those trends in exegesis that did not consign its message solely to the eschatological future. Tyconius encapsulates trends that had been in force at least since the time of Origen and of which there had been hints earlier in parts of Irenaeus’ writings. The text becomes a tool to facilitate the discernment of the moral and spiritual rather than to search out the eschatological in the text. So the millennium becomes a medium for understanding the present rather than merely the eschatological future. The mature Augustine continued in that tradition. He had originally believed that there would be a sabbath rest for the people of God that would last a thousand years, but, influenced by Tyconius, he accepted an approach to Scripture that enables Revelation to be a source of insight both eschatologically and for the contemporary church. Thus in his discussion of the millennium in 7he City of God”° he argues that with the first coming of Christ and the establishment of the church the devil has been bound “in the innumerable multitude of the impious, in whose hearts there is a great depth of malignity against the church of God.””” Eschatological elements, like Antichrist, Gog, and Magog, are stripped of their eschatological significance and relate to the experience of the church in this age. Augustine’s approach to empire is in certain key respects at one with the dualistic and suspicious attitude evident in earlier Christian apocalyptic interpretation. This contrasts with a different tone in the writing of Eusebius of Caesarea, a militant opponent of millenarian hope and an apologist for a Christian empire. For him the fulfillment of eschatological promise had come with the conversion of Constantine, which had enabled the divine peace to envelop the world.” The Joachite School.” The Augustinian exegesis held sway for much of the next five hundred years. The later Middle Ages saw the emergence of the next influential reading by Joachim of Fiore (c. 1132-1202), which was to use Revelation as a way of understanding salvation history and thereby embolden people to see themselves as being part of the imminent apocalypse. In a highly complex interpretative method formulated by allowing one part of Scripture to offer the model for interpreting the whole (what he calls concordia), Joachim related closely the Old and the New Testaments. He divided the book of Revelation into eight 74. K. Steinhauser, The Apocalypse Commentary of Tyconius (Frankfurt: Lang, 1987). 75. See P. Fredriksen, “Tyconius and Augustine on the Apocalypse,” in The Apocalypse in the Middle Ages, ed. R. Emmerson and B. McGinn (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1992) 20-37. 76. Augustine The City of God 20. 77,. Ibid., 023. 78. See Eusebius Ecclesiastical History X.9; Oration XVI.3-8. 79. Emmerson and McGinn, The Apocalypse in the Middle Ages, H. Lee, M. Reeves, and G. Silano, Western Mediterranean Prophecy: The School ofJoachim of Fiore and the Fourteenth Century Breviloquium (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1989).

534

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

parts: (1) 1:1-3:22, letters to seven churches; (2) 4:1-8:1, the opening of the seals; (3) 8:2-11:18, the trumpet blasts; (4) 11:19-14:20, the two beasts; (5) 15:1-16:7, the seven bowls; (6) 18:16-19:21, destruction of Babylon; (7) 20:1-10, the millennium; and (8) 20:11—22:21, the new Jerusalem. The parts of the book correspond to the seven periods of the church, which are then followed by eternity. Each of the series of seven is then related to the seven ages (tempora) of the church. The seven seals relate to the seven ages of both Israel and the church. In the sequence of seven, the sixth assumes great importance as the penultimate period, anticipating the consummation of history. Thus the sixth letter is a prophecy of the sixth period, which is imminent in Joachim’s day. In Israel’s history and in the beginnings of the church, the Babylonian exile and the birth ofJesus, respectively, herald the renewal of the church in the sixth period of history. The preoccupation with the penultimate period, the sixth, is typical of exegesis in the Joachite tradition; it is the period of Antichrist and leads to the fulfillment of Joachim’s final age of the Spirit. So Joachim finds a parallel between the experience of Israel and that of the church, but he broke decisively from the Augustinian tradition in being willing to find significance in history. Joachim used a trinitarian reading of history in which a coming third age, that of the Spirit, would be characterized by an outburst of spiritual activity in the form of monastic renewal. That time, for him, was imminent. The opening of the sixth seal would be a time of persecution and exile, parallel to that of the Jews in Babylon, that would purify the church. The coming of the seventh era, the opening of the seventh seal, would herald the era of the Holy Spirit, and the seeds of that new age, sowed long before, would come to fruition. Revelation, therefore, offered the key to the reading of the Bible as a whole and to the interpretation of history. Most daring of the commentators in this tradition is Peter Olivi (1248-98), who used Joachim extensively in his Postilla in apocalypsim®® Olivi’s commentary on the book of Revelation was investigated and condemned in 1326. For him, the sixth period is the beginning of the time of renewal. Olivi places himself in the sixth period and identifies Francis of Assisi, whom he identifies with the angel of the sixth seal in Rev 7:2, as the inaugurator of that period. What is remarkable about Olivi’s exegesis are his predictions of the corruption of the church and the conflict over the issue of poverty in the Franciscan order, which dominated the early history of the order, which are to be seen as an eschatological tribulation. Olivi predicts that the pope and Franciscan leaders would reject the “true” Franciscan view of poverty. Like Joachim, he divided salvation history into three periods, corresponding to Father, Son, and Spirit. In the seven ages of the church, the sixth age is that of evangelical men, from Francis to the death of Antichrist; the final age will last from Antichrist until the end of the world. Olivi matched the seven heads of the dragon with seven persecutions of the church and the seven periods of the church to the seven ages of world history: Adam 80. D. Burr, Olivi’s Peaceable Kingdom: A Be Pennsylvania Press, 1993).

of the Apocalypse Commentary (Philadelphia: University of

535

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

to Noah, Noah to Abraham, Abraham to Moses, Moses to David, David to Christ, Christ to Antichrist, Antichrist to the end of the world. He spoke of three advents of Christ: first in the flesh, then in the spirit of evangelical reform, and third in judgment. Just as Christ came in the sixth age to replace Judaism, so also in the sixth age of the church, it will be renewed, something initiated by the appearance of Francis of Assisi. Whatis new in Olivi’s interpretation is that he saw the forces of evil as being concentrated in a worldly church, a present, or at least imminent, reality, that is identified with the whore of Babylon. A mystic antichrist appears, possibly a false pope, though this is unclear from his writing. On the basis of the second half of Revelation 13, Olivi sees this mystic antichrist as one who excludes those who contradict ecclesiastical authority. During the time of Antichrist, the doctors of the church will take the side of Antichrist, and they will attack the life and spirit of Christ in the lives of those engaged in the renewal of the church. Like Augustine, Olivi declared that the millennium began with the church’s reign, starting in the time of Constantine and lasting until the last judgment, which would take place at some point in the fourteenth century. In the light of views like this, it comes as no surprise that the later Middle Ages were a period of such intense upheaval fired by apocalyptic revivals.°! The Reformation.” Bullinger was the only magisterial Reformer to write a commentary on Revelation arising from lections and sermons, and the importance of that commentary to sixteenth-century theological study should not be underestimated. In the first edition of the German Bible, however, which was richly illustrated (in the 1522 edition Babylon is depicted wearing a papal crown), Luther outlined his reasons for relegating the book to a subordinate place within the canon of the New Testament, in words that echo much earlier (and later) assessments in the Christian tradition: About this book of the Revelation of John, | leave everyone free to hold his own ideas, and would bind no man to my opinion and judgment: | say what I feel. Imiss more than one thing in this book, and this makes me hold it to be neither apostolic or prophetic. First and foremost, the Apostles do not deal with visions, but prophecy in clear, plain words, as do Peter and Paul and Christ in the gospel. For it befits the apostolic office to speak of Christ and his deeds without figures and visions but there is no prophet in the Old Testament, to

say nothing of the New, who deals so out and out with visions and figures. And so I think of it almost as I do of the Fourth Book of Esdras, and I can in nothing detect that it was provided by the Holy Spirit. Moreover, he seems to be going much too far when he commends his own book so

highly—more than any other of the sacred books do, though they are much more important, and threaten that if any one takes away anything from it, God will deal likewise with him. 81. See N. Cohn, The Pursuit of the Millennium (London: Paladin, 1984). 82. K. Firth, The Apocalyptic Tradition in Reformation Britain, 1530-1645 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979): C. Hill, The Antichrist in Seventeenth Century England, rev. ed. (London: Verso, 1990); C. Hill, The English Bible and the Seventeenth Century Revolution (London: Penguin, 1993).

536

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

Again, they are to be blessed who keep what is written therein; and yet no one knows what that is, to say nothing of keeping it. It is just the same as if we had it not, and there are many far better books for us to keep. Many of the fathers rejected, too, this book of old, though St. Jerome, to be sure, praises it highly and says that it is above all praise and that there are as Many mysteries in it as words; though he cannot prove this at all, and his praise is at many points, too mild. Finally, let every one think of it as his own spirit gives him to think. My spirit cannot fit itself into this book. There isone sufficient reason for me not to think highly of it—Christ is not taught or known in it; but to teach Christ is the thing which an apostle above all else is bound to do, as He says in Acts 1 “Ye shall be my witnesses.” Therefore I stick to the books which give me Christ clearly and purely.®3

Revelation’s theological shortcomings and the dangers it posed for the faithful meant that it was to be considered as little better than an apocryphal book. Luther subtly modified his view of Revelation in the later editions of his New Testament from 1530 onward, offering the advice: “The first and surest step toward finding its interpretation is to take from history the events and disasters that have come upon Christendom until now, and hold them up alongside these images and so compare them very carefully. If then the two perfectly coincided and squared with one another, we could build on that as a sure, or at least unobjectionable interpretation.” ®* “In this book,” wrote Luther in his Preface to Revelation of 1545, “we see that, through and above all plagues and beasts and bad angels, Christ is with his saints, and wins the victory at last.” Luther came to the view that the pope was Antichrist, a view held also by Calvin, who believed that “all the marks by which the Spirit of God has pointed out antichrist appear clearly in the Pope,”® a view worked out in detail by many Protestant commentators. This notion was repudiated by Roman Catholic expositors like Bellarmine, who argued that the advent of Enoch and Elijah (Revelation 11), the emergence of Antichrist from the tribe of Dan, and the universal proclamation of the gospel had to precede Antichrist, and so the Roman Catholic pontiff could not be that figure.*®° A fascinating witness to the interpretation of Revelation in the early Calvinist tradition is provided by the Geneva Bible, which offers a historicizing interpretation typical of the day.*” It enables us to see how Revelation was used as part of the ecclesiastical struggle of the time. Its Protestant leanings are everywhere apparent. On Rev 15:2, the promise is that the afflictions of the world are all overcome by the saints of God. According to 14:1, 83. Martin Luther, Preface to the New Testament, | 2ff. 84. See R. Bauckham, Tudor Apocalypse: Sixteenth Century Apocalypticism, Millenarianism, and the English Reformation (Oxford: Sutton Courtenay, 1978) 41ff. 85. Firth, The Apocalyptic Tradition in Reformation Britain, 13. 86. Ibid., 171. 87. Edinburgh 1579. See also Hill, The English Bible and the Seventeenth Century Revolution, 56-62. The notes were influenced by Bullinger’s sermons and Bale’s writing, see Firth, The Apocalyptic Tradition in Reformation Britain, 122-24. See also Bauckham, 7udor Apocalypse, 45-48.

sous

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

Christ is ever-present with his church: “there can be no vicare; for where there is a vicare, there is no church.” The mark on the forehead of the elect is “the mark of their election, their faith.” The throne of Satan (2:13) is “all townes and countries whence God’s words and good living is banished . . . and also the places where the word is not preched syncerly, nor manners right reformed.” As may be expected, there is an identification of Rome with the antichrist (the papacy is the inheritor of the power of the Roman Empire, in the interpretation of the two beasts of Revelation 13). The beast from the sea has two horns, “which signifies the priesthode and the kingdoms, and therefore he giveth in his armes two keys, and hath two swordes caryed before him.” The Roman Catholic character of Antichrist is supported by the interpretation of 666 as /ateinus (an early patristic exegesis as well). The locusts of Rev 9:3 are “worldlie suttil Prelates, with Monkes, freres, cardinals, Patriarkes, Archbishops, Doctors, Bachelors and masters which forsake Christ to maintain false doctrine.” There is explicit rejection of the Anabaptists (the Nicolaitans of Rev 2:6 are said to be “the heretics which helde that wives shulde be commune”) and of their doctrine of the State in the comment on Rev 21:24: “here we see as in infinite other places that Kings and Princes (contrarie to what wicked opinion of the Anabaptists) are partakers of the heavenilie glorie, if they rule in the feare of the Lord.” The opening of the first seal in Rev 6:1 is the declaration of God’s will, and the white horse signifies “innocence, victorie and felicitie which shilde come by the preaching of the gospel” (an echo of the exegesis of Victorinus). The plagues that come through the sequence of seals, trumpets, and bowls refer to the corruption of the church from within and the persecutions from without. The only remedy is to appear before God “by the meanes ofJesus Christ” (on 8:2). True ministry should resemble that of the two witnesses,

who are types of “all the preachers that shulde buylde up God’s church” (11:3).°* The ministers “ought to receive the worde into their hearts and to have grace and deep judgment and diligently to studie it with zeale to utter it” (on 10:9). So zeal is required, for “nothing more displeaseth God than indifference and coldness in religion” (on 3:19). The marginal note urges readers to recognize the contemporary relevance of the book: “this is not then as the other Prophecies which were commanded to be hid till the time appointed .. . because that these things shulde be quickly accomplished and did now begin” (on 22:10). Urgency and watchfulness are essential: “Seeing the Lord is at hand, we ought to be constant and rejoyce, but we must beware we esteme not the length or shortness of the Lord’s coming by our own imagination.” What is needed is to “read diligently: judge soberly, and call earnestly to God for the true understanding thereof” (the conclusion of The Argument, The Revelation of John the Divine). The interpretation of

Revelation’s imagery includes recognition of the historical background of the original work, evident also in the approach to passages like Dan 9:24ff. These passages have often been a subject of eschatological speculation, but in the Geneva Bible they are interpreted entirely 88. On the interpretation of these verses, see R. L. Petersen, Preaching in the Last Days: The Theme of “Two Witnesses” in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (London: Oxford University Press, 1993) 199.

538

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

in terms of Jewish history before Christ. So while Christopher Hill writes that “the main offence of the Geneva Bible lay in its notes,”® it cannot be said that they fomented eschatological enthusiasm, for “the time shall be long of Christ’s second coming, and yet the children of God ought not to be discouraged” (on Dan 12:11). Rather, they are a testimony to a use of Revelation as a crucial tool for “the true kings and priests in Christ” whereby may be disclosed “the wicked deceit” in their midst (on 16:12) and acting in a way appropriate to their election and continued perseverance. Given that this historicizing and hortatory reading of Revelation rejects both Anabaptist and chiliastic enthusiasm, it is strange that Revelation should have a less favored position in the lectionary of the Book of Common Prayer than do apocryphal books (read in October and November).” Joachite influence continued in differing forms. On the one hand, in his widely influential book The Image of Both Churches, John Bale combined the historical interpretation of the Joachite tradition with the Augustinian apocalyptic dualism of an eternal struggle between two classes of people: those of Christ and those of Antichrist. Revelation, therefore, offers an important insight into the nature of this eternal struggle, which has gone on through the ages.”! In the spirit of Joachim, Bale suggested that the sixth trumpet and seal introduced his own period: The sixth age is the age of reformation. Another interpreter who was influenced by the Joachite tradition, yet in an overtly revolutionary direction, was Thomas Muentzer (d. 1525). Despite his reputation as the epitome of apocalyptic radicalism, Muentzer’s use of the book of Revelation itself is quite sparse. His political radicalism is rooted in the mystical tradition influenced by the writings of Tauler rather than in the Apocalypse,*? which may have influenced early Anabaptism. Hans Hut, for example (who may have been part of Muentzer’s army, which was routed at Frankenhausen in 1525 and who himself died in prison the following year), wrote of the situation at the time of the Peasants Revolt that “the final and most terrible times of the world are upon us.” The evidence of an extensive use of Revelation is apparent, however, in the writings of Muentzer’s contemporary Melchior Hoffman (d. c. 1534).°* He saw Revelation as the key to the understanding of history, the meaning of the secrets of which had been revealed to him. There were three revelations of divine glory in the time of the apostles, the second at the time of Jan Hus, and the third at the time of the Reformation. Following each was a period of decline. He saw his own time as the coincidence of the last kingdom of Antichrist and the last outpouring of the Holy Spirit. He shared an Augustinian view of the millennium: There had been a Christian Jerusalem in which the elect, together with Christ, ruled the faithful for a thousand years. After Hus, God had given the church time to repent, but the 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. and on 94.

Hill, The English Bible and the Seventeenth Century Revolution , 64. F. E. Brightman, The English Rite (London: Rivingtons, 1915) 1:51. See Bauckham, 7udor Apocalypse, 54-90; Firth, The Apocalyptic Tradition in Reformation Britain, 32-68. P. Matheson, 7he Collected Works of Thomas Muentzer (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988). Hans Hut, “On the Mystery of Baptism,” in D. Liechty, Early Anabaptist Spirituality (London: SPCK, 1994) 64; anabaptism in England, I. B. Horst, The Radical Brethren (Nieuwkoop: de Graaf, 1972). K. Deppermann, Melchior Hoffmann (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1987).

539

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

papacy was antichrist and still prevailed. Hoffman, like Muentzer, identified his own mission with Elijah to come, one of the two witnesses of Revelation 11. Their defeat was a certain sign of the Second Coming, after which there would be a persecution of the true church, at the end of which a company of 144,000, inspired by the Spirit, would proclaim God’s grace throughout the world (echoes here of Joachim’s “spiritual men”). Although his own vision had no place for the exercise of violent retribution by the elect, Hoffman’s views were an ingredient in the establishment of the millennialist commonwealth in the city of Miinster. He appears to have given tacit support to the Miinster commonwealth, as when he described one of the leaders, Jan Matthijs, as one of the divine witnesses of Revelation 11. His successor as prophet was Jan of Leyden, who believed himself to be the eschatological Davidide. A reign of terror in Miinster in 1534 fueled by antinomianism ensued. The influx of people into the city was seen as the fulfillment of the gathering of 144,000 into the new Jerusalem in Revelation 14. The Melchiorite interpretation of Revelation is an unusual example of the use of Revelation in the practice of a millenarian politics that, like the revolutionary actions of Thomas Muentzer a decade earlier (and like the more recent example of the Branch Davidian compound at Waco, Texas), did not remain at the level of utopian idealism but resulted

in violent attempts to establish an eschatological theocracy, The use of the sword by the elect was not accepted by all Anabaptists of this period, however. The catastrophic effects of Mtinster as well as the career of Thomas Muentzer led to reaction against notions of eschatological theocracy.” It was viewed as a diabolical exercise whose enthusiasm was to be repudiated by all Christian people. Menno Simons, for example, the key figure in the revival of the Anabaptist movement after the Miinster debacle, attacked the Minster prophets as false. He talked of the kingdom of Christ as not being of this visible world. The church is the visible form of the kingdom. It is visible in this world to the extent that Christians are obedient to the teachings of Christ. Despite the sense of an expectation of imminent fulfillment, what one finds in the post-Miinster Anabaptism is the sense of being in the penultimate period rather than in the eschatological commonwealth on earth.” Alongside the place of Revelation in radical religion in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries is a rich stream of interpretation in which the careful exposition of the book was carried out in a more measured and less heated atmosphere, encouraging a long tradition of apocalyptic speculation. Chief among such interpreters was Joseph Mede (1586-1638), whose work had enormous influence on subsequent generations (and whose interpretation of Revelation was taken up and used by more politically active groups during the Commonwealth period in England after the execution of Charles I).°* By an interpretive method that viewed the book as a series of “synchronisms,” or recapitulations in which several 95. Cf. M. Walzer, Exodus and Revolution (New York: HarperCollins, 1985) 120-22. 96. On millenarian apocalypticism, see Cohn, 7he Pursuit of the Millennium. 97. W. Klaassen, Living at the End of the Ages: Apocalyptic Expectation in the Radical Reformation (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1992). 98. K. Firth, The Apocalyptic Tradition in Reformation Britain, 1530-1645 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979) 240-46.

540

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

passages are said to relate to the same period of history, he calculated a period of 1,260 years from the rise of the papacy (dated to 365 CE) to its overthrow sometime in the seventeenth century. He considered his hermeneutical method to be based on a careful exegesis of the text: “The Apocalypse considered only according to the naked Letter... hath marks and signs sufficient by the Holy Spirit, whereby the Order, Synchonism and Sequele of all the Visions therein contained, may be found out. . . without supposall of

any Interpretation whatsoever.” In a diagram in the 1833 edition of Clavis Apocalyptica, the last in each of the three series of sevens is viewed together as a moment of climax. That synchronic approach to the visions has been typical of many commentators on Revelation down to the present day, and his work has been frequently quoted in subsequent centuries. Similar in approach (explicitly indebted to Mede’s work) and dictated by a concern to manifest evidence of divine providence in history are Isaac Newton’s commentaries on Revelation, written a century and a half later. These are detailed and exhaustive attempts to demonstrate the marvelous orderliness of the pattern of the history of church and world, condensed in the books of Daniel and Revelation and parallel to what may be observed in the physical world.!°° A link between revelation and radical politics is particularly evident in English Civil War writing,'®' best exemplified in the brief radical career of Gerrard Winstanley, who, with others, laid claim to the common land of the basis of a belief that the earth was a common treasury. The rule of the beast is not merely eschatological but is seen in the political arrangements of the day. Professional ministry, royal power, the judiciary, and the buying and selling of the earth correspond to the four beasts in the book of Daniel. The struggle between the dragon and Christ is exemplified in the advocacy of communism over against the rival claims to private property. The new heaven and earth can be seen here and now. Royal power is the old heaven and earth that must pass away. The new Jerusalem is not “to be seen only hereafter.” Winstanley asserts, “I know that the glory of the Lord shall be seen and known within creation, and the blessing shall spread within all nations.” God is not far above the heavens; God is to be found in the lives and experiences of ordinary men and women. God’s kingdom comes when God arises in the saints. The perfect society will come when there takes place “the rising up of Christ in sons and daughters, which is his second coming.” Winstanley used apocalyptic imagery to speak of the present as a critical moment in the life of the nation. He was convinced that Christ would reign and judge the world in and through his saints.'°* This millenarian vision was 99. Quoted in ibid., 221. 100. C. Burdon, The Apocalypse in England 1700-1834: Revelation Unravelling (London: Macmillan, 1997). 101. See C. Hill, The World Turned Upside Down (London: Penguin, 1972); C. Hill, The English Bible and the Seventeenth Century Revolution (London: Penguin, 1993); Firth, The Apocalyptic Tradition, 242. 102. On Winstanley and his relationship to radical interpretation of Scripture, see C. Rowland, Radical Christianity: A Reading of Recovery (Oxford: Polity, 1988). The millenarian tradition is evident in early American exegesis. See R. Bloch, Visionary Republic, Millennial Themes in American Thought 1756-1800 (Cambridge: Cambridge University \ Press, 1985).

541

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

to permeate English religion through the individualized reading of the apocalyptic narrative in Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress, itself a product of a period when the revolutionary politics of the mid-seventeenth century were on the wane.!” William Blake and His Contemporaries. The German commentator Albrecht Bengel had an enormous influence on contemporary readers, not least John Wesley, who quotes from Bengel’s Gnomon in his introduction to Revelation. Bengel speaks for many eighteenth-century commentators in appreciating this quality in the prophetic literature in writing thus about Revelation: The whole structure of it breathes the art of God, comprising in the most finished compendium, things to come, many, various; near, intermediate, remote; the greatest, the least; terrible, comfortable; old, new; long, short; and these interwoven together, opposite, composite; relative to each other at a small, at a great distance; and therefore sometimes as it were disappearing, broken off, suspended, and afterwards unexpectedly and most seasonably appearing again. In all its parts it has an admirable variety, with the most exact harmony, beautifully illustrated by those digressions which seem to interrupt it. In this manner does it display the manifold wisdom of God shining in the economy of the church through so many ages,!04

While the existential, individualistic appropriation of the book in early Methodism suggests a move from the world of politics to that of the human soul,'® the approach to Revelation that saw in it an account of universal history in which contemporary events could be found had a new lease of life at the time of the French Revolution.'° Throughout his life, Samuel Taylor Coleridge retained a fascination for Apocalypse, the visionary

manifestation evident in the fragmentary “Kubla Khan.”!°” In the context of the French Revolution, Coleridge, like his contemporary Joseph Priestley, saw the prophecy of Revelation being fulfilled, as is evident from his explicit use of Revelation in his “Religious Musing,” published in 1796. As he became more conservative in his political views, however, he stressed the need for interpretation and set store by the emerging historical study of the text (e.g., in the work of Eichorn). Arguably, the person who has understood most about Revelation without ever alban commenting on it was William Blake. He inhabited and was suffused with the world of the Bible in a way without parallel. Blake wrote no commentary on Revelation, but wrote his own prophecy, weaving images of Revelation into the fabric of his own visionary mythology. He read Revelation not as an end in itself but as a means to an 103. See C. Hill, A Turbulent Seditious and Factious People: John Bunyan and His Church (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989). 104. Albrecht Bengel, Gnomon Novi Testamenti, 1026 on Rev 1:1, quoted in John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, 2:313. See also the important attempt to make contemporary the message of Revelation in J. G. Herder, Maran Atha, English trans. (London, 1821), discussed by Burdon, The Apocalypse in England, 85-87. 105. See M. H. Abrams, Natural Supernaturalism, Tradition and Revolution in Romantic Literature (New York: Norton, 1973) 47; M. Butler, Romantics Rebels and Reactionaries (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981). 106. Burdon, The Apocalypse in England 1700-1834. 107. E. Shaffer, “Kubla Khan” and the Fall ofJerusalem (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975).

542

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

end: the permeating of consciousness with the apocalyptic outlook. Blake recognized the prophets of the Old Testament as kindred spirits, and he wrote in their style and used their images, but for his own time and in his own way. Blake’s mythological writings challenge the God of the Bible, who had become a key figure in the creation of the ideology of the state.'°* Blake manifests the prophetic impulse that is in opposition to the kind of conformity to church and monarch typical of his day. Throughout the 1790s Blake’s writing and designs returned to the themes of prophetic struggle and the need to be aware of the dangers of the prophetic spirit’s degenerating into the apostasy of state religion.!” For Blake, Revelation offered a supreme example of the prophetic impulse. And yet its authoritarianism, asceticism, and emphasis on divine transcendence are often implicitly criticized by him in the light of divine immanence and a spirit of forgiveness and mercy, which, according to Blake, characterized the religion of Jesus. The Eschatological Synthesis of Modern Fundamentalism. The use of Revelation as a repository of prophecies concerning the future has been evidenced from the start and reached an influential climax in the work of Joseph Mede. In the last two hundred years, it has become very much a part of a growing trend toward eschatological interpretation. It was given an impetus from an unlikely source when an Anglican clergyman, John Nelson Darby, founder of the Plymouth Brethren, interpreted the book as unfulfilled prophecy. In his interpretation of the rapture, which is not in Revelation but is described in 1 Thess 4:17 (though Darby thought he could find it alluded to in Rev 3:10), this event was to occur before the resurrection, thereby opening the way for a period of great tribulation.

This kind of reading is supported by the widely influential Scofield Reference Bible, first published in 1909. Here the letters in Revelation 2-3 have a prophetic as well as a local application, disclosing seven phases of the spiritual history of the church. Thus Thyatira is the papacy: “as Jezebel brought idolatry into Israel, so Romanism weds Christian doctrine to pagan ceremonies.” There is a close link between Revelation and Daniel: Revelation 4-19 synchronize with Daniel’s seventieth week (Dan 9:24), with the great tribulation of Rev 7:14 coming in the middle of the “week.” This is brought to an end by the parousia and the battle of Armageddon. The day of the Lord is preceded by seven signs: the sending of Elijah; cosmic disturbances; the insensibility of the professing church; the apostasy of the church; the rapture of the true church (1 Thessalonians 4); the manifestation of the man of sin (2 Thessalonians); and the apocalyptic judgments of Revelation 1 1—18 (“the great tribulation”), which involve the people of God who have returned to Palestine. The beasts of Revelation 13 are the last civil and ecclesiastical heads respectively. The “ten horns” of Dan 7:24 and Rev 17:12 refer to the last form of Gentile power, “a confederated ten-kingdom empire covering the sphere of authority of ancient Rome.” The return of 108. See D. V. Erdman, Blake: Prophet Against Empire, 3rd ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977). 109. J. Mee, Dangerous Enthusiasm (Oxfords Oxford University Press, 1992) 211.

543

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

Christ in glory, which will bring to an end Gentile dominion, is followed by the destruction of the beast, the millennium, the satanic revolt, the second resurrection and final judgment, and the coming of the day of God. Although thoroughly influenced by the peculiar fears of the late twentieth century, most

influential in this tradition has been Hal Lindsey’s Late, Great Planet Earth.''® For Lindsey, the seals predict war in the Middle East. The sixth seal concerns the beginning of nuclear war, and the trumpet heralds the terrible disasters of such a war. The 200 million cavalry are the army of China, which will do battle with the armies of the West at Armageddon. The beast from the sea is Antichrist, which will emerge from the European Union, whose member nations are symbolized by ten horns. The beast from the land is religious and seeks to unite all religions in a spurious faith. The decline in religious and moral life, castigated in the Laodicean letter, is addressed to the twentieth century’s generations. It is a sign that the end is near. The book of Revelation encourages the elect to dream of a miraculous rescue by the rapture and is a license for escape from political struggle to change the present world order, doomed as it is to destruction. There is no role for humans in saving it. All that matters is to be found as part of the elect, who will enjoy the escape of the rapture. The panorama of destruction in Revelation offers no human solution but ensures flight from the world.'!! The nature of Revelation’s polyvalent imagery means that there is at the end of the day no refuting of readings like this. One can only appeal to consistency with the wider demand of the gospel and its application by generations of men and women in lives of service and involvement with the suffering and the marginalized to counter such world-denying and dehumanizing appropriations of Revelation and other biblical books. Historical Criticism and Modern Exegesis. The rise of historical scholarship led to a different perspective on the book, which focused more on past meaning than on present use. Earlier critics, like Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) in his Annotations on the New Testament, had argued that the book’s meaning was almost entirely related to the circumstances of John’s own day (the so-called preterist method of interpretation). He considered that John’s visions related to the fall of Jerusalem and the end of Rome and that the millennium had started with the accession of Constantine, though he did not exclude some eschatological fulfillment. Typical of the method that has dominated study not only of Revelation but of all biblical texts since is evident in the work of J. J. Wettstein (1693-1754). In his Novum Testamentum, he dated the work at the outbreak of the Jewish war against Rome (66-73 CE) and saw it in part as a prophecy about the collapse of Jerusalem and then of Rome, and a prediction about the fate of Domitian. The form of his study is significant, and it exemplifies the subtle change that the rise of the historical 110. Hal Lindsey, The Late, Great Planet Earth (London: Lakeland) 1971. According to US News and World Report (Dec. 13, 1997) 69, this book and its sequels had phenomenal sales: 40 million copies. 111. A. Mojtabai, Blessed Assurance (Boston: Houghton Mifflin) 1987; P. Boyer, When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in Modern American Culture (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992); D. Thompson, The End of Time: Faith and Fear in the Shadow of the Millennium (London: Minerva, 1997).

544

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

method brought with it. Attention is paid entirely to the book in its ancient context. As well as detailed text-critical analysis, there are lengthy quotations from ancient sources, including rabbinic parallels that illuminate particular passages of Revelation. Ferdinand Christian Baur’s (1792-1860) theory of texts as mirrors of church conflict (given a new impetus in recent years in the writing of Michael Goulder)!!? considered the Apocalypse as an example of a Jewish-Christian anti-Pauline text. Attacks on Balaam, Jezebel, and the Nicolaitans are thinly veiled attacks on Paul. Thus Rev 2:14, 20 contrasts with advice that Paul offers on the issue of food offered to idols in 1 Corinthians 8; 10:23ff. The early dating of Revelation by members of the Ttibingen school of biblical exegesis led Friedrich Engels to regard Revelation as the prime witness to the character of primitive Christian religion.'' Perhaps the most distinctive contribution of historical study of the book has been the application of source-critical study to it. The recognition of inconsistencies led Grotius to think that the book was written at different times in John’s life, a view that has had many variations. So, for example, Revelation 11, with its reference to Jerusalem under siege,

may have been written in the 60s and later incorporated into a book written in the 90s. R. H. Charles, the doyen of source critics of apocalyptic texts, considered that the author was responsible for compiling much of the first twenty chapters, but a later redactor wrote most of chapters 20-22 and made additions to the rest of the book, bringing about severe dislocations to the original. Questions about the authorship of the book are not confined to the modern period but go back to the early centuries of the church, when anti-Montanist polemic led writers like Dionysius of Alexandria to question its apostolic origin and to suggest that it may have come from the hand of the heretic Cerinthus because of its espousal of a messianic, this-worldly eschatology. Luther and Zwingli also questioned its apostolic origin. Doubts about a common author for it and the Johannine Gospel are now widespread, with the consensus being that it was written by an unknown John in Asia. In the light of source criticism, the view that the book contains non-Christian elements recurs from time to time.!'4 Such a theory reflects the kind of source-critical ingenuity applied to other apocalyptic texts in which there is some evidence of Christian revision (e.g., the /estaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Apocalypse of Abraham, and the Ascension of Isaiah), but enough evidence remains of a Jewish work untouched by the Christian gospel (though what counts as Christian in this context is never really discussed). A distinctive voice in modern interpretation of the book, particularly in British circles, has been Austin Farrer. His careful and ingenious treatment of Revelation’s number symbolism as well as an eye for the visionary character of the book have given him a

peculiar position in the interpretation of the book." 112. M. Goulder, A Tale of Two Missions (London: SCM, 1994). 113. F. Engels, Marx and Engels: Basic Writings on Politics and Philosophy, ed. L. Feuer (London: Fontana, 1959). 114. J. M. Ford, Revelation, AB 38 (New York: Doubleday, 1975). ofSt.John’s Apocalypse (Westminster: Dacre, 1949); The Revelation 115. A.Farrer, A Rebirth oflmages: The Making of St. John the Divine (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Farrer’s work is used in a judicious way by J. Sweet, Revelation (London: SCM, 1979). \

545

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

The recognition of the importance of apocalyptic for the understanding of Christianity, particularly the New Testament, has meant that Christian theologians have had to wrestle

with the visionary and the eschatological as central features of their interpretive agenda.'!° At one and the same time the strange world of the apocalypse, far removed from the demythologized world of the Enlightenment, has contributed a golden thread that runs through modern scholarship on early Christianity and, in part, on ancient Judaism also. The reasons for the rediscovery in the second half of the nineteenth century of eschatological beliefs as a significant aspect of earliest Christianity are complex. The books of Daniel and Revelation, and for some traditions 2 Esdras, were for centuries part of the Christian canon of scriptures. The exploration of Abyssinia led to the discovery of Jewish apocalyptic works like / Enoch, which for centuries had been part of the Old Testament canon of the Ethiopic church. The Apocalypse of Enoch,''’ for example, now extant in full only in Ethiopic (though fragments have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls), contains ideas similar to Daniel and Revelation and the Gospels; it confirmed that the world of Jesus and the first Christians was very much that of the Jewish apocalypses. Such ideas made perhaps their most dramatic impact on the study of the New Testament in the work of Albert Schweitzer. After reviewing the various attempts, over the previous hundred years, to go behind the pages of the New Testament to get at the historical Jesus,''® he proposed that Jesus’ mission could be understood only if one took seriously the eschatological convictions found in Jewish apocalypses. In Schweitzer’s view, the early church had to deal with an initial and dramatic disappointed hope; the result is found in what Schweitzer calls Paul’s Christ mysticism, the identification of the messianic age in the lives of believers and the church. Much of what has been written since Schweitzer’s work has been an attempt to come to terms with the impact of the eschatological ideas brought to the fore in such a dramatic way by exegetical pioneers like him and Johannes Weiss. Yet despite its problematic character, eschatology paradoxically was the means whereby Jesus’ apocalyptic message could continue to speak to every generation—precisely because its strangeness meant that it could never be transformed into the compromises of history. A feature of modern discussion has been the extent to which Revelation Be ele to contemporary Jewish apocalypses. The flowering of scholarship on Second Temple Judaism after the Second World War (coinciding with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls) has led to a renewed interest in and sophisticated analysis of apocalypses.!'° Revelation’s apparent lack of pseudonymity, its tightness of structure, and its author’s assertion that the book is prophecy have led some to question how wellit fits into the genre of apocalypse, 116. E.g., J.C. Beker, Paul the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1980); E. Kaésemann, Commentary on Romans (London: SCM, 1980). 117. On theapocalyptic character of the Qumran writings, see J.J. Collins, Apocalypticism and the Dead Sea Scrolls (London: Routledge, 1997). 118. A. Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus (London: A. & C. Black, 1931). 119. R.A. Kraft and G. Nickelsburg, Early Judaism and Its Modern Interpreters (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986); J. M. Schmidt, Die jiidische Apokalyptik (Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1969).

546

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

despite its title in 1:1 and the inclusion of some typical features of the apocalypses of Second Temple Judaism (e.g., symbolic visions and heavenly journeys). Social sciences have made less of an impact on the study of Revelation than one might have expected, given that asignificant part of the emerging study of the sociology of religion

has been concerned with the rise and character of sectarianism and its ideology.'?° A sectarian origin for apocalyptic has been canvassed.'*! The influential theory of cognitive dissonance pioneered by L. ,Festinger, with its origins in the study of the millenarian movements in Melanesia, has been applied to early Christian eschatology.!?? The result is to suggest that the failure of the materialization of the millennial hope might prompt a community to engage in various forms of activism (e.g., proselytizing) to cope with their disappointment. Revelation, then, is viewed as a myth for an oppressed community that found itself confronted with the dissonance between its beliefs and the sociopolitical realities of a militant Roman Empire, by which the reader can overcome the contradiction between the present, with its threat of persecution and the hoped-for life of bliss. The link with millenarian movements has been explored historically by Norman Cohn, who has

continued to explore the social psychology of a dualistic mind-set.!*° Perhaps the most relevant (though not specifically related either to Revelation or to the New Testament) work is Stuart Hall’s study of the rise and character of the Rastafarian movement (which is itself indebted in various ways to passages from the book of Revelation).'” The social-psychological perspective is evident also in Adela Yarbro Collins’s exploration of the extent to which reading can be a way of dealing with aggression. The process of engaging

with the book can bring about catharsis and displacement of difficult emotion.'”° This follows in the footsteps of C. G. Jung, who juxtaposed the gospel and the Apocalypse as examples of different and unresolved aspects of human personality—the gospel a testimony to love, and the Apocalypse a cry of vengeance. The perfectionist teaching of the First Epistle of John has its dark side in Revelation, replete with its primal myths. The shadow side of the gospel of love is fear and vengeance, which are split off and removed from the character of God. There is much evidence of the power and influence of the book of Revelation among the grassroots groups influenced by late twentieth-century liberation theology. Two commentaries written from that perspective reflect these concerns, though, strictly speaking, their interpretative approach differs little in most respects from the mainstream of historical exegesis. Allan Boesak, for example, favors what he calls “a contemporary historical understanding” of the book of Revelation.'”° By this he means that John’s book 120. P. L. Esler, The First Christians in Their Social Worlds (London: Routledge, 1995). 121. P. Hanson, Zhe Dawn of Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974). 122. See John Gager, Kingdom and Community (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1975). 123. N. Cohn, Europe’s Inner Demons (London: Paladin, 1976). 124. S. Hall, “Religious Ideologies and Social Movements in Jamaica,” in R. Bobock and K. Thompson, Religion and Ideology (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1985). 125. A. Y. Collins, Crisis and Catharsis (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984); C. G. Jung, Answer to Job (London: Routledge, 1984); E. Drewermann, Jiefenpsychologie und Exegesis Band II Vision, Weissagung, Apokalypse Geschichte Gleichnis (Olten: Walter, 1985) 541-91. 126. A. Boesak, Comfort and Protest (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1987).

547

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

cannot be understood outside his own political context, but as prophecy does not receive its “full and final fulfillment in one given historical moment only but will be fulfilled at different times and in different ways in the history of the world.” That enables him to relate the images of beast and Babylon, for example, to the struggle against the apartheid regime in South Africa. Similarly, Pablo Richard'?’ sees the bulk of Revelation until 19:10 to be about the present, the challenge to the community and its role in the world (through his examination of the structure of the book, chap. 14 becomes the center of the message) and its own struggles, only the final chapters being concerned with the eschatological judgment of the world. In the liberationist perspective, the book of Revelation both offers hope and stimulates resistance. It is a way of looking at the world that refuses to accept that the dominant powers are the ultimate point of reference. Apocalyptic discourse, consisting of picture and symbol, asks the reader to participate in another way of speaking about God and the world that makes it more readily understood by all. It taps the well of human response in those whose experience of struggle, persecution, and death has taught them what it means to wash their robes and to make them white in the blood of the Lamb. Two other interpreters ought to be mentioned in this context: Jacques Ellul'** and William Stringfellow.!2? Both are marginal to the mainstream of modern biblical exegesis, but each reflects the way in which the Bible, and particularly the book of Revelation, challenges ideology by unmasking the principalities and powers. Perhaps few have understood the meaning of an apocalyptic witness in Babylon better than these two. The liberationist perspective is apparent in the marginal notes of Biblia Sagrada,

published in Brazil.’*° The introduction declares that the work is explicitly geared to promote the relationship between text and life and thereby initiate a dialogue between the word of God and “our reality,” albeit one qualified by the communal context of reading.'*' In the notes to the first verses of Revelation it is stated that “the Apocalypse is a book read and expounded in meetings of Christian communities.” The final verses in 22:6ff. are seen as a dialogue between Christ and the churches, where the book should be read in a liturgical context in which it can be explained and meditated upon and its message applied (thereby asserting a degree of control over individualistic and idiosyncratic readings). Revelation urges that John’s mission is that of all Christians: to be prophets, announcing the word of God and continuing the testimony of Jesus Christ. Main themes include warnings against syncretistic religion (particularly applicable in Brazil, where the Afro-Brazilian religions are prominent) and the domination of imperial religion. The sketch 127. P. Richard, Apocalypse (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1995). 128. J. Ellul, Apocalypse: The Book of Revelation (New York: Seabury, 1977). 129. W. Stringfellow, Conscience and Obedience (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1977); An Ethic for Christians and Other Aliens in a Strange Land (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1973). Stringfellow’s work is a precursor of Walter Wink’s work on the principalities and powers. See W. Wink, Engaging the Powers (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1992). 130. Biblia Sagrada (Sao Paulo: 1990). 131. C. Mesters, “The Use of the Bible in Christian Communities ofthe Common People,” in 7he Bible and Liberation, ed. N. Gottwald (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1983) 119-33; C. Mesters, Defenseless Flower (London: CIIR, 1989)

548

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

of the age in which Revelation was written, particularly the references to the decadence and the prevalence of autocratic regimes, echoes the recent experience of Latin American nations. John’s aim, according to the marginal notes, is to recall Christians to their original option and involvement in liberating action, which has to be informed by an understanding of the oppressive situation in which the communities found themselves and the maintenance of a horizon of hope for a new society. John, in his visions, is said to analyze the nature of the victory over evil {on 12:1). Throughout the work are several resonances with the favorite terms within the theology of liberation: option for the poor, oppression, liberation, new society, and the “see, judge, act” of popular pastoral practice. Salvation is said to consist, notin reform, but in radical transformation, “bringing to birth a new world of justice and fraternity.” Revelation offers the opportunity to discern “God’s project in history,” the title of a pamphlet about the life and history of the people of God down the ages, written by Carlos Mesters, and widely used by the basic ecclesial communities. The interpretation of chap. 13 in this edition as compared with the Spanish translation La Nueva Biblia Latinoamerica indicates the more overtly modern political reading of the Brazilian version. In the former the interpretative notes concentrate mainly on the original context of Revelation, whereas in the latter the beast is stated without qualification to be “absolute political power,” which takes the place of God and enslaves humans, “totalitarianism, dictatorships and oppressive regimes.” The crime of Babylon is to persecute those who reject absolute political power and who are not taken in by the ideological propaganda that ensnares those not vigilant enough to see through it. Although the (ancient) Roman context is not ignored, a general message is found in which the second beast represents manipulative power on the ideological and political levels. When Babylon’s fate is lamented in chap. 19, the notes speak of the laments coming from wielders of political, economic, and commercial power. In addition to the eschatological dimension of the book there is the assertion that the coming of Jesus is something that is in process and is evident in the testimony of those who maintain the faith: “to manifest truth, reveal the love of the Father, and promote conversion. Whenever Jesus comes there is the destruction of an unjust world and the construction of a new one.” The contextual character of the notes parallel, in their contemporary concern, the approach of those in the sixteenth-century Geneva Bible, whose marginal glosses occasionally suggest politically subversive readings.'** The narrowly religious interpretations that are standard fare in most modern commentaries are replaced in the Latin American texts by an interpretative lens through which the world can be perceived afresh. There are examples in abundance of the work’s appealing to the oppressed, whether whether in our time or in the ancient world, and of its being the ideology of what Leonard Thompson calls a “cognitive minority.” Nevertheless, it has appealed also to those well established in society, albeit through different reading strategies (Newton’s interpretation 132. Hill, The English Bible and the Seventeenth Century Revolution .

549

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

contrasts sharply with the roughly contemporary Winstanley’s in this respect). People can think in the manner of the Apocalypse without themselves being part of a minority or even discontented with their personal life circumstances. The neat correspondence between literature and life, in which an apocalyptic text reflects a persecuted or threatened minority, does not do justice to the wide dissemination of such ideas in the ancient or modern world. The appeal of Revelation to the oppressed in Latin America as they practice their liberation theology lends plausibility to the hypothesis that apocalyptic is peculiarly applicable to the situation of an oppressed minority. But when the images of the Apocalypse can contribute to the mind-set of a significant group within the mainstream of North American society, we should beware of supposing that we have a book that appeals only to persons on the fringes of society. Liberal Christianity’s distaste for Revelation’s vindictiveness and lack of concern with love, viewed as prime amongall Christian characteristics, has led to attempts to domesticate

or tone down its barbarous tone.'%? Recent feminist scholarship has a different objection. Tina Pippin has examined the references to women in the book and found it impossible to regard them as anything other than negative; the transformation of the world is only partial, as gender relations remain untouched.!*4 The disparagement of women’s activism and encouragement of a passive, dependent attitude is so firmly rooted in the domain of patriarchy that women everywhere remain subject to male dominion.

The Apocalypse and Art.'* The exegetical commentary on a biblical text like Revelation needs to be complemented by the artistic exposition of the text. Indeed, a commentary cannot do justice to the character of apocalyptic discourse in the way that a picture or a poem can. An explanation, however suggestive and allusive, reduces and diminishes the hermeneutical power of symbol and myth. Thus art may be better able to stimulate our aesthetic faculties. A commentator on Revelation struggles to find ways to enable interaction with the text as we have it, so that the book, with its peculiar network of imagery, may begin to pervade the reader’s consciousness. Whereas exegesis renders texts in ways that systematize and explain, art defies explanation. Art assists in the new moments of unveiling that can occur through the repristination of the apocalyptic images in artistic work. If what we have in Revelation is the opening of an interpretative space for readers or hearers to be provoked, to have their imaginations broadened and the incentive to think and behave differently, then that process requires new methods to ensure that the original impact of a metaphorical text is maintained in different circum133. See G. B. Caird, A Commentary on the Revelation of Saint John the Divine (London: A. & C. Black, 1984). 134. T. Pippin, Death and Desire: The Rhetoric of Gender in the Apocalypse ofJohn (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992). 135. See R. K. Emmerson and B. McGinn, The Apocalypse in the Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1992); M. R. James, The Apocalypse in Art (London: Oxford University Press, 1931); F. van der Meer, Apocalypse: Visions from the Book of Revelation in Western Art (London: Thames and Hudson, 1978); R. M. Wright, Art and Antichrist in Medieval Europe (Manchester: 1996). See also the use of Kip Gresham’s prints of scenes from Revelation in C. Rowland, Revelation (London: Epworth, 1993).

550

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

stances. Readers of Revelation require a variety of explanatory mediums to explore its words and images, so that they may be able to see, and behave, differently. Different artistic uses of Revelation may be found over the centuries, ranging from the iconography of ecclesiastical architecture to designs that accompany the text itself. Revelation also lent itself to the catena of illustrations evident in texts like the Trier Apocalypse and the longseries of “Beatus” manuscripts, which go back to Beatus of Liebana. Apart from manuscripts, there are cycles from the Apocalypsein church murals, the Angers tapestry (late 14th cent.), and stained glass (e.g., the east window in York Minster, England, from the early 15th cent.). Artistic representation of the apocalypse continued in the Renaissance art form of the woodcut, the most famous being Albrecht Dtirer’s depictions (1497-98). The prominent place given to illuminations of the apocalypse in Luther’s Bible of 1534 is an indication of the continuing role of artistic imagination in the exegesis of what continued to be a controversial text. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the contrasting images of Revelation evident in J. M. W. Turner’s (1775-1851) work Death on a Pale Horse (c. 1825) can be compared with William Blake’s less abstract painting of the same title (c. 1800). In our more secular world, the dependence on the inspiration of Revelation is less direct and more subtle. Yet the evocation of cataclysm in art, often distasteful and even banal in the written word, affects a generation saturated with images, not least of human and cosmic disaster, and is a profound influence on the artistic work of a century that has witnessed humanity’s worst evils. The different exegetical approaches to Revelation are manifest in art. Revelation has had from the start of New Testamentinterpretation a pre-eminent place as the primary eschatological text of the Bible. Last judgment scenes are common in European ecclesiastical buildings. In addition to the eschatological, Van Eycks’s Mystical Lamb (1432) indicates another way of appropriating the book, following a tradition of interpretation that goes back to Tyconius and Augustine. The division between heaven and earth is transcended in the eucharistic feast as the Lamb, in the midst of the throne, is found on an altar on earth. Contextual readings, in which visions are related to their ancient historical or contemporary contexts, and thus used as an interpretative lens through which to view contemporary history, are seen in severe medieval cycles of apocalypse illustrations and the later woodcuts (e.g., in the depiction of Babylon as papal Rome in the Luther Bible). William Blake (1757-1827) offers a significant example of the artistic appropriation of the book of Revelation and the creative exploitation of its exegetical potential. He is a unique example of a visionary who was an accomplished artist and poet and whose visionary imagination was combined with creative productive techniques, very much in the tradition of the medieval combination of text and design, to give him a unique place among cultural critics!*° Blake explicitly traced a continuity not only between his own

mythology and the vision seen by John,'*” but also between his own vocation to prophesy 136. See William Blake’s Illuminated Books, 6 vols., ed. David Bindman (London: Tate Gallery Publications/William Blake Trust) 1991-1995. 137. William Blake, The Four Zoas, in Blake: Complete Writings, ed. G. Keynes (London: Oxford University Press, 1966) 263-382. i

Dol

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

and that of John of Patmos. While John’s apocalyptic vision is a central component of many aspects of Blake’s visionary world and informs Blake’s understanding of his own political situation, Blake uses the Apocalypse as inspiration rather than a prescription of his own apocalyptic visions. He is not a conventional commentator on it, unlike the emerging German historical critics in his day. Blake’s relationship with the text represents that of the visionary who stands in continuity not by visualizing again Revelation’s images but by using Revelation as a means of true insight into vision, who sees more clearly by means of the ancient apocalyptic text. Unlike his medieval forebears, he does not illuminate the text of Revelation,

for his work stands alongside Revelation, not as exegesis but as a further exemplification of the prophetic tradition. For Blake, the visionary and imaginative is all important, and the Bible has an apocalyptic role in encouraging this. Allowing reason to triumph over imagination denies a wisdom “Permanent in the Imagination,” through which one could be “open [to] the Eternal Worlds.” This would “open the immortal Eyes/ Of Man inwards into the Worlds of Thought, into Eternity’ Ever expanding in the Bosom of God, the Human Imagination.”'°? A way in which he achieves this is to juxtapose text and design in his illuminated books. Readings of the text must be set in the context of the illuminations. He achieves hermeneutical creativity by this juxtaposition. Often text and illumination seem to have little contact. The indeterminate relationship between writing and illustration demands that readers engage with the text, and their own imagination contributes to making sense of the two. Language and portrait function in an apocalyptic way, a hermeneutical device that opens up the imagination. Blake demands of the reader imaginative participation to explore the tensions and problems that the text poses. Nature itself can function in this way, for “to the Eyes of the Man of Imagination, Nature [can be] Imagination itself.” '8° Blake expects “to see a World in a Grain of Sand and a Heaven in a Wild Flower.”!“° “The Old & New Testaments are the Great Code of Art”’! are just the best examples of art that can, with proper use, open up the way to the eternal: The Bible is “more Entertaining & Instructive than any other book,” because it is “addressed as to the Imagination, which is Spiritual Sensation, & but mediately to the Understanding or Reason.”'? For Blake, the exegetical task involved reading, hearing, and appropriating in order to break what he called the “mind forg’d manacles” that prevent imagination and human community from flourishing. Essays in apocalyptic exegesis of the Bible must involve a variety of ways, in which the artistic is paramount, of rousing the faculties to new moments of understanding. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142.

William William William William William

Blake, Blake, Blake, Blake, Blake,

Jerusalem, plate 5, ll. 18-20, in ibid., 623. Letter to Dr. Trusler, 23 August 1799, in ibid., 793. “Auguries of Innocence,” ll. 1-2, in ibid., 431. 7he Laoco6n, in ibid., 777. Letter to Dr. Trusler, 23 August 1799, in ibid., 794.

552

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

An Apocalyptic Tone in Recent Theology and Philosophy.'“ There are alternative modern perspectives outside the Christian tradition. Oneis that of D. H. Lawrence.'“4 Lawrence saw-Revelation as representing the vengeful Christianity of self-glorification, contrasting with the tender religion of Jesus. At its heart is a vital pagan original that has been overlaid by subsequent editors who in each succeeding edition made the book more mean-spirited. And yet there is sufficient evidence of the link with the pagan religion of nature that it can be appropriated by those who will put aside the historical perspective of the final versions and relish the cyclical world of nature that lies dormant in the text. Jacques Derrida'* looks at the antimonies sketched by Kant between poetry and mysticism, on the one hand, and philosophy on the other hand (echoes of Blake). Just as the Enlightenment claimed to bring new awareness, so also do apocalypses. When viewed more closely, apocalypse turns out to be an unveiling that reveals only another enigma. Far from offering answers, “the apocalyptic tone” leads to indeterminancy. What apocalyptic unveiling achieves is the revelation of the metaphorical character of all languages, which thereby challenges the fantasy of “answers” by demonstrating in the starkest way possible the indeterminancy of all reality. The influence of the apocalyptic dimension was not felt within biblical scholarship alone, for the eschatological emphasis found in the work of Weiss and Schweitzer was to spill over in dramatic form into the theology of the immediate post-war scene in Barth’s commentary on the Epistle to the Romans.!*° Eschatology offered a stark alternative to the world of destruction and devastation of 1919 and the compromises that contributed to it. It was a situation that provoked acute pessimism about humanity’s resources to build a better world. Barth asserted that knowledge of God could come only through God’s own revelation, which humanity could only accept or reject. Like the apocalypses of old, which seemed to offer some explanation of human existence and God’s purposes through a revelation, Barth stressed the subordination of the human intellect to the revelation of God. He repudiated human attempts to comprehend God (what is referred to as natural theology). Instead, he stressed the centrality of revelation as the only basis for understanding anything about God; that is an “unveiling” or apocalypse.'“” Contemporary with Barth and equally committed to the eschatological inheritance of the Jewish tradition, but with a very different assessment of it, is Ernst Bloch. He rehabilitated the perspectives of Joachim of Fiore and Gerrard Winstanley and recognized the significance of utopian elements in a variety of cultures. He was committed to the rehabilitation of that millenarian, apocalyptic inheritance on the fringes of orthodox Christianity. His mammoth book, 7he Principle ofHope,'*’ explores the ways in which 143. See the essays in M. Bull, Apocalypse Theory (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995). 144. D. H. Lawrence, Apocalypse (London: Penguin, 1960). 145. Jacques Derrida, “Of an Apocalyptic Tone Recently Adopted in Philosophy,” Semeia 23 (1982) 63-97. 146. K. Barth, The Epistle to the Romans (London: A. & C. Black, 1933) 19. See further B. McCormack, Karl Barth's Critically Realistic Dialectical Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995). 147. K. Barth, Church Dogmatics 1/2 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1961) 28ff. 148. E. Bloch, The Principle of Hope, trans. N. Plaice, S. Plaice, and P. Knight (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986). For an introduction to Bloch’s thought, see W. Hudson, The Marxist Philosophy of Ernst Bloch (London: Macmillan, 1982).

S09

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

that longing for a future age of perfection has colored the whole range of culture in both East and West. Bloch called attention to the power of the utopian inheritance and its contribution to Marxism as well as the Judeo-Christian tradition (though his views are tangential to the mainstream Marxist tradition and have been received with considerable skepticism by other Marxists). He promoted the eschatological traditions that mainstream Christianity has preferred to forget. It is as the philosopher of “utopia” that Bloch will be remembered. Bloch considers that utopia is not something far off in the future, but is at the heart of human experience; it is already at hand in an anticipatory and fragmentary way. These fragments are themselves an encouragement to human action in the present, even if the hoped-for utopia is not fully possible without changing the present order of things. Despite its kaleidoscopic quality, Bloch’s work often provides suggestive insights into the character of Christian doctrine and its mutation into an ideology.'*? He does not see the Bible as an elaboration of a social utopia, but it “does point most vehemently to exodus and kingdom.'°° Apocalypse is the breaking in of the “novum” (Rev 21:5 is a favorite text of Bloch’s). The Apocalypse is the vehicle of an unparalleled phenomenon in the history of religion: “the apocalyptic transformation of the world into something as yet completely non-existent.”'>' Not surprisingly, Bloch pays great attention to the chiliastic tradition: “Utiopian unconditionality comes from the Bible,2 Bloch’s own work, echoed in a more attentuated form in the later writing of Walter

Benjamin? and even Theodor Adorno,'*4 all of whom were close friends of Gershom Scholem, the great pioneer of the modern study of Jewish apocalypticism and mysticism,'* reminds us of neglected aspects of the eschatological tradition and its political potential. In the light of Bloch’s work it is not surprising that Christians and some Marxists influenced by this utopian tradition have been united in a common quest for change and a new social order based on peace and justice in this world. Modern political theology owes a great debt to Bloch’s appropriation of the Christian chiliastic tradition. The German theologian Jurgen Moltmann is particularly indebted to him.'*° Political theology in Europe in the post-war period has echoes in turn in the influential political theology of Latin America: liberation theology, in which the language of utopianism has sometimes been used as a way of speaking of the relationship between the future kingdom and present movements for social change in church and state, particularly among the downtrodden at the base of 149. In Ernst Bloch, Atheism in Christianity, trans. J. T. Swann (New York: Herder and Herder, 1972). i a Principle of Hope, 502. 152. Ibid., 509-15. On the links, see C. Rowland, Radical Christianity: A Reading of Recovery (Oxford: Polity, 1988). 153. See Walter Benjamin, “Theses on the Philosophy of History,” in ///uminations (London: Collins Fontana,

1970). 154, R. Wiggerhaus, The Frankfurt School (Oxford: Polity, 1994). 155. D. Biale, Gershom Scholem: Kabbalah and Counter-History (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1982). 156. J. Moltmann, Theology of Hope (London: SCM, 1975).

554

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION

Latin American society.'*’ In their refusal to divide history and eschatology, the present from the future, liberation theologians have inherited the mantle of that alternative political eschatology championed by Bloch.

Conclusion. The shifting fortunes of the Apocalypse can be traced in the history of interpretation. That ambivalence manifest in the work of the earliest commentators, where an ecclesiological and eschatological hermeneutic are woven together without comment, has characterized the two poles of interpretation. Despite their theological and political differences, Augustine, Winstanley, and Melchior Hoffman all seem to agree that key images relate to contemporary realities. Those who interpret the book wholly eschatologically effectively diminish its contemporary significance, as do those who see the book as applying totally to the past. But the differences of the contemporizing approach suggest that the impact of the images has as much to do with the complex preferences and interests of the readers as it does with what the text demands. We can say that Augustine’s interpretation of Revelation 20 as a reference to the rule of bishops in the church conveniently ignores the fact that the text itself places the rule firmly with the martyrs, only a few of whom could be expected to be bishops (particularly in the post-Constantinian age). Equally the realized eschatology that dominates the theocratic applications of Revelation, such as those of Melchior Hoffman, ignore the fact that although whatis described may be comingsoon there is still an unfulfilled dimension to its apocalyptic evocation. The demand for understanding has gone hand in hand with attempts to find precise equivalence between history and every image in the book and has resulted in a long tradition of interpretation based on the decoding principle. An image has a particular meaning, and if the code is understood in its entirety the whole apocalypse can be rendered in another form when the code is cracked and the inner meaning laid bare. It is only the occasional reader who refuses to settle for simple meanings, who insists on leaving open the possibility of polyvalence. Instead we typically find meaning confined as the details of images and actions are fixed on some historical personage or event. That applies also to encapsulations of Revelation’s theology, for the problem posed by this book is the difficulty imagination places on that desire for the ordered systematic presentation that lies at the heart of theology. A book that requires interpretation and seems to demand order in the face of the apparent chaos of its

imagery in the end confounds such attempts, not least those that are furthest from its own prophetic impulse. Schtissler Fiorenza aptly summarizes the peculiar importance of the text and of the context in which it is read: Revelation will elicit a fitting . . . response . . . only in those socio-political situations that cry out for justice. When Christian groups are excluded from political power, Revelation’s language of divine kingship and royal reward, as well as its ethical dualism, stands against unjust authority 157. See L. Boff, Jesus Christ Liberator (London: SPCK, 1980).

555

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

and champions the oppressed and disenfranchised. Whenever Christians join the power structures of their society and seek to stabilise them, the same rhetorical world of vision serves to sacralise dominant authorities and preach against their enemies.!°°

In situations where its imagery is allowed to work, however, it can disturb the convention maintained by the commonsensical. Like metaphors, whose function is to lay bare the realities of experience by the abrupt and jarring impact of their linguistic juxtapositions, apocalypse seeks to stop usin our tracks and get us to view things differently. For many, however, metaphors are “dead,” themselves having become part of mere convention or habit without the effect they once had; they are salt that has lost its savor. Revelation requires the recovery of that ability to hear or read and to be stirred or shocked and scandalized into repentance and action rather

than indifference or rejection: “Let any one who has an ear listen.”!? 158. E. Schiissler Fiorenza, Revelation: Vision ofaJust World (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993) 139. On the language of Revelation, see D. Barr, “The Apocalypse of John as Oral Enactment,” /nt. 40 (1986) 243-56; G. B. Caird, The Language and Imagery of the Bible (London: Duckworth, 1980). 159. I am grateful to James Grenfell, Alan Kreider, and Rebekah Rowland for comments on earlier drafts of this commentary and for help with proofreading and the checking of references.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Aune, D. E. Revelation 1—5. WBC. Nashville: Word, 1997. The most recent and comprehensive commentary in the historical critical tradition. . Revelation 6-16. WBC. Nashville: Word, 1997. . Revelation

17-22. WBC. Nashville: Word, 1997.

Bauckham, R. 7he Theology of the Book of Revelation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. An outline of the main theological themes of the book that manages to remain sensitive to the apocalyptic genre and its resistance to theological system. Beale, G. K. The Book of Revelation: ACommentary on the Greek Text. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. A comprehensive survey of the biblical antecedents of Revelation. Bindman, D., ed. William Blake’s Illuminated Books. 6 vols. London: Tate Gallery Publications/William Blake Trust, 1991-95. An indispensable aid to the understanding of apocalyptic prophecy. Boring, M. Eugene. Revelation. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox, 1989.

Burdon, C. The Apocalypse in England 1700-1834: Revelation Unravelling. London: Macmillan, 1997. An excellent introduction to apocalyptic aesthetics.

Cohn, N. The Pursuit of the Millennium. London: Paladin, 1957. An epochal account of medieval revolutionary millenarianism that, though dated in some respects, gives some indication of the enormous importance of Revelation in late medieval politics and religion. Collins, J.J. ZheApocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to the Jewish Matrix of Christianity. New York: Crossroad, 1987. An indispensable guide to the varying characteristics of the apocalyptic genre in ancient Judaism.

Daley, B. The Hope of the Early Church. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. The wider theological context of early Christian apocalypticism. Emmerson, R., and B. McGinn. The Apocalypse in the Middle Ages. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1992. An authoritative account of the interpretation and effects of Revelation down to the late medieval period.

556

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse Albrecht Diirer (1471-1528) Scala/Art Resource, NY

Death on a Pale Horse William Blake

Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

Death on a Pale Horse

J. M. W. Turner (1825-30) Clore Collection, Tate Gallery, London/Art Resource, NY

The Fifth Seal Vision: The Souls of the Martyrs Under the Altar The Douce Apocalypse (13th cent.) Bodleian Library, Oxford. MS Douce 180, p. 17

Le Sommeil des Justes (The Sleep of the Righteous) Angers tapestry (14th cent.) Giraudon /Art Resource, NY

The Angel Standing in the Sun J. M. W. Turner (1846) Clore Collection, Tate Gallery, London/Art Resource, NY

ihe Last Judgement William Blake (1757-1827) National Trust/Art Resource, NY

“America, a Prophecy.” Copy A. Bentley 1/ Frontispiece William Blake The Pierpont Morgan Library/Art Resource, NY

REVELATION—INTRODUCTION Hill, C. The English Bible and the Seventeenth Century Revolution. London: Penguin, 1993. Represents the climax of a life’s work of study on radical groups in the early modern period and the enormous importance the book of Revelation had for them. Rowland, C. The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity. London: SPCK, 1982. An attempt to explore the revelatory character of apocalyptic texts and the central place they have in Judaism and Christianity. . Radical Christianity: AReading ofRecovery. Oxford: Polity, 1988. An outline of the importance of apocalyptic religion for radical Christianity down to the twentieth century, including liberation theology.

Schtissler Fiorenza, E. Revelation: Vision of a Just World. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993. A social-rhetorical analysis that shows how Revelation is a work of persuasion intended to enable people to embark on a new way of seeing the world. Wainwright, A. Mysterious Apocalypse. Nashville: Abingdon, 1993. A concise history of the interpretation of the book of Revelation. Wenegst, K. Pax Romana and the Peace ofJesus Christ. London: SCM, 1988. An account of the countercultural gospel with an important place given to the book of Revelation.

OUTLINE OF REVELATION I. Revelation 1:1-8, John Introduces His Book: The Apocalypse of Jesus Christ II. Revelation 1:9-20, The Great Voice, the Vision of the Son of Man Who Commissions John to Write

Ill. Revelation 2:13:22, John Writes to the Angels A. B. C. D. E. F. G.

2:1-7, The Letter to the Angel at Ephesus 2:8-11, The Letter to the Angel at Smyrna 2:12-17, The Letter to the Angel at Pergamum 2:18-29, The Letter to the Angel at Thyatira 3:1-6, The Letter to the Angel at Sardis 3:7-13, The Letter to the Angel at Philadelphia 3:14-22, The Letter to the Angel at Laodicea

IV. Revelation 4:1-11, Vision of God’s Throne in Heaven V. Revelation 5:1-14, Vision of the Divine Scroll and the Lamb VI. Revelation 6:1-17, John Sees the Seals Opened VII. Revelation 7:1-17, Concerning Those Sealed and a Vision of the Great Multitude

A. 7:1-8, The 144,000 of Israel Are Sealed B. 7:9-17, The Multitude from Every Nation poy!

THE NEW INTERPRETER’S BIBLE

VIII. Revelation 8:1—9:21, The Seventh Seal and the Seven Angels with Seven Trumpets IX. Revelation 10:1-11, The Vision of the Strong Angel and the Command to Prophesy X. Revelation 11:1-19, The Two Witnesses XI. Revelation 12:1-18, Signs in Heaven: The Woman and the Dragon XII. Revelation 13:1-18, The Vision of Two Beasts

XIII. 14:1-20, The Lamb, the 144,000, the Eternal Gospel, and the Human Figure

A. 14:1-5, The Song of the 144,000 B. 14:6-13, The Message of the Three Angels C. 14:14-20, The Harvest of the Earth XIV. Revelation 15:1-8, Another Sign in Heaven: The Sea of Glass and the Song of Those Who Conquered XV. Revelation 16:1-21, Seven Angels and Seven Trumpets

XVI. Revelation 17:1-18, The Vision of Babylon XVII. Revelation 18:1-19:10, The Fall of Babylon XVIII. Revelation 19:11-21, Heaven Opens, and the Rider on the White Horse Appears

XIX. Revelation 20:1-15, Millennium and Judgment A. 20:1-6, Another Angel Descending from Heaven, the Binding of Satan, and the Millennium B. 20:7-10, The Release of Satan for the Last Battle C. 20:11-15, The Vision of the Great White Throne and Judgment XX.

Revelation 21:1—22:5, The New Heaven, the New Earth, and the New Jerusalem

XX]. Revelation 22:6-21, Concluding Sayings

558

REVELATION: bel--&

JOHN INTRODUCES HIs BOOK: THE APOCALYPSE OF JESUS CHRIST

NIV

‘

NRSV

]

The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, *who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. *Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.

]

The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants? what must soon take place; he made? it known by sending his angel to his servant® John, *who testified to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. 3Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear and who keep what is written in it; for the time

‘John,

is near.

To the seven churches in the province of Asia: Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits? before his throne, °and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

AJohn to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and peace from him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven spirits who are before his throne, °and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and freed? us from our

To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, °and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father—to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen. 7Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen. 8“T am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”

priests serving’ his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. 7 Look! He is coming with the clouds; every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and on his account all the tribes of the earth will wail. So it is to be. Amen. 8“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.

a4 Or the sevenfold Spirit

sins by his blood, °and made? us to be a kingdom,

6 Gk and he made ¢ Gk slave 4 Gk slaves e Gk priests to authorities read washed

d Other ancient

(COMMENTARY 1:1-3. Revelation is a book without parallel in the New Testament. It is a revelation that comes from Jesus Christ. The authoritative quality of the book is announced, similar in some ways to the

way Paul announces the authoritative character of his apostolic office at the beginning of Galatians (Gal 1:12, 16). In this respect, Revelation differs even from the biblical book with which, in other

REVELATION 1:1-8 COMMENTARY respects, it has most in common: Daniel, which opens with stories that set the scene rather than with the stark announcement of apocalypse. Revelation’s closest parallels in vocabulary and style, however, are with the opening of Ezekiel’s prophecy and the word of God written on tablets of stone at Sinai in Exodus and Deuteronomy, though Revelation is emphatically not a collection of law. A passage from Deuteronomy is alluded to in the words in Rev 22:18, which suggests that the words of this prophecy matter: It is these words that are to be heard and read, not a commentary or a paraphrase. Just as the Muslim hears and reveres the particular words of the Quran, so also it is the words of the Apocalypse

that are the medium of the revelation of Jesus Christ, and it is these pre-eminently that are to be attended to and pondered. The word “apocalypse” (dtroxddudis apokalypsis) is used for the first and only time here to describe a written collection of revelations, though it is used to speak of divine revelations elsewhere in the NT (see Introduction). Elsewhere the book is described as prophecy; John’s contemporary, the writer of the Epistle of Jude, writes of Enoch’s “prophesying” (Jude 14) and then quotes a work that is conventionally categorized by modern scholars as an apocalypse, though the word is not used in the book itself (7 Enoch 1:9). As far as these writers are concerned, to be called to see

and to write in this way is to utter prophecy.! The apocalypse is given by God and is something to be communicated to God’s servants, who are elsewhere designated as prophets (19:10; 22:9). An apocalypse is a peculiar form of writing. Whatever the experience that triggered these words, it is a collection of images that persuades not by appealing to “our logical faculties but to our imagination and emotions.”!°' What we have in Revelation is a series of images relating to things that have been seen (1:12, 19), communicated by means of words. John writes (we may compare John with William Blake, who communicated a sense of vision both pictorially and verbally). While we have to read Revelation and recognize the importance of words, therefore, we 160. J. Barton, Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel After the Exile (London: Darton, Longman, and Todd, 1986). 161. E. Schtissler Fiorenza, Revelation: Vision of a Just World (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991) 25.

need to appreciate that John communicates what he sees and what he hears (see Commentary on Revelation 7). In the imagery there is an attempt to evoke that visionary experience.'©? Unlike the letter to the Romans, which uses argument to persuade readers that the revelation to which it bears witness should be taken seriously, Revelation’s word pictures seek to address and involve readers and relocate them in that divine economy. It is full of comparisons as the writer struggles to expand the boundaries of language to encapsulate what defies description. Paul’s words summarize the problem for the visionary in the opening chapters of 1 Corinthians, where he renounces plausible words of wisdom (1 Cor 2:4) in favor of “God’s wisdom, secret and hidden... revealed to us through the Spirit... [which] we speak of...in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit” (1 Cor 2:7, 10, 13 NRSV). Apocalypse does not consist of “propositional, logical, [or] factual language” but persuades by means of “the evocative, persuasive power of its symbolic language compelling imaginative participation.”!@ The problem with a Bible commentary whose main concerns are authorship, date, purpose, and background is that it can fail to do justice to the peculiarities of a work that depends on imagination and the power of symbolic language. This caution is particularly appropriate for a work like Revelation. We may be tempted to “make sense” of it by offering an interpretation—what it really means. But to do that is to ignore the claim made in the words with which John introduces his book: €onpavev (esemanen). The NRSV translates this expression as “he made it known,” but a more literal translation, “he signified,” makes clear the importance of the signification through which the apocalypse is communicated. In other words, the medium is the message. To understand Revelation is not to translate its message into another medium but to engage with those signs and juxtapose others to complement them. The verb onpaive (semaino; lit., “signifying”) is the same word used by the narrator of the Fourth Gospel to comment on Jesus’ use of a phrase like “lift up” (John 12:33), indicating that he would die by crucifixion (John 18:32; cf. John 21:19). How this 162. See G. B, Caird, The Language and Imagery of the Bible (London: Duckworth, 1980). 163. Schiissler Fiorenza, Revelation, 31.

560

REVELATION

1:1-8 COMMENTARY

revelation is signified is important, therefore. To read Revelation as if it were merely a code, reducible without remainder to another form of discourse, is to ignore the fact that it is this mode through which God has communicated to John and that has taxed, vexed, and provoked readers ever since. So, to extract a message from Revelation and leave behind the images in faver of something more manageable and rational is to run the risk of evacuating the Apocalypse of its power by ignoring that which enables it to be the word of God. Commentators and readers of the book are beckoned to stay within the imagery and not too readily get diverted in their quest for a simple message lurking behind the words, which, it is supposed, history and reason can lay bare. Revelation stands apart from the rest of the Bible. The bulk of it is presented as a vision that John received. An apostolic epistle or a gospel could legitimately be expected to have worked within received traditions; certainly Paul sought to respond to situations and problems and, in general, to have exercised a conscious effort to mold tradition, thought, and technique to meet an immediate need. Revelation is an altogether different work. It is possible that there are contacts with contemporary Jewish tradition or the hymns of praise of church or synagogue.'™ If we examine its relationship with the Old Testament,'©> we would find that there is hardly a verse in Revelation that does not have some kind of contact with the language and imagery of the Old Testament. But what kind of contact? Are we, for example, justified in thinking of it as an allusion,'° in the way that an evangelist would cite Scripture to prove the fulfillment of prophecy in Christ (e.g., Matt 1:23) or that a gospel tradition is linked with Scripture (e.g., Gen 28:12 in John 1:51)? Did John sit down and write an apocalypse in much the same way Paul might have written an epistle, either himself or through an amanuensis? Or like an evangelist using sources, whether oral or written? If we take seriously

John’s claim to report a vision, then we would be wrong to consider the writing as a conscious recall of tradition with a particular intent. If we respect the writer’s visionary claim, we will be wary of seeking allusions, as if they were deliberate attempts to echo biblical passages or to respond, in a pragmatic fashion, to particular circumstances, however much these might have affected the deepest levels of his consciousness. Rather, the immediate circumstances, as well as the language of the Bible, become a mode of discourse in which the original context and purpose ceases to be of primary concern (some of these issues are explored further in the Reflections on Revelation 17). The visionary language and its particular syntax are what demands the reader’s attention. In the visionary imagination, Ezekiel and Daniel echo in the minds of readers who know these texts well. This is an indication of the “visionary tradition” rather than a deliberate attempt to write a commentary on these texts. Such language is the appropriate—indeed, inevitable— mode of discourse for the visionary. Daniel’s and Ezekiel’s prophecies are quite simply the means whereby visions are expressed and, perhaps, even engendered. Consider the opening vision, for example. Its relationship with Daniel is evident, as a comparison makes clear: I looked up and saw a man clothed in linen, with a belt of gold from Uphaz around his waist. His body was like beryl, his face like lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the roar of a multitude. (Dan 10:5-6 NRSV)

I saw one like the Son of Man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden sash across his chest. His head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire, his feet were like burnished bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters. (Rev 1:13-15 NRSV)

This is obviously not mere copying, though the parameters provided by the vision in Daniel are crucial for the Apocalypse’s vision. It is as if the language is in some sense determinative for what John sees. Whether he believes he sees what Daniel saw or that the overwhelming vision of the risen Christ could only be written about in terms derived from the book of Daniel is unclear. Like contempo-

164. P. Prigent, Apocalypse et Liturgie (Paris: Delachaux, 1960). 165. On the major prophetic books and Revelation, seeJ.Fekkes, /saiah and the Prophetic Traditions in the Book of Revelation (1988); J. M. Vogelsang, The Interpretation of Ezekiel in the Book of Revelation (1985); S. P. Moyise, The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1995). 166. See R. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1989). »

561

REVELATION

1:1-8 COMMENTARY throughout the book (from chap. 5 onward) as a Lamb. It is a trinitarian juxtaposition reminiscent of 2 Cor 13:12 and Mark 1:10. Jesus Christ is further described in terms that are important for the rest of the book of Revelation. He is the firstborn from the dead (cf. Col 1:18) and ruler of the kings of the earth, a political dominion, a fact that will be stressed again at the parousia in 19:16. John’s greeting is from himself as well as from Jesus Christ. This juxtaposition is in line with much else in these opening words, where the authority of John is enhanced by the ease with which his words and the words of God or Christ (e.g., v. 8) mingle, affirming the divine origin of this particular word to God’s servants {v. 1). As the faithful witness (3:14; 19:11), Christ offers a model for subsequent acts of witness (e.g., 2:13; 11:3; cf. 22:20). John himself, on the isle of Patmos as a witness (v. 9), is engaged in recording the apocalypse itself (1:2; 22:18). The power of witness is evident (11:7; 12:11) and can be a costly affair (2:13; 6:9; 11:7-8; 17:6; 20:4), reflecting the will of God (cf. 15:3). Witness to the way of God is centered on lives of faithfulness and is encapsulated in the witness of the book of Revelation to the ways of God. There is a similar pattern in the Fourth Gospel, in which Jesus is said to have come in order to bear witness to truth John 18:37), and the Paraclete and the disciples continue that witness (John 15:26-27). Likewise, the witness of John the Baptist assumes importance as a crucial means of adding to the testimony of Father and Son (John yer TSO Tole Verse 5 is one of many examples of the departure from standard Greek grammar—not evident in English translations of the text, which inevitably tend to gloss over such grammatical infelicities and leave readers with a more fluent text and an impression of homogeneity. The idiosyncratic Greek syntax!®” underlines a message that does not, at least at first sight, conform to what is normal or common sense. John writes from Patmos, not one of the centers of influence or power. He is an outsider, an insignificant person, perhaps not even an apostle. Yet he is the one who

rary believers who pray using the language and style of the version of Scripture familiar to them, this written description of the awesome apparition that confronted the seer on Patmos can only be written in the words of Scripture. To write in any other style might be to devalue what was there and reduce its significance. The blessing promised by engagement with the booke(t:Sichel4s13; 16205; 19:020:6; 22:7, 14) comes for both reader and listeners; interestingly, there is only one reference to the former, possibly indicating something about the situation in which a solitary reader might read, with the majority hearing the words of the book (cf. Mark 13:14). Reading and hearing are two very different activities: The reader’s occupation allows the words on a page the possibility of cross-referencing, whereas the hearer engages the imagination more easily and makes connections that are perhaps less structured and predictable. Either way, the process leads to “keeping the words.” This does not refer to mere preservation of what is contained in the book but, as is evident elsewhere, is the act of practicing them in a way that responds to the critical moment that is near (22:10). 1:4-8. In v. 4, John writes to the seven churches in Asia, which are then addressed individually in chaps. 2-3. Here the particularity of context seems important. We may wonder whether there were only seven churches in the area in John’s day, for, as the letters of Paul (Colossians) and Ignatius (7rallians and Magnesians) indicate, it is likely that there were more. This raises the question of whether the number 7, like the number later in the book (seven seals, trumpets, and bowls; seven spirits, etc., contrasting with the threefold 666 in 13:18), represents the wholeness of the church, a point noted in the earliest extant commentary of Victorinus (see “The Patristic Period,” in the Introduction). Like the opening of Paul’s letters (e.g., 1 Cor 1:1), there is a greeting from God, who is described as the one “who is and who was and who is to come” (cf. Rev 3:1; 4:8; 11:17; 16:5). The greeting is from the God of past, present, and future (whose name in Exodus [mim yhwh] is glossed as “I am who | am” [or “was” or “will be”]; see Exod 3:14; cf. Isa 41:4). The greeting is also from the seven spirits that are near God’s throne (cf. 3:1; 4:5; 5:6) and from Jesus Christ, who is represented

167. Discussed by Dionysius of Alexandria in Eusebius Ecclesiastical History VU1.25.24-27, and in R. H. Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1970) 1:cxvii-clix.

562

REVELATION

1:1-8 COMMENTARY

glimpses the mystery of God’s purposes. The Greek style, like the imagery, pulls readers up short, as we begin to recognize that God’s ways are not our ways and that God’s thoughts are not like our thoughts (see Job 40-41; Isa 40:12). Human wisdom, to paraphrase Paul, is stretched to its limit as “normal” language seeks to bear witness to the mystery of God. A doxology starts in the second half of v. 5, reminiscent of similar interruptions in New Testament letters (e.g., Rom 11:33; 16:25; Jude 24). It continues to the end of v. 8. In v. 7 it takes the form of an assertion about a future coming and universal vindication, and then there is a first-person declaration, as if from the voice of God (v. 8). One might note the emphasis on the love of God in these verses, not a particularly common theme in Revelation (cf. 2:4, 19; 3:9; 12:11). The praise is due to one who “loosed” (Atw lyo, preferring that reading to “washed us from our sins,” which is found in some later mss). The imagery is that of release, similar to the way in which the blood of the Passover lamb released the people of Israel from the curse on Egypt (see further on this in the Commentary on 5:5-6). With echoes of the vocation of the people in Exod 19:6 (cf. Exod 23:22; Isa 61:6), the constitution

of “us as a kingdom, priests to our God” speaks of a present role, a theme that will be taken up in the hymn in 5:10. We are immediately confronted with a contrast between the present state of “us” (an inclusive reference when the author joins with the addressees of v. 4) who have been made a kingdom and priests, and who still with patience have to endure tribulation (cf. v. 9). The climax of the book marks the fulfillment of the hope that they will reign with the Lamb (20:6; cf. 5:10). The abrupt introduction of the statement about the parousia in v. 7 points the reader to that future and sets it as the context in which the praise is uttered. Once again, as in v. 5, suffering is mentioned—presumably of Christ, though this is implied rather than stated. Here suffering is set in the context of the demonstration of the dignity of the one who is pierced. Verse 7 uses language from a variety of biblical sources, including Dan 7:13 and Zech 12:10, and resembles Gospel passages like Matt 24:30 and John 19:37. The praise and assertion are rounded off with a first-person pronouncement in a formula that recurs later in the book (11:17; 21:6; 22:13), together with a description of God as “almighty,” taken up in the heavenly praise in the throne scene (4:8). (See Reflections at 1:9-20.)

563

REVELATION-1:9-20 THE GREAT VOICE, THE VISION OF THE SON OF MAN WHO

COMMISSIONS JOHN TO WRITE

NIV

NRSV

*I, John, your brother and companion in the suf fering and kingdom and patient endurance that are ours in Jesus, was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus. 'On the Lord’s Day | was in the Spirit, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet, ''which said: “Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea.” "1 turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, '"and among the lampstands was someone “like a son of man,”? dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. '*His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. !°His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. 'In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance. “When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. | am the First and the Last. '*I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades. '“Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. *°The mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand and of the seven golden lampstands is this: The seven stars are the angels? of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

91, John, your brother who share with you in Jesus the persecution and the kingdom and the patient endurance, was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.? '!°I was in the spirit? on the Lord’s day, and | heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet ''saying, “Write in a book what you see and send it to the seven churches, to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamum, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.” 12Then I turned to see whose voice it was that spoke to me, and on turning I saw seven golden I saw one like the Son of Man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden sash across his chest. “His head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire, his feet were like burnished bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters. 'In his right hand he held seven stars, and from his mouth came a sharp, twoedged sword, and his face was like the sun shining with full force. 17When I saw him, | fell at his feet as though dead. But he placed his right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, 8and the living one. I was dead, and see, I am alive forever and ever; and I have the keys of Death and of Hades. '"Now write what you have seen, what is, and what is to take place after this. 2°As for the mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand, and the seven golden lampstands: the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

213 Daniel 7:13

aOr testimony to Jesus

lampstands, 'Sand in the midst of the lampstands

620 Or messengers

564

6Or in the Spirit

REVELATION

1:9-20 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY 1:9. The autobiographical explanation of the text is picked up after the divine pronouncement in v. 8 (cf. 22:8). We know nothing about John other than the fragmentary remarks in these verses: his prophetic vocation and the evidence of his deep immersion in the Scriptures and the Jewish visionary tradition. John’s qualifications do not include companionship of the historical Jesus, membership in an apostolic circle, or any eccleSiastical status. John bids us dwell on different qualities than an authority based on knowing or listening to a person in the flesh, however important that may be in certain circumstances (cf. 2 Cor 5:16). He does not place himself in a position of superiority. So alongside the unique authority vouchsafed to one who has seen a vision, John describes himself as a “brother who share|s] with you in Jesus the persecution and the kingdom and the patient endurance,” a situation that characterizes Christian witness (14:18; cf. Mark 13:13). In other words, he identifies himself with that group that has been released (v. 5) and now knows themselves part of the messianic reign, though the readers of the book must submit to the demands of the ensuing message. That bonding parallels a similar assertion by Paul in Philippians as he links his own and the Philippians’ sufferings (Phil 4:14; cf. Phil 1:29). There is throughout the book a refusal to allow a hierarchy that detracts from the worship of Almighty God and God’s service. Thus John, in his vision, when persuaded to fall down at the feet of an angel is told by the angel that he is a fellow servant (19:10). John’s relationship with his hearers, then, is similar and involves a companionship in tribulation. The word translated “persecution” (OXtisis thlipsis) is used often in Revelation and has particular resonances within the eschatological tradition referring to the specific trials and tribulations that have to precede the coming of God’s reign (e.g., Mark 13:19). Paul speaks of his suffering in such terms (2 Cor 1:4) and even suggests that his own life of suffering can vicariously relieve that of the church (Col 1:24). What that tribulation may have meant for John, we have no means of knowing. John tells us that he was.on Patmos “because of

Whether that is the result of external circumstances (e.g., persecution) or the inner compulsion of the Spirit leading John to this island is not clear. It has been suggested that John was exiled by the proconsul of Asia Minor to an island within his jurisdiction.'°® The tribulation, however, is balanced by the participation in the reign of Christ, and the present is characterized by another important virtue: “patience,” the cultivation of which, arguably, the book of Revelation as a whole seeks to encourage. Indeed, keeping the commandments of God in circumstances that are not conducive to that activity characterizes “the endurance of the saints” (14:12 NRSV). The “testimony of Jesus” has been much debated, since it could mean the testimony about Jesus or the testimony that Jesus offered.'© The hypothesis of John’s exile leads to a preference for the former, but the testimony Jesus offered might itself have been the reason for a separation or distancing from society. The phrase “testimony of Jesus.” is found elsewhere (12:17; 14:12; 17:6; 19:10; 20:4), adding weight to the view that it may refer to the earthly life of Jesus (though Jesus is a present heavenly agent in 22:16). 1:10. The enigmatic “I was in the spirit” (cf. 4:2; 17:3) has been understood to indicate some

kind of visionary state inspired by the Spirit.'”° The same phrase is used in 4:2 to speak of what seems to be John’s heavenly ascent and in 17:3, where the Spirit is the means whereby John is taken, in his vision, to a desert place to see Babylon. The phrase is a marker that something different is occurring (an event of the spirit as opposed to flesh), and so what follows should be read in an appropriate way, “interpreting spiritual things to those who are spiritual” (1 Cor 2:13 NRSV). It signifies a change of gears and alerts us to what will be the case in so much that follows—e.g., that the metaphorical will dominate John’s description of his vision. 168. G. B. Caird, A Commentary on the Revelation of Saint John the Divine (London: A. & C. Black, 1984) 22. 169. See the essays by J. Sweet and G. Lampe in Suffering and Martyrdom in the New Testament, ed. W. Horbury and B. McNeil (Cambridge: 1981). 170. Cf. Ezek 3:12; 8:2, which seem to form the basis for the Gospel of the Hebrews, quoted in Origen Commentary on John ii.12.87:; “My mother the Holy Spirit took me by one of the hairs of my head and brought

the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.”

me to the great mount Tabor.”

565

REVELATION

1:9-20 COMMENTARY ture” (19:9; Isa 30:8). John is commanded to write what he sees (v. 11). It is the written vision that assumes importance. That becomes a particularly important part of the message in 5:5, where John hears that the Lion of Judah has conquered but sees a Lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered. What John sees is written about in differing ways; yet it is marked with the visionary qualifier “as if” (ws Aos), which is used scores of times in the book as John gropes to find the language to convey adequately the awesome and stirring images that have confronted him. The reader is confronted by the immediacy of the impact as words seek to convey what is seen, whether it be the glory of the Son of Man, the terrible color and appearance of the armed locusts, or the gaudy beauty of Babylon (17:4). That contrasts with a more prosaic, narrative style of reportage, albeit in summary form. Thus the actual end of Babylon is hinted at: It is burned with fire (e.g., 18:8), and the end of the armies that are ranged against the rider on the white horse in 19:21 are said to have been killed with the sword that proceeds from his mouth. Much of the book is not just an immediate report of what John has seen but includes what he hears from the various voices in heaven that contribute to a Kaleidoscope of perspectives about what has happened (this is particularly true of chaps. 18-19). John’s visions of God’s throne and the beast rising from the sea are vivid and detailed. This contrasts with reportage that assumes a less vivid narrative style as what he has seen, which has made such an impact, is described in a more prosaic, concise manner (e€.g., 13:5ff., 12-13). The first things John sees are seven lampstands (v. 12), which he will be told are the seven churches (v. 20; cf. Exod 25:37; Num 8:1; Zech 4:2). A mysterious human figure (“one like the Son of Man”; cf. the similar figure in 14:14) confronts John, standing in the midst of the lampstands. The human figure is described with language drawn from several biblical passages, particularly Ezekiel 1 and Daniel 7; 10 (and there is a general similarity with the description of the beloved in Cant 5:10-16). In seeing something that looks like the mysterious divine figures in Ezekiel and Daniel, he is seeing again, in his own way and for his own time, the vision as Ezekiel

Like the OT prophets, whose visions are recorded (e.g., Isa 6:1), John gives a general indication of time, “the Lord’s day” (the adjective “belonging to the Lord” |kuptakds kyriakos| is found elsewhere in the NT only in 1 Cor 11:20, referring to the Lord’s supper). It is probably a reference to Sunday rather than to the sabbath (cf. Matt 28:1; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2). It is a day when the Lord comes to John, anticipating the great day of God’s wrath (see 6:17). Such an indication suggests that the actuality of or the memories of a setting of worship were the context for John’s vision just as they had been for Isaiah in his Temple vision. We should recall that worship was widely seen as a communion with heaven, in which the earthly saints join with the heavenly people of God in lauding God. This is a matter of promise as well as a threat (see 1 Cor 16:21). The “Lord’s day” belongs to God, who is Lord (1:8; 4:8; 11:4; 11:17) the one who will be seen as “King of kings and Lord of lords” (19:16 NRSV; cf. 11:8; 17:14). It is sacred time just as Patmos has, at least temporarily, become sacred space, hallowed by the vision. It was the day in particular when the risen Lord had appeared to disciples in the past (Luke 24:13ff.; John 20:1ff.). 1:11-16. In this setting, John hears a voice, which he compares to a trumpet (cf. Exod 19:16), blasts of which will herald the eschatological woes later in the book. The voice like a trumpet (cf. 4:1) speaks words and utters a command to write in a book (v. 11) to seven churches, already alluded to in v. 4 but now named. The voice is behind John, and John turns and sees as well as hears. But he turns in order to see, according to v. 12, a voice. Here is one of many awkward juxtapositions: How can John see a voice? Perhaps one should not ask such a prosaic question. But the text, with its surprising, even jarring, images has the effect of stopping us in our tracks by its idiosyncrasy. The voice seems to impinge so much on John’s consciousness that it demands to be seen as well as heard. Indeed, eventually the voice will be seen, because what it says will be translated into writing and the words of the prophecy will be read as Scripture. In the command to write lies a distinctive feature of Revelation. John functions as a scribe who will communicate with the angels of the churches, not by word of mouth but by “scrip-

566

REVELATION

1:9-20 COMMENTARY

or Daniel would have seen it (see Excursus: “God’s Throne, the Heavenly Merkabah, and the Human Figure,” 596-99). The details of the description of this figure are echoed in the letters to the seven churches: He “holds the seven stars in his right hand” (2:1 NRSV; cf. 3:1) and has a “sharp, double-edged sword” (2:12 NIV). He has “eyes like a flame of fire’ and feet “like burnished‘ bronze” (2:18 NRSV). The long robe, golden sash, hair, voice, and face are not mentioned in the letters. Three letters, however, refer to other qualities mentioned in chap. 1: “the first and the last, who was dead and came to life” (2:8) refers to 1:17, “the first and the last, and the living one. I was dead, and see, I am alive”; “the seven spirits of God” (3:1) refers to 1:4, “the seven spirits who are before his throne”; “the key of David” (3:7) refers

16:19). The credentials of the divine envoy having been stated, the command to write is given. Unusual for Revelation, an explanation is offered at the end of the chapter for one aspect of the vision (v. 20). This may be paralleled in 4:5, where the lamps are said to be the spirits of God, but it is found infrequently elsewhere. Even chap. 17, which includes heavy historical and geographical allusions, is not as explicit as this. This all contrasts with much apocalyptic literature (the book of Daniel is a good example in this respect), in which the details of a vision are offered a minute interpretation so that every atom of meaning can be extracted from the symbolism (e.g., Daniel 7 and the vision of the man from the sea in 4 Ezra 13). The mystery of the seven stars and seven lampstands has an immediate connection with what follows, where John writes to the angels of seven churches. In v. 20 the different and yet intimate relationship between Christ, the angels, and the churches is stressed. Christ stands in the midst of the lampstands (the churches) and holds the stars (the angels). The latter seem to stand closer to Christ, whereas the lampstands, though overshadowed by his presence, stand somewhat apart. As we shall see in the ensuing message, it is going to be possible for the lampstand to be removed from its place as a result of judgment, though nothing is said about the removal of the angel of the church from Christ’s right hand. John is commanded to write down what he has seen (v. 19): “What is, and what is to take place after this” (cf. 1:1; 4:1; 22:7). “What must happen soon” may refer either to what is to take place in human history or, more probably, to what will take place in the narrative of the vision John is to receive and write down. Indeed, what actually follows is a revelation of the nature of the churches and in chaps. 4-5 a vision of heaven. The revelation, therefore, is not solely about the end of the age. John is about to have opened up to him reality, including the presence of the whole eschatological process in the midst of which the readers now stand, and in the light of which they have to make decisions about their present conduct.

to 1:18, “keys of Death and Hades”; “the faithful and true witness” (3:14) refers to 1:5, “the faithful witness.” Those images picked up later in the letters preface different kinds of exhortations. The eyes and the feet stand at the beginning of a letter that criticizes tolerance of appearances (Jezebel thinks she is a prophet, 2:20) and affirms patience. The sharp sword prefaces a letter that is in part a recognition of Antipas’s witness and the threat of judgment for the tolerance of the Nicolaitans (2:15). The first letter, to the angel of Ephesus, stresses the proximity of the one like the Son of Man to all the churches. 1:17-20. The dramatic appearance results in John’s prostration (v. 17) and the typical command not to fear, reminiscent of Jesus’ words of assurance to the disciples after the vision on the mount of transfiguration (Matt 17:6; cf. Dan 8:18; 10:15ff.). In v. 17, there is no command not to worship (unlike 19:10), suggesting that John’s response of obeisance here is entirely appropriate. The word of comfort echoes v. 8, this time with “first” and “last” replacing “alpha” and “omega,” together with a reference to the figure as one who “is alive,” though he had been dead. As first and last, the human figure is linked with the divine statement in Isa 44:6 and 48:12. The power of life and death belongs to this figure (cf. Matt

567

REVELATION

1:9-20 REFLECTIONS

REFLECTIONS 1. The opening and closing words of the book of Revelation indicate the special status of this book: It is revelation. To read its contents, and particularly to heed them, is to be blessed. Here for the first time is a Christian text that comes close to portraying itself as sacred scripture on a par with the writings of the old covenant. The book is grounded in the apocalyptic event: the revelation of God in Jesus Christ. And yet it is the one book of the New Testament that is most neglected or treated with suspicion. New Testament writers want to signal something of world-shaking significance bursting over the horizon of human experience. That is the way in which Paul speaks of the cross in 1 Corinthians 1-3. It is folly to uncomprehending humanity, but those who have eyes to see can understand it as the means of God’s ultimate saving purposes. Apocalypse demands a break from our present way of looking at things. It offers an alternative perspective—though not the authoritative, definitive statement for which we crave—that requires the recipient who understands to bear witness. Despite its message “from beyond,” as it were, there is a familiar greeting similar to those found in Paul’s letters (1:4). John is not commissioned to write some abstract, ethereal collection of eschatological predictions. The language may seem strange and otherworldly, but it is rooted in the needs and obligations of specific communities. The words of this text are important and encourage our preoccupation with detailed exegesis of them. But what this text, perhaps especially of all the biblical texts, encourages and requires is not preoccupation with the letter. Instead, it calls us to move through the letter to the spirit, not to become so bogged down in the minutiae of symbolic detail that we fail to experience these words as an organ for further imaginative insight into the ways of God and the world. 2. The figure standing in the midst of the lampstand is “like the Son of Man” (1:13 NRSV). Jesus frequently used the phrase “Son of Man” to refer to himself in all the Gospels. This is the weak human figure who must suffer many things (Mark 8:31) and has nowhere to lay his head (Luke 9:58), yet he is none other than the one whose coming manifests the injustice done to him (1:7; cf. Mark 13:26) as he comes in judgment (19:11ff.; cf. Matt 25:31 ff.). This is no remote judge whom the nations will fear only in the future. John sees the risen Christ now standing in the midst of the lamps, which symbolize the Christian communities (1:20). This is a reminder that the present activity of the churches’ angels and its individual members is of eternal significance. There is a distinctive pattern of behavior and witness that needs to be adhered to.

3. Three times within the opening nine verses of Revelation 1, John writes of witness. It is a word and an activity removed from the everyday experience of most of us, reserved for courts of law, but it was central to the understanding of Christian identity in the pre-Constantinian church. Persons in contemporary situations comparable to those of the first Christians, who were misunderstood, suspected, ostracized, and persecuted, yet carried on lives of faithfulness, can particularly resonate with John’s words. I recall a meeting in Sao Paulo, Brazil, during a period of military dictatorship in that country. Members of grassroots churches were studying these words from Revelation 1 with the help of biblical exegetes from a local university. There was an atmosphere of utter comprehension of, and accord with, John’s situation, as trade union activists, catechists, and human rights workers shared their experiences of persecution and harassment as a result of their work with the poor and the marginalized. They found in John a kindred spirit as they sought to understand and build up their communities in the face of the contemporary beast of poverty and oppression.

568

REVELATION

1:9-20 REFLECTIONS

It was readily apparent as I listened to their eager attempts to relate Revelation to their situation that they had discovered a text that spoke to them. They had not been desensitized by an ordered and “respectable” life of accommodation and assimilation. But Revelation is not directed only to the persecuted. Several of the letters to the angels of the churches indicate that it is the comfortable who are being addressed, too. It is, however, more readily comprehended by those who, when they pray for God’s reign to come on earth as in heaven, know that they live in Babylon and cannot be at ease with its habits and demands. 4. We may consider the claim in 1:7, that all peoples of the world will lament, to be outrageous when viewed from the perspective of isolated (and in some cases, for example at Smyrna) weak communities. After all, that claim sounds very far removed from these communities’ everyday life. But these words remind such people of the significance of their position. The poor, the weak, the marginalized are the ones who, despite their lowliness, may be destined to share in the messianic governance. They follow in the steps of the crucified Messiah, whose death seemed to be another sad episode in the story of the world, yet who turned out to be the one whose way will ultimately be vindicated (1:7) when God will be recognized as Creator and Lord of the universe (1:8). Meanwhile, whenever Christians meet, they remind each other in their liturgy that the story of Jesus shakes the world. To worship is to have the opportunity to have one’s eyes opened, to have a fresh, apocalyptic dimension

to life. 5. At the start of John’s vision Christ commissions him to be the divine envoy to the seven churches. It is the moment when John receives authority from Christ himself to act as the agent of that message of doom and encouragement. The prophet or witness is given a crucial role, something that will be explored further in later visions. The mind-blowing apocalyptic vision is laid upon weak human flesh to communicate to angels and to humans (cf. Eph 3:10). John’s vision occurs not in some recognized holy place in the midst of a beautiful edifice or a lavish divine service but on an island, Patmos. The prophet Ezekiel long before had seen God in exile in Babylon, far removed from the ark in the holy place of Israel, the Temple in Jerusalem. The kingdom of God had appeared on the margins of Judaism’s life with an eccentric prophet and his baptism in the Jordan. It was there that Jesus had seen the heavens open and the Spirit of God descending upon him in the wilderness (Mark 1:10). God identifies with Hebrew slaves, a humiliated people in exile in Babylon, a crucified Messiah. Patmos becomes a special place and moment. It is a moment “in the spirit” in which John could “stand outside” himself and his world to see things differently. The spiritual illumination John speaks of here has resonances with the visionary call that is at the heart of the mystical experience throughout history. Such moments are not the preserve of a spiritual elite, however. The disciplines of using Ignatius of Loyola’s Spiritual Exercises or of living in solidarity with the poor and the marginalized enable those who practice them to put themselves in a “Patmos situation” and, thereby, with imagination, to begin to see things differently. The coming One now stands in the midst of the world as a challenger and a comforter. If John’s experience is anything to go by, the divine voice will be apprehended more clearly in places like Patmos, in moments like “the Lord’s day.” So liturgy, especially that of eucharist, is a moment of communion with the eternal purposes and the birth pangs of a new world and to those whose words and deeds make them marginal to the processes of the world.

6. John is commanded to write down what he has seen (1:19; cf. 4:1). The revelation is not solely, nor indeed primarily, about the future. Some of what he sees is past history (e.g., the death of Christ and his exaltation in chap. 5). From the perspective of those on earth, John’s vision brings together the mind of God and human history. His vision portrays the

569

REVELATION

1:9-20 REFLECTIONS

relationship between the one who was, who is, and who is to come and what is now the case, between eternity and the finite, between the Holy One and the profanity of sinful and unjust institutions. The theme of the Apocalypse is that the two cannot co-exist. Human chronology is not that of the apocalyptic mind. The perspective of the Apocalypse cannot be tied down to a particular time scale. The reality of the significance of Christ’s death at a particular point in human history is immediately present with God (see 13:8). The coming One now stands in the midst of the world. He demands that the mystery of that presence be heeded, particularly by those who acknowledge him as ruler of the kings of the earth (1:5).

570

REVELATION 2:1-3:22

JOHN WRITES TO THE ANGELS OVERVIEW a

| ™

ohn had been commissioned to write what he had seen (1:18). This task is expanded

bility in his commentary on John 1:6. To support his argument that John the Baptist was the incarnation of an angel, he quotes a Jewish work, the Prayer of Joseph, which asserts that Jacob was the incarnation of an archangel named Israel.!”? Addressing an angel involves addressing the human or humans whose representative that angel is. The significance of the letters in Revelation is that communication with heaven is also communication with earth, as John is able to share this hidden knowledge. Indeed, the words of exhortation at the end of each letter presuppose a wider audience. The call vision itself has hinted as much, for the angels of the seven churches and the seven churches themselves are in the hand of the heavenly Son of Man. As we shall see in the letters to the angels, there is an- oscillation between angel and church, suggesting the close relationship between the two (e.g., 2:10). The letters to the seven churches raise in turn both historical and hermeneutical questions. Archaeological and literary study have found information that may assist readers in clarifying the contextual character of the address.'” Ephesus was an important Christian center and the base for Paul’s work. A variety of groups inhabited the city, including Jews, disciples of John the Baptist (Acts 18:19ff.), and worshipers of Artemis. The crown in 2:10 may relate to the games at Smyrna. Pergamum was the center of the cult of the emperor. The stone of Pergamum is dark, in contrast to the white stones mentioned in 2:17. Lydia was in the province of Thyatira (Acts 16:14), a center of the dye goods industry. Inscriptions from Thyatira show that trade guilds were numerous. Membership in them involved

in. chapters 2-3 when seven times over he is instructed to write to the angels of seven different churches. Writing is central to Revelation. John is commissioned as a scribe (cf. 1 John 1:4; 2 John 5; 12; 3 John 9, 13). Just as Paul writes to churches as an apostle of Christ, so also John is a witness of Christ (1:2), like the heavenly scribe Enoch of Jewish legend.!”! Revelation is a written text, a book, of ultimate importance (1:11; 22:1819), whose contents can help to determine one’s inclusion in another book: the book of life (13:8; 17:8). There has been much discussion about the identity of the angel of each of the seven churches. Is a heavenly being referred to or an emissary or messenger who might be a church official? In the light of the use of dyyehos (angelos) throughout the rest of the book, the translation “heavenly being” is to be preferred. Nevertheless a sharp distinction should probably not be drawn between angels and humans. Other NT passages indicate that there was a close link between angels and humans. In Matt 18:10, for example, the “little ones” have angels who behold the face of God, and in Acts 12:15 the human Peter can be mistaken for his angel in circumstances when, in the estimation of the assembled company, the appearance of a flesh-and-blood person would seem to be out of the question. Even a reference like Matt 11:10, in which John the Baptist is hailed in the words of Mal 3:1 (“See, I am sending my messenger/angel” [NRSV]), may reflect a widespread belief that certain humans were incarnations of important angels. The early Christian writer Origen discusses this very possi-

172. See J. Z. Smith, “The Prayer of Joseph,” in J. Neusner, ed., Religions in Antiquity, Supplement to Numen 1-2 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1968) 253-94. 173. The evidence is reviewed in C.J. Hemer, The Letters to the Seven Churches in Their Local Setting (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1986).

171. 1 Enoch 12:1; Jub. 4:20; Pseudo-Jonathan Targum on Gen 5:24. See alsoJ.W. Bowker, 7he Targums and Rabbinic Literature ARPES: Cambridge University Press) 1969.

ayia

EY

The Seven Churches of Revelation 50

100

150

Miles 50

100

150

200

Kilometers

S72

REVELATION 2:1-3:22 OVERVIEW participation in religious ceremonies. It has been Suggested that the suddenness of the coming

unique authority means that it stands firmly against the claims of false prophets (Matt 7:15-16; 1 John 4:1ff.; Didache 11) and false apostles (2:2-3; 22 Compleat|: This information is of interest to the historian, and if our primary concern is to recover the original situation in which the letter was read and heard, finding such information is important. Nevertheless, these are hints that only in certain instances, particularly in the last letter, warrant any degree of certainty. The reconstruction of early Christianity and Judaism in Asia Minor is a tentative kind of exercise and cannot be the foundation of interpretation.!”? Barth’s words in the preface to his commentary on Romans give us pause for thought: “Why should parallels drawn from the ancient world be of more value for our understanding of the epistle than the situation in which we ourselves actually are and to which we can therefore bear witness?” As in so much historical reconstruction, the hints and allusions are simply not sufficient to bear the weight of even the most tentative reconstruction. Exegetes who wrestle with the text as a resource for insight into the human condition may find themselves needing to resort from time to time to history, but must never be bound by that obligation. Biblical exegesis cannot depend on reconstruction, however valuable that might be for pursuing historical research into the history of Christian origins. There is no need to imagine ourselves in the situation of the first readers to enable the text to “speak” to us—unless, that is, we find that the text is so utterly opaque that we cannot discern any resonance at all with our own reading. That original context has been left behind in Revelation as we now have it, as the visionary imagination forges the elements of history into a new literary substance, just as William Blake took the events of his time and produced insightful comments.'®° The challenges and insights of Revelation are largely comprehensible and relevant in our time even without access to hypothetically reconstructed situations.

announced in 2:13 is an allusion to the attacks by Cyrus and Alexander the Great. Ignatius’s letters to the Philadelphians and the Magnesians (beginning of the second century) indicate that the tension between church and synagogue was still an issue.'7* Laodicea was a prosperous city, and there are cutting allusions to-its wealth in the letter. There are some links with the terminology of Colossians in Rev 3:14, language unique to Revelation. The angel’s reference to a lukewarm attitude may have been derived from the Laodicean water supply, which came from hot springs. Laodicea’s self-assertive prosperity (3:17) may reflect the city’s refusal of imperial help to rebuild after the earthquake in 61 cr. The eye salve mentioned in 3:18 is said to reflect the medical school and famous Phrygian eye powder. This city also had a clothing industry. The reference to Jezebel the prophetess (2:20) reminds us that Asia Minor became a center of Montanism!” in the second half of the second century cE. This was a prophetic renewal movement in which, initially at least, female prophets played a major role. Montanism seems to have drawn inspiration from Revelation.'”° There does seem to be some concern in the Pastoral Letters, traditionally linked with Asia Minor, with the exercise of charisma (1 Tim 4:14; 2 Tim 1:6). A proto-Montanist movement might explain the sobriety of the Pastorals, their firm regulation of the conduct of women, and their support for regular ministry (1 Tim 1:3ff.; 2:8ff.; 5:1ff.).!7” Ignatius of Antioch wrote letters to communities in Asia Minor. A visionary,'”® he seems to have functioned in a mediating role between the prophetic tradition of Revelation and the traditional authority recommended in the Pastoral Epistles. While Revelation is a book whose slant would seem to be more “Montanist “than “Pastoral,” its claim to 174. Ignatius Letter to the Philadelphians 6:1. 175. Montanism was a movement that sprang up in Asia MInor in the second century under the leadership of Montanus. Along with a strict asceticism, it proclaimed through ecstatic utterances the proximity of the end of this age, the imminent age of the Paraclete, and the establishment of the new Jerusalem. 176. Hemer, The Letters to the Seven Churches in Their Local Setting, 168-74. 177. J. Sweet, Revelation (London: SCM, 1979) 94. 178. Ignatius Letter to the Trallians 5.

179. For a judicious survey of material relating to this area, see J. Lieu, Image and Reality (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1947). 180. See William Blake, Continental Prophecies; and D. Erdman, Blake: Prophet Against Empire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987).

5/3

REVELATION 2:1-7

REVEEATION 2 77 | Er Pee ANGEL AT EPHESUS _ NIV

ei

NRSV “To the angel? of the church in Ephesus write:

“To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: These are the words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand, who walks among the seven golden lampstands: 2“1 know your works, your toil and your patient endurance. | know that you cannot tolerate evildoers; you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them to be false. 3] also know that you are enduring patiently and bearing up for the sake of my name, and that you have not grown weary. “But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love

These are the words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand and walks among the seven golden lampstands: #] know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked men, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. SYou have persevered and have endured hardships for my name, and have not grown weary. 4Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken your first love. “Remember the height from which you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place. ‘But you have this in your favor: You hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which | also hate. 7He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.

you had at first. >Remember then from what you

have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent. °Yet this is to your credit: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. 7Let anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches. To everyone who conquers, | will give permission to eat from the tree of life that is

in the paradise of God.

a] Or messenger, also in verses 8, 12 and 18

(COMMENTARY 2:1

lates the,ethe-_

The message is addressed to the angel of a

church that has “fallen” (v. 5; cf. the fate of

Pt ity. Ephesus had an important place in the earliest Christian mission, Acts 19:1ff.; 1 Cor 16:8), with letters,addressed to it by him (depending on how we approach the variant reading in Eph 1:1; see also Acts 20:1 7ff.) and by the early second-century bishop of Antioch, i y precise understanding of the character of the Ephesian church cannot be discerned from this letter, nor do external sources offer much enlightenment.'*!

Babylon in The city’s reputation is based on its past deeds, like that of the churches in Sardis (3:3) and Laodicea (3:17). The message comes from one who is depicted as being present with his church (cf. 1:19). Indeed, it is worth recalling that at the very beginning of John’s vision the first thing he sees is not the human figure but seven golden lampstands (1:13), which are the churches. Christ is just as close to them as he is to John on Patmos. He walks in the midst of the seven lampstands, just as God had walked in the Garden of Eden when Adam and Eve had

181. See J. T. Sanders, Schismatics, Sectarians, Deviants: The First

One Hundred Years ofJewish-Christian Relations (London: SCM, 1993).

574

REVELATION 2:1-7 COMMENTARY disobeyed God (Gen 3:8). The judge of all the world cannot be avoided; God is not an absent lord, but one who “knows your works, your toil and your patient -endurance” (v. 2 NRSV). 2:2-3. The speaker stresses knowledge: “

taken place “because of my name,” reminiscent of the ignominy predicted in Matt 10:22. 2:4-6. The opening compliment is then followed by a critical evaluation, which is found in a formulation repeated in vv. 14 and 20 and a parallel exhortation to “remember” in 3:3. What is described here is a fall (cf. 18:2; Gal 5:4). The major indictment is that love, an eschatological sign in Matt 24:12. There is little in Revelation of that insistent stress on the love of God reflected in the life of the disciples, so familiar from the Gospel of John (esp. John

knowyour,works,” a repeated phrase in the letters (see v. 19; 3:1, 8, 15). The angel of the church is first congratulated. The emphasis is on “deeds” (cf. 14:13; 20:13), often taken to indicate that Revelation propounds a religion of human endeavor and fails to connect that concern with the supportive action of grace. A goal is set before the readers, whose task is to be faithful amid toil, tribulation, and hardship. As the first verse of the chapter makes clear, however, the risen Christ stands in the midst of the church, both as judge and as comforter (more evident in the letters to weaker churches, like Smyrna and Philadelphia).

13ff.51 John 4;-ef1-Cor 13:1ff.) and 1 Pet 4:8. (Powerrand itsexercise (Of which love is an aspec t)

are the constant concern of Revelation. Love is a necessary characteristic of discipleship (cf. 2:19) and reflects the love of God and Christ (1:5; 3:9). Love will not be self-centered (12:11; cf. Mark 8:34ff.; John 12:25). As elsewhere in the NT, the love of Christ as a distinctive experience and practice has as its corollary hatred by the world (ohms ta1G: civ 15:25): Like the people addressed in Hebrews (Heb 6:1ff.) the angel of the church in Ephesus needs to be warned of the dangers of falling away. Here is the first of the insistent commands to repent

Indeed, what is offered inthe words of the book is itself “grace,” enabling understanding and patient endurance to the end (1:3). “Patient endurance” (utopovn hypomone, v. 2) is a characteristic of authentic Christian existencesict. daike 6:15; 21:19; Rom 5:3; 8:25; 15:5; 1 Thess 1:3), modeled by John himself (1:9). “Endurance” is persistence in faith (evident in the behavior of the ancestors in Hebrews 11 as they looked forward to a greater destiny) when all appears to be lost and there seems to be no good reason for carrying on to achieve one’s eschatological goal (cf. 13:10; 14:12). The angel of the church is congratulated for not putting up with evil people and for exercising a test for true and false prophets. This issue emerges from time to time in the NT and elsewhere in early Christian literature (Matt 24:24; 2 Cor 11:13ff.; 1 John 4:1; Didache 11ff.). In Matt 7:15ff. rudimentary tests are set up to test true and false prophets (“by their fruits you will know them”). Prophecy is an activity that Paul includes as a gift of the Spirit (1 Cor 12:10). The perseverance of the church is such that it has not wearied. This is seen elsewhere as a characteristic of Christian ministry (e.g., John 4:38; Rom 16:6; 1 Cor 4:12; 16:16; 2 Cor 6:52 11:23-24; 1 Thess 1:3; and note the offer of Jesus to the weary in Matt 11:28). Exactly what the church has had to put up with is not clear, though Paul gives some indication of what he had to endure in Ephesus in 1 Cor 15:32 (cf. Acts 20:31-32; 2 Cor 1:8). This affliction has

(vv. 5, 16, 22; 3:3, 19), refusal of which (e.g., 9:20) is characteristic of a rebellious cee uncomprehending humanity. eat What is required is “the v works you did atSt firs (v. 5). Christ’s coming suggests a coming at the universal parousia (cf. 1:7; 19:11ff.). But the message to the angel suggests that the coming One comes without waiting for the end. The threat now extends to an unrepentant community and not just to an angel (it is the lampstand that is to be removed, symbol of the church in 1:20). Verses 5-6 mix positive assertion and a call to repentance with the hatred of the teaching of the Nicolaitans is an obscure reference that may be illuminated a little more by 2:13ff. Possible links with Acts

6:5 are of little help.'® 2:7. This verse is a final summons, similar to those in Matt 13:9 and 11:15, using a repeated formula: (wv. lle 17,29; 3:6, 13, 224¢f 51329) lt is a portentous announcement that comes from the Spirit; the words of the Spirit and the words of Christ are thus closely linked, as in 22:17. 182. Sweet, Revelation, 69.

ZV)

REVELATION 2:1-7 COMMENTARY There is then a promise to the one who “conquers” (vikdw nikao), a favorite Johannine word

‘a

Verse 7 provides the only reference to paradise in the book of Revelation (though 22:2 suggests an Edenic setting). “Paradise” (tapddetoos paradeisos), a word found occasionally in the NT (Luke 23:43; 2 Cor 12:4), is a Persian loan word meaning “enclosure” or “garden” (e.g., Cant 4:13; cf. John 19:41). The promise to eat of the tree of life (cf. Gen 2:9; 3:22ff.; Ezek 31:8) is one that is not explicitly described in the description of the privileges of the inhabitants of the new Jerusalem (22:2), where the ultimate joy is seeing God face to face (though note the reference to the feast in 19:17 in the context of judgment). (See Reflections at 3:14-22.)

(1 John 2:13-14; 4:4; 5:4-5), used fifteen times in Revelation (27k lit 752603: 5:52.652: Deel Zhe S275. 15:20 lela 127), The idea of “conquest” is connected with achieving the eschatological goal (22:2). We shall see how the peculiar notion of conquest in Revelation is illuminated by 5:5: The lion of Judah turns out to be a Lamb, indicating that “conquest” differs from that of the beast (cf. 11:7; 13:7). That subversion of language becomes the model for the “conquests” of those who identify with the Lamb (ea et ANSN

REY BEA TION 2:8-17, THE LETTER FO GEE ANGEL AT SMYRNA NIV

NRSV

*“To the angel of the church in Smyrna write:

8“And to the angel of the church in Smyrna

These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again. *I know your afflictions and your poverty—yet you are rich! I know the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. '°Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer. I tell you, the devil will put some of you in prison to test you, and you will suffer persecution for ten days. Be faithful, even to the point of death, and | will give you the crown of life. "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death.

_write: These are the words of the first and the last, who was dead and came to life: _ 9*T know your affliction and your poverty, even though you are rich. | know the slander on the part of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. '!°Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Beware, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison so that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have

affliction. Be faithful until death, and I will give

you the crown of life. ''Let anyone who has an

ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches. Whoever conquers will not be harmed by the second death.

(COMMENTARY The address to the angel of. the church in Smyrna comes from one who is both eternal (cf. 1:17) and who has died and is alive (cf. 1:18). The letter is written to a church that is undergoing “affliction” (cf. 7:14). In their suffering, they are in the same situation as John himself (1:9). “Af

fliction” (OXtusts thlipsis) is a word that is often used of the time of crisis and catastrophe that marks the climax of history (e.g., Matt 24:21), and it is in such terms that Paul might have construed his sufferings (2 Cor 1:4; 6:4; Phil 1:17; Col 1:24) and the suffering of his churches (Phil

576

REVELATION 2:8-11 COMMENTARY 4:14; 1 Thess 1:6; 3:3, 7). The contrast set up here, so typical of the function of apocalypse, which unveils reality as opposed to fantasy or illusion, is evident when the angel of the church, whose poverty Christ knows, is told that it is rich. It is subject to “blasphemy” (BrAaodnuta blasphémia; cf. Mark 3:22) by the synagogue of Satan (v. 9; cf. 3:9; John 8:30ff.), which may be linked with that exercise of diabolical power that will be seen in the vision from chap. 12 onward. These are people who think they are Jews and are not. It is not necessary to suppose that ethnic Jews are referred to here. They may be Jewish Christians or Christians (like Paul’s opponents in Galatia or Colossae) who claimed to be Jews or to practice Jewish law. Here the word “Jew” is seen as a positive term (in contrast to the Gospel of John), as in the Gospel of Matthew (with the exception of Matt 28:15). Blasphemy (NRSV, “slander”) is characteristic of the beast (13:1, 5-6) and of Babylon, which is seated upon the beast (1723). Satan is introduced for the first time. In the vision proper, readers will learn that Satan has been thrown out of heaven and will be bound in prison (20:7; cf. 18:2), so his presence on earth is only to be expected (cf. 12:12; cf. 1

Perr

Pet5:8). “Satan” (Zatavas Satanas) and “devil” (AtdBoAos Diabolos) are used interchangeably (cf. 12:9; 20:2). Like John, who is reassured by the touch and words of comfort of the risen Christ in 1:17, the angel receives words of reassurance in the midst of suffering (v. 10, “Do not fear”). The perspective of the letter now includes the church (note the change from singular to plural in v. 10). The devil is about to throw some of the church members into prison, where testing will take place. Babylon is a prison in 18:2 and is a particular site of testing for those who seek to resist the beast. This testing (cf. 2:2; 3:10; Matt 6:13) will be limited (only ten days) and, therefore, endurable (cf. Mark 13:12, 20; 1 Cor 10:13). Faithfulness to death (v. 10) reflects the life of the one addressing them (1:5). The promise of crowns (the property of the elders in 4:4-5; cf. 1:6; 20:4; 1 Cor 9:25), characterized by life, corresponds with the escape from the second death in 20:6, suggesting that some Smyrneans were dying for their witness (cf. 12:11; 20:4). Freedom from harm (v. 11) may offer a temporary respite for the Witnesses in 11:5 and for the earth in 7:2, but What counts is one’s ultimate destiny and integrity, whatever the cost. (See Reflections at 3:1422, .

tion 210-7 THE EET TER TO TUE ANGEL AT PERGAMUM

NN

NRSV

“12*And to the angel of the ee in Perga-

v6 theomeofthechurch iinPetgamnum write:

mum write: These are the words of him who has

These are. the words of him who has te ae double-edged sword. “SI know where you live—where Satan has his throne. Yet you

e sharp two-edged sword: 130 know where you are living, where Satan’s ‘throne is. Yet you are holding fast to my name,

—

_ femain true to my peme. You did mol te ~~ - nounce your faith in me, even in the days of

and you did not deny your faith in me* even in _ the days of Antipas my witness, my faithful one, - Antipas, my faithful witness, who was put to —

_ death in your city—where Satan lives. \4Nevertheless, I have a few things against you: You have people there who hold to the

who was killed among you, where Satan lives. —4But I have a few things against you: you have

tice the Israelites to sin by eating food sacri-

the people of Israel, so that they would eat food

‘some there who hold to the teaching of Balaam,

teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to en- — who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before

ficed to idols and by committing |sexual — sacrificed to idols and practice fornication. '°So you also have some who hold to the teaching of immorality. Likewise you also have those _ 4Or deny my faith who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans. oy.

REVELATION 2:12-17 NRSV

NIV

the Nicolaitans. '°Repent then. If not, I will come to you soon and make war against them with the sword of my mouth. '7Let anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches. To everyone who conquers I will give some of the hidden manna, and I will give a white stone, and on the white stone is written a new name that no one Knows except the one who receives

‘Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give some of the hidden manna. | will also give him a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to him who receives it.

it.

(COMMENTARY 2:14-17. The contrast between the faithful witness and some members of the church is continued in v. 14: “You [presumably the angel] have [or tolerate] those who hold the teaching of Balaam” (similarly also in the next verse, possibly closely linking the Balaamites and the Nicolaitans; cf. 2:6).!84 The angel is held responsible for a group of people, and their repentance is needed in order to avoid the “war” on the offenders (v. 16). Heavenly and earthly responsibility are closely aligned. It should come as no surprise to the reader

2:12-13. The address to the angel in Pergamum picks up the reference to the sword that proceeds from the mouth of the Son of Man in 1:16. This is alluded to again in 19:15, 21 (cf. Isa 49:2), where the sword functions as a means of guiding the nations. There is an opening commendation as in the previous letters. The angel dwells where the throne of Satan is (cf. 13:2). Indeed, this is the place where Satan dwells (v. 13). Given that readers of Revelation will learn that Satan is down on earth, “seeking whom he may devour” (cf. 1 Pet 5:8), the presence of Satan in Pergamum is no surprise, though the angel of the church appears under particular threat because of emperor worship. In the ensuing vision the reader will learn which is the true throne before which one should worship (4:2ff. and, ultimately, in the New Jerusalem in chaps. 21-22). Despite the unpromising environment, the angel holds “fast to my name” and refuses to deny “my faith” (probably an objective genitive—“faith in me”). Denial (cf. 3:8) is an important theme, often used in forensic contexts elsewhere in the NT (e.g. Matt 10:33) 2070s Actses:ioe2 Tim, 2:12; 1 John 2:22-23; Jude 4). There has been a special time of difficulty because of the killing of Antipas, who is described in terms similar to Christ in 1:5 (cf. 14:12). Note here once more the basic errors in Greek syntax; Antipas should be in the genitive, but instead

that the message is negative (cf. the similar formulation in 2:4). First, there are those who hold the teaching of Balaam, whose offense was to put a stumbling block in the way of the people of Israel (a reference to Num 31:16; 25:1-2; cf. 2 Pet 2:15; Jude 11). Balaam is seen as having led Israel astray so that the people yoked themselves to Baal Peor (Num 25:1-2) and so engaged in idolatry. The contemporary “Balaams” are persuading people to eat food

is in the nominative.!®°

sacrificed to idols and to commit fornication (cf. 2:20). Eating food sacrificed to idols resembles the issue that was a problem for the Corinthian church, according to 1 Cor 8:1 (cf. Acts 15:1819). In the light of the fact that Paul allowed the Corinthians in certain circumstances to eat meat offered to idols, the possibility arises that a Pauline Christian position is under attack here. While Balaam became a type of a deceiver (Christ is seen as a reincarnation of Balaam in

183. See G. Mussies, 7he Morphology of Koine Greek as Used in the Apocalypse of St. John (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1971).

184. On Balaam, see G. Vermes, Scripture and Tradition in Judaism (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973) 127-77.

578

REVELATION 2:12-17 COMMENTARY later Jewish texts),!® throughout the bulk of the Balaam cycle of stories in Numbers 23-24 Balaam is presented as steadfastly refusing to curse Israel, despite the urgefit demands of Balak. And Balaam is also presented as having insight into the divine wisdom, enabling him to predict Israel’s future (most famously in the Balaam oracle about the star of Jacob in 24:17). This is the first of a

number of places in Revelation where in the midst of the strong dualistic contrasts between good and evil the evil figures turn out, in fact, to be highly ambiguous (the obvious places are the descriptions of the Beast in Revelation 13, which has echoes of the description of the Lamb in chap. 5 and of Babylon and the bride of the Lamb in chaps. 17 and 21).

185. R. T. Herford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash (New York: KTAV, 1975).

, ~~

R2 ~

K2 “~

2 “~

Excursus: “FORNICATION” AND IDOLATRY In the LXX, particularly in Hosea 1-3, topvéta (porneia) is used for the activities of Israel: “The land commits great whoredom by forsaking the Lorp” (Hos 1:2 NRSV; see also Hos 2:2). In Wis 14:12, “the making of idols [is] the beginning of fornication [porneia]” (NRSV) and results in “false consciousness”: “It was not enough for them to err about the knowledge of God,/ but though living in great strife due to ignorance,/ they call such great evils peace” (Wis 14:22 NRSV). In the NT outside the book of Revelation, topvat (pornai) is used for “harlots” who precede the righteous into the kingdom (Matt 21:31; cf. Luke 15:30); for sexual immorality (1 Cor 5:9-10; 6:18; 1 Tim 1:10); for sexual intercourse with prostitutes {1 Cor 6:15-16); in a transferred sense for the sin of Israel in the wilderness (1 Cor 10:8), when they participated in sacrifices to Moabite gods and bowed to them (Num 25:1; cf. Exod 32:5-6); and it is used to describe Rahab (Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25). Elsewhere porneia is linked with characteristics like “sreedy” (Eph 5:5) and “godless” (Heb 12:16). The concept of fornication appears throughout Revelation. In the letters to the seven churches, the risen Christ challenges those who would be tempted to idolatry (2:14, 20). In this case, the eating of food sacrificed to idols is the issue. The denunciation of this practice contrasts somewhat with what Paul had to say in 1 Corinthians 8, though he is unequivocal in his repudiation of idolatry in 1 Corinthians 10. The prohibition against idolatry is a recognition of the close link between religious practice and beliefs and patterns of behavior. Rejection of idolatry in the OT is bound up with a countercultural attitude to holiness. The kings of the earth are castigated for committing fornication with Babylon (17:2; 18:3, 9). Revelation 21:8 and 22:15 use tdpvot (porno7) to describe a group of people who are excluded from the holy city. o, ~~

o, “~~

between coming and repentance. Christ’s not coming is dependent on repentance. This has an interesting connection to contemporary Jewish debates as to whether the coming of the Messiah was dependent on Israel’s ability to repent fully.'®° Verse 16 represents an inversion of this idea:

It would appear that another body of teaching is being condemned in v. 15, unless “you also hold” is a further explanation of the foregoing teaching. Mention is made once more of Nicolaitans (cf. v. 6). As in the message to the Ephesian angel, Christ promises to come (cf. 22:12) if repentance is not forthcoming. The judgment implied in v. 120 is made explicit in v. 16. There is an interesting link

186. See the contrasting positions set out in E. Urbach, 7he Sages: Their Concepts and Beliefs (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1975) 668.

579

REVELATION

2:12-17 COMMENTARY name as a distinguishing mark of the rider on the white horse (19:12), we may have here a reference to the qualification of those who are in the possession of the “name,” such as is the case for those who see God face to face (22:4). They contrast with the worshipers of the beast, who are distinguished by a mark and not by a name (14:1, 9). It is having that knowledge that enables them to sing a new song (14:3). (See Reflections at 3:14-22.)

Advent in judgment can be avoided by repentance—quite a contrast to the promise of, and yearning for, the coming of the Son of Man in 22:7, 17. Then comes a promise, not alluded to again in the book (though there is a reference to the messianic feast in 19:17): the offer of hidden manna and a white stone (a positive color in Revelation) with a new name on it (cf. 19:12; Isa 62:2; 65:15). In the light of the importance of “holding fast to the name” (v. 13) and of the

Rey ERATION 216-205 ETE TILER fO-FiiE ANGEL AT THYATIRA NIV

NRSV

8*To the angel of the church in Thyatira write:

adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. 7°I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that | am he who searches hearts and minds, and | will repay each of you according to your deeds. “Now | say to the rest of you in Thyatira, to you who do not hold to her teaching and have not learned Satan’s socalled deep secrets (I will not impose any other burden on you): “Only hold on to what you have until I come. 2°To him who overcomes and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations— */"He will rule them with an iron scepter; he will dash them to pieces like pottery’*—

18“And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write: These are the words of the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and whose feet are like burnished bronze: 19“ know your works—your love, faith, service, and patient endurance. I know that your last works are greater than the first. ?°But I have this against you: you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet and is teaching and beguiling my servants? to practice fornication and to eat food sacrificed to idols. *'I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her fornication. **Beware, | am throwing her on a bed, and those who commit adultery with her I am throwing into great distress, unless they repent of her doings; 23and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am the one who searches minds and hearts, and I will give to each of you as your works deserve. *4But to the rest of you in Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, who have not learned what some call ‘the deep things of Satan,’ to you I say, I do not lay on you any other burden; *°only hold fast to what you have until I come. ?°To everyone who conquers and continues to do my works to the end, I will give authority over the nations; *7 to rule’ them with an iron rod, as when clay pots are shattered— Seven as I also received authority from my Father. To the one who conquers I will also give the

227 Psalm 2:9

4 Gk slaves

These are the words of the Son of God, whose eyes are like blazing fire and whose

feet are like burnished bronze. '°1 know your deeds, your love and faith, your service and ‘perseverance, and that you are now doing more than you did at first. 0Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. 2'I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is

unwilling. ?*So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit

:

580

6 Or to shepherd

REVELATION 2:18-29

NIV

NRSV

just as | have received authority from my Father. 71 will also give him the morning star.

morning star. *’Let anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches.

*He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

s

(COMMENTARY

2:18-19. The message to the angel of the church at Thyatira (cf. Acts 16:14) is the longest of the seven. It comes from the Son of God, a term used only here in Revelation (cf. 21:7), and picks up the reference to the eyes and feet of the Son of Man in the initial vision (1:14; cf. Dan 10:6). The angel is commended in terms similar to those of previous letters (esp. 2:2), but with the addition of “service” (Staxovia diakonia; used only here in Revelation, though “servant”/“slave” [SovA0s doulos] is widely used of those in the divine service [e.g., 11:18] as well as of all those who acknowledge God [e.g., 7:3]). Unlike the angel of Ephesus, this angel’s situation has improved (v. 19). 2:20-23. The commendation is followed by criticism of toleration of Jezebel, who “calls herself a prophet and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practice fornication and to eat food sacrificed to idols” (v. 20). “Beguiling” is the activity of Satan (12:9) and the beast (13:14), which leads to the nations’ being deceived and led away from the truth (18:23; cf. 20:3, 8). Deception is the mark of the false prophet in Deuteronomy 13. Why the prophet should be called Jezebel can only be guessed, because there is nothing to suggest that the Jezebel who was the wife of Ahab had prophetic powers, unless that is hinted at in 2 Kgs 9:22. She is, however, an opponent of the true prophet Elijah, a zealous critic of idolatrous compromise with the religion of Baal, and she persecuted the prophets (1 Kgs 18:13; 19:2). Ahab’s marriage to Jezebel (1 Kgs 16:31; 21:25) produced apostasy from the service of the true God, just as Balaam had led Israel astray. The “fornication” referred to here is probably to be understood metaphorically (cf. 14:8; 17:2-4; 18:3; 19:2) as the compromises with a prevailing culture that result from idolatry and thereby com-

promise the distinctiveness of life and outlook that is a central feature of Revelation. We can discern what this might mean from 1 Corinthians 8, where social intercourse with non—church members might involve attendance at pagan worship (cf. 2:14). Separation rather than compromise is commended; the latter seems to be the message of “Jezebel” (1 Kgs 16:31). Jezebel is to be thrown onto the bed of her fornication; perhaps the extent of her compromise with society will be made manifest for all to see and her claim to piety and divine inspiration shown to be spurious. Those who commit adultery with her could be persons who follow her teaching or who have engaged in acts of compromise with her—that is, pagans who have been part of her circle. They are to be distinguished from “her children,” who are her followers in the church (v. 23). They are threatened with death, like the children of the Egyptians (Exodus lle=cl: Ezek 33:27)" slheim=atate is” a warning to the churches (v. 23) that the risen Christ is not an absent lord but one who knows the very secrets of all and judges them accordingly (cf. Jer 11:20; Heb 4:12-13; see esp. Rom 8:27; 1 Cor 4:5, where it is the Lord’s role to search the hidden things of the heart). Recompense will be according to works (20:12; Rom 2:6). 2:24-29. The “adultery” with Jezebel does not typify the whole of the church who have not known the deep things of Satan. In 1 Cor 2:10, there is reference to the Spirit, who “searches everything, even the depths of God” (NRSV; cf. Sir 24:5). Such a claim to insight and knowledge, which may characterize an intellectual elite, is of no value if it is not matched by appropriate behavior. Mystery and knowledge are useless and positively corrupting when divorced from appropriate practice. No other “demand” (lit., “burden” [Bdpos baros]; cf. Acts 15:28) is made, save perseverance; this is needed “until I come” (2:25;

581

REVELATION 2:18-29 COMMENTARY cf. 3:11). Such a coming has about it a note of threat (as in 2:5, 16; cf. 16:15). It is to be set in the context of that cosmic “coming” on the clouds (1:7; 22:7, 12) and the judgment unleashed by the Lamb’s coronation (6:1, 3, 5, 7, and esp. 17; 9:12; 11:14; 14:7). “Conquering” here means “holding fast to what you have” (v. 25) until “the end” (v. 26, used only here in this sense in Revelation, but note the similar sentiment in Matt

24:13). The promise is to share in the messianic role of “shepherding” the nations, which is the lot of the Messiah (v. 26; cf. 7:17; 12:5; 19:15; Ps 2:8-9, which is echoed), a rule that is fulfilled in the vision in 20:4 and 22:5. Similarly, the gift of the “morning star” (22:16; cf. Dan 12:3; Phil 2:15) is shared by the Son of God as agent of the Father (cf. John 5:19ff.) with the one who conquers (2:28). (See Reflections at 3:14-22.)

REVELATION 3:1-6, THE LETTER TO THE ANGEL i OAR DLS NIV

NRSV “To the oo ofthe church in ‘Gadi write:

the sight of my God. °Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it,

_ and repent. But if you do not wake up, | will

come like athief, and you will not know at what time I will cometo you. 4Yet you have a few people in Sardis who

will be clothed like them in white robes, and I

have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. °He who overcomes will, like them, be

dressed in white. I will never blot out his _ name from the book oflife, but will acknowledge his name

“And to the angel of the church in Sardis

write: These are the words of him who has the seven spirits of God and the seven stars: “I know your works; you have a name of being alive, but you are dead. Wake up, and strengthen what remains and is on the point of death, for | have not found your works perfect in the sight of my God. °Remember then what you received and heard; obey it, and repent. If you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come to you. *Yet you have still a few persons in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes; they will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. 5If you conquer, you

_ These are thewords ofhim who bods the seven spirits? of God and the seven stars. | know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead. 2Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have not found your deeds complete in

—

3

will not blot your name out of the book of life; | will confess your name before my Father and before his angels. “Let anyone who has an ear

listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches.

before my Father and his

angels. °He who has an ear, let him hear what ‘the Spirit says to the churches. a] Or messenger, also in verses 7 and 14 Spirit

61 Or the sevenfold

(COMMENTARY 3:1a. This letter to Sardis, another city with a church that received a letter from Ignatius on his way to martyrdom at the beginning of the second century cg, comes from the one who holds

the seven spirits of God. This goes beyond 1:4, where the greeting comes from the seven spirits who are before the throne and alongside Christ. That Christ also holds the seven stars, which are

582

REVELATION 3:1-6 COMMENTARY the angels of the churches (1:20), is a reminder that the autonomy of the angels is circumscribed by the oversight of the Son of Man. 3:1b-2. Commendation is avoided, and a negative comment is immediately offered. The possession of a “name” here is not a strength but a weakness, since it is a “reputation” that is a deceit (cf. 3:17). It contrasts with the reality of Christ, who was dead and then alive (1:17). The angel is urged to strengthen what remains (a neuter plural) and is on the point of death. The verb “strengthen” (otnpiCw sterizo) is used elsewhere in the NT in eschatological contexts that concern the support needed to endure to the end (eg-; 2, Thess 3:3;-cfaRom 16:25; 1: Thess:.3:13; 1 Pet 5:10). The command to the angel is to “watch” (ypnyopéw gregoreo), a favorite word also used in eschatological contexts (16:15; cf. Matt 24:42; Mark 13:34ff.; 14:34ff.). The picture in v. 2 is of Christ as a prosecuting counsel opening the books (cf. 20:12; Luke 12:8). The deeds of the angel of the church are known in full detail in heaven. 3:3. The call to remember sets the present in the context of the past (cf. 2:5; cf. Luke 17:32, where the past is offered as a basis for present understanding of eschatological crisis). The consequences of not being alert are illustrated by the metaphor of the thief (cf. 16:15; Matt 24:42; 1 Thess 5:2). The threat of the coming (cf. 2:5, 16) seems to be an anticipation of the coming on the clouds (1:7; 22:7, 12) and the terrible judgment unleashed by the Lamb’s vindication (6:1, 3, 5, 7). 3:4. A compliment is now paid to the angel. The church has a few “names” in Sardis who have

not defiled their robes (cf. Jude 23). In the light of 14:4, these would be the ones identified with the Lamb. Those whose robes are pure have washed them in the blood of the Lamb (7:14), or as the result of their martyrdom are given white robes (6:9-10). The conquest leads to sharing in the privilege of wearing white robes (3:18; cf. 16:15), for the possession of white robes is a mark of proximity to the throne (4:4). “Walking with me in white” (cf. 2:1) is not alluded to elsewhere in Revelation, though in 14:4 the 144,000 follow the Lamb wherever it goes and in 19:13 the rider on the white horse, by implication, wears a white robe spattered with blood and leads an army of the saints (19:14). The “names” are deemed worthy, like God (4:11), the Lamb (5:12), and the saints and prophets (16:6). 3:5-6. In v. 5, Christ is described as a heavenly scribe with the right to erase names from the book of life (cf. 1:19; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27). The criterion for being named in the book of life is one’s works, specifically whether one had resisted being deceived by the beast (13:8; 17:8). Being included in the book of life means washing one’s robes and making them white in the blood of the Lamb (see 7:14) and resisting the deluding power of the beast. There might be an allusion to the tradition in Matt 10:32 (cf. Luke 12:8; Rev 3:5). Christ here is depicted not as a judge but as an accuser (cf. Mark 8:38) or a defender (cf. Rom 8:34). In the Gospels, Christ is rarely portrayed as judge; according to John’s Gospel, he comes not to judge the world (Matt 25:31ff. is a solitary example). He is also presented as a vindicator of the elect (Matt 24:30-31). (See Reflections at 3:14-22.)

Be VELA LION 3: (013, THE LETTER TO:THE ANGEL AT PHILADELPHIA NRSV 7“And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: These are the words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David,

7“To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. *! know your deeds. See, |

who opens and no one will shut,

have placed before you an open door that no 583

REVELATION 3:7-13

NIV

NRSV

one can shut. I know that you have little

who shuts and no one opens:

strength, yet you have kept my word and

8“I know your works. Look, I have set before you an open door, which no one is able to shut. I know that you have but little power, and yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. °I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say that they are Jews and are not, but are lying—I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and they will learn that I have loved you. !°Because you have kept my word

have not denied my name. °! will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. !°Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come

upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth, =

'T am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.

:

of patient endurance, | will keep you from the _ hourof trial that is coming on the whole world totest the inhabitants of the earth. ''l am coming soon; hold fast to what you have, so that no may seize your crown. "If you conquer, | make you a pillar in the temple of my God; will never go out of it. | will write on you

'2Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of

one will you the

name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem that comes down from

heaven from my God; and | will also write

on him my new name. 'He who has an ear,

my God out of heaven, and my own new name. 'SLet anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches.

let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

(COMMENTARY 3:7. The epithets attached to the risen One are used of God in 6:10. With one exception, “true” (adnOtvds alethinos) is used in conjunction with other words, like “faithful” or “just” (eg olds 15:39 1Ott 21:5) “Holy™ as used many times, particularly of “the saints” (e.g., 17:6), and occasionally of angels (14:10), the new Jerusalem (21:2, 10), and in the trisagion in 4:8 of God (cf. 6:10). It is used only here of Christ. Also unique is the reference to the “key of David” (closely following the words of Isa 22:22, where it is a promise to Eliakim son of Hilkiah to succeed Shebna the steward—a context not relevant for the interpretation of this passage and an indication of the way a piece of scripture could be transmuted in the visionary imagination to form a different message in a different context). This is one of three references to David (cf. 5:5; 22:16), indicating the continuing contribution of the Davidic messianic dimension, though, as we shall

see, in 5:5 the nature of that messianism is thoroughly subverted. 3:8. The privilege granted the Holy One to open and close (reminiscent of the binding and loosing in Matt 16:19) leads into the very next verse, with its reference to the open door. The image of a closed door will form part of the challenge to the angel of Laodicea: Christ stands outside the door knocking and seeking entrance (v. 20). It is an open door that will introduce a new dimension of John’s vision (4:1). That privilege afforded John to enter, to see, and to enjoy the glory of God is now accorded to the (outwardly) least promising of the angels. It is a promise from Christ to an angel who is weak (v. 86). “Keeping my word” (vv. 8, 10) comes again in 22:7 in connection with the words of the apocalypse. The “word” (héyos logos) is used in connection with the “testimony of Jesus” in 1:9 and 20:4 (cf. 12:11). “Keeping” is used in a positive sense of keeping the words of prophecy

584

REVELATION 3:7-13 COMMENTARY in the apocalypse (1:3; 22:7, 9), “my works” (2:26), the commandments of God (12:17; 14:12), and one’s robes clean (16:15). Refusal to deny the name (cf. 2:13) echoes the positive statement in v. 5 and has its links with Mark 8:38 (cf. 2 Tim 212). 3:9. As in 2:9, the “synagogue” of Satan reappears (cf. 2:13), which suggests a division be-

to the beast and thereby continuing the witness of Jesus. Faithful endurance means being kept from the hour (cf. 14:7, 15) of trial (cf. 2 Pet 2:9), which is to come on the whole world (“trial” [(Tetpaopos peirasmos] is found only here in Revelation, though it is possibly used elsewhere in the NT of eschatological trials; e.g., Luke 4:13; 11:4; 22:28, 40; 1 Cor 10:13). This may be an allusion to the temptation of the earth’s inhabitants, who (according to chap. 13) seem to be led astray to follow the beast. Satan, having descended to the world (12:9), proceeds through the beast to lead humankind astray (13:8). 3:11. In this verse there is the ambiguous “I am coming soon,” which in this context is an assurance rather than a threat (cf. 2:5, 16). Whether it refers to a coming before the parousia is unclear (cf. 22:7, 12). The angel is urged to hang on to ensure the bestowal of its crown (v. 11): The promise to this weak angel is that the one who conquers will become a pillar in the temple of God (cf. Gal 2:9; 1 Tim 3:15). The use of temple imagery in connection with Christians is found in 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19 and corresponds with the priestly vocation of the new community (1:5; 7:15). The juxtaposition of templé and new Jerusalem in v. 12 contrasts with the description of the heavenly city, where there will be no temple (21:22; cf. 7:15), though the city’s foundation has written on it the names of the twelve apostles (21:14). The one who conquers never has to leave the temple, and so is free from the threat posed by those outside in that shadowy, threatening land at its gate (21:27; 22:15). 3:12-13. The climax of the apocalypse is alluded to in v. 12: God’s name will be on their foreheads (22:4). In addition to the name of God, there is the name of the city and Christ’s new name (2:17; cf. 19:12). The act of writing, so important in the book, both as a sign of the definitive judgment of God (chaps. 5; 10) and as a mark of the authority of the book of Revelation itself and the message to the angels of the churches (1:3), is epitomized in the great privilege for the elect of having the names written on them (v. 12). (See Reflections at 3:14-22.)

tween éxkhnota (ekklésia), John’s word for the true religious community (chaps. 1-3; 22, as elsewhere in the NT) and ovvaywyn (synagogé), the word used twice in Revelation and elsewhere in the NT (with the exception of Jas 2:2) for the Jewish religious meeting. Whereas in 2:8 the synagogue of Satan was guilty of blasphemy, here they are lying and place themselves in the same category as the deceivers who appear later in the vision (cf. 2:2; 16:13) and are to be excluded from the new Jerusalem because of it (21:27; 22:15).

A promise is made that members of “the synagogue of Satan” will be compelled to come to the angel and worship. There are here echoes of Isa 49:23 and 60:14 (cf. Ps 86:9}. The use of “worship” (tpookuvéw proskyneo) is striking, because it is used in Revelation only for the true worship of God or for false worship of the beast and Satan. This kind of obeisance, which is due to God, will be enjoyed by the Philadelphian angel, suggesting once more the ultimate demonstration of the rectitude of those who are persecuted (cf. Wisdom 3-4). This verse is a demonstration of the peculiar affection of God for the angel of the church (cf. Matt 18:10, where the angels of the little ones have the privilege of seeing God). The echo here of Isa 43:4, a particularly personal and warm address to Israel concerning the love of God for the chosen people, is striking in the context of a book in which the tenderness and graciousness of God is not always immediately evident. 3:10. The commendation is for keeping “my word of patient endurance,” a key phrase in Revelation (1:9; 2:2-3, 19; 13:10; 14:12) that is found in eschatological contexts elsewhere (Luke 21:19; Rom 8:25; cf. Matt 10:22; Mark 13:13). From Rev 13:10 and 14:12 we see that this characteristic is defined by resisting capitulation

585

REVELATION 3:14-22

Ree VBA TION 3:14922, PEE PET TER heer ANGEL AT LAODICEA NIV

NRSV

'4“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:

14“And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the origin? of God’s creation: 15“I know your works; you are neither cold nor hot. I wish that you were either cold or hot. '0So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I am about to spit you out of my mouth. “For you say, ‘I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing.’ You do not realize that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. '8Therefore I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire so that you may be rich; and white robes to clothe you and to keep the shame of your nakedness from being seen; and salve to anoint your eyes so that you may see. !%I reprove and discipline those whom I love. Be earnest, therefore, and repent. ?°Listen! | am standing at the door, knocking; if you hear my voice and open the door, I will come in to you and eat with you, and you with me. ?!To the one who conquers | will give a place with me on my throne, just as I myself conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne. ?#7Let anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches.”

These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. '°I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! '°So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you outof my mouth. !’You say, ‘I am rich; | have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are

wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked. '*I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes,

sO you can see. Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest, and repent. ?°Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me. 21To him who overcomes, | will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as | overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne. ?7He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”

2 Or beginning

(COMMENTARY 3:14-16. This is the most negative letter of all. As elsewhere, knowledge of the angel’s deeds (2:2, 19; 3:1, 8) anticipates a negative comment. There is no positive assessment to balance the negative, however, and the angel is described as neither cold nor hot, but lukewarm (v. 16). The state of being neither one thing nor another conflicts with Revelation’s stark dualism. It is important to choose and not sit on the fence (cf. Luke 11:23). Christ’s mouth (v. 16), from which the angel is to be spewed, is elsewhere a source of judgment (1:16; 2:16; 19:15, 21; cf. 9:17-18; 11:5). Although the message has nothing by way

of commendation, it still manages to indicate the love of Christ for the angel (v. 19; cf. Prov 3:12; Heb 12:6) and the reality of the present Christ waiting to sup with them (v. 20). The message comes from the “Amen” (v. 14; cf. 2 Cor 1:20), “the faithful and true witness” (1:5). The epithet “origin of God’s creation” is unique and is similar to Col 1:15: “the firstborn of all creation” (NRSV; Colossae and Laodicea were adjacent cities). It is the only place in Revelation that hints at pre-existence (divine foreknowledge is implied elsewhere; e.g., 13:8; 17:8) and links the text with

586

REVELATION 3:14-22 COMMENTARY the wisdom tradition of Proverbs (esp. Prov 8:2223)

consequent separation from the prevailing wisdom and culture, as the man born blind discovered in persisting doggedly in his faithfulness John 9:34-

3:17-18. Like the angel at Sardis, which had a reputation for-life but, in fact, was dead, the Laodicean angel brags of its wealth (cf. Ezek 28:1; Zech 11:5; 1 Cor 4:8). But it is wretched, poor, and naked. In Revelation, it is the rich (6:15) and those who have become wealthy (18:3, 15, 19) who are particularly under threat from the wrath of the Lamb, and true wealth is commended (2:9). The frank assessment of the extent of the angel’s lack of self-knowledge is offered in v. 17. The angel’s nakedness anticipates the fate of Babylon in 17:16, when it is stripped of wealth, a fate the reader is warned to avoid (16:15). The address to the angel (v. 18) repeats the importance of white robes to clothe nakedness (cf. 6:11; see also Commentary on 3:4). The Son of Man explicitly offers words of counsel (v. 18). True wealth comes from the Son of Man, whose precious metal is refined (v. 18; Gi 1715; Isa 55-1). ihe summons. is. like the summons of Wisdom to purchase from her (Sir 51:25; cf. Matt 11:28). “Purchase” (ayopdCw agorazo | is used elsewhere in Revelation of the purchase for God by the Lamb (5:9; cf. 1:5-6; 1 Pet 1:7). The ointment used to “anoint” (the same verb root [xptw chrio| as in the phrase “Christ, the anointed one”) the eyes parallels the anointing of the blind man in John 9:11, where sight and understanding are closely linked. The consequence of “sight” is insight into one’s context and

35). 3:19-22. The severe criticism is explained with a word derived from Prov 3:12 to indicate the need for the discipline of God, which may enable life rather than death (cf. 1 Cor 11:32; Heb 12:6). The Son of Man describes himself as standing outside the door, seeking entry just as Wisdom seeks to call people (Prov 1:20) and just as the beloved seeks entry (Cant 5:2). Those who open the door recognize his voice (cf. John 10:3), and they can share a meal with him (cf. John 14:23). The address in v. 20 appears to be to a wider group that extends beyond the church’s angel. In contrast to the afflicted John, to whom a door opens in heaven (4:1), and the open door to God for the angel of the Philadelphian church (3:8), the door of the Laodicean angel is closed and needs to be opened to the one standing outside (cf. 1:13; 14:1). Throughout Revelation, John hears the voice, responds to it, and writes what he sees. That responsiveness is demanded in order to share a common meal with the Son of Man, an anticipation of that final messianic meal (19:9, 17; cf. 2:7) when Christ comes (cf. 3:11). In v. 21, participation in the royal reign (Luke 22:29-30; cf. Col 3:1) anticipates the vision of the Lamb’s sharing the throne of God (7:17). As we shall see in chap. 5, the Lamb’s “conquest” as a result of suffering equips it to share in God’s throne.

REFLECTIONS 1. The very occasional references in the letters indicating local knowledge of the various cities remind us that the Word of God always occurs in the context of specific situations. The first readers of Revelation might have recognized the local allusions, and that would have heightened the impact of the message. The letters to the seven churches remind us that context is all-important in any theology or exegesis. The Word became flesh at a particular time and place, and it is by attention to particularity that one may hear what the Spirit says to the churches. In interpreting this text, we need to pay attention to context, to attend to the weakness and fallibility of Smyrna and Philadelphia and to the complacency and compromise of Laodicea and Pergamum. While there is no guarantee that people will hear what the Spirit says to the churches, the address is a present, not a past one, is contextual, and is linked to the particulars of existence. 2. Two churches receive unequivocally positive addresses, Smyrna and Philadelphia. They are fragile, like the crucified Christ, whose resurrection is offered as a source of hope (2:8; 3:7). Positive things are said about six ofsthe churches (2:2, 10, 13, 19; 3:4, 10). Even the

587

REVELATION 3:14-22 REFLECTIONS most negative letter of all, the one to the Laodiceans, which has no congratulatory note, indicates the love of Christ for the church (3:19) and the reality of the present Christ waiting outside the confines of their complacent existence to sup with them (3:20). A mixture of encouragement and criticism is a necessary prerequisite for pastoral practice. Affirmation is something we find difficult; it is much easier to find fault. The letters offer a pattern of affirmation and correction, challenge and comfort. 3. There may have been a struggle with rival Jewish congregations (2:9; 3:9), but it is possible that a Jewish-Christian community may be alluded to. In the letter to the Philadelphians, it appears that the people had been pressured to disown the name of Jesus (3:8), something that may have confronted some Jewish Christians who wished to continue to worship in the synagogues in the early years of the second century. We must not too quickly see these remarks as a judgment on Judaism. A historical approach to the New Testament reminds us that these texts were produced when Christianity was still loosely linked to Judaism and Christianity itself was a minority group. Anti-Jewish polemic takes on a far more sinister hue in later years when Christianity could enforce its will with the power of the empire.

4. What the letters offer is a catalog of church life: “loss of first love” (Ephesus), persecution (Smyrna), compromise (Pergamum), true and false prophecy (Thyatira), fragments of hope (Sardis), being lukewarm (Laodicea). Because these are often portraits of human failings, situations worthy of divine disapproval, these letters make uncomfortable reading. But there are surprises to be seen. Weakness and fallibility are opportunities for strength (2 Cor 12:9). The open door of revelation is granted to the weak. Insight, not least about the meaning of the Apocalypse, may sometimes be glimpsed by those we least expect to understand. Indeed, the book of Revelation may better be comprehended by non-academics than by those inside the academy, whose way of studying divinity can make them resistant. It is disconcerting for experts to discover the truth of Jesus’ saying, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent and have revealed them to infants” (Matt 11:25 NRSV) and to realize that the understanding of the divine call may be better understood by the poor and outcast than by academics and ecclesiastics who think they know the depths of the text.'*” 5. The letters to the angels suggest that there are limits to how much the churches should compromise with contemporary culture. This is a major biblical theme, as is evident in the repeated rejection of idolatry throughout the Bible. In the wilderness, the people of Israel worshiped the golden calf (Exodus 32) and learned from their mistake what idolatry involved. Instead of the unseen God, who went before them, they wanted something dazzling and static, a tangible expression that accommodated itself to their desires. An idol is the work of human hands onto which is projected a quasi-divine, mystical status. The work of our hands achieves a mystical quality with superhuman characteristics that displace God. God stands over against humanity, pointing to other norms besides those to which nature and society give expression. Idols have to be unmasked and knocked down from their pedestals. Isaiah of the exile (Isaiah 40-55) does this by ridiculing idolatrous practices. The maintenance of idolatry is self-serving and exclusive of the interest of others, the quintessential expression of special interests. Revelation, like Old Testament prophecy, refuses to “baptize” the world as it is and accept the values of the surrounding culture. The readers of the letters are challenged about their unwillingness to dissociate from the regular habits of life of the ancient city and from easy and uncritical relations with the surrounding culture. Idolatrous compromise takes many forms. The Gospel of Luke hints at one way we might view the matter in Luke 16:15, where the 187. C. Rowland, ““Open Thy Mouth for the Dumb’: A Task for the Exegete of Holy Scripture,” Biblical Interpretation 1 (1993).

588

REVELATION 3:14-22 REFLECTIONS “abomination” of idolatry is linked, not with worship in a religious place, but with the idol Mammon (cf. Matt 6:24, “You cannot serve both God and Money” [NIV)). Coming to terms with a culture involves recognizing conflicts of interest and being aware of the extent to which one’s language and behavior are influenced by ideological power struggles. Revelation is a book about the exercise of power, and, disconcerting as it is to our modern sentiments, not primarily about the manifestation of divine love (a4ydtmn [agape ]occurs only twice [the verb four times]; €€ovoia [exousia] is found twenty times; Sivas [dynamis] twelve times). Divine power is manifested in the effects of the revelation, which is consequent upon the vindication of the Lamb who was a victim. It is that power of unmasking everything that runs like a thread throughout the vision. 6. In the opening chapters we find two sets of names: John and Antipas, who are faithful witnesses, and Jezebel and Balaam,'** who are used as an attack on those who fall short of the standard required to “conquer.” These names of biblical characters are used to both mask and illuminate the identity of the true offending parties. These names are given as we might give someone a nickname, which, whether affectionate or hurtful, point to some aspect of the person’s character. The name that betokens our identity under God, that reflects what it is to be true to our deepest selves, is utterly distinctive. It is not a matter of acting out, whether consciously or unconsciously, the character of others, past or present. This is what, according to Revelation, the Balaam and Jezebel who were contemporary with John were doing. Their being addressed in the names of others indicates that they repeat the identity of those characters from the past without fulfilling that distinctive vocation that is the fundamental property of each human being under God. The simple names “John” and “Antipas,” without the mask of another persona, indicate a distinctive personality and vocation that enabled them to stand out from the sea of names merging into the undifferentiated, stereotypical “whole world” (which wandered, misguidedly, after the beast and Babylon) or the charismatic individuals whose identity was merely a repetition of the past. The people of Sardis stand out from the rest. But, as we shall read elsewhere in Revelation, standing out from the rest is an uncomfortable position to be in. Indeed, to “have a name of being alive” is not the same as being alive. Reputation in society and culture counts for little, as the angelic messengers learn: “Woe to you when people speak well of you” (Luke 6:26 NRSV). 7. The address of the letters to the angels rather than directly to the churches opens up a heavenly perspective, but not in a deterministic way, as if heaven were controlling human existence. Quite the reverse. The insight into the heavenly message offered by the apocalypse is a way for those on earth to see that what is said and done on earth determines the message from heaven to the angel. What is striking (as in the exaltation of the Lamb and the prayers of the saints) is that what happens on earth affects what happens in heaven. The angel of a church embodies those qualities (or lack of them) that make up the church as a whole. The angel, as it were, distills the character of the behavior and attitudes of the individual communities.

8. A theme that runs through the letters is the need for endurance. Habits of resistance are required in order to endure. Whenever we pray the Lord’s prayer, we pray to be delivered from evil, words paralleled in the promise to the Philadelphian angel: “Because you have kept my word of patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world” (Rev 3:10 NRSV). Apocalypse offers a converted sense of history, so that one might see in every event not only the reality of death but also the Word of God; not only the demonic and the dehumanizing, but also the power of the resurrection; not only the portents of apocalyptic doom, but also hope for oneself and one’s society. 188. See G. Vermes, Scripture and Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 1973). 189. See S. Kripke, Naming and Necessity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1980).

589

REVELATION 4:1-11 VISION OF GOD’S THRONE IN HEAVEN NIV

NRSV

After this I looked, and there before me was a door standing open in heaven. And the voice I had first heard speaking to me like a trumpet said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this.” 2At once I was in the Spirit, and there before me was a throne in heaven with someone sitting on it. ?And the one who sat there had the appearance of jasper and carnelian. A rainbow, resembling an emerald, encircled the throne. “Surrounding the throne were twenty-four other thrones, and seated on them were twenty-four elders. They were dressed in white and had crowns of gold on their heads. >From the throne came flashes of lightning, rumblings and peals of thunder. Before the throne, seven lamps were blazing. These are the seven spirits? of God. °Also before the throne there was what looked like a sea of glass, clear as crystal. In the center, around the throne, were four living creatures, and they were covered with eyes, in front and in back. ’The first living creature was like a lion, the second was like an ox, the third had a face like a man, the fourth was like a flying eagle. °Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under his wings. Day and night they never stop saying:

After this I looked, and there in heaven a door stood open! And the first voice, which I had heard speaking to me like a trumpet, said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this.” 7At once I was in the spirit, and there in heaven stood a throne, with one seated

on the throne! *And the one seated there looks like jasper and carnelian, and around the throne is a

rainbow that looks like an emerald. *Around the

°Whenever the living creatures give glory, honor and thanks to him who sits on the throne and who lives for ever and ever, !°the twenty-four elders fall down before him who sits on the throne, and worship him who lives for ever and ever. They lay their crowns before the throne and say: "You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being.”

throne are twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones are twenty-four elders, dressed in white robes, with golden crowns on their heads. *Coming from the throne are flashes of lightning, and rumblings and peals of thunder, and in front of the throne burn seven flaming torches, which are the seven spirits of God; and in front of the throne there is something like a sea of glass, like crystal. Around the throne, and on each side of the throne, are four living creatures, full of eyes in front and behind: ’the first living creature like a lion, the second living creature like an ox, the third living creature with a face like a human face, and the fourth living creature like a flying eagle. And the four living creatures, each of them with six wings, are full of eyes all around and inside. Day and night without ceasing they sing, “Holy, holy, holy, the Lord God the Almighty, who was and is and is to come.” °And whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to the one who is seated on the throne, who lives forever and ever, !°the twenty-four elders fall before the one who is seated on the throne and worship the one who lives forever and ever; they cast their crowns before the throne, singing, “You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.”

a5 Or the sevenfold Spirit

2Or in the Spirit

“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come.”

590

REVELATION 4:1-11 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY _ n chap. 1,John had seen the way in which = Christ was intimately concerned for the life of the churches. In chap. 4, John is allowed to see the reality of God’s sovereignty. God is the creator of the universe (4:8, 11). Even if another lord appears to rule the world at present (chaps.

in 3:21. The throne is the dwelling of God, of the Spirit (1:4), and (after 5:7) of the Lamb (5:13; cf. 12:5). In v. 2, John sees a throne “in heaven” surrounded by other thrones and marked by the awesome appurtenances of the theophany (cf. Exod 19:16). The description of it owes much to OT theophanies, in which God is enthroned, mysterious, fiery, and glorious (Ezek 1:26; Isa 6:1-2; and see Excursus: “God’s Throne, the Heavenly Merkabah, and the Human Figure,” 596-99). The worship of God takes place around the throne (4:9; 7:11; 14:3). The One seated on the throne (4:2; cf. Ezek 1:26) will eventually “tabernacle” (oxnvow skenoo ) with the multitude of the redeemed (7:15). Voices come from the throne (16:17; 19:5; 21:3). One voice will speak, finally (21:3), to affirm that the throne of God is with humanity on a new earth when the old heaven and old earth have passed away (21:1). Only at 21:5 is the voice of the one seated on the throne identified. The throne of God and the Lamb will be set in the midst of the new Jerusalem (22:3), the description of which marks the climax of the book. In 4:5, however, the throne pours forth lightning and thunder (cf. Exod 19:16), and before it is what appears to be a sea of glass. Later, the sea disappears (21:1), and instead of fire the throne pours forth a river of living water (22:1). Contrasting with the throne of God is the throne of Satan (2:13), the dragon (13:2), or the beast (16:10), two contrasting sites of dominion and obligation (cf. Rom 6:1 2ff.). The indebtedness to the language of Ezekiel’s vision in Ezekiel 1 and 10 (especially), to Isaiah 6, and to the great theophany at Sinai in Exodus 19 is everywhere apparent in Revelation 4. If we compare John’s vision with Ezekiel’s, we shall see that John starts where Ezekiel finishes. The fiery cloud that bursts on the prophet’s life in Babylon leads to a description, often convoluted, of the divine chariot, with its wheels, fire, terrible faces of creatures, and crystal firmament, before culminating in the brief mention of the throne and the fiery human figure sitting upon it. John’s vision does not ignore the terrible faces and the fire. There is little evidence here of the chariot ("2577 merkaba), its wheels, and its movement, which so captivated Ezekiel. John’s gaze is fixed imme-

12-13), such a rule can be only temporary. The God who appeared at the exodus and made a covenant with Israel in thunder and lightning is at present only apparent to the eye of vision, but in due course will be apparent in all creation. Like Isaiah and Ezekiel before him, John describes the holy God, who seems far removed, yet is everpresent and active.

4:1-3. After giving John the letters to the angels, a door in heaven (v.,1) opens and a new visionary perspective is presented to John. The opening of heaven is also a prelude to a vision in Ezek 1:1 (cf. 19:11; Mark 1:10; John 1:51; Acts 7:56; 10:11). The continuity with the vision that opens Revelation is evident (1:10). John uses the same phrase, “in the Spirit” (v. 2), that he had used in 1:9, and the first voice speaks once more (1:10). The trumpet will be a significant feature of the later vision in the trumpet sequence (8:6ff). The trumpet is linked with the eschatological moment in 1 Thess 4:16 (cf. Matt 24:30-31) and is the first of several links with Exod 19:16ff. The voice summons John to “come up here,” a summons similar to the dead witnesses in 11:12 (cf. 17:1; 21:9; Exod 19:24); and there is a repetition of the promise to show “what must take place

after this” (v. 1; cf. 1:1, 19; Dan 2:29, 45). John’s experience of being “in the Spirit” (v. 2; cf. 1:10) leads him to the awareness of another space, in this case heaven (the Spirit will be the means of John’s removal to a desert place in 17:3; cf. 21:10), the setting for the ensuing apocalyptic narrative. Heaven is the place where God’s throne is set (4:2; cf. Ps 103:19) and the source of the crisis that unfolds (6:1; cf. 10:1; 20:1). Heaven’s “cleansing” of Satan (12:7-8) is the prelude to earth’s trial. The throne of God will play an important role in Revelation, though heaven plays virtually no part in John’s vision of the new Jerusalem. We have already had reference to the throne with the promise to the Laodicean angel 591

REVELATION 4:1-11 COMMENTARY diately on the climax of Ezekiel’s vision: the throne and the One seated upon it. John does not linger over its description, nor does he describe details of his ascent “in the Spirit,” in this respect differing from some contemporary visionary texts.!°° Whereas Ezekiel had dared to describe the vague outlines of a human form, John’s vision notes that there is someone seated on the throne, and he compares that figure with jasper (cf. 21:11, 18-19; Ezek 28:13), carnelian (cf. 21:20), and emerald (cf. 21:19; Ezek 28:13). The bow around the throne also accompanies the angelic figure in 10:1 and echoes the description of Ezekiel’s vision of God’s glory: “Like the bow in a cloud on a rainy day, such was the appearance of the splendor all around” (Ezek 1:28 NRSV). 4:4-6a. The throne is encircled by twenty-four other thrones, occupied by elders clad in white (apparel linked with God’s presence in 1:14; 2:17; 3:4-5; 6:11; 7:9; 20:11), with crowns on their heads (cf. Zech 6:11). These elders form the divine court (1 Kgs 22:19; Isa 6:1). They engage in worship (4:10; 5:5-8; 7:11; 11:16; 14:3; 19:4) without ceasing (4:8; 14:11). Occasionally, in the subsequent vision, one of the elders is given a role in communicating with John to enable him to understand what he sees (5:5; 7:13). The identity of the elders is unclear, though passages like Isa 24:23 and the twenty-four priestly families of 1 Chr 24:4ff. have often been cited as background. The noise and fire that proceed from the throne (v. 5) appear elsewhere (8:5; 11:19; 16:18) and are reminiscent of the description of the Lord’s descent on Mount Sinai to give the Torah (Exod 19:10ff.) and the fire that proceeds from the divine chariot (Ezek 1:13). The “flashes of lightning, and rumblings and peals of thunder” (v. 5) occur at significant points in the later vision: at the end of the seventh seal and immediately before the sequence of trumpet blasts (8:5); at the end of the sequence of seven trumpet blasts when God’s temple in heaven is opened (11:19); and when a voice comes from the throne, asserting “It is done” at the end of the sequence of bowls (16:18). Only once in the description of God’s throne in heaven does John offer an interpretation of what he sees: The seven lamps before the throne are the seven spirits of God (v. 5; cf. Zech 4:2).

We shall meet the seven spirits again in 5:6, where they are closely linked with the Lamb (cf. 1:4). That solitary interpretation is a warning not to read too much into the images without indicators in the text. It would be tempting—but questionable—to read, as many commentators have done, the rainbow as a sign of the covenant with Noah in Gen 9:13, an interpretation noted in the earliest extant commentary by Victorinus of Pettau. While John’s use of colors and spatial contrasts has a degree of consistency, allowing us to speak of an “apocalyptic grammar,” the exploration of the full extent of the intertextual references in this allusive text lies with the reader to exploit. In front of the throne is a sea of glass (v. 6; cf. Ezek 1:22, 26). In 15:2, it is mingled with fire, and those who have “conquered” the beast are standing on its shore, singing a song, just as the people of Israel did after the destruction of Pharaoh and his host (15:3; cf. Exod 15:11). At this moment in John’s vision, however, the sea of glass is not mingled with fire. 4:6b-8. John’s gaze returns to the throne in v. 6, and (in a direct allusion to Ezek 1:5, 18) the terrible creatures that appear there are described. They are both in the midst of and around the throne (see Commentary on 5:6), full of eyes (eyes and insight or knowledge are occasionally linked; see 2:18; 5:6; cf. Zech 4:10). Like the elders, the creatures recur throughout the vision as part of the description of the throne (e.g., 5:6ff.; 7:11; 14:3; 15:7; 19:4), and as part of the worship of God (4:9; cf. 14:3). All four participate in summoning the procession that follows the opening of the seals in 6:1ff. The description of the creatures echoes Ezek 1:18 (cf. Ezek 10:12) but is much less convoluted. Whereas Ezekiel’s creatures have four faces each, John sees four different creatures: a lion, an ox, a man, and an eagle (cf. the four beasts in Dan 7:4ff.). Another difference is that John’s creatures have six wings (v. 8; derived from Isa 6:2 rather than Ezek 1:6) and are full of eyes all around (the eyes in Ezek 1:18 are attached to the wheels of the chariot). They engage in ceaseless praise, echoing the song of the seraphim of Isaiah’s vision: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lorp of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory.” (Isa 6:3 NRSV) “Holy, holy, holy the Lord God the Almighty, who was and is and is to come.” (Rev 4:8 NRSV)

190. E.g., 1 Enoch 14:8ff.; Ascension of Isaiah 7ff. Cf. 2 Cor 12:2ff.

592

REVELATION 4:1-11 COMMENTARY The praise in vv. 8-9 has become a praise of God’s being. Isaiah’s assertion that God’s glory fills the earth is not denied; God is “Almighty” (tavtoKpdtwe pantokrator). God is past, present, and future (cf. 1:8; 11:17). The divine glory, hymned by the heavenly host, belongs peculiarly to the God of heaven (11:13; cf. 4:9; 7:2; 15:8). This is changed only when, as the divine judg ment moves to its conclusion, the earth is permeated with the divine glory (18:1); in the new Jerusalem that glory will be found everywhere (21:11, 23; cf. 21:24, 26). This contrasts with the Gospel of John, where the divine glory is evident in the past on earth in the incarnation of the Logos: “We have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14 NRSV)—though, of course, the divine glory does not pervade the whole world. 4:9-11. In the ritual of praise (v. 9) there is a close relationship between the praise of the creatures and the elders, actions that recur in the vision at 5:8, 14, and 19:4. The reference in the next chapter may possibly be connected with the action described in v. 9. The verbs in vv. 9-10 are consistently future (though there is important mss evidence that has present tenses). Translations usually take these future-tense verbs as frequentative (e.g., the NRSV’s “whenever the living creatures give glory”). If we take these future tenses literally (and there is a debate as to whether we should),'*! then they refer to acts of the attendants of the divine throne at some future point in the apocalyptic narrative. That is best understood as being 5:8, where that action is described with present-tense verbs. They form a response to the moment when the Lamb took the book and opened the seals. So this double action of praise and obeisance takes place after the exaltation of the Lamb in 5:6. If we give full weight to the future tenses, vv. 9-10 refer to a future fulfillment. John sees the elders here at a point before they perform their ritual of worship in response to the creatures’ song, when the Lamb shares the divine throne (already seen by John, according to 4:8). The ritual in v. 9 takes place in his vision only once the Lamb has appeared.

These future-tense verbs give weight to the view that what we have here, as Victorinus hinted long ago, is like a scene of the old covenant, devoid of any distinguishing marks of Christian interpretation, which could have been written by any Jewish apocalyptic visionary of John’s day. But it will be transformed in the following chapter. The act of casting crowns before God is one of the few uses of Bd\Aw (ballo, “throw”) in Revelation that does not have connotations of the judgment of God (e.g., 8:5ff.). The crowns of the elders are shown to be subject to the authority of God, unlike the diadems on the heads of the beast, which are worn without any acknowledgment that such a sign of rule might derive from God (cf. Rom 13:1-2). Hymns recur throughout Revelation (e.g., 5:12135 FLOP IZ 14155 172 12: 10s 152324) hey probably echo the worship in synagogues and the early Christian communities and are reminiscent of doxological passages elsewhere in the NT (esp. Rom 16:27; Jude 24; cf. 1 Chr 29:11). But what passages like Isaiah 6 indicate to readers is that the uttering of the sanctus enabled humans to share in the language of the heavenly liturgy. Of the words of praise to God, “glory” (86E€a doxa) and “honor” (tin time; along with “power”) are often included (cf. 4:11; 5:13); “thanksgiving” is found only here and in 7:12. Glory is ascribed to God when the nations engage in an act of obeisance in the new Jerusalem (21:26). God is described as the One who “lives forever and ever” (v. 10; cf. 10:6; 15:7; Dan 4:34), parallel to v. 8: “who was and is and is to come” (cf. 1:4, 8; 11:17; 16:15) and similar to the description of Christ as the one who is now alive (though he was dead) in 1:18. That God is “worthy” (dEtos axios) is found only in 4:11, though the word forms part of the question asked as the search goes on for one worthy to open the seals (5:2, 4, 9; it is used of the Lamb in 5:12). Elsewhere it is used of those who are found worthy of attaining the bliss of the new age (3:4) and of the just judgment of God on the persecutors of the saints and the prophets (16:6). One difference about this particular paean of praise (v. 11) is the inclusion of the praise of God as creator (parallel to Eph 3:9; Col 1:17):

191. See L. Thompson, The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990); G. Mussies, The Morphology of Koine Greek as Used in the Apocalypse of St. John (Leiden: \ E. J. Brill, 1971).

What is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things. (Eph 3:9 NRSV)

593

REVELATION 4:1-11 COMMENTARY In for by] him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible. (Col 1:17 NRSV) You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created. (Rev 4:11 NRSV)

The only other place in Revelation where God is hailed as Creator is the moment when the great angel swears by the God who created heaven and earth (10:2) and declares that there will be no more delay (10:6). In Revelation, the created world, for all its rebellion (cf. 9:20), is God’s creation. Power is attributed to God (4:11). The Greek word dvvapts (dynamis) is used to describe the “power of God” (7:12; 12:10; 15:8; 19:1) and the Lamb (5:12; cf. 1:16). It is also used for the power given by the dragon to the beast (13:2) and the power bestowed in turn by the kings of the earth on the beast (17:13). In two other passages, it is used in an address to the angel at Philadelphia, where the lack of the angel’s power prompts an offer of grace, an open door that no one will shut. “The power of her luxury” in 18:3 (NRSV) refers to the wealth accrued by the merchants of the earth. Babylon’s luxury was a powerful means of creating wealth, therefore. Closely related is the word “authority” (EEovota exousia), also used in connection with

“siving” (StSwpt didomi; 6:8; 9:3; 13:2, 4-5, 7; 17:13; cf. 9:10, 19). It refers to the rule (2:26), the right to participate in life in the holy city, the new Jerusalem (22:14), and the power the two witnesses have the right to exercise (11:6). Only occasionally is it used of God (16:9) or Christ (12:10). It is not always easy to make a clear distinction between the two (exousia and dynamis could probably be used interchangeably in passages like 2:26 and 20:6). Nevertheless, it often does have the sense of the specific exercise of power within the mystery of the divine providence. So the angels who have power over a quarter of the earth (6:8) exercise that authority within the providence of God (see also 14:18). In 17:13, where the two words are used together, there may be a contrast between undifferentiated and specific forms of the exercise of power, manifested in political and economic rule. That may be behind the use in 12:10, where the two words are juxtaposed, albeit in the very different rule of Christ. In a vision largely devoid of sentiment, though not devoid of the ability to provoke emotion, the exercise of power and its specific authorization are examined. The exercise of love involves power in almost all circumstances. That is the case in the story of Jesus, whose self-giving love is also an exercise in power, albeit one that contrasts with the powers of this age.

REFLECTIONS Worship plays a central role in Revelation.'” The first of several hymnic passages is to be found in chapter 4. Three things can be said about these passages, which are interspersed throughout John’s vision from chap. 4 to chap. 19.

1. There is the all-encompassing participation of the worshipers (4:10; cf. Mark 12:30). We can too readily dismiss the affective and confine worship to verbal or intellectual expression. Physical and sensory participation in worship (e.g., the smell of incense is hinted at in 8:3ff., and the strains of music in 14:2) are all important components of worship of God. There is no evidence of words of praise either in the account of the messianic reign or in the new creation in chaps. 20ff. That may suggest that in the new age, when men and women see God face to face and God tabernacles with them, they will serve God in a fashion that has no need of words (7:15; 22:3). Indeed, there will be no temple in the new Jerusalem PA RHA and so no need of mediation between humanity and God. However, as long as the old order exists, worship in words and action helps to maintain a true perspective on life focused on God and God’s demands rather than on those of the beast or Babylon. 192. On the importance of worship as a countercultural act, see A. Kreider, Worship and Evangelism in Pre-Christendom (Cambridge: Grove, 1995).

594

REVELATION 4:1-11 REFLECTIONS Later in the book the repeated concern to stress the justice of God’s action reflects a concern with theodicy, which hints at some sensitivity to the horror of all that is happening in the eschatological process. The wrath of God is not arbitrary and capricious, even if the inscrutability of God’s ways means that full understanding lies beyond human comprehension. The paeans of praise are related to God’s actions in history and human response to do God’s works. Z. We shall see as the vision progresses that singing hymns to God is incompatible with idolatry. An appropriate pattern of behavior is expected from worshipers. Those who worship God will not worship the beast (cf. 14:9). To have the character of God means above all being committed to a particular style of life. One cannot have true worship without doing the works of God (cf. 1 John 3:18). When worship becomes an escape from life and from witness, it has lost touch with God. There is always a great temptation to allow worship and churchgoing to be ends in themselves. Of course, religious activity can be a haven from the rigors of everyday life, an evocation of a different kind of society, and a means of resistance to the dominant culture, as is evident in the hymns and songs of the African American slaves.'*? But when worship serves merely as an opiate, an anesthetic for the hurt of life rather than a divine discipline for an alternative way of life, it has moved into activity contrary to God’s purposes. 3. In Revelation 4, with its obvious indebtedness to Ezekiel and Isaiah, the ancient scriptures provide the medium whereby John enters the door of perception to see, hear, and communicate the divine mysteries. The insight of apocalypse is not an avoidance of what is there, a diverting opiate to escape reality, but another way of perceiving that reality. “The ‘visionary’ is the man who has passed through sight into vision, never the man who has avoided seeing, who has not trained himself to see clearly, or who generalises among his stock of visual memories.”'” It is the product of insight into the nature of things, which recognizes the contradictions and sees “through” them to a more complete understanding. The eye of vision is not mere repetition of normal discourse or the words of the past. Revelation is not an exegesis, a conscious attempt by the sophisticated scholar to offer a precise interpretation of the biblical text. It is an interpretation—but it comes through the use of Scripture as the medium of fresh apocalyptic insight. This is evident in every line of Revelation, where words and images of Scripture are subtly transformed, elements from earlier texts are dropped, and others are emphasized. Our use of Revelation may well be similar. We may find in our context that the Spirit now speaks to the churches in different ways, with new symbols, but always speaks of hope and in dialogue with the story of Jesus. This is one reason why Revelation has been regarded as a dangerous book. Its own relationship with the biblical tradition indicates creativity and development rather than a rigid adherence to the meaning of the letter of ancient scriptures. Revelation licenses imagination and insight and the use of Scripture as the vehicle of new. insight. It is a text that breathes the importance of the Spirit rather than the letter, and it stands at the fountainhead of that radical tradition in Christianity, where mere knowledge of Scripture or tradition is inadequate without the Spirit’s enlightenment or from the gracious moment of insight into everyday life. Scripture, then, is a witness to the faith of the writer or visionary. The inner illumination that prompted the writing is at the heart of true

discipleship.’” 193. See L. Genovese, Roll, Jordan, Roll (New York: Vintage, 1975). 194. N. Frye, Fearful Symmetry: A Study of William Blake (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1947) 25. 195. See C. Rowland, Radical Christianity (Oxford: Polity, 1988), on the use of Scripture in the writings of Winstanley and Muentzer.

595

EXCURSUS: GOD’S THRONE, THE HEAVENLY MERKABAH, & THE HUMAN FIGURE 7 “2

7 “~

, ~

“ye

Excursus: Gop’s THRONE, THE HEAVENLY MERKABAH, AND THE HUMAN FIGURE Interest in God’s throne and the one seated upon it, as well as the cosmos and its origins, formed key aspects of Jewish mysticism. This interest almost certainly antedates the fall of Jerusalem in 70 ce and had a long history from the very earliest times after

the return from exile in Babylon down to the hasidic movements nearer our own day.'”° Interest in Ezekiel 1 is attested mainly in apocalyptic writings that in part antedate the Christian era. The material from Qumran Caves 4 and 11 known as the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice has given considerable support to the view that the origin of the idea that the speculative, visionary interest in the heavenly temple, liturgy, and the existence of a complex angelology linked with attempts to pierce the veil surrounding the profound secrets of God’s dwelling lies early in the Second Temple period.'” According to the Mishnah, two biblical passages provide the foundation for this speculative interest: Genesis 1 and Ezekiel 1.'° Jewish mysticism is divided into two main branches: one concerned with cosmogony and cosmology, based on Genesis 1 (mwxna nwya ma'aseh béré’sit), and the other based on Ezekiel 1 and the throne-chariot of God (maDam mya ma‘aseh merkaba). The latter is much more theologically oriented insofar as it deals specifically with God’s nature and immediate environment in heaven. Reading Ezekiel 1 was severely restricted by ancient Jewish teachers because of its use by visionaries and the dangers to faith and life that such visionary activity posed.'” The reconstruction of the content of the merkabah tradition in the late first century is not easy. The focus of the tradition was the throne-chariot of God and the glorious figure enthroned upon it. Meditation on passages like Ezekiel 1, set as it is in exile and in the aftermath of a previous destruction of the Temple, would have been particularly apposite as the rabbis sought to come to terms with the devastation of Jerusalem in 70 cE. We know that Paul was influenced by apocalyptic ascent ideas (2 Cor 12:2ff.)° and that he emphasizes the importance of this visionary element as the basis of his practice (Gal 1:12, 16; cf. Acts 22:17). His apocalyptic outlook enabled him to act on his eschatological convictions, so that the apocalypse of Jesus Christ became the basis for his practice of admitting Gentiles into the messianic age without the Law of Moses. The threat posed by apocalyptic may be discerned elsewhere, particularly in its possibilities for christology.*’ There may have been a “seeing again” of that awesome vision of Ezekiel, or perhaps that vision becomes itself the

object of analysis and speculation.” Texts that resemble Revelation 4’s vision of God and the throne and can be dated to the same period are now quoted. 196. G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (New York: Schocken, 1955); I. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1978); D. Halperin, The Faces of the Chariot (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1988); C. Rowland, The Open Heaven (London: SPCK, 1982) 1; P. Schafer, Zhe Hidden and Manifest God (New York: State University of New York Press, 1992).

197. On the expositions of the chapter in the apocalyptic tradition see C. Rowland, “The Visions of God in Apocalyptic Literature,” /SZ 10 (1979) 138ff. 198. m. Hagigah 2:1. ¢ 199. m. Megillah 4:10; Tosefta Megillah 4:3.11ff.; b. Megillah 24.6. 200. See M. Dean-Otting, Heavenly Journeys: A Study of the Motif in Hellenistic Jewish Literature (Frankfurt: 1984); M. Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993). 201. See A. F. Segal, Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports About Christianity and Gnosticism (Leiden: Brill, 1977); J. Fossum, The Name of God and the Angel of the Lord (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1985); C. Rowland, The Open Heaven, esp. 94ff.; L. W. Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism (London: SCM, 1988). 202. M. Lieb, The Visionary Mode (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1991); D. Halperin, The Faces of the Chariot.

596

EXCURSUS: GOD’S THRONE, THE HEAVENLY MERKABAH, & THE HUMAN FIGURE

1 ENOCH

(AT LEAST 3RD CENTURY BCE AND PROBABLY MUCH OLDER)

And behold I°saw the clouds: And they were calling me in a vision; and the fogs were calling me; and the course of the stars and the lightnings were rushing me and causing me to desire; and in the vision, the winds were causing me to fly and rushing me high up into heaven. And I kept coming (into heaven) until I approached a wall which was built of white marble and surrounded by tongues of fire; and it began to frighten me. And I came into the tongues of the fire and drew near to a great house which was built of white marble, and the inner wall(s) were like mosaics of white marble, the floor of crystal, the ceiling like the path of the stars and lightnings between which (stood) fiery cherubim and their heaven of water; and flaming fire surrounded the wall(s), and its gates were burning with fire. And I entered into the house, which was hot like fire and cold like ice, and there was nothing inside it; fear covered me and trembling seized me. And as I shook and trembled, | fell upon my face and saw a vision. And behold there was an opening before me (and) a second house which is greater than the former and everything was built with tongues of fire. And in every respect it excelled (the other)—in glory and great honor—to the extent that it is impossible for me to recount to you concerning its glory and greatness. As for its floor, it was of fire and above it was lightning and the path of the stars; and as for the ceiling, it was flaming fire. And | observed and saw inside it a lofty throne—its appearance was like crystal and its wheels like the shining sun; and (I heard?) the voice of the cherubim; and from beneath the throne were issuing streams of flaming fire. It was difficult to look at it. And the Great Glory was sitting upon it—as for his gown, which was shining more brightly than the sun, it was whiter than any snow. None of the angels was able to come in and see the face of the Excellent and the Glorious One; and no one of the flesh can see him—the flaming fire was round about him, and a great fire stood before him. No one could come near unto him from among those that surrounded the tens of millions (that stood) before him. He needed no council, but the most holy ones who are near to him neither go far away at night nor move away from him. Until then I was prostrate on my face covered and trembling. And the Lord called me with his own mouth and said to me, “Come near to me, Enoch, and to my holy Word.” And he lifted me up and brought me near to the gate, but I (continued) to look down with my face.”

40405 20.ii.21-22 (PROBABLY 1ST CENTURY BCE) The cherubim prostrate themselves before him and bless. As they rise, a whispered divine voice [is heard], and there is a roar of praise. When they drop their wings, there is a [whispered] divine voice. The cherubim bless the image of the throne-chariot above the firmament, [and] they praise [the majestly of the luminous firmament beneath his seat of glory. When the wheels advance, angels of holiness come and go. From between his glorious wheels there is as it were a fiery vision of most holy spirits. About them, the appearance of rivulets of fire in the likeness of gleaming brass, and a work of... radiance in many-coloured glory, marvellous pigments, clearly mingled. The spirits of the living gods move perpetually with the glory of the marvellous chariots. The whispered voice of blessing accompanies the roar of their advance, and they praise the Holy One on their way of return. When they ascend, they ascend marvellously, and when they settle, they stand still. The sound of joyful praise is silenced and there is a whispered blessing of the gods in all the camps of God. And the sound of praise... from among all their divisions .. . and all their numbered ones praise, each in his turn.” 203.

_ 1983).

1 Enoch 14:8-25, trans. E. Isaac, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol.1, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday,

204. Translation from G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1961) 228. See C. Newsom, The Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985). s

597

EXCURSUS: GOD’S THRONE, THE HEAVENLY MERKABAH, & THE HUMAN FIGURE

APOCALYPSE OF ABRAHAM (PROBABLY FROM THE END OF THE 1ST CENTURY CE AND CONTEMPORARY WITH REVELATION) And as | was still reciting the song, the mouth of the fire which was on the firmament was rising up on high. And I heard a voice like the roaring of the sea, and it did not cease from the plenitude of the fire. And as the fire rose up, soaring to the highest point, I saw under the fire a throne of fire and the many-eyed ones round about, reciting the song, under the throne four fiery living creatures, singing. And the appearance of each of them was the same, each having four faces. And this (was) the aspect of their faces: of a lion, of a man, of an ox, and of an eagle. Each one had four heads on its body so that the four living creatures had sixteen faces. And each one had six wings: two on the shoulders, two halfway down, and two at the loins. With the wings which were on their shoulders they covered their faces, with the wings at their loins they clothed their feet, and they would stretch the two middle wings out and fly, erect. And when they finished singing, they would look at one another and threaten one another. And it came to pass when the angel who was with me saw that they were threatening each other, he left me and went running to them. And he turned the face of each living creature from the face which Was Opposite it so that they could not see each other’s faces threatening each other. And he taught them the song of peace which the Eternal One has in himself. And while I was still standing and watching, I saw behind the living creatures a chariot with fiery wheels. Each wheel was full of eyes round about. And above the wheels was the throne which I had seen. And it was covered with fire and the fire encircled it round about, and an indescribable light surrounded the fiery crowd. And I heard the voice of their sanctification like the voice of a single man.

PARALLELS TO JOHN’S VISION OF THE HUMAN

FIGURE

The opening of the book describes a christophany with few parallels in the NT (the transfiguration being a notable exception).”° There are some similarities with various christophanies and angelophanies from both Jewish and Christian texts. The elements of Revelation 4 are inspired by several OT passages, one of which is the first chapter of Ezekiel, particularly the climax of his call-vision, in which the prophet catches a glimpse of the form of God on the throne of glory in the dazzling gleam of bronze. It is also similar to Dan 10:5-6, where we find a vision of a heavenly being, broadly based on Ezekiel 1. There are hints of a tradition of interpretation of Ezekiel 1, particularly in visionary contexts, in which the glorious figure on the throne acts in a quasi-angelic role. At that time I, Daniel, had been mourning for three weeks. I had eaten no rich food, no meat or wine had entered my mouth, and | had not anointed myself at all, for the full three weeks. On the twenty-fourth day of the first month, as I was standing on the bank of the great river (that is, the Tigris), I looked up and saw a man clothed in linen, with a belt of gold from Uphaz around his waist. His body was like beryl, his face like lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the roar of a multitude. I, Daniel, alone saw the vision; the people who were with me did not see the vision, though a great trembling fell upon them, and they fled and hid themselves. So I was left alone to see this great vision. My strength left me, and my complexion grew deathly pale, and | retained no strength. Then I heard the sound of his words; and when I heard the sound of his words, I fell into a trance, face to the ground. But then a hand touched me and roused me to my hands and knees. He said to me: “Daniel, greatly beloved, pay attention to the words that I am going to speak to you. Stand on your feet, for I have been sent to you.... Do not fear, Daniel, for from the first day that you set your mind to 205. Apocalypse ofAbraham 18:1-14, trans. R. Rubinkiewicz, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol.1, ed.J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1983). 206. Thoroughly explored in L. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1995).

598

EXCURSUS: GOD’S THRONE, THE HEAVENLY MERKABAH, & THE HUMAN FIGURE gain understanding and to humble yourself before your God, your words have been heard. (Dan 10:2-12 NRSV) And I stood up and saw him who had taken my right hand and set me on my feet. The appearance of his body was like sapphire, and the aspect of his face was like chrysolite, and the hair of his head like snow. And a kidaris (was) on his head, its look that of a rainbow, and the clothing of his garments (was) purple; and a golden staff (was) in his right hand. And he said to me, “Abraham.” And I said, “Here is your servant!” And he said, “Let my appearance not frighten you, nor my speech trouble your soul. Come with me!...and I got up and looked at him who had taken my right hand and set me up on my feet; and his body was like sapphire, and his face like chrysolite, and the hair of his head like snow, and there was a linen band about his head and it was like a rainbow and the robes he was wearing were purple, and he had a golden staff in his right hand.?””

And a man came to her from heaven and stood by Aseneth’s head. And he called her and said ... “I am the chief of the house of the Lord and commander of the whole host of the Most High. Rise and stand on your feet, and | will tell you what I have to say.” And Aseneth raised her head and saw, and behold, (there was) a man in every respect similar to Joseph, by the robe and the crown and the royal staff, except that his face was like lightning, and his eyes like sunshine, and the hairs of his head like a flame of fire of a burning torch, and hands and feet like iron shining forth from a fire, and sparks shot forth from his hands and feet. And Aseneth saw (it) and fell on her face at his feet on the ground. And Aseneth was filled with great fear, and all of her limbs trembled. And the man said to her, “Courage, and do not be afraid, but rise and stand on your feet, and I will tell you what I have to say.”

With the book of Revelation we are in the midst of the world of apocalyptic mystery. Despite attempts over the years to play down the importance of this book, the indications suggest that its thought forms and outlook were more typical of early Christianity than is often allowed. The fact that there is no visionary material elsewhere in the NT accounts for some of the differences, but they are only superficial. Beneath the surface, we have here convictions about God, about Christ, and about the world that are not far removed from the so-called mainstream Christianity of the rest of the NT. The synoptic eschatological discourses are an obvious example of a similar outlook, but they are by no means alone. Revelation, with its indebtedness to a shadowy, perhaps embryonic mysticism of the Second Temple period, prompts us to look closer at other NT texts to see whether they, too, exhibit some of the telltale marks of mysticism. This unique early Christian example of the apocalyptic genre is profoundly indebted to Jewish apocalyptic ideas. In Revelation, the first chapter of Ezekiel, the merkabah chapter, has not only contributed to the visionary vocabulary of John, but also the initiatory visions (Rev 1:13ff.; 4:1ff.) are dominated by it. When taken alongside those other descriptions of the divinity that are now extant from the Second Temple period, we may suppose that we have in Revelation a glimpse of the tip of a mystical iceberg now largely lost from view. What is visible points to a distinctive use of prophecy parallel to, but in significant respects different from, other apocalyptic texts. 207. Apocalypse of Abraham 11:1-4, trans. R. Rubinkiewicz, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1983). 208. Vision of the angel in Joseph and Aseneth 14:4-11, trans. C. Burchard, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1985). K2 “~

“~

~~

599

SZ “~~

REVELATION 5:1-14 VISION OF THE DIVINE SCROLL AND THE LAMB NIV

NRSV

Then | saw in the right hand of him who 5 sat on the throne a scroll with writing on both sides and sealed with seven seals. 7And I saw a mighty angel proclaiming in a loud voice, “Who is worthy to break the seals and open the scroll?” *But no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth could open the scroll or even look inside it. 41 wept and wept because no one was found who was worthy to open the scroll or look inside. Then one of the elders said to me, “Do not weep! See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has triumphed. He is able to open the scroll and its seven seals.” °Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain, standing in the center of the throne, encircled by the four living creatures and the elders. He had seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits? of God sent out into all the earth. 7He came and took the scroll from the right

Then | saw in the right hand of the one 5 seated on the throne a scroll written on the inside and on the back, sealed? with seven seals; 2and I saw a mighty angel proclaiming with a loud voice, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?” °And no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it. And I began to weep bitterly because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it. °Then one of the elders said to me, “Do not weep. See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals.” 6Then I saw between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders a Lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth. 7He went

hand of him who sat on the throne. And when

and took the scroll from the right hand of the one

he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. *And they sang a new song: “You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God

who was seated on the throne. When he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell before the Lamb, each holding a harp and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. °They sing a new song: “You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slaughtered and by your blood you ransomed for God saints from? every tribe and language and people and nation; 'you have made them to be a kingdom and priests serving® our God, and they will reign on earth.” 11Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels surrounding the throne and the living creatures and the elders; they numbered myriads of

from every tribe and language and people and nation. You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth.” ''Then I looked and heard the voice of many angels, numbering thousands upon thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand. They encircled

2Or written on the inside, and sealed on the back

26 Or the sevenfoid Spirit

somed for God from

600

© Gk priests to

6 Gk ran-

REVELATION 5:1-14

NIV

NRSV

the throne and the living creatures and the elders.

myriads and thousands of thousands, 'singing with full voice, “Worthy is the Lamb that was slaughtered to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might / and honor and glory and blessing!” 'SThen I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, singing,

'2In a loud voice they sang: “Worthy is the Lamb, who was slain, toTeceive power and wealth and wisdom and _ strength— and honor and aloryand praise!” Then I heard every creature in heaven and

on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, singing: “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb bepraise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!”

40. the one seated on the throne and to the | Lamp

be blessing forever and 4’And the four the elders fell

4The four living creatures said, “Amen,” and the elders fell down and worshiped.

and honor and glory and might ever!” living creatures said, “Amen!” And down and worshiped.

(COMMENTARY BiBAos [biblos| is used). The opening of seals eventually results in a text that describes what John has seen and heard, the unsealed prophecy of the apocalypse itself (22:10; cf. 10:4). A mighty angel asks the question, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?” (v. 2; cf. 10:1, where the mighty angel appears with the distinctive characteristics of the risen Christ of 1:13ff.; see also 18:21). The verb “loose” in v. 2 (Avw luo; NRSV, “open”; NIV, “break”) is the same used of the “loosing from sin” in 1:5. In the light of what follows in the vision, we can surmise that the book contains the story of judgment, the opening of which initiates its performance. 5:3-5. No one is found anywhere in creation who is worthy (v. 4) to open the scroll or even to look into it.2° Recall that Jesus’ words reassured the disciples that their names are written in the heavens (Luke 10:20). John writes a heavenly book but does not read one; he sees actions in and from heaven that arise from the opening of this heavenly writing. John sees and writes (1:11; 22:8), and so the one who reads his book is counted as blessed (1:3), because the book Witnesses to the mysteries of heaven. Earlier in his vision, when John was confronted with the vision, he was overwhelmed with fear

[@) part of the heavenly scene described in = chap. 4 now attracts John’s attention. He sees a sealed scroll, which is a cause of consternation to him. Then he hears about the one who will open the seal, the lion from the tribe of Judah. But he sees something different. In the midst of the worship and movement in heaven, John sees a Lamb “bearing the marks of slaughter,” who comes to God and takes the scroll, the opening of which heralds the manifestation of the crisis described in the subsequent chapters.

5:1-2. John’s attention is focused on the right hand of the one seated on the throne, holding the churches in the right hand (1:16-17; cf. 10:5-6, where an angel raises his right hand to heaven and swears an oath). In contrast, the mark of the beast is found on the right hand of those who worship and thereby are effectively excluded from sitting at the right hand of the Holy One. John sees a scroll written “on the inside and on the back” (cf. Ezek 2:10 and also the eyes of the creatures in Rev 4:8; Dan 12:4, 9). The sealed scroll echoes Jer 32:9-10 and Isa 29:11. As we have already seen, books form an important part of Revelation. John’s commission is to write a book (1:11; cf. 22:7, 10, 18-19), and he will be commanded to eat a book or scroll in 10:8. Key to the judgment are the books (20:12), particularly the book of life (21:27; cf. 3:5; 20:15, .where

209. Looking into the secrets of heavenly books is one of the functions of apocalyptic, such as / Enoch 81:1ff.; 93:2; 103:2.

601

REVELATION 5:1-14 COMMENTARY Fig. 3: “Hearing and Seeing in the Book of Revelation,” 622-23).

(1:17), and he was given commands that he could not but obey (4:1). He has so far been encountered by God, commissioned to “write,” and observes the vision. Now he reacts. Immediately after the mighty angel has asserted that no one has been found worthy to open the scroll and look at its contents, John weeps (v. 4). Unlike the merchants and magnates who will weep because of its opening and the consequent judgment on

Throughout the history of the interpretation of the book of Revelation, it has been assumed that the Lamb is a metaphor for Christ.2!° The lack of specific “Christian” elements (despite the expressions “as if it had been slaughtered” [5:6] and “the blood of the Lamb” [7:14; 12:11]) have occasionally raised doubts about such an identification. Connections have been made with the Lamb of God of John 1:29, plausibly interpreted there also as an apocalyptic symbol of the Messiah, though, as elsewhere, there is probably a closer link with Isa 53:7, as in Acts 8:32 and 1 Pet 1:19 (though in all these cases duvds [amnos] is used, not apviov [arnion] as in Rev 5:6; cf. Jer 11:19). In the light of what follows, the apocalyptic background should remind us not to play down the element of power and messianic upheaval attached to the figure by concentrating on notions of suffering and powerlessness. Revelation is a text of messianism, and whatever its idiosyncrasies, it is in tune with much else in NT soteriology.?"! The notion that the blood of the Lamb is a means of redemption is mentioned elsewhere (T53714g 12h1s ek. 69:13). There® hasbeen much debate over the background to the imagery. The juxtaposition of buying/redeeming/loosing, blood, and a lamb suggests a Passover context, in which deliverance is effected for the children of Israel by the blood of a lamb, bringing deliverance from the angel of death and facilitating the process of liberation from Egypt (Exod 12:22-23, 31). As the hymn in v. 9 suggests, the death of the Lamb—who is no passive victim but one who was a “faithful witness” (1:5 NRSV)—has brought about release. The Lamb’s death has “made them to be a kingdom and priests serving our God,/ and they will reign [assuming that the future rather than the present tense is the earlier reading] on earth” (v. 10). The similarity with 1:6 (cf. 20:6) is close:

Babylon (18:9ff.), John mourns the fact that the process of justice and judgment is being delayed (cf. 6:9). One of the elders commands him not to weep (cf. the word of assurance from the Son of Man in 1:17: “Do not be afraid”), for “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered” (v. 5; a lion appears among the creatures itt 47> cf. 928, 17 1 G;3: 13:2). The: tribe of Judah is given a place of pre-eminence in the roll call in 7:5, and the Davidic origin of the Messiah (cf. 3:7; 22:16), well documented in the OT (e.g., Genesis 49; Isa 11:1; cf. Rom 1:3-4; 15:12; Heb 7:14; Rev 22:16) is asserted, only now to be juxtaposed with the Lamb (just as Davidic messianism is juxtaposed with the statement of Ps 110:1 in Mark 12:36, which seems to put that belief in question; cf. Mark 8:29ff.; 14:61-62). This standard messianic hope is represented in contemporary Jewish texts like Pss Sol 17:25-26, where military messianism, albeit clearly indebted to the language of Isaiah 11 as Revelation is, contributes to the expectation of the Messiah. 5:6-10. Despite the fact that the voice cries out that no one is able to break the seals and open the book, John sees who will do just that, a Lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered. Literally, the Lamb emerges “in the middle of the throne and of the four creatures and in the middle of the elders” to open the book. Whatever the precise meaning of the Greek, in comparison with 7:17, where the Lamb is said to be “at the center of the throne,” here the Lamb’s position is more ambiguous, being related in some way to creatures and elders as well as to the throne, and so not identified with either. In other words, the Lamb is in a liminal position, an intermediary. That position changes by the time John speaks of the Lamb and the throne in 7:17. The contrast between what John hears and what he sees is striking. It is the latter that offers him the insight into the nature of the liberation and its agent (see

To him who loves us and freed us from our sins by his blood, and made us to be a kingdom, priests serving his God and Father. (Rev 1:5-6 NRSV) 210. G. B. Caird, A Commentary on the Revelation of Saint John the Divine (London: A. & C. Black, 1966) 75; J. M. Ford, Revelation, AB 38 (New York: Doubleday, 1975) 87-95. 211. C. Rowland, “The Meaning of the Resurrection,” in The Resurrection ofJesus Christ, ed. P. Avis (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1993).

602

REVELATION 5:1-14 COMMENTARY “You were slaughtered and by your blood you ransomed for God saints from every tribe and language and people and nation; you have made them to be a kingdom and priests serving our God, and they will reign on earth.” (Rev 5:9-10 NRSV) Indeed, the whole earth is mine, but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation. (Exod 19:6)

We are given no explanatior, no story, that leads to this moment in the heart of heaven. It is a critical moment of deliverance. The identification of Christ with the Lamb, made throughout the book, suggests that an act of witness, at great cost, has turned the world upside down. The victim is shown to be in the right, and the demonstration of that witness shakes the fabric of the cosmos and its institutions to the core. The figure of the one like the Son of Man (1:13ff.) now gives way to that of a Lamb, who has the decisive role (6:1ff.; 7:9; 12:11; 13:8; 14:1ff.; 22:4). John’s description of the Lamb suggests death (hence the “as if”). The Lamb appears to have been slaughtered (obd{w [sphazo, v. 6] is the word used by 1 John 3:12 for the primal killing of Abel by Cain; cf. Isa 53:7; Matt 23:35; Heb 11:37). This is the only time in Revelation that the Lamb stands as a suppliant (cf. 14:1, where the Lamb stands on Mount Zion with its armies, like the Messiah in 4 Ezra 13:6). Elsewhere it is the recipient of praise (5:8, 12-13), shares God’s throne (7:9, 17), and is associated with death (5:6; 7:14; 12:11), with wrath and judgment (6:1; 17:14), with the messianic banquet (19:9), and with the life in the new age (21:9). The Lamb’s slaughter (a fate shared by saints and prophets [6:9; 18:4]) is redemptive (5:9; cf. 1:5). It is a fate that is no random event but whose significance lies deep within the mists of time (13:8). In describing the Lamb with the seven horns, John sets up a comparison with the dragon (12:3) and the beast that will arise from the sea (13:1). In other respects, too, the Lamb and the beast are comparable. In 13:3, the phrase “seemed to have received a death-blow” is used to describe one of the beast’s seven heads. In one respect, however, the Lamb is different. The eyes of the Lamb are not matched by those of the beast. Elsewhere in Revelation, we find reference to the eyes of the Son of Man (1:7; cf. 2:18) and to those of the rider on the white horse

603

(19:12), but here the eyes are associated with the throne of God (4:6, 8); these are “the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth” (v. 6; this picks up 1:4 and is inspired by the seven lamps of Zech 4:10). Note the link between the “spirits” of God and the Lamb here as well as the theme that runs throughout the NT of the immanence of God through the divine Spirit, which comes from the Messiah (cf. Isa 11:1; John 15:26; Acts 2:33). One unusual parallel to this passage appears to be the fourth beast of Dan 7:7: “I saw in the visions by night a fourth beast, terrifying and dreadful and exceedingly strong... . It was different from all the beasts that preceded it, and it had ten horns” (NRSV). There the animal is a symbol of the mighty kings of the earth. In John’s vision there is an unusual development of the apocalyptic tradition. Superficially, the scene is similar to that described in Dan 7:9 (cf. 1 Kgs 22:19). Whereas in Dan 7:13 a human figure comes to take divine authority, here it is an animal. The contrast between Revelation and Daniel is striking. If we examine the Jewish apocalypses,?!2 it is apparent that there are several types of visions. There is the report by the seer of what has been seen in heaven, usually after a mystical ascent (e.g., / Enoch 14). Then there is the communication to the seer of divine secrets by an angel in which visions play no part (as in 4 Ezra). Finally there is the dream vision, in which the seer sees in a dream various objects (often animals) that afterward by means of an angelic interpretation are explained (Daniel 7; 7 Enoch 89ff.). These objects have no independent existence in heaven except as part of the dream vision and are merely symbols of persons and events that take place on earth. There is usually a fairly clear distinction in the apocalypses between visions in which a seer reports what he has seen in heaven and visions in which the contents of a dream are not direct glimpses of heavenly realities but need to be interpreted by earthly persons or events. For the first type of vision, there is an attempt to describe the environs of God using the terminology of Ezekiel and Isaiah. These visions are reports of what is actually believed to be occurring in the world above. Dream visions, with their extrava212. J. J. Collins, 7he Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984). .

REVELATION 5:1-14 COMMENTARY of John to worship the angel who accompanies him on his apocalyptic journey (19:10). The elders now possess a harp and golden bowls of incense (cf. 14:2; 15:3). John offers an interpretation of them as the prayers of the saints, which will be referred to again, particularly with regard to their effect (8:3; cf. Ps 141:2). Praying is not referred to in Revelation apart from these passages, although one should not ignore that attitude of adoration and submission to God, which the divine presence prompts among those around the throne. The elders sing a new song (v. 9). This anticipates the new song sung with harps before the throne, the creatures, and the elders by the 144,000 who have God’s name written on their foreheads (14:1-2; cf. Ps 144:9). There is a connection in the words of both songs (v. 9; cf. 14:4). It is anew song, celebrating a new departure in salvation history with the Lamb’s receipt of the scroll. The right to take it, which is hymned, recalls the declaration of the worthiness of God in 4:11. The right to take the scroll is based on the fact of the Lamb’s slaughter, the consequence of which is the liberation of people from every tribe, tongue, and nation (v. 9; cf. 7:9; note the all-embracing inclusiveness suggested by the phrase “tribe, language, people, and nation” elsewhere in, 10st id1:Op0h3:7; 14:62. 17-15) The Lamb’s role is an active one (cf. Gal 1:4, where Christ is not a passive victim but the agent of deliverance). That role results in the formation of a kingdom and priests (cf. 1:6; Exod 19:16; Isa 61:6) who will reign on earth (20:6; 22:5). The formation of a kingdom and priests contrasts with the “priestly kingdom” of Exod 19:6, though Rev 1:6,-where

gant symbols and interpretations, are not usually merged in the Jewish apocalypses with heavenly ascent visions, as they are in Revelation 4-5. The vision in Revelation 4 is a good example of the first type of vision. John glimpses the activities in heaven, normally hidden from human perception. If John had followed the conventions of apocalyptic, set out in chap. 4, he might have been expected to describe Christ, in language similar to that in 1:13ff., as a heavenly figure clad in divine glory. Instead, John introduced the language more typical of the symbolic vision. The use of animal imagery parallels the way / Enoch 89-90 uses animals to represent humans. These images have symbolic significance, as representive of persons or nations (just as the beasts represent kings in Daniel 7). Humans are invariably animals and only become angelic in advance of the eschatological age (as in the case of Noah in 1 Enoch 89:1). When viewed in the light of the / Enoch material, the use of that animal symbolism suggests a stress on the humanity of the messianic agent. The juxtaposition of visionary types has few parallels. This awkwardness reflected also in the juxtaposition of “Lion” and “Lamb” in 5:4-5 may be taken to reflect the jarring nature of the eschatological reality to which John seeks to bear witness. The Lamb had affected the normal apocalyptic conventions, and hitherto accepted patterns of discourse are shattered, as well as the understanding and course of history. We may even speak of a mixing, perhaps even a subversion, of genres here, all the more apt when the message the text seeks to convey is of the cosmos-shattering effects of the triumph of Christ. The Lamb takes the scroll (v. 8). No permission is given for him to do so; it is as if the qualifications have already been demonstrated and the action is a necessary consequence. That act prompts praise directed to the Lamb, similar to what had been described earlier as praise directed toward God (4:10); it should be noted, however, that the verb “worship” (tpookuvéw proskyneo) is not used here. It is worth noting also that proskyneo is used in Revelation either for worship of God alone (5:14 is ambiguous), for the worship of the beast (13:8), or to describe those occasions when humans show obeisance to others (3:9). The word is also used to describe the desire

priests are in apposition to kingdom, may suggest that the sense of the Exodus passage is preserved. The democratization of holiness here is paralleled elsewhere in the NT and in Jewish sources (Rom

1516, 27; We Pet 2355.9» 1OS*8): 5:11-14. Inv. 11, John begins his description of what he hears with the expression “I saw,” so typical of the style of apocalyptic narrative (e.g., Dan 7:2, 9). This time it is the heavenly hosts, countless angels who surround the throne, the creatures, and the elders, described in 4:10 (cf. Dan 7:10; Heb 12:22). The assertion of the Lamb’s worthiness is here a statement about it, not fo it, as in v. 9; thus it is similar to 4:10:

604

REVELATION 5:1-14 COMMENTARY “You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.” (Rev 4:11 NRSV)

sponse to the Lamb’s receiving the book, starting with the elders (v. 8), now moves to every creature in the universe, “on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them” (v. 13), echoing and extending the phraseology of v. 3 (note that the sea ultimately will have no part in the new heaven and earth, 21:1). The universal approbation of the Lamb seems strange at this juncture, when the force of wrath is about to burst upon a recalcitrant universe. It is as though there is a moment of recognition, short-lived yet full of insight. The Lamb is now added to the name of the one who sits upon the throne, an acknowledgment of the Lamb’s status (Ghoti EAs Phil 210).

“Worthy is the Lamb that was slaughtered to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” (Rev 5:12 NRSV)

Included in this list of wHat the Lamb is worthy to receive is wealth, which, when accumulated illicitly, is to be laid waste when Babylon’s profligacy is judged (18:17). Babylon’s luxury is the basis of the wealth of the merchants of the world (18:3, 15). But true wealth comes from purchasing from the Son of Man “gold refined by fire” (3:18 NRSV). The re-

REFLECTIONS 1. Revelation 5 is the pivotal chapter in the book. The account of the opening of the seals, which in turn leads to the trumpet blasts and the pouring out of the bowls of wrath, starts here in the opening of the sealed scroll by the Lamb. Contrary to what might have been expected, a weak creature with no mark of triumph—only the marks of its own slaughter—is the agent of God’s purposes. So, too, Paul declared: “We proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God” (1 Cor 1:23-24 NRSV). This involves, to quote the words with which Nietzsche concludes The Antichrist, the “revaluation of all

values.””"* The way of Christ cuts across all those “respectable” virtues. Those who would be disciples have to learn what it means to take up a cross and follow him. 2. The execution of Jesus was of little concern to the writers of his era. He was a troublemaker who received the just reward for his actions and cried out to heaven for vindication (Gen 4:10; cf. Acts 2:24). That event in Palestine, however, affected the way God relates to the world; it was, in Paul’s words, “not done in a corner” (Acts 26:26 NRSV). God’s relationship to creation could never be the same again. The Lamb, then, becomes the means of bridging the gap between heaven and earth. The one who was dead is now alive and shares God’s throne. The experience of human life and death is taken into God. A human being shares the intimacy of God’s throne (cf. John 1:18 where the Logos is in the bosom of the father).

3. In Revelation 5, the transformation of heaven rather than that of humanity is the issue, though the consequences of that transformation are for the cosmos as a whole. That is done not by the conquering of heaven through violence. The secret of the heart of God (cf. 13:8; 1 Pet 1:20) and the qualification for proximity to God are rooted in the death of the Lamb. The character of God is revealed in that God did not spare God’s own Son but gave him up for us all (see Rom 8:32). This is the identity of the true ruler of the kings of the earth, whose sovereignty does not come by force of arms or by the exploitation of the inhabitants of the world and its resources, but by costly witness (cf. Phil 2:5ff.). 213. Friedrich Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols and the Antichrist (London: Penguin, 1990).

605

REVELATION 5:1-14 REFLECTIONS 4. The striking character of the image of the Lamb should not lead us to suppose that complete passivity is encouraged. The juxtaposition of the Lion of Judah and the Lamb challenges our assumptions about the character of the Messiah. But the image of the Lamb—benign, defenseless, and passive—by no means exhausts what John wants to tell us about Jesus. (William Blake complements his poem “The Lamb” in Songs of Innocence with “The Tyger” in Songs of Experience.) The description of the Lamb must be complemented by passages like 1:13ff. and 19:11ff. The Lamb does not go to its death with a fatalistic acceptance of its lot. Nor is its death all that is important. The human one is, after all, the “faithful witness” (1:5). As we shall see in the discussion of the two witnesses in chap. 11, activity in pursuance of the witness to God leads to death in the midst of Babylon. It is testimony before the nations of that other way, the way of truth, in which messiahship consists. The writer of 1 Timothy gives expression to it when he speaks of Jesus as having made a “sood confession” in his testimony before Pontius Pilate (see 1 Tim 6:13). 5. If it is the slain Lamb that merits the worship of the heavenly host, then we have to ask about the character of the lifestyle that is acceptable to God. It is not that of the mighty of the world, who attract fame and attention, those who are worldly wise, those who run the system best of all. It is those who are victims of the system of the beast and Babylon, just as the Lamb was, who are promised the blessings of the age to come (7:15). Revelation 5 compels us to consider a different understanding of the meaning of success and the exercise of power. This is so difficult to hold on to when we are pressured to conform to a culture of selfaggrandizement, epitomized by Babylon. Self-offering and weakness, recognized and accepted, are powerful and acceptable to God; but this is not about passivity (as is suggested by the more defiant stance of the Lamb in 14:1ff.). 6. John is not merely passive, a mere spectator, but an obedient servant to the divine will to act as scribe. Here he weeps. Such moments of participation may not seem important. But the expression

of grief (cf. John 11:35) is a radical. challenge to the status quo.”* Weeping is “radical criticism.”?"° 7. The vision of the slaughtered Lamb’s place with God reminds us that the gospel offers an alternative story—in which the side of the victims is taken. In society’s dominant version of the story, victims are perceived as troublemakers, subversives. The sentiment reported in John 11:50 (“It is better for you to have one man die for the people than to have the whole nation destroyed” [NRSV}) is the sentiment of the leaders of state security forces down the centuries. The gospel, in contrast, takes the perspective of the victim, the innocent victim. The Christian gospel exposes the distortions and delusions we tell about ourselves, the violence we use to maintain the status quo, and our ways of disguising from ourselves the oppression of the victim. One of the most compelling explorations of the impact of the gospel on human culture is the

work of René Girard.” According to Girard, human cultures originate in the basic human tendency to imitate (mimesis). This provokes conflicts of desire, which are resolved by the murder or scapegoating of an arbitrary victim. Events like this are remembered and retold, and the initial problems that led to the murder are wrongly attributed to the victim. Myths grow up to narrate the murder from the perspective of the killers, and, along with such myths, sacrificial rites provide an outlet for the actual violence generated by mimetic desire. In the Gospels, however, we have a story of a victim and a killing, but this story is told from the perspective of the scapegoated person, asserting his innocence. This has the effect of unmasking cultures based on violence. Humanity is challenged to follow Jesus in renouncing violence, lest we destroy ourselves. 214. Itumeleng Mosala, Biblical Hermeneutics and Black Theology in South Africa (Exeter: Paternoster, 1989) 151. 215. W. Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1978) 61. 216. For this section, I am indebted to the work of Steve Finamore (“God, Order, and Chaos” (D. Phil. diss. Oxford University, 1997), who has discussed R. Girard, Violence and the Sacred (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977); The Scapegoat (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989); and Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World (London: Athlone, 1987). Girard’s work has been used to interpret the apocalyptic and eschatological traditions of the Bible in J. Alison, Living in the End Times: The Last Things Re-imagined (London: SPCK, 1997).

606

REVELATION 5:1-14 REFLECTIONS These observations are relevant for the interpretation of Revelation,which is a text about the unmasking of human culture. At its start it reveals the vindication of the Lamb who was slain. The story of Jesus’ death is a revelation of the false consciousness of the scapegoat mechanism and the violence that it institutionalizes. The gospel unmasks the fact that violence lies at the base of all human culture and does so by proclaiming the innocence of the victim. It offers an alternative pattern for human mimesis. The consequence of this (crucial for our understanding of Revelation) is the cross. Jesus identifies with the victims in his society, and as a result he sets in motion a process of victimization of himself. There is a violent reaction as the political elite plot to rid themselves of a troublemaker. As John’s unfolding visions demonstrate, this leads to violence as the gospel shows up human culture for what it is. To bear witness to this alternative way is to risk the violence of the old system. The story of Christ’s life and death subverts the “lie” of a culture based on violence, as do the lives of those who follow this pattern. That provokes a violent crisis as the lie is revealed, accelerating the process of cultural disintegration. With the gospel there can be no resolution other than acceptance of its alternative way. Culture based on violence is inherently unstable. Religion, myth, and ritual can only paper over the cracks in society. The gospel reveals God’s wrath in that the human culture based on violence is shown for what it really is. Sooner or later the power of the gospel’s alternative story becomes evident: We can see why the Passion is found between the preaching of the Kingdom and the Apocalypse... . It is a phenomenon that has no importance in the eyes of the world—incapable, at least in principle, of setting up or reinstating a cultural order, but very effective, in spite of those who know better, in carrying out subversion. In the long run, it is quite capable of undermining and overturning the whole cultural history and supplying the secret motive force of all subsequent history.” 217. Girard, Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World, 209.

607

REVELATION 6:1-17

JOHN SEES THE SEALS OPENED NIV

NRSV

6

6

I watched as the Lamb opened the first of the seven seals. Then I heard one of the four living creatures say in a voice like thunder, “Come!” 7I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest. 3When the Lamb opened the second seal, | heard the second living creature say, “Come!” 4Then another horse came out, a fiery red one. Its rider was given power to take peace from the earth and to make men slay each other. To him was given a large sword. >When the Lamb opened the third seal, I heard the third living creature say, “Come!” I looked, and there before me was a black horse! Its rider was holding a pair of scales in his hand. °Then I heard what sounded like a voice among the four living creatures, saying, “A quart? of wheat for a day’s wages,’ and three quarts of barley for a day’s wages,’and do not damage the oil and the wine!” ™)When the Lamb opened the fourth seal, | heard the voice of the fourth living creature say, “Come!” ®I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hades was following close behind him. They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth. °When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. !°They called out in a loud voice, “How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?” ''Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and brothers who were to be killed as they had been was completed. '2] watched as he opened the sixth seal. There 46 Greek a choinix (probably about a liter)

66 Greek a denarius

608

Then I saw the Lamb open one of the seven seals, and I heard one of the four living creatures call out, as with a voice of thunder, “Come!”? 7I looked, and there was a white horse! Its rider had a bow; a crown was given to him, and he came out conquering and to conquer. 3When he opened the second seal, I heard the

second living creature call out, “Come!” 4And out came? another horse, bright red; its rider was permitted to take peace from the earth, so that people would slaughter one another; and he was given a great sword. 5SWhen he opened the third seal, I heard the third living creature call out, “Come!”? I looked, and there was a black horse! Its rider held a pair of scales in his hand, °and I heard what seemed to be a voice in the midst of the four living creatures saying, “A quart of wheat for a day’s pay,° and three quarts of barley for a day’s pay,°

but do not damage the olive oil and the wine!” 7When he opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature call out, “Come!” ®1 looked and there was a pale green horse! Its rider’s name was Death, and Hades followed with him; they were given authority over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword, famine, and pestilence, and by the wild animals of the earth. 9QWhen he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slaughtered for the word of God and for the testimony they had given; '°they cried out with a loud voice, “Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge and avenge our blood on the

inhabitants of the earth?” ''They were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number would be complete both of their fellow servants’ and of their brothers and sisters,¢ who were soon to be killed as they themselves had been killed. aOr “Go!” brothers

© Or went

¢Gk a denarius

4 Gk slaves

é Gk

REVELATION 6:1-17

NIV

NRSV

Was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like

12When he opened the sixth seal, I looked,

sackcloth madeof goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, 'and the stars in the sky fell

and there came a great earthquake; the sun be-

came black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, ‘Sand the stars of the sky fell to the

to earth, as late figs drop from a fig tree when

earth as the fig tree drops its winter fruit when —

shaken by a strong wind. The sky receded like a scroll, rolling up, and every Mountain and island a was removed from its place.

'SThen the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and

every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. '°They called to the mountains

and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! '’For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”

shaken by a gale. '*The sky vanished like a scroll Tolling itself up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. '*Then the kings of the earth and the magnates and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave -

and free, hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, ‘calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of the one seated on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb; '’for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?” _

(COMMENTARY of the two prophets in chap. 11). The reader may have a sense of frustrated anticipation in the way the penultimate event, the sixth, is halted before the seventh takes place (this is true of the first two sequences in 6:12 and 8:1; 9:13 and 11:15, though not the third sequence in 16:12ff.). That sense of being at the penultimate moment, on the brink of a special event in human history has been a consistent mark of interpretations of Revelation. Readers’ attention will be drawn to their own time as special. John finds himself situated between the sixth and seventh trumpets when he is called to prophesy (10:1—11:13), and the community is faced with the blasphemy that issues from the mouth of the false prophet (16:13ff.). The angel of the sixth seal and the awesome destruction that causes the inhabitants of the world to cringe in terror only pave the way for delay in the apocalyptic narrative. There will be a promise in 10:6 that there will be no more delay when the seventh trumpet blasts; but that only marks a significant moment of assertion of the divine reign and the drastic and immediate consequences for earth as Satan inspires the institutions of beast and Babylon. 6:1-8. The opening of the first four seals by the Lamb follows a pattern. Each one in turn prompts a summons from one of the creatures

e outburst of praise at the Lamb’s coming O open the book provokes, surprisingly, an outburst of a very different kind: the four riders of the apocalypse, heralding the gospel with conquest, war, famine, and death. The coming of the Lamb, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, heralds “the wrath of the Lamb.” The gospel is news of the reality of death and destruction, which will be punctuated in chapter 7 by a vision of those who are sealed and those who will come through the great tribulation with integrity intact, even if they are not promised escape from the violence of an unjust world. There is a close link between the sequences of trumpets and bowls, each of which resemble Exodus themes and echo the catastrophes that

accompanied God’s liberation of the people.?'® Despite the parallelism, there is a sense of progression as the bowls suggest a degree of finality (e.g. 15:1). It is only a sense of progression, however. There is no neat sequence. What we find in chaps. 6-16 is what Bengel described as “the admirable variety... with the most exact harmony, beautifully illustrated by those digressions which seem to interrupt it” (e.g., the sealing of the servants of God in chap. 7 and the witness 218. P. Richard, Apocalypse (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1995)84-86.

609

REVELATION 6:1-17 COMMENTARY Figure 2: The Sequence of Seven Seals, Trumpets, and Bowls S1 (6:1-2) first horseman conquers

T1 (8:7) hail and fire mixed with blood; third of earth burnt up

B1 (16:2) evil sores appear on those with mark of beast

S2 (6:3) second horseman removes peace from the earth, so humans would slay one another

T2 (8:8-9) third of sea creatures die after burning mountain thrown into sea and latter is turned to blood

B2 (16:3) sea becomes blood and every living thing in it dies

S3 (6:5-6) third horseman: famine and inflated prices

T3 (8:10-11) water made bitter after star fell from heaven; people died from drinking water

B3 (16:4) river and springs become blood

S4 (6:7-8) fourth horseman:. quarter of earth killed by sword, famine, death, and wild beasts

T4 (8:12) third of sun does not

B4 (16:8-9) humans scorched by sun

S5 (6:9) martyrs plead for vindication

S6 (6:12-17) earthquake; sun darkened; stars fall from heaven; heaven rolls up; kings and mighty hide themselves from

God’s presence

shine nor do moon and stars

8:13: THREEFOLD WOE TS (9:1-6) air polluted by smoke from abyss after star falls from heaven. Locusts created from smoke harm humans not sealed. Humanity tormented by insects with scorpion stings

9:12: FIRST WOE PAST TO (9:13ff.) third of humanity killed after release of the angels bound at the Euphrates

10:1-11:13

BS (16:10) darkness over the kingdom of the beast

B6 (16:12) Euphrates dried up to prepare a way for the kings of the East. Spirits from dragon, beast, and false prophet work miracles to assemble kings at Armageddon

11:14: SECOND WOE PAST S7 (8:1) silence in heaven followed by prayers of saints in the incense offering

T6 (11:15-19) celestial worship proclaiming the fact that God reigns. Sanctuary in heaven opened

around the throne and is a prelude to action, as is the case with all the sequences of sevens (with the exception of 8:1; 11:19; 15:5). The first creature speaks with a voice that sounds like thunder that proceeds from the throne (4:5; 14:2), similar to the (unwritten) speech of the seven thunders John is initially instructed to seal up (10:3-4). The first four seals are related to one another

B7 (16:17) earthquake that splits great city into three; every island vanishes

and may well be inspired by Zech 1:8; 6:1-3. In Revelation, the four horses are colored white, red, black, and pale green, whereas in Zech 1:8 the horses are red, sorrel, and white, and in Zech 6:1-2 they are red, black, white, and dappled gray. In Zechariah, the horses patrol the earth (Zech 1:10) and are the four spirits of heaven (Zech 6:5; Ci-3:8):

REVELATION 6:1-17 COMMENTARY 6:1-2. The white horse comes first. Its rider is similar to the rider in 19:11 and may for that reason be separated from the rest. Doubt has been expressed as to whether this could be an image of Christ (as in 19:11), because Christ has been identified as the Lamb who opens the seals. Such a demand for consistency ignores the fluidity of the apocalyptic mind. Christ appears as a Lamb, as a fiery heavenly being, as well as through his angels (10:1; 14:14); in 1:1 and 22:16 explicit mention is made of Christ’s angel. So there seems to be no insuperable objection, other than our desire for precision, to interpreting the first rider as the Christ who “conquers” (a use of vikdw [nikao | here akin to other intransitive usage in which the emphasis seems to be on the overcoming of the forces of darkness through resistance and martyrdom [e.g., 12:11; 15:2]. The rider has a crown like those of the elders (4:4), the woman (12:1), and, most important, like that of the Christ-like angel in 14:14. The use of the word “bow” here is unique in Revelation. The Greek word for “bow” (td€ov toxon) used here is the same word used in Ezek 1:27-28 for the rainbow that is used in the prophet’s attempt to describe the divine glory. The other images associated with the first rider are more common in Revelation. The color white is associated with God or Christ (1:14; 19:11, 14; 20:11) and the followers of the Lamb (3:4-5; 4:4; 6:11; 7:9, 13-14; 19:14). Because the verb “come” (Epxopat erchomai) is not used exclusively of Christ, or even of the process of judgment, identification of the rider with Christ at first sight seems improbable, not least because the Lamb is said to open the seals in v. 1. Nevertheless, such logic may be out of place in an apocalypse, particularly when Christ could send his angel as emissary of his purposes (22:16). In the earliest extant commentary on Revelation, Victorinus of Pettau wrote: “After the Lord ascended to heaven and opened all things, he sent the Holy Spirit, whose words the preachers sent forth as arrows reaching the human heart, that they might overcome unbelief.”2!° Thus the rider on the white horse symbolizes the gospel, a proclamation of salvation that inevitably includes judgment on unrepentant persons and institutions (cf. Rom 1:17ff.; 1 Cor

1:18; 2 Cor 4:3). In artistic representations of this chapter, the four riders are often presented as a group, all of whom symbolize the death and destruction connected in popular imagination with an apocalyptic cataclysm. The gospel is an ambivalent phenomenon, however, and it effects a moment of crisis in which indignity, death, and disorder are seen for what they actually are. The first horseman goes forth to “conquer.” Nothing explicitly is said about death and destruction. As we have seen, “conquer” is used throughout the letters to the seven churches. Here, as there, the verb is used intransitively (cf. 11:7, where the beast is said to conquer and kill God’s two witnesses; 13:7, where the beast is permitted to conquer the saints). This activity is closely related to that of the Lamb, who “conquers” and is able to open the scroll. To “conquer,” therefore, is to be like the Lamb, to do the Lamb’s works and to be faithful like the Lamb. The reward will be to share the state that Jesus has (3:21). In 12:11, we will read of the conquest of Satan by Christians, but the character of the “conquest” there reflects the terms set out in 5:5, 9. The principal use of nikao in connection with Christ and his followers is defined in 5:9 and 12:11. It is connected with the faithful witness, which may be “unto death,” and it indicates a new way of life, overcoming and resisting conventional patterns of existence. In other words, there is a deconstructing of the usual meaning of the idea of conquest based on military victory. The language of conquering appears frequently in Johannine literature. Christ’s conquest of the world (John 16:33) is closely linked with the casting out of Satan (John 12:32), a process that comes to completion with Jesus’ declaration that “it is finished [retékeotat fefelestai|” on the cross (John 19:30). The diabolical initiative that leads to the crucifixion is in reality the moment of the lifting of the Son of Man to heaven. The cross, therefore, is the moment when the Lamb “as if it had been slaughtered” opens the heavenly book of judgment and takes a place on the throne of glory. “Conquering” comes through the victim, barely evident to those whose eyes are closed. In the ordinary world of the Johannine narrative, only the barest hints of the apocalyptic scenario are acted out, as it were, behind the scenes.

219. Victorinus Commentary on the Book of Revelation.

611

REVELATION 6:1-17 COMMENTARY rider. A voice comes from the circle of the creatures who have each summoned a rider, “A quart of wheat for a day’s pay, and three quarts of barley for a day’s pay, but do not damage the olive oil and the wine!” (NRSV). This partial catastrophe contrasts with the awesome death and famine brought by the last plagues (18:8). We cannot know whether this reflects particular events in John’s day, but the times must have been many when gross shortages led to inflation of the cost of basic necessities. Thus the memory of a time of famine and inflation may have been transformed into a symbol of the consequence of the Lamb’s opening of the seals. Later in the text, wheat, olive oil, and wine will be listed among the food stuffs traded by the merchants who had profited from the wealth of Babylon (18:13). That the rider on the black horse is told not to harm the wine is ironic, for it is wine that many will continue to drink and end up intoxicated with Babylon (17:2), thereby discovering the wine of the wrath of God (14:8, 10; 16:19; 19:15). 6:7-8. The fourth creature summons a different rider, whose horse’s color is rendered “sickly pale” by the REB, appropriately enough, given the fact that the rider’s name is Death (probably appearing again in 20:13-14; cf. Hos 13:14; 1 Cor 15:55). Elsewhere this color is used to describe scorched grass (8:7; cf. 9:4). According to 1:18, however, death has been overcome and the fear of death should offer no peril for those who are faithful (2:10); they will participate in the new Jerusalem, where death will be no more (21:4). Hades, repository of the dead (20:13-14), over which Christ has power (1:18), accompanies the rider and will be thrown into the lake of fire (20:14). The granting of power (v. 8) to be an agent of death, destruction, and trial is a feature found throughout the judgment section of Revelation (cf. 9:3; 13:2ff.). Such license has to be set in the context of the authority that belongs to God (16:9) and to Christ (12:10). A quarter of the earth is to suffer death and famine, taking up a combination familiar from prophetic sources (cf. Jet 14s 25.05:2):21:7; Ezek Ss:Lift 14st Boar Famine plagued the civilizations of antiquity,22! and it is described as such in Rev 18:8. Famine

Parallel to this, the word nikao is used frequently in 1 John (2:13; 4:4; 5:4-5) in the context of triumphing over the way of evil by means of following a path that demands love of the “brethren.” These observations suggest that the gospel is a demonstration of the values vindicated in the coming of the Lamb to God, a new understanding of what it means to conquer. 6:3-4. If little is said about the white horse other than its activity of “conquering,” the second horse has a more sinister role. Its color matches that of the dragon that persecutes the woman in 12:3. Whereas the first rider was given a bow, the second rider is given a sword (udxatpa machaira rather than poudaia romphaia; 13:10, L4siehs 12 b6; 2:12, 10; 6:8% 19:15, .21-all occur rences except 6:8 are associated with Christ) and permission to remove peace from the earth. “Peace” (elpnvn eirené) is not a word found frequently in Revelation (only here and in the salutation in 1:4). Perhaps, in the light of the disruption of order in the Apocalypse, “peace”??? is a word too easily misunderstood, since it is not that which comes from God, but a state of apparent stability under the dominion of the beast, in which the merchants are able to buy and sell, men and women end up as slaves, and people grow rich by their fornication with Babylon. The opening of the seals breaks the bonds that have kept human society in its previous patterns of so-called peace, releasing forces that hitherto have been kept in check (cf. 7:1; 9:1, 14). 6:5-6. The opening of the third seal heralds the rider on the black horse, a color only used to describe the conditions when the sixth seal is opened and the sun turns black (v. 12). The rider holds Cuydos (zygos), translated here as “pair of scales,” but elsewhere in the NT it is used metaphorically as the yoke or burden laid upon a person (e.g., “slavery” in Gal 5:1; 1 Tim 6:1; the religious requirements in Acts 15:10; the “yoke” of Christ in Matt 11:29-30). The scales used for weighing wheat may be what is referred to in v. 6, but it is equally possible that it is a metaphor for the subjugation to forces of death-dealing hunger (perhaps a consequence of Babylon’s insatiable desire for luxury in 18:11ff.?). There is an additional comment on the third

221. See P. Garnsey, Famine and Food Supply in the Greco-Roman World: Responses to Risk and Crisis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988); P. Garnsey and S. Whittaker, ed., Trade and Famine in Classical Antiquity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983).

220. See K. Wengst, Pax Romana and the Peace of Jesus Christ (London: SCM, 1985).

612

REVELATION 6:1-17 COMMENTARY and death are elements of the eschatological tribulation in Mark 13:8 as well (cf. Matt 24:7; Luke 21:11), and they form part of the list of things that Paul declares- cannot triumph over the overwhelming love of God (Rom 8:35). Death, particularly the second death (20:14), is the ultimate threat. Physical death, say as the result of faithfulness unto death (cf. 12:11), is not what really matters (cf. Matt 10:28). Indeed,-death comes as a relief for those who seek refuge from divine wrath (9:6; cf. Gen 4:13ff.). The beasts of the earth and their threat are alluded to in v. 8 (cf. 19:18-19; Ezek 29:5). But the threat of “the beast” that comes from “the Abyss” is more to be feared. A breakdown of those bonds that prevent murder and strife and ensure a proper food supply prompts the invasion of beasts of the earth into areas from which they are normally excluded. The beginning of the dissolution of the threads of society and civilization runs throughout this part of the vision. Proper order will be re-established in the new Jerusalem, for there no one will hunger or thirst anymore (cf. 7:15), and death will be destroyed (20:14; cf. 21:4). Proper boundaries will be set there, so that “unwelcome animals” will be excluded (22:15; cf. 21:27). The wrath of the Lamb will unravel those threads that have hitherto maintained civilization. The current order is under judgment and must be replaced by one with different values (cf. Mark 10:41ff.; Phil 3:20). 6:9-11. The opening of the fifth seal ends the sequence in which the creatures summon the riders. A different scene now confronts John. He sees under the altar the souls of those “slaughtered for the word of God and for the testimony they had given” (v. 9; cf. 1:2; 12:11; 20:4). The altar, presumably in heaven, appears elsewhere only at 8:3, where the saints once again feature: An angel stands on the altar with incense that accompanies the prayers of the saints. The cry to God in v. 10 (here called Seomdétns [despotes; NRSV, “sovereign Lord”] for the only time in Revelation; cf. Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24; 2 Pet 2:1; Jude 4), who is holy and true (cf. 3:7), echoes the themes of Zech 1:12 and Ps 79:5, where the prophet remonstrates with God about the delay in showing mercy upon Zion (cf. Luke 18:7; Acts 4:24ff.). It is a cry for vindication and judgment (cf. Gen 4:10; Deut 32:43; Matt 23:35), and what

follows is a description and an assertion of God’s just judgment (16:5; 18:8, 20; 19:2, 11; 20:12). The loud cry in 19:2 indicates that with the destruction of Babylon the blood of God’s servants has been avenged, though, as v. 9 indicates (cf. 11:10), it is the dwellers on earth who collude with the promotion and promulgation of that culture. John sees “souls.” In Revelation, the “soul” (sux psyche} is the essence of a person (much as is implied in Matt 10:28). The enigmatic 8:9 suggests a distinction between creatures that have souls (the NRSV translates psyche as “living creatures”) and those that do not. The word is used alongside “bodies” in 18:13 (cf. Matt 10:28), hinting that enslavement is not just a physical but also a mental or spiritual phenomenon that destroys any sense of autonomy. Verse 9, together with 20:4, might suggest that John sees disembodied souls whose cry for vengeance because of their desire to avoid continued nakedness (on the shame of nakedness, see the Commentary on 3:18; cf. 16:15; 17:16). Their pleas are met with the gift of white robes (cf. 7:9, 13-14; 22:14; see also the discussion of “garments” [iwatia himatia] in the Commentary on 3:4-5, 18). In 2 Corinthians 5, Paul contemplates mortality and appears to wrestle with the possibility of nakedness, desiring to be clothed with a heavenly “tent” without any gap between the present and the hereafter (what he calls “being further clothed”). But he seems to accept the fact that it will be necessary to be undressed, even naked, before one can be dressed. The souls under the altar are told to rest (see also 14:13; cf. Matt 11:28, with which Rev 14:13 has several affinities). Rest is an eschatological promise in Heb 4:10-11 (cf. Sir 24:7). There is a full complement of those who are to be killed (cf. 2:13; Heb 11:40) among their “fellow servants” and “brothers and sisters” (cf. 1:9; 12:10; 19:10; 22:9), a line of those who must engage in lives of witness and obedience, which will mean that they will have to wash their robes in the blood of the Lamb. The idea that there is a particular number or quota that has to be filled is evident, albeit in terms of a nation’s misdeeds, in Matt 23:32, where “this generation” has fulfilled the full measure of the fathers in their rejection of the prophets (cf. Matt 23:35). In Rom 11:25, Paul

613

REVELATION 6:1-17 COMMENTARY in Luke 23:30, where there is a reaction on the part of the crowd similar to that in Rev 6:16, and

claims that there are a number of Gentiles who have to come in before all Israel will be saved. A limit is set on the time of persecution and destruction (cf. 2:10); it is not a never-ending sequence without significance or terminus. 6:12-17. Cataclysmic events accompany the opening of the sixth seal (v. 12): earthquake (cf. Jer 10:22 LXX; Ezek 38:19; Joel 2:10), the darkening of the sun (Isa 50:3) and the moon (Ezek 32:7), stars falling from the sky (cf. Isa 13:10), and the heaven’s being rolled up (cf. 16:20; 20:11; Isa 34:4; Heb 1:12). The reference to the earthquake appears in almost identical language in 11:13 and 16:18, though the unique character of the earthquake in 16:18 is stressed (thunders and earthquake are found together also in 8:5; 11:19). What is described here has its counterpart in 8:12 (cf. 9:2). The turning of the moon to blood (arising from Joel 3:4) is part of the Pentecost prophecy in Acts 2:20 (an important reminder of the apocalyptic character of that event in Luke’s narrative). Within the context of Revelation, these cataclysmic events are telling reminders of the risk that those who are “stars” (the angels of the churches) in the hands of the Son of Man might also find themselves falling from their exalted positions. John uses an analogy of a fig tree that is shaken by the wind and loses its fruit to illustrate the falling of the stars, an apt analogy for overripe fruit (cf. 2:4-5; the fig tree is used as an analogy of the eschaton, though with a different purpose, in Mark 13:28-29; cf. Mark 11:13). The shaking of mountains and islands is referred to in a more climactic way in 16:20 (cf. Heb 12:26). As well as the parallels in prophetic texts of judgment, there are apocalyptic elements in the discourses that precede the narratives of Jesus’ death (Matthew 24-25; Mark 13; Luke 21)—not entirely inappropriate to mention in this context, given that the Lamb’s death is the basis for the opening of the seals (5:5-6). Matthew describes an earthquake (Matt 27:54; 28:2; cf. 24:7). Both Matthew and Luke report a darkening of the sun (Matt 27:45; Luke 23:45; cf. Rev 8:12). The Gospels also include references to the moon (Matt 24:29; Luke 21:25; cf. Acts 2:20) and the stars (Matt 24:29; Mark 13:25). The “apocalyptic” character of the death of Jesus may be hinted at

each quoting Hos 10:8.?22 In the midst of the cosmic upheaval we find the first reactions from the earth’s populace. There is a particular, though not exclusive, concentration on the mighty—kings, magnates, generals, rich (see Isa 24:21)—though the slave is included as well (cf. 13:16; 19:18). There can be no respite for anyone. There is no release from judgment for any, rich and poor alike, who capitulate to the

beast (13:16), who fail to practice the way of the | King of kings (19:16). The kings of the earth commit fornication with Babylon (17:2; 18:3) and are destined to bewail their folly (18:9) and pay for it (see 19:18, where the generals and the mighty are mentioned). Here the terror of the divine glory revealed in wrath prompts a reaction like that spoken of by the prophets Isaiah (Isa 2:10) and Hosea (Hos 10:8). The people’s reaction is to hide in the face of apocalypse (the unveiling); the revelation of the day of wrath is too much to bear (“who can stand?”), and yet that is precisely what those who “conquer” will do (7:9; 11:4; 14:1; 15:2; cf. Jude 24). Mountains and their caves will prove utterly inadequate hiding places (16:20). The desire to hide is like that of the man and the woman in Eden when they realized their nakedness (Gen 3:8). The plea to the mountains and rocks to “fall upon us” will have a ghastly fulfillment in the destruction wrought by the falling stars (8:10; 9:1) and the falling dragon (12:7; cf. Luke 10:18). The cataclysm is described as a consequence of the wrath not only of God but also of the Lamb (cf. 14:10).223 God’s reign means the manifestation of wrath (11:18; cf. Rom 1:17ff.). It will be likened to a draft of wine (14:10; 16:19; 19:15), which those who bear the mark of the beast will taste. Only here and in 16:14 is there an explicit connection with the rich tradition of the Day of the Lord in the reference to “the great day” (v. 17; cf. Joel 2:1, 11; Amos 5:18; Nah 1:6; Zeph 1:14; Mark 13:32; Rom 2:5; 2, Pness 2:2), 222. See Ched Myers, Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story ofJesus (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1988), who brings out well the apocalyptic dimension of Mark’s narrative. 223. On the theological implications, see A. T. Hanson, The Wrath of the Lamb (London: SPCK, 1957) 159-80; and G. B. Caird, The Revelation (London: A. & C. Black, 1966) 91.

614

REVELATION 6:1-17 REFLECTIONS

REFLECTIONS 1. The uplifting hymn of praise in 5:9ff., which many readers may find themselves owning, cannot disguise the more difficult questions and emotions that may be unleashed on reading the words that follow in chapter 6. Revelation does not dwell on the issue of how a loving God, hymned so lovingly, can be the source of so much death and destruction. Its refusal to abstract God from the dark side of our world is a reminder not to protect God from the seamier sides of ourselves and the world in which we live. Revelation leaves us with the problems of theodicy, but not before demanding that we seek to recognize God in unexpected places: I form light and create darkness, I make weal and create woe; I the LorD do all these things. (Isa 45:7 NRSV)

What appears in chap. 6 and the following chapters contrasts starkly with the optimism generated by the paeans in the previous vision. Nevertheless, as the scroll of Ezekiel reminds us (which John is instructed to eat in Rev 10:10), “written on it were words of lamentation and mourning and woe” (Ezek 2:10 NRSV). Understanding their theological significance is another matter. Theologians long to be able to tie up loose ends. But texts like Revelation deny them the privilege, offering little sign of dealing with the questions they seek to have answered. Revelation only infrequently provides the satisfaction of interpretive certainty, involving as it does an appeal to the imagination rather than to logic. Unlike the philosophical essay, which demands its readers’ intellectual submission by the force of argument, Revelation’s word pictures seek to address and involve readers and relocate them in the divine economy. They deny us those “plausible words of wisdom” (1 Cor 2:4 NRSV) in favor of “God’s wisdom, secret and hidden... revealed to us through the Spirit...in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit” (1 Cor 2:7, 10, 13 NRSV). Revelation offers no reasoned theodicy, unless the hymns asserting God’s righteous judgment be understood as such. A danger with interpreting Revelation is to be too prescriptive and, therefore, too restrictive. Its surprises and abrupt transitions are part and parcel of the prophetic tradition, as Bengel noted long ago. If we cannot pin down apocalyptic symbolism, whose meaning will be conditioned by readings in very different contexts, we may nevertheless be able to offer some pointers for finding meaning in this turbulent and shocking sequence of images in the middle chapters, contrasting so markedly with the sublime evocation of heavenly worship in the previous chapters.

2. Interpreters of Revelation through the centuries have been struck by the repetition of references to the penultimate. Readers stand in the midst of the eschatological drama. It is partly complete, and we are offered a preview of the ending. In the midst of the trials and tribulations, we await their climax. All we can do is watch, wait, witness, and not be led astray (cf. Mark 13:13, 33). That sense of anticipation, of living in the penultimate time, characterizes New Testament eschatology. Paul criticizes the Corinthians for living as if the kingdom of God had already arrived (1 Cor 4:8), and he teaches the Romans that the present is a time of waiting, struggle, and anticipation (Rom 8:18). New Testament theology is characterized by this sense of being “in between” with the prospect not of release but of disorientation, of destruction and chaos before the new age can come. The weak Smyrnean Christians already know that tribulation, whereas the Laodiceans carry on, falsely confident. For all that the good news is about a present reality, the present remains, stubbornly, a time of exile from which deliverance is still awaited.

615

REVELATION 6:1-17 REFLECTIONS 3. Apocalypse provokes crisis, and injustice is laid bare. The terror of that critical moment evokes prophetic passages where judgment comes on a people disobedient to the covenant. The apocalyptic imagery of Revelation could be seen as a consequence of the fracture of the cosmic covenant, whose repair was the function of the Messiah.” Revelation demonstrates the world disorder, particularly through the activity of the Beast in which injustice and human self-centeredness have distorted the way society and the whole created order function. The world is out of joint, demonstrated in the destruction of the Messiah by the representatives of the present scheme of things. The Messiah’s coming shows up the distorted and fractured nature of the world, humans, beasts, and the whole of creation for what it really is (cf. Isa 11:4). There is in Revelation no bland indulgence of the status quo or easy inclusiveness, but a vision of covenant faithfulness that involves mutual responsibilities (John 14:15; cf. Deut 30:15ff.; 1 John 3). The God of the covenant will allow the cry of the weak and the oppressed to go unheard (Exod 3:7). Revelation 4 is linked to Sinai via Exod 19:15, and the sound of the trumpet in the latter is, of course, important in Rev 8:6ff. At the end of each series of plagues, the reference to theophany (and covenant) is reiterated (8:5; 11:19; 16:18ff.), and the plagues may relate to the covenant curses in Deut 28:15ff. and the prophecies of the day of the Lord, which turns out to be a day of disaster for people who have neglected the covenant demands (Amos 5:1 8ff.). Despite all this, humanity persists in carrying on in the same old way, ignoring the justice of God—indeed, cursing the very God who can offer life and true peace and harmony (9:20; 16:9, 11). And the disorder and disease continue. 4. Even allowing for the fact that the book offers prophetic insight into the misguided attitudes and practices of a deluded humanity, Revelation, understandably, has the reputation of being one of the most violent books in the New Testament. It is important to remember that in reading Revelation we are asked to share in the celebration of God’s justice—to read it is to be open to feelings of passion, hatred, longing, and vindication as well as sorrow. But we are not asked to engage in barbarism or violence ourselves, nor is there ever any hint that we should. Revelation’s portrayal of violence may (and has) encouraged imitation of the violent scenes, but that is a misunderstanding of Revelation and needs to be corrected by the positive traits it encourages: patient endurance, faithfulness, and steadfast witness. Revelation may draw us into the process of recognizing those feelings that are too big and too powerful to manage; but it persuades us to recognize the darker side of things—what we have become and the peril of staying as we are—while at the same time feeding our aspirations that things may be different. The process of reading or hearing is itself a means whereby the darker feelings may be brought to the surface, so that the

effect of the book can be cathartic.” Even the most revolutionary of texts, seeking to challenge the conventional and articulate the alternative, are written in fallible human language and are shot through with the values of the prevailing culture and prejudice. One of the features of apocalyptic is that it represents

an alternative to conventional wisdom. Yet it is that which is most conventional—language— that often has to serve as the vehicle of what is subversive. Such texts, therefore, are inevitably related to the assumptions and ideas of their social formations, so often based on violence and oppression. We cannot expect a text to be devoid of the values of the prevailing culture, even if it struggles to bring to birth something different. The most we can hope for is (to quote Walter Benjamin) that “involuntary memory of a redeemed humanity,” which contrasts with “convention and false tradition.” Revelation is no exception. Its language, however unconventional, its themes, and its imagery still work within the dominant culture and inherit from it the values contaminated by it, alongside a glimpse of something different. There is no easy way out of this dilemma. Human language is pervaded with a culture that is opposed to 224. See R. Murray, Zhe Cosmic Covenant (London: Sheed and Ward, 1992). 225. A. Y. Collins, Crisis and Catharsis (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984); E. Drewermann, Tiefenpsychologie und Exegesis Band II Wunder. Vision, Weissagung, Apokalypse, Geschichte, Gleichnis (Olten: Walter 1985) 541-91.

616

REVELATION 6:1-17 REFLECTIONS sentiments that are, at best, ambiguous and, at worst, shot through with the strains of conflict and violence of the old order. Even this sublime vision will be no exception insofar as it is, of necessity, expressed in the words of human discourse. It, too, cannot quite shake off the culture of rejection and exclusion and violence. Revelation, if we allow it to do so, may touch the reality of our anger and passion, too. The symbols are evocative means of bringing to the surface the horror of personal and corporate feelings of destructive power and the way to their transcendence. Unless we can recognize the passions and desires that have led to so much conflict, victimization, and destruction, then we shall continue to use the de¢eit that has covered up human conflict. Revelation is a text, a product of visionary imagination, that claims a privileged access to divine realities. The church has long recognized the importance of our owning the whole spectrum of our feelings within the context of the liturgy. Hence, we read psalms that embrace the celebration of God’s tenderness and deliverance as well as the fierce outbursts of pain and the demand for vengeance. We are unwilling to include words like those that conclude Psalm 137, because they express sentiments we would not always own. I do not want to identify with the righteous who “will rejoice when they see the vengeance done;/ they will bathe their feet in the blood of the wicked” (Ps 58:10 NRSV). These words, however, in certain circumstances might be true to our feelings. In avoiding those feelings, we may only end up in denial of the attitudes we would prefer not to acknowledge. But to deny them and drive them underground is to risk their bursting out in a far more virulent form. To own our feelings and to talk about them is the start of healing; to deny them is the insidious process of heaping up a bonfire of resentment whose destructive capability knows no bounds. Revelation reminds us that the darker side cannot be hidden from God, because God is in it as well. The message of Revelation 6, with its tale of destruction and death, is not apart from God.

617

REVELATION: fel-ty (CONCERNING THOSE SEALED AND A VISION OF THE (GREAT MULTITUDE OVERVIEW a price for it. There is a contrast here similar to that found in chaps. 13-14, where it is between bearing the mark of the beast (13:17; 14:9) and having the name of God written on the forehead (14:1). Washing their robes and making them white in the blood of the Lamb is no specifically “religious” matter. It is a matter of not conforming to the negative aspects of the prevailing culture.

ce his chapter picks up the sealing theme of = chaps. 5-6, but uses it in a different way. There the opening of the seals means the beginning of the judgment of God, the wrath of the Lamb, but here there is hope for those who are sealed with God’s name and have washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb. In the midst of death and destruction, some people have with integrity refused to conform and are willing to pay

REVELATION 7:1-8, THE 144,000 OF ISRAEL ARE SEALED NIV

NRSV

After this | saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth to prevent any wind from ~ blowing on the land or on the sea or on any tree. ?Then I saw another angel coming up from the east, having the seal of the living God. He called out in a loud voice to the four angels who had been given power to harm the land and the sea: 3“Do not harm the land or the sea or the trees until we put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God.” “Then I heard the number of those who were sealed: 144,000 from all the tribes of Israel. *From from from from

the the the the

tribe tribe tribe tribe

of Judah 12,000 were sealed, of Reuben 12,000, of Gad 12,000, of Asher 12,000,

After this I saw four angels standing at the

four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth blow on earth or sea or another angel ascending sun, having the seal of

called with a loud voice to the four angels who had been given power to damage earth and sea, Ssaying, “Do not damage the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have marked the servants? of our God with a seal on their foreheads.”

4And I heard the number of those who were sealed, one hundred forty-four thousand, sealed out of every tribe of the people of Israel: "From the tribe of Judah twelve thousand

sealed,

a Gk slaves

618

so that no wind could against any tree. 2I saw from the rising of the the living God, and he >

_

REVELATION 7:1-8

NRSV . Lo thethe off Naphtali 12,000,

- from the tribe of Reuben twelve thousand, from the tribe of Gad twelve thousand,

_ from the tribe of Manasseh 12 ,000, “from the tribe of Simeon 12, 000, - from the tribe of. Levi 12,000, from the tribe of Issachar 12, 000,

from the tribe of Asher twelve thousand, from the tribe of Naphtali twelve thousand,

from. the tribe of Zebulun 12, 000, :

_ from the tribe of Joseph 12,000,

_ from the tribeof Benjamin 12,000.

~ from the tribe of Manasseh twelve thousand, 1 ‘from the tribe of Simeon twelve thousand, from the tribe of Levi twelve thousand, from the tribe of Issachar twelve thousand,

®from the tribe of Zebulun twelve thousand,

—

from the tribe of Joseph twelve thousand, - from the tribe of ae weve thousand

sealed.

(COMMENTARY 7:1. At this point in the vision five seals have

Ezek 9:4-5, where a mark is placed on the heads of those who “sigh and groan” over all the abominations of the city while a man in white linen kills those who do not have the mark. Persons who have the mark are spared the torment of the locusts in Rev 9:4. Sealing as a metaphor of divine favor is found elsewhere in the NT, occasionally as a sign of eschatological deliverance (as in Eph 1:13; 4:30; cf. 2 Cor 1:22), and a sign of an esoteric book relevant for another generation (10:4; cf. Dan 12:4). John’s writing is not to be sealed (22:10), however. We have in this verse another reference to the “servants of God” (lit., “slaves”). John uses the word SotvA0s (doulos) to describe himself and others who are obedient to God (1:1; 2:20; 19:2, 5; 22:3), just as Paul does (Rom 1:1; Phil 1:1; cf. Titus 1:1). John’s use of the term in Revelation is often linked with the prophetic ministry (10:7; 11:18; cf. 1:1; 22:6). In this usage, John and the other prophetic servants of God follow in the footsteps of Moses (Rev 15:3). In the context of the opening of the seals and the unleashing of the contents of the book, those who are the “slaves of God” are marked as such. Whereas in Ezekiel such a mark will preserve people from harm, we shall see in the ensuing chapters that not all of the “servants” of God can expect to be preserved from physical harm. 7:4-8. John hears the numbers of those sealed (v. 4) and begins to offer a list from “every tribe

been opened, and there is an interruption in the inexorable process, resumed at 8:1. John sees a vision not of death and destruction but of assembly and praise. An angel stands at each of the four corners of the earth (cf. Ezek 7:2; 37:9; Zech 6:5), preventing the wind from blowing and so harming the earth (see-v. 3; cf. 6:6; 9:4). The loosening of restraint on the angels and on Satan has brought chaos to the natural order (cf. 9:14-15;

20:7). 7:2. Another angel ascends from the dawn (cf. 16:12; Isa 41:25). The use of “ascend” (dvaBaivuy anabaino ) often signifies a significant moment in Revelation: note John’s and the witnesses’ ascent (4:1; 11:12); the emergence of the beast (11:7; 13:11; cf. 17:8); the enduring evidence of judg ment (9:2; 14:11; 19:3); and the ascent to the presence of God of the prayers of the saints (8:4). This angel holds a seal of the living God (cf. 4:9; 15:7; of Christ in 1:18) and cries with a loud voice (a phrase invariably used for heavenly commands [10:3; 14:15; 18:2; 19:17] or for the elect (6:10; 7:10]) to prevent the four angels from releasing the winds to harm the earth (note once again the notion of permission; see Commentary

on 6:4). 7:3. The reason for the delay in releasing the destructive powers of the four winds is to allow time to mark “the servants of our God with a seal on their foreheads.” This theme is reminiscent of

619

REVELATION

7:1-8 COMMENTARY Dan is absent from and Manasseh is included in the number in Revelation (but Ephraim, the other son of Joseph, is excluded; see the allocation of land in Joshua 13) and that the list starts with Judah rather than with the firstborn, Reuben, an indication of the priority given to Judah as the tribe of the Messiah (5:5; cf. Isaiah 11). Numbering is important (cf. 5:11; 7:9; 9:16; 13:17-18; 15:2; 20:8), .as is measuring (11:1-2; 21:15ff.). The numbers here, based on the number twelve, are linked explicitly with the twelve tribes. Elsewhere, the number seven (seals, trumpets, bowls, and letters) contrasts with a number like six (used in 13:18), which is one short of perfection. Numbering and measuring are a sign of possession, a sort of census of the full complement of God (cf. 6:11). It is an activity that indicates ownership rather than being a measure of the success of human endeavors. (See Reflections at 7:9-17.)

of the people of Israel” (v. 4)—one hundred and forty-four thousand in all (cf. 14:1-2). The NRSV translation uses “people” (v. 4), though the Greek reads “sons” (uto. Ayioi). Though the issue of whether Revelation’s vision of the future appears to be includisve of gender and race, there are contrary indications elsewhere in the book (e.g., 14:4). The 144,000 is composed of people from every tribe of Israel. The Jewish identity of this group is indicated by the fact that there is another multitude in v. 9 that comes from every nation, suggesting that those mentioned in v. 5 are Jews. The precise number suggests that it is a remnant of the children of Israel that has been sealed (Isa 10:20; Rom 9:27; cf. Rom 11:25-26). If we compare the list in v. 5 with the names of the sons of Jacob/Israel in Gen 35:22; 49 (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Joseph, Benjamin), we note that

REV ERATION 79-17.) HE MUP DE ROM EVERY NATION NIV

NRSV

°*After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. '?And they cried out in a loud voice: “Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.” NAIl the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures. They fell down on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, 'saying: “Amen! Praise and glory and wisdom and thanks and honor and power and strength be to our God for ever and ever. Amen!” 'SThen one of the elders asked me, “These in white robes—who are they, and where did they come from?”

QAfter this I looked, and there was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, robed in white, with palm branches in their hands. '°They cried out in a loud voice, saying, “Salvation belongs to our God who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb!” ‘And all the angels stood around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, 'singing, “Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever! Amen.” 13Then one of the elders addressed me, saying, “Who are these, robed in white, and where have they come from?” "I said to him, “Sir, you are the one that knows.” Then he said to me, “These are they who have come out of the great ordeal; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

620

REVELATION

NIV

7:9-17

NRSV

‘47 answered, “Sir, you know.” And he said, “These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. '*Therefore, “they are before the throne of God and serve him day and night in his temple; and he who sits on the throne will spread his tent over them. 'ONever again will they hunger; never again will they thirst. The sun will not beat upon them, nor any scorching heat. For the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd; he will lead them to springs of living water. And God will wipe away every tear from their

'S For this reason they are before the throne of God, and worship him day and night within his temple, and the one who is seated on the throne will shelter them. '© They will hunger no more, and thirst no more; the sun will not strike them, nor any scorching heat; '7 for the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd, and he will guide them to springs of the water of life, and God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.”

eyes.”

(COMMENTARY 7:9-12. In addition to the 144,000 from the

the environs for this gathering. In contrast with the very close link between the Lamb and the throne in v. 17 (“the Lamb at the center of the throne”), in vv. 9-10 the throne and the Lamb are described as two adjacent parts of the heavenly presence (cf. 22:1, 3). The great multitude is clothed in white (cf. 3:4; 4:4; 6:11; Mark 16:5). They hold palm branches in their hands, as if celebrating the Feast of Tabernacles (Lev 23:40ff.; 2 Macc 10:7), and like the oppressed and insignificant crowd who welcomed Jesus the humble king (Matt 21:5) into Jerusalem (Matt 21:15; John 12:13). In antiquity, the palm branch was also a symbol of victory. The crowd in v. 10 (cf. 5:12) sings “with a great voice” of God’s salvation (cf. 12:10; 19:1). The ascription of saving power to God (v. 10) is another link with Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem. A great crowd of people was present in Jerusalem for the feast, and they met Jesus with shouts of “Hosanna!/ Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord—/ the King of Israel!” (John 12:13 NRSV). The Pharisees complained that the whole world had “gone after him” (John 12:19 NRSV), an ironic foreshadowing of the vision of the host that assembles in praise of God’s salvation and of the Lamb in Revelation 7.

children of Israel who are sealed, there is another

group, “a great multitude.” This group John sees (v. 9) as opposed to hearing the report of the number of those who have been sealed (see Fig. 3, “Hearing and Seeing in the Book of Revelation,” 622-23). No mention is made of this group’s being sealed, and so they do not seem to be given the protection offered as the result of being marked with the angelic seal. The precision of the numbering of the children of Israel contrasts with the countless host “from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages,” which John sees (v. 9; cf. 5:9; Gen 15:5). This multitude contrasts with the waters, interpreted as “peoples and multitudes and nations and languages” (NRSV), on which Babylon is seated in 17:15. John often uses a similar string of words to denote variety and universality (see 1:9; 5:9; 10:11; 13:7; 14:6; 17:15) and to add to the rhetorical effect. Theirs is a situation of subjection and oppression. This crowd is distinguished by its identification with the Lamb, and its status is dignified and defiant. This crowd stands, as the Lamb had done, before the throne (cf. 5:6). Now the Lamb, in company with those around the throne, forms

621

REVELATION 7:9-17 COMMENTARY Figure 3: Hearing and Seeing in the Book of Revelation great voice commissioning John (1:10ff) vision of the Human Figure (1:13ff.) address to the seven angels (2-3) first voice speaks again (4:1) the throne in heaven (4:1) praise of elders and creatures (4:8ff.) the scroll (5:1f) the strong angel asks about scroll (5:2) elder’s command not to weep (5:5)

the Lamb (5:6) new song (5:9) voice of many angels (5:11) whole creation (5:13) John sees seals 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 opened

(Ort 2r5. 9 512) four living creatures summon (6:1, 3, 5, 7) voice from midst of creatures (6:6) reaction of terrified humanity (6:16) four angels at the corners of the earth (7:1) the angel ascending from the dawn (7:2) command not to damage the earth (7:3) number of sealed (7:4) the great multitude (7:9) songs of multitude (7:10, 12) questions and answer about the multitude (713) song of multitude (7:15f) the seven angels with seven trumpets (8:2) sight of the eagle (8:13) the threefold woe (8:13) star falling from heaven (9:1) voice from horns of altar (9:13) number of cavalry (9:16) the horses (9:17) the strong angel (10:1) voice from heaven (10:4) oath of the angel (10:6) command to John to take scroll (10:8ff.) John, the measuring rod and the vision of the two witnesses (11:1ff.) command to measure (11:1) transfer of sovereignty (11:15) praise by elders (11:16) ark of covenant in heaven (11:19) signs of woman and dragon (12:1ff.) loud voice proclaims transfer of sovereignty (12:10f) sight of dragon (12:13)

622

hearing = italic type seeing = roman type

REVELATION 7:9-17 COMMENTARY

two beasts (13:2, 11) cry of inhabitants of world (13:4) Lamb standing (14:1) voice from heaven (14:2) angel with eternal gospel (14:6) eternal gospel (14:7) prediction of Babylon’s fall (14:8) wrath on those who worship the beast (14:9) voice from heaven (14:13) human figure on white cloud (14:14) command to commence reaping (14:15) another angel (14:17) another command to reap (14:18) another sign in heaven (15:1) sea of glass (15:2) Moses’ song (15:3) temple opened (15:5)

hearing = italic type seeing = roman type

great voice from temple (16:1) angel of waters (16:5) altar speaks (16:7) unclean spirits out of mouth of dragon (16:13) the vision of Babylon (17:3, 6, 8, 12, 15, 16, 18) summons by one of angels of bowls (17:1) explanation by angel (17:7ff.) another angel (18:1) mighty voice of angel (18:2) another voice from heaven (18:4) kings of earth lament (18:9) merchants of earth lament (18:14, 16) seafarers of earth lament (18:18) mighty angel casts stone (18:21ff.) voice of multitude (19:1, 6) responses from elders and throne (19:4f) angelic command to write and not worship (19:9f) heaven opened (19:11) angel standing in the sun (19:17) summons to supper of God (19:17) beasts and kings of earth assemble (19:19) another angel descending from heaven (20:1) thrones in millennium (20:4) great white throne (20:12) vision of new heaven and new earth & new Jerusalem (21:1) voice from throne (21:3ff) summons by one of angels of bowls (21:9) John sees no temple (21:22) angel confirms importance of prophecy (22:0) Jesus speaks (22:16)

623

REVELATION 7:9-17 COMMENTARY here is a proleptic glimpse of those who have made it through the time of trial, particularly as a result of resisting the pressure to conform to the beast and the allure of Babylon. Although John uses the verb “whiten” (\eukatvw leukaino) only here (v. 14; NIV and NRSV, “made them white”), whiteness in Revelation is associated with God and with Jesus, and it is associated with the clothes of the redeemed

In the Gospels, the widespread references to the crowds indicate that they are the special object of Jesus’ ministry (e.g., Matt 9:36; 15:32; cf. Matt 4:25). Of particular relevance to this passage in Revelation is when the festival crowd sang similar songs at the triumphal entry (Matt 21:8). Unlike the crowd who later turned against Jesus, this festal gathering in Revelation 7 will not turn away from the Lamb. The cry of salvation (v. 10) may echo the “Hosanna” of Ps 118:21, 25. There is a response to this shout of praise from the heavenly host (v. 11), the angels around the throne, and the elders and creatures (cf. 5:11). Interestingly, they worship God alone; there is no mention here of the Lamb. The ascriptions of praise are almost identical with 5:12 (cf. 4:11), there addressed to the Lamb, with the exception that thanksgiving rather than wealth is included in the praise (v. 12). 7:13-17. John is then met by one of the elders (v. 13; cf. 4:4; 5:5), who asks him a question about the vision (we must remember that John has only seen the great multitude and heard the number of those who are sealed). It may be tempting to suppose that the question is put by the elder only for John to confess ignorance and then be enlightened by his heavenly interlocutor, of whom such knowledge might be expected (2:2, 9, 13; 3:1; 19:12). As one of that great multitude and himself a martyr, John may know as much about them and their experience as does the heavenly elder. Hence, it is appropriate that John be asked who they are and from where they have come. Indeed, at two points later in the vision, John will be reminded that he is in no way inferior to the angelic companion whom he feels compelled to worship (19:10; 22:8), hinted at here in John’s address to the elder as ktjpos (Kyrios; lit., “lord”; here it is “sir”), a word used elsewhere either for God (e.g., 1:8; 4:8) or for Christ (11:8). The meaning of “the great ordeal” (v. 14) is unclear. The phrase tis OAibews Ths weyddns (tes thlipseos tes megales) is found only here (see Commentary on 2:9) and echoes similar themes in the Gospels (e.g., Matt 24:21; cf. Dan 12:1). A passage like Rev 3:10 points to the whole gamut of upheaval described in the book. Such an ordeal would have a peculiar dimension for those who identify with the Lamb and who experience social ostracism or even persecution. What John is offered

(3:4-5; 4:4; 6:11; 7:9, 13-14; 19:14). The washing of the robes in blood to make them white is a startling example of an oxymoron, a juxtaposition of contradictory ideas (another example is the lion who turns out to be a Lamb in 5:5-6). The meaning of the phrase “washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” can best be gleaned from related passages in Revelation, though it may be inspired by passages like Gen 49:11 (the blessing of Judah by Jacob); Exod 19:14; and Isa 63:1. In Rev 22:14 and in the related references in 3:4-5, we are not told what is required to keep the robes white. Here, however, the multitude have washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb (cf. 1:5; 5:9; 12:11; 19:13; 1 John 1:7). In 12:10, the conquering of the “accuser” by “our brethren” comes about by the Lamb’s blood and by the testimony of the faithful, which itself resembles the testimony of Christ, the faithful and true witness (1:5; 3:14; cf. 2:13). Engaging in the faithful testimony of Jesus, therefore, and being prepared, like him, to forsake life is the basis of “conquering” (cf. Mark 8:34-35). That includes resisting Babylon, which has gotten drunk on the blood of the witnesses to Jesus (17:6; cf. 18:24). In 16:15, the warning to readers, “See, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and is clothed, not going about naked and exposed to shame” (NRSV), comes immediately after John sees demonic spirits, linked with the beast, performing signs to lead the kings of the earth astray. So washing one’s robes in the blood of the Lamb not only identifies one with his way but also means abstaining from the ways of the beast. It means that one will be prepared to face discrimination, and even death (12:11), for the sake of the Word of God and the witness to Jesus (6:9; cf. 12:11). It is their active perseverance (v. 14; cf. 14:12) that enables the righteous to stand before God’s throne (cf. 22:4), where they serve God day and

624

REVELATION 7:9-17 COMMENTARY night in the temple (v. 15; cf. 22:3). “Service” (Aatpevw latreyo) is a verb used of cultic service (see Acts 7:7, 42; Heb 8:6; 9:9, 14; 10:2; 13:10; it seems to be used in a transferred sense of general divine service in Luke 1:74; Rom 1:19). That divine service is one that, as the witnesses in 11:1ff. demonstrate, takes place outside the safe heaven of temple or cult in the place trampled by the nations. Thereby is fulfilled the command to “prophesy again about many peoples and nations and languages and kings” (10:11 NRSV). The divine service that is described at the climax of the vision in 22:3 is priestly. The righteous will see God face to face (the divine “face” and its blessing are a theme of the priestly blessing in Num 6:24-25). The name of God will be written on their foreheads (cf. Exod 28:16), and they will enter the divine presence (cf. Leviticus 16; Num 12:8). God is described as hovering over them (cf. 21:3, where God tabernacles with the people), as the Spirit hovers over Jesus at his

baptism (Mark 1:10; cf. Gen 1:2). “Tabernacling” (a verb used in 12:12; 13:6; 21:3) is also used for the dwelling of the incarnate Logos with humanity in John 1:14 (cf. Wis 24:8, 10, 21). Freedom from hunger and thirst (v. 16; cf. 21:14) and the heat of the sun (cf. Isa 49:10) contrasts with the want implied in the death and destruction that was unleashed at the opening of the seals (e.g., 6:6) and that will intensify in the awesome visions that follow. In particular, being burned by the fierce heat of the sun is explicitly mentioned in 16:8-9. The reason why they are protected is that the Lamb “at the center” (ava eoov ana meson; used only here in Revelation; cf. 5:6) “shepherds” them (cf. Ezek 34:23). This guidance contrasts with the more aggressive shepherding in 12:5 and 19:15 (cf. 2:27). In a reversal of roles, a Lamb will be a shepherd for the people (cf. 5:5). The eschatological prophecy of Isa 25:8 is here fulfilled (quoted again in 21:4).

REFLECTIONS 1. The very striking image of washing robes in blood to make them white raises a question about the participation in God’s saving work of the members of the great multitude. The image is an active rather than a passive one, “washing” rather than “being washed.” As we shall see in chap. 11, the task of faithful witness, epitomized by Jesus, can be the vocation of others too. Revelation suggests that the saving work is to be shared and continued by men and women, just as the writer of Colossians describes the apostolic task as “completing what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions” (Col 1:24 NRSV). The sharing in the divine economy, being God’s co-worker as Paul puts it in 1 Cor 3:9, has been typical of apocalyptic and mystical beliefs within Christianity through the centuries.” It is exemplified by the long tradition of martyrdom in the early church, in which Christians participated and continued the efficacious witness of the Lamb against and on behalf of the world. As other passages of Revelation indicate (6:9; 11:1ff.; 14:12), there is no guarantee of either the spiritual or the physical well-being of God’s servants. They are always under pressure to conform (chaps. 2-3; 13). When they resist, they will find themselves at the receiving end of the anger and retribution of those who seek to maintain the world as it is and who will see their deaths as a reason for rejoicing. That which pricks the conscience of these people has been removed (11:10; cf. John 16:2). That harsh juxtaposition of ideas, making robes white in blood, evinces an awesome purity that comes through costly and deliberate devotion to a better way. The vision here (like passages in Paul’s letters; e.g., 2 Cor 4:10; Col 1:24) expresses the conviction that Jesus continues to suffer among those who, like him, are victims of the injustices of our world.

2. The graciousness of God to those who follow the Lamb is brought out in Rev 7:16. This passage injects a theme of tenderness and comfort, seemingly lacking elsewhere in Revelation. We should take care not to miss the odd hints of God’s sustaining and enabling 226. See N. Cohn, The Pursuit of the Millennium (London: Paladin, 1957); C. Rowland, Radical Christianity (Oxford: Polity, 1988).

625

REVELATION 7:9-17 REFLECTIONS promise to support an enduring witness to Christ in the midst of death and destruction. But, as we have seen, the book of Revelation is realistic in its concern with power and the exercise of power, both in the divine way and in opposition to it. And to love is to be engaged in an exercise of power that itself needs to be examined with the eye of vision and devoid of any cloud of sentiment. The promise fulfilled in 7:16 hints that the blessed are particularly those who have suffered hunger and thirst in the present age: “They will hunger no more, and thirst no more” (Rev 7:16 NRSV). The promise is focused on the needy and the outcast, therefore (cf. Matt 25:35ff.). This focus comes as no surprise after the letters to the seven churches. It is the, outwardly, least prosperous and famous churches (Smyrna and Philadelphia) that are singled out for commendation and support by the risen Christ. The distinguished and, outwardly, spiritually complete churches are shown to be dead and lukewarm (Sardis and Laodicea): “Woe to you when all speak well of you, for that is what their ancestors did to the false prophets” (Luke 6:26 NRSV). For those who have conformed to society and reflect its values, there is a much greater temptation to be “lukewarm” and to offer support, however tacit, to the beast and to Babylon. The poor and the marginalized often have nothing to gain from such a course of action, though, as we shall see, Revelation is not sanguine about their ability to resist the pervasive seduction of ideology.

3. The inclusiveness of the vision is striking (something that needs to be borne in mind . when this passage is the subject of a sermon on All Saints Day). The multitude includes Jews and all those who have washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb and thereby have identified with the way of the Lamb. The neat equation that is often made between this image and the sense of having one’s sins washed away christianizes something that is not necessarily so in the apocalyptic text. Such an interpretive move brings the vision a little too quickly within the ambit of a precise theological formula. Witnessing against the beast, refusing to compromise, and espousing the way of the Lamb, inside or outside the church, mean inclusion in that great multitude. “All Saints” means that. The great multitude includes many who never “named the name” of Jesus but who lived lives that continued in the way of the Lamb: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven” (Matt 7:21 NRSV).

626

REVELATION 8:19:21 THE SEVENTH SEAL AND THE SEVEN ANGELS WITH SEVEN TRUMPETS NIV

NRSV When he opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an

When the Lamb opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. And I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and seven trumpets were given to them. 3Another angel with a golden censer came and stood at the altar; he was given a great quantity of incense to offer with the prayers of all the saints on the golden altar that is before the throne. *And

hour. ?And I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and to them were given seven trumpets. 3Another angel, who had a golden censer, came

and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, with the prayers of all the saints, on the golden altar before the throne. *The smoke of the incense, together with the prayers of the saints, went up before God from the angel’s hand. *Then the angel took the censer, filled it with fire from the altar, and hurled it on the earth; and there came peals of thunder, rumblings, flashes of lightning and an earthquake. °Then the seven angels who had the seven trumpets prepared to sound them. 7The first angel sounded his trumpet, and there came hail and fire mixed with blood, and it was hurled down upon the earth. A third of the earth was burned up, a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up. 8The second angel sounded his trumpet, and something like a huge mountain, all ablaze, was thrown into the sea. A third of the sea turned into blood, °a third of the living creatures in the sea died, and a third of the ships were destroyed.

the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, rose before God from the hand of the angel. *Then the angel took the censer and filled it with fire from the altar and threw it on the earth; and there were peals of thunder, rumblings, flashes of lightning, and an earthquake. 6Now the seven angels who had the seven trumpets made ready to blow them. 7The first angel blew his trumpet, and there came hail and fire, mixed with blood, and they were hurled to the earth; and a third of the earth was burned up, and a third of the trees were burned up, and all green grass was burned up. 8The second angel blew his trumpet, and something like a great mountain, burning with fire, was thrown into the sea. °A third of the sea became blood, a third of the living creatures in the sea died, and a third of the ships were destroyed. 10The third angel blew his trumpet, and a great star fell from heaven, blazing like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water. ''The name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters became wormwood, and many died from the water, because it was made bitter. 12The fourth angel blew his trumpet, and a third of the sun was struck, and a third of the moon, and a third of the stars, so that a third of

0The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of

water— ''the name of the star is Wormwood.? A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter. '2The fourth angel sounded his trumpet, and a third of the sun was struck, a third of the moon, and a third of the stars, so that a third of them a]/ That is, Bitterness

\

627

REVELATION 8:1-—9:21 NIV

NRSV

turned dark. A third of the day was without light, and also a third of the night. 'SAs | watched, I heard an eagle that was flying in midair call out in a loud voice: “Woe! Woe! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth, because of the trumpet blasts about to be sounded by the other three angels!” 6) The fifth angel sounded his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth. The star was given the key to the shaft of the Abyss. 7?When he opened the Abyss, smoke rose from it like the smoke from a gigantic furnace. The sun and sky were darkened by the smoke from the Abyss. *And out of the smoke locusts came down upon the earth and were given power like that of scorpions of the earth. *They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any plant or tree, but only those people who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads. °They were not given power to kill them, but only to torture them for five months. And the agony they suffered was like that of the sting of a scorpion when it strikes a man. “During those days men

teeth were like lions’ teeth. °They had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the sound of their wings was like the thundering of many horses and chariots rushing into battle. '°They had tails and stings like scorpions, and in their tails they had power to torment people for five months. ''They had as king over them the angel of the Abyss, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek, Apollyon.? The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come. The sixth angel sounded his trumpet, and | heard a voice coming from the horns? of the golden altar that is before God. 'It said to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, “Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates.” '°And the four angels who had been

their light was darkened; a third of the day was kept from shining, and likewise the night. 13Then I looked, and I heard an eagle crying with a loud voice as it flew in midheaven, “Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth, at the blasts of the other trumpets that the three angels are about to blow!” And the fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to earth, and he was given the key to the shaft of the bottomless pit; 7he opened the shaft of the bottomless pit, and from the shaft rose smoke like the smoke of a great furnace, and the sun and the air were darkened with the smoke from the shaft. *Then from the smoke came locusts on the earth, and they were given authority like the authority of scorpions of the earth. “They were told not to damage the grass of the earth or any green growth or any tree, but only those people who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads. °They were allowed to torture them for five months, but not to kill them, and their torture was like the torture of a scorpion when it stings someone. “And in those days people will seek death but will not find it; they will long to die, but death will flee from them. 7In appearance the locusts were like horses equipped for battle. On their heads were what looked like crowns of gold; their faces were like human faces, *their hair like women’s hair, and their teeth like lions’ teeth; °they had scales like iron breastplates, and the noise of their wings was like the noise of many chariots with horses rushing into battle. '°They have tails like scorpions, with stingers, and in their tails is their power to harm people for five months. !'They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit; his name in Hebrew is Abaddon,? and in Greek he is called Apollyon.? 12The first woe has passed. There are still two woes to come. 13Then the sixth angel blew his trumpet, and I heard a voice from the four‘ horns of the golden altar before God, 'saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, “Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates.” '°So the

411 Abaddon projections

2That is, Destruction authorities lack four

will seek death, but will not find it; they will long to die, but death will elude them. ’The locusts looked like horses prepared for battle. On their heads they wore something like crowns of gold, and their faces resembled human faces. °Their hair was like women’s hair, and their

and

Apollyon

mean

Destroyer.

6173 That

is,

628

>That is, Destroyer

¢ Other ancient

REVELATION 8:19:21:

NIV

NRSV

kept ready for this very hour and day and month

four angels were released, who had been held ready for the hour, the day, the month, and the year, to kill a third of humankind. !°The number of the troops of cavalry was two hundred million; I heard their number. '7And this was how I saw the horses in my vision: the riders wore breastplates the color of fire and of sapphire? and of sulfur; the heads of the horses were like lions’ heads, and fire and smoke and sulfur came out of their mouths. '*By these three plagues a third of humankind was killed, by the fire and smoke and sulfur coming out of their mouths. !°For the power of the horses is in their mouths and in their tails; their tails are like serpents, having heads; and with them they inflict harm. 20The rest of humankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands or give up worshiping demons and idols of gold and silver and bronze and stone and wood, which cannot see or hear or walk. 2!And they did not repent of their murders or their sorceries or their fornication or their thefts.

and year were released to kill a third of mankind.

'°The number of the mounted troops was two hundred million. I heard their number. "The horses and riders I saw in my vision looked like this: Their breastplates were fiery red, dark blue, and yellow as sulfur. The heads of the

horses resembled the heads of lions, and out of

their mouths came fire, smoke and sulfur, '8A third of mankind was killed by the three plagues of fire, smoke and sulfur that came out of their mouths. '°The power of the horses was in their mouths and in their tails; for their tails were like snakes, having heads with which they inflict

injury.

.

°The rest of mankind that were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the work of their hands; they did not stop worshiping demons, and idols of gold, silver, bronze, stone and

wood—idols that cannot see or hear or walk. INor did they repent of their murders, their magic arts, their sexual immorality or their thefts.

@ Gk hyacinth

(COMMENTARY ate he sequence interrupted by the report of wm the sealing of the children of Israel and John’s vision of the great multitude is now resumed with the opening of the seventh seal (presumably by the Lamb, though that is not mentioned here). This section, with its vivid and alarming description of the agents of destruction, epitomizes Revelation’s links with OT prophets like Nahum and Zephaniah. There is another sequence of seven, this time of trumpet blasts. Once more it is interrupted in 9:13ff. (cf. 6:12), with the final trumpet blast occurring at 11:15. The trumpets herald the longest sequence of catastrophes to befall the earth. The section starts with a pause in the sequence, with silence in heaven, and finishes with John reporting that the catalogue of disasters did not lead humanity to repent (9:20). —

mult of praise John has encountered in his vision. It is an opportunity to pause and, in the words of Ps 46:10, “Be still, and know that I am God!” (NRSV). Silence is a characteristic of heaven, and it is from the mysterious silence of God that the ultimate mystery comes (Rom 16:25).?27 Silence is a characteristic of the eschatological age in 4 Ezra 7:30-31: “And the world shall be turned back to primeval silence for seven days, as it was at the first beginnings; so that no one shall be left. And after seven days the world, which is not yet awake, shall be roused, and that which is corruptible shall perish.”278 Here, however, the silence serves to heighten anticipation. 8:2. John now sees seven angels (cf. Tob 12:15), standing before the throne of God (15:6; WO 70S 2129 N8ctet245220;4:35> 71 \ebeing given seven trumpets; note the passive once more,

8:1. The opening of the seventh seal brings silence in heaven (cf. Hab 2:20; Zeph 1:7; Zech 2:13; Acts 15:12)—a marked contrast to the tu-

227. Cf. Ignatius To the Ephesians 19. 228. 4 Ezra 7:30-31, trans. B. Metzger, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1983).

629

REVELATION 8:1—9:21 COMMENTARY judgment. Otherwise, only John’s message, which comes from heaven, offers hope, but only for those who repent. The first trumpet (v. 7) brings hail mingled with blood, which is cast upon the earth (cf. 16:21; Exod 9:23ff.; Ezek 38:22; Sir 39:29). The juxtaposition of hail and thunder, lightning, and earthquake in a theophany is found at 11:19, after the exposition of the ark in the heavenly temple. The consequence is disastrous for the ecology of the world (v. 7; cf. 7:3; 9:4), contrasting with the serenity of the rural idyll of the garden in the new Jerusalem, with the leaves of the tree for the healing of the nations (22:3); but that lies beyond the fiery judgment (cf. 17:16; 18:8; 1 Cor 3:13). Now one-third of the earth is destroyed, echoing Ezek 5:2, 12 and Zech 13:9. 8:8-9. With the blast of the second trumpet, the great, fiery mountain is cast into the sea, prefiguring the fall of Babylon (18:21), with whose rebellion Jerusalem itself is identified (11:8). The sea turns to blood, with terrible consequences for life in the sea and for mariners (cf. 18:19). It is possible that, if John was writing after the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 cz, this event (or rumors about something similar) might have insinuated itself into his imagination as he wrote this vision. 8:10-11. The third trumpet blast leads to a third fiery “bolt” from heaven, this time a star burning like a torch (Isa 14:12; cf. Rev 4:5), with dire consequences for rivers and springs (cf. 16:4). Once again we may compare the end of the vision, when thirst will be quenched from the spring of living water by the One who created the waters (14:7) and the river that flows through the heart of paradise (22:1-2). John names the star “Wormwood” (v. 11; cf. Amos 5:6-7; 6:12, where justice is turned to wormwood; see also Jer 9:15). Many die as a result of the waters’ being made bitter (cf. Jer 23:15), anticipating the bitterness John experiences when he devours the scroll of judgment, with its “unpalatable” message for the nations (10:9-10). 8:12-13. The fourth trumpet blast leads to a third of the sun being “struck” (mAjcow plesso, the same cognate verb that is used of the plagues in chap. 15; cf. 9:18). The partial cataclysm here contrasts with what is described in the last plagues in chap. 16. Throughout the series of trumpet blasts, their effects befall a third of creation (vv.

indicating the way in which things are allowed to happen within the divine providence (see, e.g., Oty 8s 7:29:30 :1;13:7, 14-15). The trumpet blast is a signal of alarm (see Joel 2:1) in the face of God’s awesome presence (see Exod 19:16). John’s commission and his ascent to heaven (1:10; 4:1) have been attended with a voice like that of a trumpet. The trumpet blast now has eschatological, doom-laden significance (cf. Matt 24:31; 1 Thess 4:16). 8:3-5. Before the trumpets are blown, another angel (cf. 10:1; 18:1) stands at the altar (cf. 14:18), holding a golden censer with incense {v.

Oo; cle 16:3" Exod 304 irs- Luke; 171021-1):> This angel offers to God the prayers of the saints (cf. 5:8). The smoke of the incense mingles with the prayers and ascends into the divine presence (Ps 141:2; cf. Tob 12:12). Just as John sees that the cries of the souls are heeded, so also he can see that the prayers of the saints ascend to the presence of God. The prayers of the saints are efficacious (v. 4). The angel takes the censer, fills it with fire from the altar (cf. Lev 16:12; Ezek 10:2), and casts it to earth, provoking a heavenly com-

motion such as had attended the vision of God’s throne in 4:5. In 8:5 there is also an earthquake. Whether the ascent of the prayers to God causes this commotion is not clear, but there is a juxtaposition of the prayers ascending and the contents of the censer bringing upon earth what John had hitherto only seen in heaven (chap. 4). 8:6-7. The expression of downward movement (BdA\w ballo, “throw”; cf. mintw pipto, “fall”; 8:10; 9:1) suggests divine action toward the earth (cf. 12:8; 6:13). The trumpets themselves inaugurate a series of downward movements, linking heaven and earth in a chaotic and destructive way: hail mixed with blood; a mountain of fire; a star from heaven given the key of the abyss (8:7—9:1). Similarly, the seven last plagues involve angels pouring out bowls filled with God’s wrath (16:1ff.). The verb kataBatvw (katabaino, “come down”) parallels this (10:1 ff.; 18:1). It is only in 21:2, when the descent of the new Jerusalem resolves the division between heaven and earth, that the descent from heaven to earth will bring something other than judgment. Until that moment, the sharp dichotomy between the heaven and earth means that what proceeds from heaven is experienced on earth as

630

REVELATION 8:1—9:21 COMMENTARY 7ff.; cf. 9:15, 18). Likewise, in v. 12 one-third of the sun, the moon, and the stars are afflicted, bringing darkness upon the earth (cf. 6:12; 9:2; 16:10; Exod 10:21; Amos 8:9, where these phenomena are linked with “that day,” the day of the Lord). In v. 13 (and at 14:6), there is a solemn proclamation of woe, here by an eagle (cf. 4:7), on the earth’s inhabitants, who are about to experience the consequences of, the last three trumpet blasts (9:1, 3; 11:15):

Exod 10:12), which are given power “like scorpions.” Unlike ordinary locusts, these have been told not to harm green things (cf. 7:3); instead, they are to torment for a period of five months those who “do not have the seal of God on their foreheads” (vv. 4-5; cf. 7:3; 9:10). Marking people as a prophylactic against destruction is the role of

the man clothed in linen in Ezek 9:4ff., as he goes through the city marking those who sigh over the abominations—though being marked in this way is hardly a consolation in the midst of death and destruction. There can be no escape from the widespread effects of this. Humanity is to be tormented, but not killed. According to v. 6, people will long for death, just as Job longed to be released from his torment (Job 3:21) and just as Cain, condemned to be a fugitive, was not allowed the release of death (Gen 4:13ff.; cf. Rev 6:15ff.; Luke 23:30). The torture typifies the judgment meted out on the earth (14:10; cf. 18:7, 10, 15) and that is carried out also by the two witnesses (11:10). The description of the locusts becomes more terrible in vv. 7-8 (cf. Joel 2:4). They are like armored horses ready for battle. This sets the scene for the battles to come, which will be between the forces of evil and Christ and his followers (16\eL0s [polemos, “war”/“battle”] is used only here without an explicit eschatological Sense: cia dIs7 12:7, U7: okoaeg Wonka LOahOs 20:8). The description of the locusts is a terrible parody of the divine: What appears to be a golden crown is on the heads of these creatures (golden crowns belong to the elders in 4:4, 10, and to the human figure in 14:14). The horrific creatures have human faces, as did the third creature around the divine throne (4:7). The comparison of their hair with that of women (cf. 1:14; Luke 7:38, 44; John 12:3; 1 Pet 3:3) may relate to its length (cf. 1 Cor 11:14-15) and possibly to the

“Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth, at the blasts of the other trumpets that the three angels are about to blow!” (8:13 NRSV) “Fear God and give him glory, for the hour of his judgment has come; and worship him who made heaven and earth, the sea and the springs of water.” (14:7 NRSV)

The inhabitants of the earth seem to be oblivious to the significance of what is going on. They will gloat over the death of the witnesses (11:10), worship the beast (13:8; cf. 13:14), and become drunk with the wine of Babylon’s fornication (17:2, 8). The angel of Philadelphia has been warned of this time of trial that is to come (3:10). 9:1-11. The angel with the fifth trumpet (v. 1) heralds another star’s falling from heaven to earth (cf. 8:10; Matt 24:29). A key is given to this star, probably referring to an angel, if 1:20 and Jude 6, 13 are anything to go by; this identification may be supported by Rev 20:1 (cf. Isa 14:12; Luke 10:18; 7 Enoch 80:6-7). The key opens the bottomless pit (the abyss), the abode of the beast (11:7; cf. 17:8). The word “abyss” (dBucoos abyssos) occurs only in Revelation, with the exception of Romans 10:17 and Luke 8:31, where Luke uses “abyss” in place of “sea” (cf. Mark 5:13), indicating an apocalyptic dimension to Luke’s version of the story of the Gerasene demoniac.”? The angel of the abyss is identified in v. 11 as Abaddon, the Destroyer. When the angel opens the shaft of the “bottomless pit,” smoke ascends. Unlike the smoke of the incense, which mingled with the prayers of the saints (8:4), this smoke resembles smoke from a furnace, which darkens the sun and pollutes the air (cf. Gen 19:28; Exod 19:18). The acrid nature of the smoke produces locusts on the earth (cf.

frenzy of certain manic rituals.7°° The comparison of their teeth with the teeth of a lion recalls Joel 1:6, and the sound of their wings is loosely related to Joel 2:5. In John’s visionary imagination, various OT passages seem to be linked and may have contributed to the terrifying description captured in John’s words. The king over the locusts is an angel

229. These elements are explored in Ched Myers, Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story ofJesus (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, \ 1988).

230. On the identification of the locusts with female heretics, see E. Schiissler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 227; A. Wainwright, Mysterious Apocalypse (Nashville: Abingdon, 1993) 42.

631

REVELATION 8:1—9:21 COMMENTARY 9:13-15. At the blast of the sixth trumpet, a voice is heard from the altar (v. 13; cf. 6:9; 8:3), which sounds as if it comes from the horns of the altar (cf. Exod 30:1ff.). The angel is commanded to loose the angels that are bound at the Euphrates (cf. 16:12; 20:2). Once again chaos returns upon the earth (cf. Ps 104:9). They have been destined for this moment (v. 15); it is as if they were animals eager to be unleashed (cf. 20:3, 7). The sense of predestination evident here is curiously not often explicit in Revelation (cf. 12:6; 13:8; 17:8, which refers to the eternal destiny of the Lamb; see also 21:2). Still, they are allowed to kill only one-third of humanity. 9:16-19. John hears the enormous number of the horsemen: two hundred million (v. 16). This number is large, but finite (cf. 5:11; 7:4; 20:8). As in the previous vision, John describes the horses’ armor. Their breastplates (cf. v. 9), which are multi-colored, in the colors of fire, sapphire (cf. 21:20), and sulphur (cf. 14:10; 19:20; 20:10; 21:8). They have heads like lions (cf. 4:7; 9:8; 13:2), and fire, smoke, and sulphur come out of their mouths. Their power resides in their mouths (choke 16520 1:5; 12S 162134 19:1 5)sand ait their tails (cf. 9:10; 12:4). The tails are like serpents, and they have heads, with which they do harm (cf. 7:2; 9:10); this description indirectly links this vision with the serpent that gives power to a beast with seven heads (12:3, 9; 13:4). Although there are few verbal parallels, there is a general similarity between these creatures and Job’s leviathan (Job 41:10ff.), which has similar teeth, breastplate, smoke, and fire. 9:20-21. This horrific picture of destruction, called “these plagues” (v. 20; cf. 15:8), is interrupted by a comment from John that will appear later in 16:9 (cf. 11:21). Instead of being led to repentance by these calamities, humankind continues in its old ways. The need for repentance is the insistent theme of the letters to the angels (2:5, 16, 21, 22; 3:3, 19), with the letters to the angels in Smyrna and Philadelphia being the only exceptions. The fragment of humankind that has survived the plagues does not repent of the “works of their hands” or their idolatry (cf. Isa 2:8; 17:8), the futility of which is expounded in words from Pss 115:4 and 135:15ff. This idol worship is nothing other than the worship of demons (v. 20; cf. Deut 32:17 LXX; Ps 95:5 LXX; 1 Cor 10:20). John might have gone on to com-

called Abaddon, “the destroyer” (from the Hebrew 7as ['abad], meaning “destroy”; Abaddon is another name for Sheol, the realm of the dead; see Job 26:6; Prov 15:11). John’s intention is to leave his readers in no doubt of the malevolent function of this angel, and so he includes the Greek term for “destroyer,” Apollyon (cf. the phrase “were destroyed by the destroyer” [atwAovto UTO TOV OAOB8peuTOU apolonto hypo tou olothreutou] in 1 Cor 10:10, which is dependent on the story in Num 21:6; cf. also Heb 11:28). 9:12. John comments that the first woe has passed and that two more are to come. This comes at a point, roughly speaking, halfway through the sequences of seals, trumpets, and bowls. Four seals and five trumpet blasts have brought acts of destruction (seals 1, 5, and, possibly, 7 have not). Of the trumpet blasts, eight have brought about destruction on earth, as did the seven bowls, which are the last plagues. The second woe comes after the sixth trumpet blast and follows the vision of the two witnesses. Although only one more woe is actually described in the book (11:14), with the promise that the third one is to come quickly, in 8:13 there is a threefold woe on the inhabitants of the earth, in 18:10, 16, 19 there is a threefold double woe on the great city, and, before that, in 12:12, a woe is pronounced on sea and land because of Satan’s ejection from heaven. The “messianic woes” are a consistent feature of the eschatological expectation of texts contemporary with Revelation (e.g., the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch 25-26; see Excursus: “The Tribulation of the Messianic Age,” 635-36); they are probably presupposed in Matt 24:19 and Mark 13:17. The eschatological character of the woes in Revelation casts fresh light on such passages elsewhere in the New Testament, especially in the Gospels. Thus the woes on the rich in Luke 6:24ff. and on the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23 should also be seen in this light (particularly the latter, coming as they do immediately before the eschatological discourse in Matthew 24-25). The woes of Jesus fall upon the cities (Matt 11:21) and upon the betrayer (Mark 14:21); perhaps also the woe Paul proclaims on himself if he does not preach the gospel (1 Cor 9:16) reminds readers that such woes have an eschatological significance.

632

REVELATION 8:1—9:21 COMMENTARY plete Ps 135:18: “Those who make them/ and all who trust them/ shall become like them” (NRSV), but that is set forth in John’s own vision in the surrounding context. The inability of human beings to act on the initial recognition that they have been confronted with the wrath of God and the Lamb (6:15ff.) suggests minds dulled to the awareness of God and the divine justice (cf. Rom 1:21 [NRSV]: “For though they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their senseless minds were darkened”). The precious metals of which the idols were made are found elsewhere; gold is often used, for example, for crowns (14:14) and to describe Babylon (17:4; cf. 18:16; Isa 2:20; Dan 5:4), and silver and gold are among the cargo of the lamenting merchants (18:12). In addition, the misdeeds of this fragment of humanity are mentioned elsewhere (idolatry and murder: 21:8; 22:15; Genesis A exod 20:15. sorcery:.18:23;°21:8*"22:15;°Mic 5:12; Mal 3:5; and fornication: 2:14, 21; 14:8; 17:1-2, 5, 15-16; 18:3,°9; 19:2; [note the linking of sorcery and fornication in 2 Kgs 9:22; Isa 47:9; Nah 3:4]; theft is mentioned only here in Revelation). The plagues seem to be designed to bring people to repentance, similar to Wis 12:10: “you carried out your sentence by stages to give them room for repentance” (cf. Wis 12:20). But that has not occurred. Revelation pauses in the midst of the final sequence of plagues to comment on the inability of humanity to understand and repent (16:9, 11, 21; cf. Mark 4:11-12). Humanity longs for release, but does not find it. It is as if humanity is brought face to face with the full horror of the world it has created and is not allowed to escape the consequences of its actions. That leads to darkness, disfigurement, and the unbalancing of the natural world. The death and destruction that

have taken place up to this point constitute the first woe. The absence of any mention of the third woe may be an indication that the final consummation is still awaited. The readers stand in the midst of the eschatological drama. It is partly complete, and we are (as it were) offered a preview of the ending. In the midst of the trials and tribulations, we await the climax. All we can do is watch, wait, witness, and not be led astray (cf. Mark 13:9, 33ff.). Despite all the terrible indications of disintegration, however, people’s injustice toward one another still persists. It is as if death and destruction had become an anesthetic, preventing the recognition of the remedy for disorder. It is a seemingly unending forgetfulness, which prevents a change of mind (“metanoia”) that can enable the world, and God, to be seen aright and the religion of the beast to be replaced by the way of the Lamb. At the top of the list of injustices people continue in is idolatry, accompanied by evil deeds that exhibit disorder. We shall be shown the ultimate demonstration of murder, idolatry, and robbery in Babylon’s cruel regime (chaps. 17-18). Amid the growing chaos, life goes on as before with no sense on humanity’s part that anything is amiss with the way in which they are conducting themselves: They were eating and drinking, and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed all of them. Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot: they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, but on the day that Lot left Sodom, it rained fire and sulphur from heaven and destroyed all of them—it will be like that on the day the Son of Man is revealed. On that day, anyone on the housetop who has belongings in the house must not come down to take them away; and likewise anyone in the field must not turn back. Remember Lot’s wife. Those who try to make their life secure will lose it, but those who lose their life will keep it. (Luke 17:27-33 NRSV)

REFLECTIONS 1. The opening of the seventh seal causes silence in heaven. The seemingly inevitable process is interrupted, and the pause enables reflection on what is happening, even in heaven. Silence and reflection are appropriate in the midst of the tumult of life. Silence is an appropriate response in the light of this coming of God in wrath. Ludwig Wittgenstein finished a very 231 different book with the words, “What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence. 231. Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, trans. D. F. Pears and B. F. McGuiness (London: Routledge, 1974).

REVELATION 8:1—9:21 REFLECTIONS That is an appropriate warning for any commentator on the book of Revelation. The desire to explain and justify prompts many words, but perhaps silence, awe, fear, and dread are more appropriate responses to moments of apocalyptic insight. If reading Revelation leads to disorientation and bewilderment, then we shall begin to comprehend the moment of apocalypse, such as when the women fled from the tomb in fear when they were confronted by the ultimate apocalyptic moment and words failed them (Mark 16:8). 2. In the sequence of seals and trumpets there emerge scenes even more nightmarish than our worst dreams. John’s “nightmare” is the reality of judgment. The fantastic and horrifying description of the torments that await those who are not sealed (9:4) brings to our awareness our deepest, usually unacknowledged, fears, represented by poisonous insects and the disruption of the natural world so that it becomes a threat rather than an accepted, and acceptable, part of our existence, as the bonds of normality are loosened (7:1; 9:14). It is the reverse of that process described in Genesis 1, where (to use the words of Ps 104:9) God has set them their bounds, which they should not pass or turn again to cover the earth. As has been suggested, cosmological disorder is linked with neglect of God’s way. To put it in the words of Gen 6:11, “Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight, and the earth was filled with violence” (NRSV). Violence marked the Lamb who was brought to God’s throne and prompted the opening of the seals. The worst fears surface in the gruesome catalogue that issues forth from the trumpet blasts. Locusts are a plague to humanity, and the sting of the scorpion is proverbially threatening. Yet the creatures are girded with weapons of war (9:9), and the threat of the angelic host who had been bound at the Euphrates (9:14) described in military terms. John’s vision is of the awfulness and destructive potential of war. Creatures that are already frightening in themselves take on an even more fearsome aspect in John’s vision. The full destructive power of nature is set loose as it is transformed into something far more threatening than the occasional plague of locusts or the poisonous sting. In nature and in society, the destructive power consequent to rebellion against God the Creator and the rejection of the coming Messiah leads to the dissolution of order. Revelation 18-19 evoke a doomsday vision, a glimpse of what ecological disaster might mean. There has been much discussion about threats to the environment. But those of us in the affluent West like our way of life and are unwilling to do much more than make a half-hearted attempt to curb the profligate consumption and destruction of the world that our life-styles entail. Readers are asked whether they wish to side with Babylon, “which destroys the earth” (11:18; 19:2), or with God, whose order provides healing for the nations (22:2).

3. Revelation’s grim picture of ecological catastrophe might seem to underline the belief of some that Christianity is not merely world-denying but also uncaring about the cosmos, destined, as it appears to be, for destruction. There are hints in passages like 11:18 and 19:2, however, that the destruction of the earth is not the result of a divine caprice but a consequence of the behavior of humanity. Revelation is about the return to chaos, symbolized by the relaxation of those arrangements that gave the world its order, an order, which the book as a whole demonstrates, is in reality disorder, because it is based on the luxury of Babylon (18:3) and the trade in human souls (18:13). When New Testament writers, like the author of 1 John, speak of “the form of this world passing away,” they are not referring to the imminent winding up of the world and the irruption of a new world from above. Rather, it is the desire and, where at all possible, the implementation of another way of being and behaving that demands an alteration in the nature of things so that they reflect the divine righteousness. The world is the arena of God’s saving purposes, past, present, and future; but the form of the world in its entirety had been demonstrated as being disordered in the light of the Messiah

634

REVELATION 8:1—9:21 REFLECTIONS and the rejection of him. The cross points to human folly as well as pointing forward to another type of wisdom. It shows the order of the world and its institutions to be shot through with the disorder that had to be put right before the new age could come in all its fullness. Revelation 20, in the language of apocalyptic, links the dawn of the messianic era with the binding of Satan. The writer of 1 John addresses his readers with, “We are God’s children now; what we will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is this: when he is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as he is” (1 John 3:2 NRSV). So in saying that early Christianity was world-denying, we should be clear that it was not because Christians believed that the end of the world was imminent through some cosmic disintegration. Rather, its arrangements would be changed. Meanwhile, in the midst of disorder, it is important not to be conformed to the world as it is.

ExcuRSsUS: THE TRIBULATIONS OF THE MESSIANIC AGE” The occurrence of terrible calamities on earth before the coming of the messianic kingdom was a widely held belief and is well illustrated in the Old Testament deuterocanonical/ apocryphal book 2 Esdras: “And if the place where you are standing is greatly shaken while the voice is speaking, do not be terrified; because the word concerns the end, and the foundations of the earth will understand that the speech concerns them. They will tremble and be shaken, for they know that their end must be changed.” When I heard this, | got to my feet and listened; a voice was speaking, and its sound was like the sound of mighty waters. It said, “The days are coming when I draw near to visit the inhabitants of the earth, and when I require from the doers of iniquity the penalty of their iniquity, and when the humiliation of Zion is complete. When the seal is placed upon the age that is about to pass away, then I will show these signs: the books shall be opened before the face of the firmament, and all shall see my judgment together. Children a year old shall speak with their voices, and pregnant women shall give birth to premature children at three and four months, and these shall live and leap about. Sown places shall suddenly appear unsown, and full storehouses shall suddenly be found to be empty; the trumpet shall sound aloud, and when all hear it, they shall suddenly be terrified. At that time friends shall make war on friends like enemies, the earth and those who inhabit it shall be terrified, and the springs of the fountains shall stand still so that for three hours they shall not flow.” (2 Esdr 6:14-24 NRSV) “Now concerning the signs: Behold, the days are coming when those who dwell on earth shall be seized with great terror, and the way of truth shall be hidden, and the land shall be barren of faith, and unrighteousness shall be increased beyond what you yourself see, and beyond what you heard of formerly. And the land which you now see ruling shall be waste and untrodden, and men shall see it desolate. But if the Most High grants that you live, you shall see it thrown into confusion after the third period; and the sun shall suddenly shine forth at night, and the moon during the day. Blood shall drip from wood, and the stone shall utter its voice; the peoples shall be troubled, and the stars shall fall. 232. Further parallels in H. L. Strack and P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum NT aus Talmud und Midrasch (Munich: Beck, 1924) 4:977ff.

635

EXCURSUS: THE TRIBULATIONS OF THE MESSIANIC AGE And one shall reign whom those who dwell on earth do not expect, and the birds shall fly away together; and the sea of Sodom shall cast up fish; and one whom the many do not know shall make his voice heard by night, and all shall hear his voice. There shall be chaos also in many places, and fire shall often break out, and the wild beasts shall roam beyond their haunts, and menstruous women shall bring forth monsters. And salt waters shall be found in the sweet, and all friends shall conquer one another; then shall reason hide itself, and wisdom shall withdraw into its chamber, and it shall be sought by many but shall not be found, and unrighteousness and unrestraint shall increase on earth. And one country shall ask its neighbor, ‘Has righteousness, or anyone who does right, passed through you?’ And it will answer, ‘No.’ And at that time men shall hope but not obtain; they shall labor but their ways shall not prosper.”?°3

In a similar vein, the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch 25-27 treats the notion of calamities befalling earth before the coming of the kingdom of the Messiah, though with the added similarity of the clear periodization of the messianic woes, as in Revelation, and earlier /ubilees evokes the grim circumstances of the end of the age: When horror seizes the inhabitants of earth, and they fall into many tribulations and further, they fall into great torments. And it will happen that they will say in their thoughts because of their great tribulations, “The Mighty One does not anymore remember the earth”; It will happen when they lose hope, that the time will awake.... That time will be divided into twelve parts, and each part has been preserved for that for which it was appointed. In the first part: the beginning of commotions. In the second part: the slaughtering of the great. In the third part: the fall of many into death. In the fourth part: the drawing of the sword. In the fifth part: famine and the withholding of rain. In the sixth part: earthquakes and terrors. In the eighth part: a multitude of ghosts and the appearances of demons. In the ninth part: the fall of fire. In the tenth part: rape and much violence. In the eleventh part: injustice and unchastity. In the twelfth part: disorder and a mixture of all that has been before. These parts of that time will be preserved and will be mixed, one with another, and they will minister to each other.”4

And in those days if a man will live a jubilee and a half, they will say about him, “He prolonged his life, but the majority of his days were suffering and affliction. And there was no peace, because plague (came) upon plague, and wound upon wound, and affliction upon affliction, and evil report upon evil report, and sickness upon sickness, and every evil judgment of this sort one with another: sickness, and downfall, and sleet, and hail, and frost, and fever, and chills, and stupor, and famine, and death, and sword, and captivity, and all plagues, and suffering.” And all of this will come in the evil generation which sins in the land. Pollution and fornication and contamination and abomination are their deeds.?% 233. 4 Ezra 5:1-13, trans. B. Metzger, in The Old Testament Pseudepigraph, vol. 1, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1983). 234. 2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch 25:1-27:14, trans. A. F. J. Klijn, in ibid. 235 Jub. 23:12-14, trans. O. S. Wintermute, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, ed.J.H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1985).

%K2

%

&0,

636

xso,

REVELATION 10:1-11 THE VISION OF THE STRONG ANGEL AND THE COMMAND TO PROPHESY NRSV

é

]0 I saw another mighty angel coming down from heaven. He was robed in a cloud, with a rainbow above his head; his face

] And I saw another mighty angel coming ‘UJ down from heaven, wrapped in a cloud, with a rainbow over his head; his face was like the sun, and his legs like pillars of fire. 7He held a little scroll open in his hand. Setting his right foot on the sea and his left foot on the land, *he gave a great shout, like a lion roaring. And when he shouted, the seven thunders sounded. *And when the seven thunders had sounded, | was

was like the sun, and his legs were like fiery pillars. 7He was holding a little scroll, which lay open in his hand. He planted his right foot on the sea and his left foot on the land, ?and he gave a loud shout like the roar of a lion. When he shouted, the voices of the seven thunders spoke. 4And when the seven thunders spoke, I was about

about to write, but I heard a voice from heaven

to write; but I heard a voice from heaven say, “Seal up what the seven thunders have said and do not write it down.” *Then the angel I had seen standing on the sea

and on the land raised his right hand to heaven. “And he swore by him who lives for ever and ever, who created the heavens and all that is in

them, the earth and all that is in it, and the sea and all that is in it, and said, “There will be no more delay! 7But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants the prophets.” 8Then the voice that I had heard from heaven ‘spoke to me once more: “Go, take the scroll that lies open in the hand of the angel who is standing

on the sea and on the land.” °So | went to the angel and asked him to give me the little scroll. He said to me, “Take it and eat it. It will turn your stomach sour, but in your mouth it will be as sweetas honey.” ‘I took the little scroll from the angel’s hand and ate it. It tasted as sweet as honey in my mouth, but when I had eaten it, my stomach turned sour. ''Then I was told, “You must prophesy again about many peoples, nations, languages and kings.”

637

saying, “Seal up what the seven thunders have said, and do not write it down.” *Then the angel whom I saw standing on the sea and the land raised his right hand to heaven 6 and swore by him who lives forever and ever, who created heaven and what is in it, the earth and what is in it, and the sea and what is in it: “There will be no more delay, “but in the days when the seventh angel is to blow his trumpet, the mystery of God will be fulfilled, as he announced to his servants? the prophets.” 8Then the voice that I had heard from heaven spoke to me again, saying, “Go, take the scroll that is open in the hand of the angel who is standing on the sea and on the land.” °So I went to the angel and told him to give me the little scroll; and he said to me, “Take it, and eat; it will be bitter to your stomach, but sweet as honey in your mouth.” !°So | took the little scroll from the hand of the angel and ate it; it was sweet as honey in my mouth, but when | had eaten it, my stomach was made bitter. 11Then they said to me, “You must prophesy again about many peoples and nations and languages and kings.” a Gk slaves

REVELATION

10:1-11 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY 7:29 VANS18:2; 19:97; 4Jer 25:30; Matt27:50; Mark 5:7) is like a lion’s roar (cf. 13:2; Amos 3:8). It prompts a response from the seven thunders (cf. the sevenfold voice of the Lord in Ps 29:3ff.; note also John 12:29, where the divine voice is mistaken for thunder). Elsewhere in Revelation, thunder accompanies the appearance of God (e.g., 4:5; cf. Exod 19:16) and the accomplishment of the judgment of God (11:19; 16:18). John is about to write down what the seven thunders have spoken in obedience to the command to “write what you have seen” (1:19 NRSV), but a voice from heaven (cf. 11:12; 12:10; 14:2; 18:4) commands him to “seal up” what they have said and not write it down (cf. 22:10; Dan 8:26; 12:4, 9). Like the contents of the sealed scroll in chap. 5, what the seven thunders said must remain a mystery and, thus, is to form no part of this book of prophecy, which is very much a public rather than an esoteric text (22:10). The word “mystery” is rare in Revelation, usually linked with explanations (1:20; 17:7; cf. 17:5; Rom 11:25; 1 Cor 15:51). The mystery of God is what is contained in John’s prophecy (cf. 17:17). This apocalyptic mystery is not for some religious elite; rather, it is a public matter (14:6), as was the case for Paul (1 Cor 2:6-7; Eph 3:9-10; Col 1:26), who proclaimed the ultimate apocalyptic mystery in the word of the cross. What the content of the utterance of the seven thunders might have been can only be guessed. 10:5-7. To describe an oath by the God of earth and heaven, John uses words from Dan 12:7, adding a reference to God as Creator, based on Exod 20:11 (cf. Ps 146:6; Acts 4:24). The content of the oath is that “there will be no more delay.” The word used for “delay” (xpdvos chronos, “time”) is used also at 2:21; 6:11; and 20:3 having the

n the middle of the seemingly inexorable process of judgment, once more interrupting a sequence of seven at the penultimate, there

are two complementary visions: one an account of a call to John to prophesy (chap. 10), and the other an account of the witness of two figures who prophesy for a time before being killed by the beast from the abyss (chap. 11). The deaths of these prophets, who are vindicated after their corpses have lain in the street, provokes enormous rejoicing among the world’s inhabitants. Their vindication, parallel to that of the Lamb, provokes cataclysm and marks the assertion of the transfer of sovereignty to God and the Messiah. 10:1-2. The descents from heaven to earth continue. A mighty angel, “wrapped in a cloud, with a rainbow over his head,” straddles sea and land (ef:.10:5;"see: also..7:2; 12; 18;.-14:7).. The physical destruction described in the preceding chapter is replaced by a different kind of devastation, that of the prophetic word. The “mighty angel” echoes the stronger one who is greater than John the Baptist (Mark 1:7) and who plunders the strong man’s kingdom (Mark 3:27) The angel descends from heaven (cf. 18:1; 20:1) clothed with cloud (cf. 12:1), something that accompanies Christ (1:7; cf. 11:12; 14:14-15; Mark 13:26; 1 Thess 4:17). The rainbow, which had been around the throne in 4:3, now surrounds this angel’s head; his face, “like the sun,” resembles that of Christ in 1:16 (cf. 12:1; Matt 17:2). His feet are like pillars of fire (cf. 1:15), and in his hand he holds an open scroll. There is some similarity between this chapter and 5:2, in which a mighty angel appears. In 5:1, as well, the one seated on the throne has a “scroll” (the Greek there is BiBAtov [diblion], as compared with PiBraptd.ov [biblaridion| in 10:2, though the papyrus $47 and the 7extus Receptus use biblion, making the link more explicit). Here, however, in contrast to chap. 5, the scroll is open, as the reader would expect, in the light of the Lamb’s having opened the seals earlier in the vision. There are some connections between Revelation 4-5 and 10 with Ezekiel (here with Ezek 2:10; 3:3) as well. 10:3-4. The angel’s “great shout” (v. 3; cf.

sense of a duration of time (rather than

katpds

Kairos, a “particular, critical moment”; cf. Mark 1:15). The mystery of God will be fulfilled when the seventh trumpet is blown (10:7), marking 11:15 as a signal moment in the narrative. The angel reveals that the mystery is moving to its climax. God had proclaimed that this would happen by means of his servants, the prophets {(v. 7; cf. Jer 7:25; Dan-9:6;,%e

2, ~

0, %

~~

REFLECTIONS Despite the universal and indiscriminate effects of the judgment as the seals are opened the vision does not ignore the reactions of particular groups. The opening of the fifth seal focuses on the martyrs (6:9). The cry for vindication and vengeance is an understandable one.” This honest expression of desire lies deep within those who have been victimized. God’s response to their cries is to give comfort and an exhortation to patience. The witness (and death) of others has to take place first. This may seem at first sight rather a strange response. Yet, it is a reminder of the important task of witnessing. That cannot be bypassed; it must go ahead. Humanity has to be given the opportunity to listen and see things differently, even if at the same time there is despair of humanity’s responding to the prophets in any way except by killing them. Indeed, in the midst of the crisis provoked by the proclamation of an eternal gospel, the prophets need to interpret the disease and disorder of the world. In the face of 242. See J. Kerrigan, Revenge Tragedy: Aeschylus to Armageddon (London: Oxford University Press, 1996).

645

REVELATION

11:1-19 REFLECTIONS

the continued deferral of the climax of the promise at the end of the first two sequences of sevens (8:1, 15), when the expected fulfillment does not quite materialize, humanity needs to take full advantage of the opportunity offered. 1. In Revelation 10-11, as in 1:19, there is a direct call to participate as a prophet rather than merely be a passive spectator. John’s commission comes in a context of much urgency. Like the Lamb in chap. 5, the prophet takes the scroll and shares in the same kind of activity. Prophecy is no longer merely an uttering of oracles but involves the whole of life. The message is internalized (10:9) and forms part of the very being of the prophet. The prophetic role encompasses every aspect of life (and death), something experienced by all true prophets of God. Prophets could expect a life of witness, suffering, and death. Chapter 11 is an important reminder that the vast eschatological drama unfolding before John’s visionary gaze leaves neither him nor his audience as passive spectators, uninvolved or unaffected. In the midst of superhuman forces, humans have a prophetic role—indeed, this is the role of the church as a whole. This prophetic vocation takes on a new dimension of urgency when one recognizes that, in reality, the holy community itself is riddled with

compromise with Babylon, as the letters to the angels of the churches indicate.” 2. Resistance, dissent, and non-conformity are recurring themes of this commentary. They trip from the lips or drip from the pen and easily mask the enormous psychological and social cost that resistance engenders. The story of non-conformity, from the anguished agony of Jeremiah to contemporary prisoners of conscience, frequently involves enormous personal expense. A spirituality of resistance involves vigilance as well, lest, imperceptibly, non-conformity slip into an attitude of making a virtue out of difference. When resistance becomes a hardened habit of life, it can cause one’s humanity to shrivel. To guard against this one needs the constant mutual support and correction that a network of solidarity can bring and critical reflection on one’s position in the light of the consistent refusal of texts like Revelation to offer any consolation of certainty and self-righteousness. Indeed, Revelation and texts like 4 Ezra and the Gospel of Matthew hardly satisfy the lust for certainty and the self-satisfaction of an elect group, nor do they offer security to the readers. Arguably, they are among the least assuring texts of the first century cE.

3. A common temptation of religious people who claim to be prophets is to speak at a level of generality that ignores the specificity of context and situation. Christian speakers are too often quick with a general comment, manifesting a vagueness that floats over a situation at a sufficiently uncontroversial and unthreatening level. This ignores one of the major elements of prophecy, the necessity of commenting on specific matters, brilliantly summarized by Blake: Prophets, in the modern sense modern sense, for his prophecy opinion both of private & public such a thing shall happen let you

of the word, have never existed. Jonah was no prophet in the of Nineveh failed. Every honest man is a Prophet; he utters his matters. Thus: If you go on So, the result is So. He never says, do what you will. A Prophet is a seer, not an Arbitrary Dictator.2“

Blake frequently criticized abstractions or grand theories and attended to “minute particulars.” It is a healthy sign that contemporary Christians are concerned with the debt of developing nations, threats to the environment, and the arms trade. But we need to guard against being so general in our concerns that we fail to engage specific concerns and, more important, miss

the “angel at our door.”

243. There are important comments relating to this theme in A. Y. Collins, “The Political Perspective of the Revelation to John,” Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1996) 198ff. 244. William Blake, Annotations to “An Apology for the Bible in a Series of Letters Addressed to Thomas Paine by R. Watson, D.D., F.R.S.,” in Blake: Complete Writings, ed. G. Keynes (London: Oxford University Press, 1966) 392. 245. William Blake, “Holy Thursday,” in Keynes, Blake.

646

REVELAT ION 12:1-18 SIGNS IN HEAVEN: THE WOMAN AND THE DRAGON NRSV | ‘)A great and wondrous sign appeared in

1

A great portent appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pangs, in the agony of giving birth. ’Then another portent appeared in heaven: a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and

heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon mder her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. ?She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. °Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on his heads. His tail swept a

seven diadems on his heads. “His tail swept down

third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the

a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to

woman who was about to give birth, so that he hild the moment it was born. She gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron scepter. And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. The woman fled into the desert to a place prepared. for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.

woman who was about to bear a child, so that he might devour her child as soon as it was born. SAnd she gave birth to a son, a male child, who

the earth. Then the dragon stood before the

is to rule? all the nations with a rod of iron. But her child was snatched away and taken to God and to his throne; °and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, so that there she can be nourished for one thousand two hundred sixty days. 7And war broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels fought against the dragon. The dragon and his angels fought back, ®but they were defeated, and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. °The great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. 10Then | heard a loud voice in heaven, proclaiming, “Now have comee the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Messiah,? for the accuser of our comrades* has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God. But they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb

7And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. *But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. °The great dragon was hurled down— that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him. 10Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say: “Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Christ. For the accuser of our brothers, who accuses them before our God day and

hight, has been hurled down. They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony;

they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death. 2Therefore rejoice, you heavens

2Or to shepherd

647

® Gk Christ

© Gk brothers

REVELATION

12:1-18

_ NRSV

NIV

and by the word of their testimony, for they did not cling to life even in the face of death. | 12 Rejoice then, you heavens and those who dwell in them!

and you who dwell in them! But woe to the earth and the sea, because the devil has gone down to you! He is filled with fury,

because he knows that his time is short.”

But woe to the earth and the sea,

—13When the dragon saw that he had been hurled to the earth, he pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. '*The woman was given the two wings of a great eagle, so that she might fly to the place prepared for her in the desert, where she would be taken care of for a time, times and half a time, out of the serpent’s

for the devil has come down to 7 with great wrath,

because he knows that his time is short!” 13So when the dragon saw that he had been thrown down to the earth, he pursued? the woman who had given birth to the male child. 4But the woman was given the two wings of the

reach. Then from his mouth the serpent spewed

great eagle, so that she could fly from the serpent

water like a river, to overtake the woman and sweep her away with the torrent. '*But the earth helped the woman by opening its mouth and swallowing the river that the dragon had spewed out of his mouth. '7Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspring—those who obey God’s commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus.

into the wilderness, to her place where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time. 'SThen from his mouth the serpent poured water like a river after the woman, to sweep her away

with the flood. '*But the earth came to the help of the woman; it opened its mouth and swallowed the river that the dragon had poured from his mouth. '’Then the dragon was angry with the woman, and went off to make war on the rest of

her children, those who keep the commandments of God and hold the testimony of Jesus. 18Then the dragon? took his stand on the sand of the seashore. a Or persecuted

oGk Then he; other ancient authorities read

Then I stood

(COMMENTARY her head (cf. 1:16). She is crying out in labor pains (cf. Isa 66:7). She may be contrasted with Babylon in 17:4, who is clothed in purple and adorned with gold and precious stones. She is in “agony” or “torment” (Bacavitw basanizo), the word used to describe the experience of the inhabitants of the world as the judgment comes (O:59°4:10-1ls 187,400, 1S: sche ikem 2123): Thus she is not immune from that experience. Elsewhere in the NT, childbirth is used as a metaphor for the birth of the reign of God (Matt 24:8; Mark 13:8; 1 Thess 5:3). Paul uses the metaphor of childbirth to describe creation as it awaits its future glory: “We know that the whole creation has been groaning in labor pains until

Ithough the themes of persecution and vindication pick up where they left off in the vision of the two witnesses, the beginning of chap. 12 is one of the most abrupt transitions in Revelation. Two visions occur in this chapter: a woman pursued by a dragon and the heavenly war between the hosts of the angel Michael and Satan. This leads to the latter’s ejection from heaven, paving the way for an immediate threat to the world’s inhabitants. 12:1-2. John speaks of the appearance of a great sign in heaven, a pregnant woman “clothed with the sun” (cf. the angel in 10:1), with “the moon under her feet” (cf. 6:12; 8:12; 21:23) and a golden crown (cf. 14:14) with twelve stars on

648

REVELATION

12:1-18 COMMENTARY

now; and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly while we wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies” (Rom 8:22 NRSV). 12:3-6. Another sign in heaven appears alongside the first (v. 3), a great dragon, whose identity is explained in v. 9 and whose effects on earth are envisioned in 13:1ff. (cf. 20:2). The dragon’s appearance is “fiery” (cf. 6:4), and its seven heads, ten horns, and seven diadems fesemblesthe.beast\in' 13:1) (cf..5:6; 19:12; Dan 7:7). Its tail (cf. 9:10) sweeps one-third of the starsof heaven to earth (cf. 6:13; 8:12; Dan 8:10). The dragon stands in the woman’s presence, echoing language used of the Lamb and the great multitude that stand in God’s presence. But the dragon is a lurking, threatening presence (v. 4; cf. Gen 4:7), because it intends to devour the woman’s child as soon as it is born. She gives birth to a male child, “who is to rule the nations with a rod of iron” (v. 5; e227 TAP ON OAS. PS2:9).22°) Theschild is “snatched away and taken to God” (the verb aptda¢w |[harpazo| is used elsewhere of being “snatched up” to heaven; see 2 Cor 12:2, 4. 1 Thess 4:17; cf. Acts 8:39; Wis 4:11). The woman flees into the desert (“wilderness,” NRSV), the place where John will later be taken to see Babylon (17:3). Just as in chap. 17, where the desert gives John a different perspective, so here, too, the desert should not be seen as a harsh and forbidding place. It is the place that God has prepared for the woman, where she will be nourished (v. 6). As the Gospels indicate, the desert is the place where the voice cries out and the Messiah emerges, on the very margins of life

is reminiscent of that of the parents of Jesus when they fled to Egypt with the infant Jesus (Matt 2:13), to a place “prepared” by God in the prophetic scriptures (Matt 2:15). Another parallel of this woman is Hagar, who found relief in the wilderness after being ill treated by Sarah (Gen 16:7) and rejected by Abraham (Gen 21:14). Even in a situation of exclusion, there is succor for Hagar (Gen 16:7; 21:19). 12:7. Juxtaposed with this vision is the mention, but not description, of a war in heaven.? Elsewhere in Revelation, war consists of the beast’s persecuting God’s people (11:7; 12:17; 13:7) and the final battle (16:14; 19:19; 20:8). This war, though waged in heaven, will have enormous significance for humankind. Michael leads the fight against the dragon (cf. 19:11ff.). This is the only reference to the archangel Michael in Revelation (elsewhere in the NT only at Jude 9, also in the context of a struggle with Satan}. Michael is the angelic protector of the people of God (Dan 12:1), their advocate in heaven (cf. Rom 8:34, where that role is assumed by the ascended Christ; see also 1 John 2:1). 12:8-9. These verses suggest an assault from the devil, in line with the active pursuit of the interests of the beast in Revelation, but the dragon and “his angels” are defeated. It is worth noting that, while the immediate environs of God’s presence may be one of perfection, no place this side of the new Jerusalem is immune from the struggle with the forces of darkness (cf. Eph 6:10). The dragon is cast out, and accompanies the stars, the fiery mountain and the hail that fell to earth (8:7). The throwing down of Satan is a theme hinted at elsewhere in the New Testament (see Luke 10:18), but is particularly important in John 12:31. There the struggle is focused on the inner turmoil of Jesus, and the earthly presence of Satan is acted out in the person of Judas (John 13:2, 27). The apocalyptic moment comes abruptly and is described without any of the usual elements of cosmic upheaval. In John 12:27-36, Jesus appears to be in a state of inner conflict and asserts: “Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out” John 12:31 NRSV). There is a link with the cross (e.g., 12:33; cf. 13:1; 17:1), but the emphatic viv (nun, “now”)

(Matt 3:3ff.).24” It is unclear who will take care of the woman (if it is angels, then this is a parallel to the care Jesus received during his trial in the desert, according to Mark 1:13). The period of her nurture is 1,260 days, roughly the same amount of time the nations will “trample over the holy city” in 11:2 (1,260 days are roughly equivalent to 42 months). The situation of the woman contrasts with that of the dragon, which will have no place in heaven (12:8, 14). The woman’s flight 246. This myth is found in a similar form in the gnostic Apocalypse of Adam from the Nag Hammadi texts. See J. M. Robinson, The Nag Hammadi Library (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977) 260-61. 247. On the role of the desert in early monasticism, see P. Brown, 7he Body and Society (London: Faber, 1991). “

248. See Bauckham, 7he Climax of Prophecy, 210-37.

649

REVELATION

12:1-18 COMMENTARY who have “conquered” by the blood of the Lamb (cf. 7:9, 14; 14:3). In God’s presence, the Son of Man acknowledges the name of the One who “conquers” (3:5). The comrades “conquered” Satan in three ways: through the blood of the Lamb, with the word of their testimony, and by virtue of the fact that “they did not cling to life even in the face of death” (cf. Matt 10:28; 16:25-26). The ejection of Satan from heaven and the lack of heavenly prosecution are here juxtaposed with the saints’ earthly activities. What appears to be threatening is shown to be an empty sham (though that does not deny the physical and spiritual hardship to be endured). “Conquering” and the end of accusation parallel each other. The Lamb’s blood (5:9; 12:11; cf. 1:5; 19:13) is linked with the “conquering” of “our brethren” (NRSV, “comrades”). The word of their testimony (cf. 1:5; 2:13; 3:14) is in continuity with that of the Lamb, provoking the same kind of response as that to the Lamb (11:7). Babylon will get drunk on the blood of the witnesses to Jesus (17:6; cf. 18:24). Solidarity with the way of the Lamb, the faithful witness, means suffering discrimination and possibly death, especially when following that way involves avoiding worship of the beast for the sake of the word of God and the witness to Jesus (6:9; cf. 12:11). Those who lose their lives are those who bear witness to the Lamb (11:5) and refuse to bow down to the beast (13:15). Such action, carried on with dogged perseverance (cf. 14:12), enables them, eventually, to stand before God’s throne (cf. 22:4). 12:12. This verse returns to the theme of rejoicing, specifically directed to heaven and its inhabitants (cf. 18:20). The word used for “dwell” (oxnvow skenoo, “to tent,” the word used of the incarnation in John 1:14) is different from the one used for “the inhabitants” of the earth (katouKéw katotkeo ), who are uniformly presented as being under the sway of the beast and rejoicing over the slaughter of the witnesses (11:10). But the carnival atmosphere of 11:10 was premature. It is heaven that can rejoice in a festal spirit (cf. 18:20; Isa 49:13), whereas a woe is pronounced on “the "earth “and tne "sea “(cf "8132" 0212" 11:13). This is because the devil (cf. 2:10; 20:10; “Satan” [zatavas Satanas| and “devil” [StéBoros diabolos| are clearly interchangeable, as 12:9 and 20:2 indicate) has descended to it. But Satan’s

in John 12:31 suggests that the triumph is not solely focused on the cross. Indeed, according to John 3:19, the eschatological judgment has already been brought into being by the coming of the Son into the world. The identity of the dragon is made quite clear, and the link with Gen 3:1, 14 is made explicit. The role of deceiver has been alluded to briefly in the description of Jezebel, the false prophet, in 2:20. There a church was threatened with deceit (cf. Matt 24:4-5, 11, 24); here it is the whole world (cf. 13:14 18:23> (19:20: 20:3, 18», LO}. Being led astray, particularly in a time of crisis (see Matt 24:5, 11, 24; 1 John 2:26), is an ever-present threat. False prophecy was always a problem within the Bible (Deuteronomy 13; 18; and Jeremiah 23 are obvious examples). As we shall see in Revelation 13, that deceit is found in the fascination with, and worship of, the beast. At the end of v. 9, John repeats the reference to Satan’s being cast out but adds that his destination is earth. 12:10. A voice is heard in heaven (cf. 10:4; 11:12; 14:2; 18:4; 19:1). The emphatic “now” (cf. 14:13; John 12:31) stresses the significance of the moment that “has come” (see the Commentary on 11:15). As compared with 4:11 and earlier hymns to God and the Lamb, this hymn (and the related passage in 11:15) includes a reference to the kingdom and salvation (cf. 7:10) The kingdom is now seen to belong to God and the rule to God’s Messiah (cf. Dan 7:14; Matt 28:18). The kingdom is closely related to Satan’s ejection from heaven. Satan is called “an accuser of our comrades” who accuses them “day and night before our God,” contrasting with the day-and-night praise of the elders (4:8; cf. 7:15; 14:11). This verse reflects an ancient understanding of Satan as a heavenly prosecutor in passages like Job 1:9ff. and Zech 3:1, another reminder that heaven, without its catharsis, is not without threat or conflict (cf. 15:2ff.). In the Gospels, Satan has a testing role, but the Pauline Epistles offer a picture

of Satan as lord of a realm “outside” that of Christ (.Gor-S:y2"Gors4:4. 1. Tim W120) mand asa constant threat to Paul (2 Cor 2:11; 12:7; 1 Thess 2:18). For Paul, Satan can at times appear to be on the side of good (2 Cor 11:14). 12:11. The obstacle to access to God is removed, and salvation may be enjoyed by those

650

REVELATION

12:1-18 COMMENTARY

time is short. The little time Satan has left corresponds to that careful quantification of time allotted to the witness (11:2), to the nurture given to the woman (vv. -7, 14), and to the short span of the reign of one of the kings in 17:10 (cf. 2:10; Dan 12:7; Mark 13:20). It may be a vicious time for those who resist the devil, but it is not of indefinite duration. In a passage that is directly analogous to this one and found only in Luke’s Gospel, at the end of the temptations of Jesus (Luke 4:13), the devil departs from Jesus “until an opportune time.” That leaves the time of Jesus’ ministry as a period when evil is overcome (Luke 10:18-19; 11:18). It is brought to an end with the diabolical plot to murder Jesus (Luke 22:3; cf. Luke 22:31). Here in v. 12, as in Luke, Satan has his moment. And it is a time of wrath, a theme of the visions to come, but then it will be God’s wrath (14:8, 10, 19; 15:1, 7; 16:1, 19) or “the wine of the wrath” of Babylon’s fornication (14:8; 18:3; cf. 6:16-17; 11:18) that earth’s inhabitants will need to avoid. Satan’s power is ultimately ineffective and futile. 12:13-14. In the last mention of the woman who had given birth (v. 6), she had fled into the desert to be nourished. She reappears in these verses to be pursued by the dragon. Thus the defeat of Satan is sandwiched between the two parts of the narration of the vision of the woman clothed with the sun. Satan is defeated and cannot conquer the woman and her offspring, however vigorous the persecution. Earlier the dragon had stood in the presence of the woman as she prepared to give birth (v. 4). Now, ejected from heaven, it pursues the woman, who is now identified as the one who bore the male child. But she is given “the two wings of the great eagle” (cf. Isa 40:31, which echoes a favorite theme of Revelation, patient

endurance}. She escapes to her place in the desert, where she is nourished (cf. 6:16; 20:11). 12:15-18. The dragon, now referred to as “the serpent” (0 dots ho ophis), poured “water like a river” from his mouth to persecute the woman, “to sweep her away with the flood” (v.

15; cf. 9:17-18; 11:5; 16:13). She is protected from the flood (cf. Isa 43:2), however, when the earth comes to help her and swallows the water (v. 16). The earth rises up, as it were, to aid the woman, against those who destroy the earth (itet 3): The devil’s anger with the woman leads him to make war on the rest of her “seed” (oTépya sperma, v. 17; NIV, “offspring”; NRSV, “children”), an indication that the woman symbolizes the people of God. The “seed” of the woman (v. 17; cf. Gen 14:12; Gal 3:16-17) are “those who keep the commandments of God and hold the testimony of Jesus” (cf. 14:12). Just as earlier the recognition of the judgment of God and the assertion of God’s reign had provoked the anger of the nations (11:18), so also now the defeat and ejection of Satan have provoked his wrath. It will mean war on the saints who are linked with the One who will rule the nations with an iron rod (v. 5; cf. 2:27). The war in heaven between Satan’s host and the host of Michael in v. 7 now has its earthly counterpart,?*? as that multitude who have “washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” (7:14 NRSV) must engage in the struggle with Satan’s earthly representative, the beast, the evil empire. John’s vision ends abruptly with the sight of Satan standing on the seashore on the brink of the abyss, that place from which the beast will rise to try the faithfulness of the saints (cf. eva 249. G. B. Caird, The Revelation (London: A. & C. Black, 1966) 154.

REFLECTIONS The two signs in heaven offer clues for reflection on Revelation 12: The woman is persecuted and bears a child, and the dragon is thrown out of heaven. 1. John’s vision of the woman contrasts with the vision of Babylon in chap. 17. There a woman is supported by the beast; here the woman is nurtured by God—not in te but in the wilderness, where she is taken on eagle wings:

REVELATION

12:1-18 REFLECTIONS

|God] gives power to the faint, and strengthens the powerless. Even youths will faint and be weary, and the young will fall exhausted; but those who wait for the LorD shall renew their strength, they shall mount up with wings like eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint. (Isa 40:29-31 NRSV)

Babylon is supported by the beast and is subject to the vagaries of the beast’s vicious behavior (17:16). The woman here is pursued by the dragon and is dependent on God. This kind of portrayal sits uneasily with an outlook on life that prefers action, responsibility, autonomy, and involvement. The picture offered of Jesus in the closing chapters of the Gospels is that of a victim, mostly passive though never fatalistic and powerless. To wait and to watch is a vocation that our age finds difficult, and yet it may be all that is politically possible as it was in John’s day, confronted as he was with the apparently all-embracing power of the Roman imperium. “The one who endures to the end shall be saved” (Mark 13:12). Victorinus of Pettau linked the woman with the ancient church of the ancestors in the faith, the prophets, the saints, and the apostles; it comes as no surprise, though, that from the sixth century onward Christian tradition has connected the vision of the woman in this chapter with Mary, mother of the

Messiah.” It is in this dramatic chapter that the conflict between good and evil and the enormity of the threat to the vulnerable are most vividly portrayed. It is not always easy to comprehend how such potent images can relate to the ordinariness of our lives. Nor is it easy to give ourselves the permission to connect them with what appears to be the triviality of our everyday existence. Threat and insecurity lie at the heart of the dramatic signs in Revelation 12. The vision of the woman clothed with the sun is one of glory. Yet at the same time she is vulnerable. She is pregnant and about to give birth, not a situation in which one can think of defending oneself. She shares the pain of the torment of creation. She gives birth, her offspring is preserved and nurtured, and the woman is cared for. Like Hagar (Gen 16:7), the woman in Revelation 12 finds relief in the wilderness. Even in that situation of exclusion and apparent God-forsakenness, there is succor for her. Revelation 12 suggests two ways in which the threat is overcome: (1) recognition of vulnerability and trust in God and (2) lack of defensiveness, obedience to God, and holding true to the witness of Jesus. Revelation’s advice to its readers is not a defensiveness based on weapons of war or protection of oneself, but an admonition to continue the way of the testimony of Jesus. There is no guarantee that there will be no threat or freedom from threat or harm. Nevertheless, the reality of the threat is nothing compared to the nakedness that is exposed at the judgment of Christ and the impoverishment of one’s own integrity by the (apparently sensible) strategy of self-protection through wealth, property, and accommodation with the beast. Divine protection is the basis for real security and self-worth. There is no human nurture that can ultimately be relied upon or any defensive strategy that will ultimately protect. To be secure in oneself is to be secure in God and to accept oneself as worthy and glorious in the sight of God; to accept that we are loved even if we may not always be able to feel it. That is no easy task, but it is the root of a sense of worth that does not have to rely on the ephemeral nature of false gods, which, as Revelation reminds us, ultimately involve us in the worship of the beast. What is required is an unmasking, something that is grasped in a different way in the words of Thomas Cranmer: “to whom all hearts are open, all desires known and

from whom no secrets are hid.””' They remind us that the one with whom we have to deal 250. P. Prigent, Apocalypse 12. Histoire de l’exégése (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1988). 251. The Collect for Purity, Service of Holy Communion, Anglican Book of Common Prayer.

652

REVELATION

12:1-18 REFLECTIONS

searches the very depths of our being (Rev 2:23), and there is no point in hiding the reality behind the masks we have constructed to protect ourselves.

2. Talk about Satan is avoided by some liberally minded people. It seems to reflect the beliefs of simple-minded believers or the fantasies of infancy, which mature adults should have grown out of. The demonic world, particularly when it dwells on destruction, is one we may find distasteful—even pathological. We may find ourselves reacting negatively to images of hostility and polarization or, rightly, reluctant to “demonize” others. The symbolism of evil in the Bible is a problem,” and yet it is a potent resource to help us to comprehend the forces that upset and subvert our managed lives. Satan symbolizes that which stands between humans and the divine presence, and the personification of him as a dragon or a serpent is a sign of the reality of evil. As Revelation indicates, the manifestation of Satan’s power is complex. It is institutional and social as well as personal. Thus the beast is a concrete embodiment of evil power. Evil does not take the form of a single king but an imperial institution or structure; it is a way of operating, and its agents of propaganda take many shapes (13:1ff.). Likewise, Babylon is not an individual but a city with its whole network of relationships and institutions contributing to a pattern of life, involvement in which John calls “fornication.” Revelation beckons us to broaden our horizons to understand the scope of evil by not confining it to what we can manage (e.g., the person who is before us or who may seem a threat to us), just as it refuses to allow us to confine the horizon of hope and salvation to the individual person’s destiny. Revelation’s unmasking of the extent of deception and the flattery of evil is entirely consistent with the practice of Jesus, who not only rooted out evil in the individual person but sought to do so in society as well. By his death, the veil of the Temple, which maintained the mystique of an institution and kept a ruling elite in power, was ripped in two. The agent of God’s kingdom could not fulfill his role without dealing with the influence it had on both individuals and society. So he went up to Jerusalem and met the resistance of its operators. The system opposed him and apparently crushed him, but in so doing it was itself denuded and overcome (Mark 15:38).”° 3. In Revelation what is opposed often is a slight perversion of something that is of God: a city (chap. 17; cf. chap. 21), a beast/Lamb bearing the marks of slaughter (chap. 5; cf. chap. 13), a prophetic spirit (2:20; cf. 11:5; 19:10), sexual impurity/purity (chaps. 2; 17; cf. chaps. 14; 21). So often evil is a distortion of what is good. The world is not to be rejected; its goodness is not to be despised, though its exploitation is. It is the way in which wealth is made that is the problem, and the disfiguration of humanity that takes place in that process are evil. 4. The bringing to birth of the messianic age and its different values is a threat to those who would maintain the status quo of the powers of this age. The symbolism of evil has a very “down-to-earth” dimension in Revelation (e.g., 12:12). The heavenly struggle is closely linked with the earthly struggle of those who seek to maintain their testimony of faith in Jesus (12:10). The letter to the Ephesians coincides with Revelation 12 in stressing the extraordinary character of the struggle Christians are engaged in (Eph 6:10). It is not just about wrestling with the temptation of individual peccadilloes or personal relations but with the effects of larger, superhuman forces. Only an apocalyptic language can give us some means of expressing the enormity of what confronts us. That is the privileged insight of those who seek an alternative

way as they continue the cosmic struggle begun by Jesus (Eph 2:6; 3:5; cf. Matt TOnee

252. P. Ricoeur, The Symbolism of Evil (New York: Beason, 1969). 253. See Ched Myers, Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story ofJesus (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1988). 254. The historical background and meaning of NT passages concerning the principalities and powers is explored by Walter Wink, Naming the Powers (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1984); Unmasking the Powers (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, | 986); and Engaging the Powers (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992). ‘

653

REVELATION

12:1-18 REFLECTIONS

5. While Revelation differentiates sharply between good and evil, it refuses to allow the reader that complete certainty and satisfaction of knowing who is in the group of the elect and who is outside it. It does not countenance a simple division between the church and the world. The letters to the seven churches indicate that uncleanness and fornication are rife in the churches. The pollution (3:4) and nakedness that are later threats (14:4; 16:15; 17:16) can already be found in the churches. There are no grounds for complacency. There is need for vigilance (3:3) and the endeavor to keep one’s robes clean (22:14). There is little suggestion that the present practice of the church is anything but confused and compromised. The only mark of true religion is based on a prophetic witness that refuses to accept the mark of the beast. This—not membership in the Christian church or being a pillar of society—is the criterion for inclusion in the book of life.

654

Bey PLA TION 1321-18 palHE» VISION OF —

eS TS

oe

.

| a | 3 ‘And lsawa beastrising outa the sea, / having ten horns and seven heads; and

on itshorns were ten diadems, and on itsheads

were blasphemous names. 2And the beast that

lion. thetone hen thebaa his ote

i saw was like a leopard, its” feet. were like a _bear’s, and its mouth was like a lion’ s mouth. And the dragon gave it his power and his throne and great authority. °One of its heads seemed to have received a death- blow, but its mortal

throne and great authority. 3One of the of the beastseemed to have had a fatalwound? had been healed. In amazement the whole earth followed the beast. ‘They worwhole cone‘waseons a oilewed the shiped the dragon, for he had given his authorbeast. “Men worshiped the dragon because he had _ ity to the beast, and they worshiped the beast, and who can a en aha to = beast,andie also vor saying, “Who is like the

fight against it?” 5The beast was given a oun iene ae 1 and. blasphemous words, and it was allowed to | for en -two months. “He ee ik mouth

exercise authority for forty-two months. ‘It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against

ie blaspheme God, and to slander his name and God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that

is, those who dwell in heaven. 7Also it was. his dwelling place andthose who live in heaven. |ee oe power to aoe waree the allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them.® It was given authority over every tribe and people and language and nation, ®and all the inhabitants of the earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written fom the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb

that was slaughtered.° _ 9Let anyone who has an ear listen:

10 Tf you are to be taken captive,

oe isto go intoCoe

into captivity you go; if you kill with the sword, with the sword you must be killed. Here is a call for the endurance and faith of the

i itocaptivity he Wil go. anyone is to be killed? with the ord” with thesword hewill bekilled. ce eis io patient endurance and faithfulness 7 the part of the saints.

; "Then I saw another beast, coming out sithe : earth. He had two horns like a lamb, but he spoke like a ¢ ragon. He exercised all the authority of

Saints.

11ThenI saw another beast that rose out of

_ the earth; it had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon. 'It exercises all the authority of the first beast on its behalf, and it makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast,

the first beast on his behalf, and made the earth 7 Sone latemanuscripts And 1 : 08 Or written from the creation of the world inthe book of life para | 2 the Lamb thatwas slain oo : 10 Some manuscripts anyone Kills

_ aGk the of its death © Other ancient authorities lack this le plague pl sentence — ¢Or written in the book of life of the Lamb that was slaughtered from the foundation of the world

655

REVELATION

13:1-18

NIV

NRSV

and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed. 'SAnd he performed great and miraculous signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to earth in full view of

whose mortal wound? had been healed. 'It per-

let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man’s number. His number is 666.

hundred sixty-six.?

forms great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in the sight of all; ‘4and by the signs that it is allowed to perform on behalf men. Because of the signs he was given power of the beast, it deceives the inhabitants of earth, to do on behalf of the first beast, he deceived the telling them to make an image for the beast that inhabitants of the earth. He ordered them to set had been wounded by the sword? and yet lived; up an image in honor of the beast who was 'Sand it was allowed to give breaths to the image wounded by the sword and yet lived. '"He was of the beast so that the image of the beast could given power to give breath to the image of the even speak and cause those who would not worfirst beast, so that it could speak and cause all ship the image of the beast to be killed. '*Also it who refused to worship the image to be Killed. causes all, both small and great, both rich and 'oHe also forced everyone, small and great, rich poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or the forehead, '’so that no one can right hand or on hisforehead, '’so that no one | buy or sell who does not have the mark, that is, could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which the name of the beast or the number of its name. is the name of the beast or the number of his '8This calls for wisdom: let anyone with undername. standing calculate the number of the beast, for it Je This calls for wader If anyone has insieht is the number of a person. Its number is six > Or that had received the aGk whose plague of its death d@Other ancient authorities plague of the sword ¢ Or spirit read six hundred sixteen

(COMMENTARY its horns (cf. 12:3). On its heads are names of blasphemy (NIV, “a blasphemous name”; NRSV, “blasphemous names”; cf. 17:3). These names contrast with the names of God and the Lamb, which are written on the foreheads of the inhabitants of the New Jerusalem (22:4; cf. 14:1). In appearance, the beast is like a leopard, with feet like a bear and the mouth of a lion. Three of Daniel’s beasts are here merged into one (cf. Dan 7:4-6). The dragon of chap. 12 gives the beast its power (v. 2), its authority, and its throne, the very throne that the angel of Pergamum had been warned about earlier (2:13; cf. 16:10). One of the heads resembles the Lamb in that it is described as having “received a death-blow” (exactly the words used in 5:5), but the “mortal wound” (lit., “the plague of its death”) had been healed and so can afflict the whole world at the climax of God’s wrath in 19:21. 13:4. In the face of the dragon’s power, the whole world follows after it in amazement (v. 4; cf. 17:8) and worships it—activity that should be

apter 12 ended with the dragon standing -on the seashore, angrily seeking to make war on the woman’s offspring. Two more beasts appear in chap. 13. From the sea emerges a beast that exercises the authority of the dragon. It is aided by a beast that rises out of the earth. The immediacy of the threat to the earth and its inhabitants, which is the consequence of Satan’s ejection from heaven, is set out in this vision. John sees the world’s inhabitants falling in line and worshiping the beast. Those who refuse to worship the beast have to live (and die) with the consequences. 13:1-3. A beast had already emerged from the abyss to persecute the two witnesses (11:7). This new beast, which appears from the sea, will be the seat upon which the woman called Babylon will sit (17:3). The sea, which will disappear in the new creation (21:1), is a sign of chaos (cf. Gen 1:7; Ps 104:9; Dan 7:3). Like Satan, the beast has ten horns and seven heads and diadems on

656

REVELATION 13:1-18 COMMENTARY reserved for God. Not even the Lamb is to be worshiped, and later John will be given strict

13:5-6. Permission is now given to the beast to “exercise authority” for forty-two months (cf. 11:2; 12:6).2%° The dragon has transferred its power and authority to the beast. This permission is now set in the context of another scheme of things, a higher power (8iSwyt didomi, the passive “was given,” often indicates the way in which things are allowed to happen within the divine Brovidences see: 6:1, 6-772; ~9:32-1:21 :°-13:7, 14-16; cf. Ezek 20:26; Acts 7:42; Rom 1:24). The beast’s arrogant speech echoes that of the horn of the fourth beast in Dan 7:8, 11, 20. It blasphemes not only the name of God (cf. Lev 24:15-16), but also God’s dwelling, which may refer to the heavenly temple (cf. 21:2) or be used, in a transferred sense, to indicate the holy people (7:15; cf. 21:3). This is suggested by the second explanatory gloss, “those who dwell in heaven” (cf. 12:12). While the present age of injustice lasts, heaven is the location of the divine glory (cf. 4:1); it, too, had been pervaded by the power of Satan (cf. Job 1) when he had accused “our comrades” (12:10). According to v. 7a, the beast is not just engaged in words of blasphemy but in hostile actions against the saints (as is the horn in Dan 7:21). The war on the saints recalls the war of Michael and Satan in heaven (12:7), won by the angels of light, particularly the war of the beast against the witnesses and its conquest of

them (11:7). However, many mss lack this sentence. 13:7-8. The apparent universality of worship offered to the beast is qualified, however, by the reference to the Lamb’s book of life. Until the books are opened (20:12; cf. Dan 12:1) and judgment takes place, the names contained in it are unknown. Thus the threat remains for all on earth, believer and unbeliever alike, that one’s name might be removed. 7he criterion for inclusion in the book of life is to resist worshiping the beast. The “Lamb that was slaughtered before the foundation of the world” (see NRSV note) refers to a pre-existent truth that reflects the world of apocalyptic mysteries and truths, where things are known from eternity even if they are only now revealed eschatologically (cf. Rom 16:20; Eph 3:9; Col 1:26).2°”7 Although there is nothing in Revelation that takes us back further than the decisive event of the life and death of the Lamb (and so little apart from 3:14 that suggests a doctrine of pre-existence), a statement like v. 8 reminds us that the mystery of the saving events has been with God from eternity (cf. 1 Pet 1:20). The message NT writers believed they were sharing was the ultimate divine mystery, opaque and only glimpsed in a fragmentary way until now. Its disclosure is surprising: The ultimate apocalyptic sign is an executed victim (1 Cor 2:6ff.). The divine mystery is a Lamb who is slain, a victim of injustice, yet a faithful and true witness. 13:9-10. The vision is then interrupted by two aphorisms (similar to Jer 15:2; 43:11), written in awkward Greek, that suggest the necessity of accepting the constraints placed on discipleship by one’s circumstances. These aphorisms are prefaced with a summons to attentiveness, which ran as a refrain throughout the letters to the angels (ere.2?7s oh Matt: 1 tl S293:0543)— and “con cludes with a call for the patience and faithfulness of the saints (cf. 14:12). The first aphorism speaks of the acceptance of any captivity that may befall one (cf. 2:10). The second promises death by the sword for those who resist with the sword (cf. 13:14). Such death has already been experienced by some (according to 2:13) and is an imminent

255. K. Wengst, Pax Romana and the Peace ofJesus Christ (London: SCM, 1988). : \ 256. Wink, Engaging the Powers.

257. This is discussed in the Babylonian Talmud, b.Pesahim 54a. See also the survey in R. Hamerton-Kelly, Pre-Existence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973).

instructions to worship God alone (22:9; cf. 19:10). The one exception to this is that the angel of Philadelphia is promised that the members of the synagogue of Satan will come and worship at the angel’s feet (3:9). Verse 4 repeats the fact of the transfer of the dragon’s authority to the beast and the deception involved in worshiping the beast. The amazed question, “Who is like the beast?” (reminiscent of similar sentiments expressed about God in Exod 15:11), is followed by “Who can make war against him?” In other words, their amazement is a combination of a sense of awe at the beast’s military power and a sense of despair: There is no alternative to capitula-

tons

657

REVELATION

13:1-18 COMMENTARY

threat to those who refuse to worship the beast (13:15). Revelation is full of calls to resistance mingled with “patient endurance,” particularly in the context of not being taken in by the allures of the beast. Nevertheless, what these two verses demand, in the midst of a description of the threat posed by the beast, is the need to accept the ill treatment meted out without rebellion (cf. Matt ZOD2) Gor 7st Ait 1 Pet: 2:208f.). 13:11-14. John returns to the description of his vision (v. 11) and sees another beast, this time arising from the land. It has “two horns like a lamb,” but it speaks like a dragon (cf. 16:13, the only other place where mention is made of what comes out of the dragon’s mouth). Verse 12 Suggests that this beast acts as an agent of the first beast and exercises its authority as a kind of grand vizier (cf. 13:14). The function of this new

beast is to make “the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast.” The created world is under thrall to the beast (cf. 11:18; 13:3; 17:5; 19:2). The beast is identified as possessing a mortal wound that has healed (v. 12; cf. v. 3). It “performs great signs” (Tovet onvela peydha poiei semeia megala, the term also used for the “portents” of 12:1; 15:1; cf. 16:14), as did the false prophets predicted by Jesus (Matt 24:4-5, 11, 24; cf. 2 Thess 2:9). Indeed, later this beast will be associated with “the false prophet” (16:13; 19:20; 20:10; cf. Matt 7:15; Acts 13:6, where false prophecy and magic are linked; 1 John 4:1). The signs recall those of Elijah in 1 Kgs 18:38 (cf. Luke 9:54; Rev 11:6). Like Satan, the second beast is a deceiver (see Commentary on 12:9; cf. 20:3). Signs deceive in order to persuade the earth’s inhabitants to make an “image” for the beast “that had been wounded by the sword,” which will be an object of worship, something that is to be resisted, according to 14:9, 11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20; and 20:4. In v. 14, we learn that the mortal wound is a wound of the sword that the beast survived. The references to the image of the beast and the more specific description of the beast’s wound have led commentators over the centuries to suppose these are specific historical allusions. The worship of the image of the beast (v. 14) has been plausibly linked with the promotion of the imperial cult, which was particularly widespread in the area of the churches whose angels are addressed

by John.”°° Emperor worship had become part of the fabric of life, and John’s vision in effect demands of readers that they unravel that fabric and weave a new fabric of living in which the persistent, even casual, participation in state religion and the social conventions that surround it form no part. The beast whose mortal wound was healed may reflect Nero, who was assassinated in 68 cE,*°? but was widely rumored to have escaped death and fled to the east, from whence he was on the point of coming back as emperor. This legend is included in Suetonius’s Life of Nero: “In fact twenty years later (c. 90 ce) when I was a young man, a person of obscure origin appeared, who gave out that he was Nero, and the name was still in such favor with the Parthians that they supported him vigorously and surrendered him with great reluctance.”2 13:15-17. The nature of charlatan is brought out in this verse; a specific series of miraculous occurrences in Asia Minor connected with the statue of the beast is hinted at here, but there is

little hard evidence.°! The instruction that proceeds from the mouth of the image is to be rejected, because it affects the eternal destiny of the readers of the book (v. 8; cf. 17:8). The spurious oracle that comes from the image threatens death to those who do not worship the image of the beast (cf. Dan 3:5-6). This threat is all-encompassing and covers all strata of society (cf. 6:15; 19:5, 18; 20:12). The inclusion of the small as well as the great is a reminder that, whatever the peculiar insight they may have (cf. Matt 11:25ff.), all persons are subject to the blandishments and ideological distortions of power and can be misled by it. This act of worship is not a private matter, for those who worship the beast will receive a mark (xdpayya charagma) on their right hand or on their forehead (cf. 14:9, 11; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4), contrasting with those who stand with the Lamb, who are marked with the name of the Lamb and of God (14:1; cf. 22:4). There are public, social, and economic consequences for those who resist; 258. S. R. F. Price, Rituals and Power; The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984). 259. R. Bauckham, “Nero and the Beast,” in The Climax of Prophecy (Edinburgh: 1992) 384-452. 260. Suetonius Life of Nero 57. 261. W. Ramsay, The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1904) 97ff.

658

REVELATION 13:1-18 COMMENTARY they are excluded from regular social intercourse. may be different from ours. It is the wisdom of Without the name of the beast or the number of God (cf. 5:12; 7:12), not human wisdom, that its name, it becomes impossible to buy or sell. determines true understanding (cf. 1 Cor 1:18ff.). Those “bought” -with the blood of the Lamb (5:9; Precise numbers clearly are important for John cf. 14:3) can do nothing other than resist, how(seers: ldee7:As O2162 chw20:8); ever. The present disruption of their pattern of One issue that should give us pause for thought life is a temporary hardship compared with the is the translation of the expression. The NRSV wider disruption of buying and selling, which will renders it as “it is the number of a person.” The take place when Babylon is destroyed, provoking REB has “the number represents a man’s name.” the merchants to lament (18:11). But the RSV’s “it is a human number” moves 13:18. Reference to the number of the beast’s away from associating the number with a particuname prompts this word of exhortation (cf. v. 10). lar person. This latter translation seems more But now “anyone with understanding” or “inlikely in the light of 21:17, the only other relevant sight” is required to calculate the number of the use of the word dvOpwttos (anthropos) in Revebeast; people will also be asked to use wisdom to lation, where most translations agree that the understand the mystery of Babylon and the beast word means “human measurement.” Could it be, in 17:9. The mysterious number 666 has attracted then, that the translation “the number of a man” much attention.” Jews in antiquity were fond of might be leading us into unnecessary speculaworking out the numerical value of letters, a tions? Within the context of Revelation itself, the technique called gematria. The numerical value number 7 (used of angels, churches, seals, trumof the name Nero Caesar in Hebrew is 666. This pets, and bowls) implies completeness, particularly interpretation has a long pedigree in the history _ evident in the sense of completion attending the of the interpretation of Revelation as is confirmed description of the last sequence of sevens (15:1, by the variant reading 616 (a reading known 8; cf. 10:7). The number 6 three times over (666) along with 666 to the late second-century writer falls one short of the number of perfection, 7. This Irenaeus). One can understand the change, since falling short is evident also in the interruption the Greek form “Neron Caesar” (Neépwv Katoap

after the sixth seal and the sixth trumpet in 6:12ff. and 9:13ff. The beast seems to be near perfection; it is, after all, a caricature of the Lamb who was slain (13:3). But what it lacks actually renders it diabolical and utterly opposed to God in supposing that it has ultimate power and wisdom (13:4). The numerical value of “Jesus” in Greek is 888, and in 17:11 it is an eighth king, the beast that was and is not, who is a kind of antichrist and who, together with the other kings, will make war on the Lamb. If there is a number game at work here, it is more likely this. But the simpler solution is to see the number 666 as a threefold falling short of perfection, that which is almost messianic but not quite so. It has most of the hallmarks of truth, and so it can easily deceive. For this reason, it must, at all costs, be resisted.?4

Neron Kaisar) written in Hebrew characters (70> 77 Neron Kasar) is equivalent to 666, whereas the Latin form “Nero Caesar” is equivalent to 616. Another suggestion, dependent on a similar numerical computation found in the Sibylline Oracles,’ is that 666 represents a contrast with the numerical value of “Jesus” (‘Incots Jésous) in Greek, which is 888, a contrast that fits in well with the parody of Christ in the image of the beast in this chapter. We need to exercise caution here and not assume that John summons readers to engage in this kind of complex calculation. Would Greek speakers have been able to latch on to the fact that the calculation is to be based on the numerical value of Hebrew, not Greek, letters? Maybe John’s understanding of what constitutes wisdom

264. See Karl Barth’s comments on revolution in the context of the

262. The matter is dealt with in exhaustive detail in R. Bauckham,

discussion of Romans 13 in his The Epistle to the Romans (London: A. & C. Black, 1933) 482-83.

“Nero and the Beast,” in Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy. 263. Sib. Or. i.324ff.

659

REVELATION

13:1-18 REFLECTIONS

REFLECTIONS 1. In Revelation 13 we are given a graphic portrait of the nature and operation of an ideology that cloaks its real goals and identity from those it has taken in. The beast is the incarnation of the powers of evil and attracts universal admiration for its military power and for acts that appear to be beneficial. The people feel pressure to conform (13:14). Those who refuse to do so face social ostracism (13:16). Because the beast has some of the characteristics of the Lamb (13:3, 14), we can understand how easy it is for people to be deceived and how watchful one has to be to avoid being taken in by what seems plausible and thereby colluding with everything that is opposed to the divine justice. We should not underestimate the impact of a prevailing set of ideas on us. When something different and challenging comes along, we

consider it wrongheaded or misguided. That is exactly the effect of what is called ideology.*” It makes you think that widely held ideas are “obvious,” “commonsense,” and “normal,” when in fact they often cover up the powerful vested interests of a small group that has power and wants to retain it. In John’s vision, the task of the beast that arises out of the land is to persuade ordinary people that what they see in the first beast is normal and admirable, so that any deviation or counterculture is regarded as strange and anti-social and, therefore, to be repudiated. John’s vision helps to unmask these processes and is a pointed reminder of the ease with which the powers of evil can seduce us. Despite the widespread assumption that it was evil men like Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot and their supporters who were responsible for crimes against humanity, they would not have been able to commit atrocities without the tacit support of ordinary people (including many Christians), who kept their noses clean, maintained a low profile, and avoided at all costs being seen as “political.” 2. There has been a tendency to limit the applicability of Revelation 13 (if it is used at all; it was explicitly excluded from readings prescribed for the Daily Offices of Morning and Evening Prayer in the old Anglican Book of Common Prayer), either to an eschatological manifestation of evil or to specific cases of tyrannical regimes. Romans 13 (along with Titus 3:1 and 1 Pet 2:13) is then left as the mainstream New Testament teaching on the state, with its apparent exhortation to be subject to the ruling authorities. Such a limitation of the applicability of Revelation 13 limits the breadth of the New Testament witness. What Revelation 13 brings out most clearly is the, perhaps inevitable, demonic character of the state. The state or society in general is not a neutral enterprise, devoid of conflict of interest or human self-aggrandizement. Political theorists from Hobbes to Marx have shown how the state is a means of controlling or masking deep-seated conflicts of interest, and it is important that structures of society be subjected to searching criticism. As human agents, we are prone to use power (or to acquiesce by our lack of resolve) to promote institutions that will serve individual or sectional interests. That can lead to blasphemy when we do not acknowledge the interest of God. The faithful use of political power involves a substantial practical implementation of ways of behaving and the creation of institutions that will give attention to the goals of God’s justice, while recognizing that, because we live in an imperfect age, we shall fall short of our ideals. Romans 13 makes a similar point, although indirectly. The blanket injunction to be subject to the ruling powers is qualified by the assertion that the powers are there as God’s agents, working “for your good” (Rom 13:4 NRSV). Whatever the source of Paul’s teaching on the state, the understanding of the “good” in this context must be informed by the wider Pauline context, in which the divine goodness is mentioned several times (particularly in Rom 12:12). It is true that Paul does not tell us to submit to the powers onlyifthey promote our good. Rather, Paul exhorts the Romans to accept the reality of the constraints of life in “Babylon.” Romans 13 needs to be 265. See the discussion in T. Eagleton, /deology: An Introduction (London: Verso, 1991).

660

REVELATION

13:1-18 REFLECTIONS

balanced by the more realistic portrayal in Revelation 13, which indicates that states serve the interests of some—particularly those who consent to its sanctioned beliefs and practices—and not of all. But Revelation, like Romans 13 (though without the positive assertion of the powers’ role in Rom 13:1), implies submission rather than revolution.” The repeated emphasis that “authority was given” indicates that what takes place is not to be resisted by revolution, except through non-conformity. 3. In one key respect, John’s situation differs from that of most contemporary Western readers of Revelation. Christianity was the religion of a tiny minority, not in any way favored by or linked with the state. It was to be another two hundred years before the Christian religion was incorporated into the life of the state. The emergence of Christendom has resulted in situations very different from the ones contemplated by John, even if from time to time in history there are close analogies to those of the first Christians, such as the situation in Germany in the 1930s. Most Christians find themselves either having to come to some kind of accommodation with the state or gladly being part of a closer alliance between throne and altar in the promotion of national welfare. Individual temperament, upbringing, and experience all condition the formation of our attitudes toward the state. The visions of Revelation present us with serious questions about an uncritical involvement with the state, particularly when it involves, tacitly or implicitly, too close a support for the values and practices of society. Too often churches have colluded with forces that oppose the gospel of Jesus Christ and have provided a veneer of religious respectability for attitudes and regimes that should be rejected by those who bear witness to Jesus Christ. In the time of the apartheid regime in South Africa, the Kairos Document emerged as a Christian, biblical, and theological comment on the political crisis in that nation. It stands in the tradition of the book of Revelation, with its concern to unmask the reality of the situation, and offers a call to the church to engage in a prophetic ministry. Its major difference from Revelation, however, is that it includes a critique of the churches’ collusion with the:state. It is critical of a state theology that is based on a misreading of Romans 13. The composers of the Kairos Document reject the idea that Paul presents an absolute doctrine about the state, and they argue that the text must be interpreted in its own context, in which Christians thought that they were exonerated from obeying the state because Christ alone was their king. Paul’s insistence is on the necessity of some kind of governmental authority. When a state does not obey the law of God and becomes a servant of Satan, however, it is passages like Revelation 13 to which one should turn to illuminate the situation. The use made of a divine sanction for the apartheid system in the constitution of South Africa can be seen as idolatrous: “The god of the South African state is not merely an idol or false god, it is the devil disguised

as Almighty God—the Antichrist.””” Christian churches are criticized for advocating reconciliation as “an absolute principle that must be applied in all cases of conflict or dissension” when reconciliation is impossible without the removal of injustice. Neutrality is nothing but a means whereby the status quo of oppression can continue. The church should expose false peace and reject mere reform of a situation that is inherently evil: “God does not bring his justice through reforms introduced by the Pharaohs

of this world.””” The document calls for “a prophetic theology,” which involves “what Jesus would call reading the signs of the times.” This means being aware of the interests of those maintaining the present system and the exploitation of those most vulnerable in it who labor to keep the 266. See furtherJ.H. Yoder, The Politics ofJesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972); W. Stringfellow, Conscience and Obedience (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1977). 267. The Kairos Document: Challenge to the Church (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1977) 8-10. \ 268. Ibid.

661

REVELATION

13:1-18 REFLECTIONS

privileged minority affluent. The churches should offer a message of hope to oppressed peoples, recognizing that suffering will be a necessary prelude to resurrection. The church of Jesus Christ is not called to be a bastion of caution and moderation. The church should challenge, inspire and motivate people. It has a message of the cross that inspires us to make sacrifices for justice and liberation. It has a message of hope that challenges us to wake up to act with hope and confidence. The church must preach this message not only in words and sermons and statements but also through its actions, programmes, campaigns and divine services.” 269. Ibid.

662

REVELATION 14:1-20

THE LAMB, THE 144,000, THE ETERNAL GOSPEL, AND THE HUMAN FIGURE OVERVIEW n stark contrast to the previous vision, in = which those who worshiped the beast had been marked with its sign, here the Lamb and its followers, with God’s name on their foreheads, stand on Mount Zion. Angelic voices proclaim an eternal gospel and assert the destruction of Baby-

Bi

ee

lon. A final vision of judgment is seen by John in the form of a terrible harvest. This is followed in chapter 15 by a vision of a sea of glass mingled with fire, with those who have “conquered” standing beside it singing a song of deliverance.

ONL Lo LE SONG OF IE ta.C00

NIV Then I looked, and there before me was ] —rthe Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his

Father’s name written on their foreheads. *And I

heard a sound from heaven like the roar of rushing waters and like a loud peal of thunder.

The sound I heard was like that of harpists playing their harps. *And they sang a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders. No one could learn the song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth. ‘These are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they kept themselves pure. ‘They follow the Lamb wherever he goes.

_ They were purchased from among men and of

fered as firstfruits to God and the Lamb. °No lie _ was found in their mouths; they are blameless.

NRSV ]

Then I looked, and there was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion! And with him were one hundred forty-four thousand who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads. And I heard a voice from heaven like the sound of many waters and like the sound of

loud thunder; the voice I heard was like the sound of harpists playing on their harps, °and they sing a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and before the elders. No one could learn that song except the one hundred forty-four thousand who have been redeemed

from the earth. It is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins; these follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They have been redeemed from humankind as first fruits for God and the Lamb, °and in their mouth no lie was found; they are blameless.

663

REVELATION

14:1-5 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY 14:1-3. The phrase “And I saw” (NIV and

redeemed from the earth (5:9) as a first fruits (14:4; cf. Rom 8:23; 16:5;M-Cor’ 15:23; 2 Thess 2:13; Jas 1:18). Only the 144,000 can learn this song (v. 3). 14:4-5. In these verses, John describes the multitude. They have not “defiled themselves with women” and are virgins. They follow the Lamb “wherever he goes” (cf. John 10:4). No lie can be found in their mouths, thus “they are blameless” (cf. Isa 53:9; 1 Pet 2:22). In 3:4, those who have not “soiled their clothes” are worthy to walk with the Lamb. Virginity and non-defilement are linked here, implying abstinence from sexual activity. The picture of the elect as virgins is also found in 2 Cor 11:2 (cf. Matt 25:1ff.).2”° Sexual activity can cause uncleanness (Lev 15:18), which requires ritual cleansing to avoid defiling the tabernacle (Lev 15:31) and the holy mountain (Exod 19:15). How should we read these verses? Does John here bear witness to a misogynist, male-only world,?”'! in which women are either a problem unless they are chaste and passive like the bride of the Lamb and the woman in heaven, or even completely absent from the eschatological vision? We should read this description of those who accompany the Lamb on Mount Zion in the same way in which we read so many of the other images in the vision—that is, metaphorically rather than literally. So it is unlikely that these are actual virgins. The idiom of sexual relations is used to evoke a sense of distinctiveness and purity. The followers of the Lamb are seen as an army of people who are in a state of ritual purity, appropriate for those who fight a holy war (Deut 23:9ff.; 1 Sam 21:5; 2 Sam 11:9ff.; 1QM 7:3ff.).272 It is parallel to the use of the imagery of fornication as a metaphor for idolatry (e.g., 2:14, 21). That does not reduce the difficulty of the fact that the metaphor of defilement with women is being used to describe the singularity and lack of compromise that abstinence from sexual intercourse involves, reflecting the profound distaste through-

NRSV, “Then I looked”) signals another vision, as so often in Revelation (e.g., 4:1; 13:11). “Seeing” is at the heart of John’s message (“write what you see,” 1:19). John sees the Lamb once more (cf. 5:6), but this time the Lamb is standing on Mount Zion. The picture of Zion as a site of salvation is familiar enough from the Old Testament (e.g., Isaiah 2; Micah 4), though Jerusalem is elsewhere in Revelation depicted as a place of rebellion (11:8). Mount Zion is here the site of God’s presence, as the New Jerusalem will be in 21:4 (cf. Ps 46:5: “God is in the midst of the city”). Although the Lamb has been mentioned throughout the vision (e.g., 7:9-10; 12:11; 13:8), this is the first time that it has formed part of one of John’s visions since 6:1, when it opened the first seal. The Lamb is here attended by 144,000 righteous persons (cf. 7:4). These persons are distinguished by the name of the Lamb and the name of the Father of the Lamb on their foreheads (cf. 7:3). This is an unusual christological conjunction: God as the Lamb’s Father is found only here. Elsewhere, God is referred to as the heavenly Father of the Son of Man (e.g., 1:6; 2:27; 3:2122). The description of God as the Lamb’s Father is not surprising, however, given that the Lamb shares the throne of God. In 21:3, the inhabitants of the new Jerusalem are “sons” of God (cf. 2 Sam 7:14). There is an obvious contrast with the previous vision, where those who worship the beast are marked (13:16). But a name is written on the foreheads of the 144,000—not just a mark. What is written is important, even sacred, not only because it is the means of signifying that which is of God, but also because it is the name of God (cf. 22:4). John hears a voice from heaven (v. 2; cf. 10:4), whose sound is like many waters (cf. 1:15; 19:6) and like thunder, but at the same time like harpists playing on their harps (cf. 5:8; 15:2). The 144,000 sing a new song (v. 3), as did the elders and creatures around the throne to mark the Lamb’s taking the scroll (5:8; cf. Ps 144:9). Now the multitude “sing a new song” in the presence of the throne and its attendants (cf. 4:6-7). The song is a mystery to all but those who have been

270. The historical context is surveyed in R. Lane Fox, Pagans and Christians (London: Penguin, 1987) 351ff. See also P. Brown, The Body and Society, (London: Faber and Faber, 1991) 38, 351-74. 271. See T. Pippin, Death and Desire: The Rhetoric of Gender in the Apocalypse ofJohn (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992). 272. See R. Bauckham, “The Book of Revelation as a Christian War

Scroll,” in The Climax of Propecy (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993).

664

REVELATION 14:1-5 COMMENTARY out this book with whatever is ambiguous, mixed, or a compromise (cf. 3:15). John describes the assembled host as a “first fruits” (v. 4). In other words, this is not the sum total of the elect but a foretaste of that great harvest of the elect, which is still to be revealed. Harvest imagery will dominate the second part of this vision (vv. 15-20). By contrast with what comes forth from the mouth of the beast in the previous vision (e.g., 13:5; cf. 3:9; 16:13), what proceeds from the mouths of these people contains nothing untruthful. That characterizes life in the New Jerusalem (21:27; cf. 22:15). Being without blame, here linked with their ransom (NRSV, “redeemed”; NIV, “purchased”; cf. 1 Pet 1:1819), is expected of those who are found worthy to stand in the divine presence (Eph 1:4; Col 1:22; Jude 24). The military imagery implicit in these verses suggests a comparison with the War Scroll from the Dead Sea Scrolls (1QM).?73 In one of the most

fascinating texts found in the vicinity of the Dead Sea, we are offered in detail the inventory of preparations necessary for the fight between the sons of light and the sons of darkness. This is a conventional battle in that weapons of war are used. But like Revelation, it is apparent that this battle is not between humans alone but between angelic forces who fight alongside humans (cf. Josh 5:13-14). But in the war that takes place in heaven in Rev 12:7, the elect do not fight. That does not mean, however, that their endurance and witness contribute nothing to the eschatological process. As in Eph 6:10, we are offered a picture of a battle conducted without weapons and rooted in the triumph of the Lamb (14:1), who (like the Messiah in the contemporary apocalypse 4 Ezra 13:10, 27) stands as a conqueror without indulging in any military action. The warfare of the elect is conducted with other weapons: endurance, witness, prophecy, obedience to God, and remaining loyal to Jesus (14:12). (See Reflections at 14:14-20.)

273. Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy, 210-37.

REVELATION 14:6-13, THE MESSAGE @F fae THREBANGELS | : NRSV

NIV

Then. fp saw another angel flying in midair, and ©- 6Then Itsaw another angel flying in midheaven, with an eternal gospel to proclaim to those who he had the eternal gospel to proclaim to those live? on the earth—to every nation and tribe and who live on the earth—to every nation, tribe, language and people. ’He said in a loud voice, language and people. ’He said in a loud voice, “Fear God and give him glory, because the hour _ “Fear God and give him glory, for the hour of his of his judgment has come. Worship him who judgment has come; and worship him who made heaven and earth, the sea and the springs of made the heavens, the earth, the sea and the water.” springs of water.” 8Then another ee aie followed, say8A second angel followed and said, “Fallen! _ ing, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! cae has Fallen isBabylon the Great, which made all the

nations drink the maddening wine of her

made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath

adulteries.” °A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: “If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the

of her fornication.” QThen another angel, a third, followed them, _ crying with a loud voice, “Those who worship the

_beast and its image, and receive a mark on their foreheads or on their hands, !°they will also drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured unmixed into

hand, !he, too, will drink of the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with

aGk sit —

\

665

NIV

REVELATION 14:6-13 : NRSV the cup of his anger, and they will be tormented

burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. ''And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day

with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. ''And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and its image a for anyone

or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of

his name.” '!*This calls for patient endurance on the partof the saints who obey God’s command-

ments and remain faithful to Jesus. '8Then I heard a voice from heaven say, “Write: Blessed are the oe who die in the se, from now on.” “Yes,” says the Spirit, “theywil rest fromnthe labor, for their deeds will follow them.”

‘who receives the mark of its name.” 12Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of ee aed

hold fast to the faith of? Jesus. 13And I heard a voice from heaven saying, “Write this: Blessed are the dead who from now on die in-the Lord,” “Yes,” says the Spirit, “they

will rest from their labors, for their deeds follow them.” 2Or to their faith in

(COMMENTARY 14:6-7. John sees an angel flying in midheaven, proclaiming an eternal “gospel” (evayyéAtov euangelion; cf. Matt 24:14; Mark 13:10). It is similar to the eagle in 8:13, which proclaims threefold woe. The angel’s message is quite simple: “Fear God and give him glory, for the hour of his judgment has come.” Such fear of God is hinted at elsewhere, explicitly on the part of the earth’s inhabitants (11:11; cf. 11:18; 15:4; 19:5; 1 Pet 2:17). Glory is given to the God of heaven in 11:13 (cf. 16:9) and by the great multitude in 19:7. Giving God glory is the regular habit of the host that surrounds God’s throne (4:9), and it contrasts with the devotion paid to the beast by the world’s inhabitants. In Josh 7:19, giving glory to God is closely linked to confession of sin (cf. John 9:24), and that may be the case in the angelic pronouncement, too. The angel utters a demand to worship the Creator rather than the creature (cf. Acts 17:24; 1 Thess 1:9-10) in the light of the imminence of the hour of judgment (cf. 3:3; 18:10). The message of this gospel is not far removed from the summary in Mark 1:15: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news” (NRSV). In Revelation, the command is to fear God; in Mark, the command is to repent. In

both passages, the presence of a time of crisis is stressed, and in both that crisis is set in the context of a struggle with the powers of the cosmos as the coming of the gospel provokes the possibility of rejection and judgment (cf. Matt 10:7, 15).274 14:8. The first angel is followed by another who proclaims the fall of Babylon (cf. Isa 21:9), the first reference to Babylon in the vision (cf. 16:19; 17:5; 18:2-3). Babylon’s offense was having caused all the nations to “drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication” (cf. Jer 51:7). This awkward phrase can be interpreted as Babylon’s having intoxicated the people and caused wrath as the result of the forgetfulness of the true vocation to worship God and keep God’s commandments (cf. 16:19; 17:2; 18:3; 19:15). 14:9-10. After the first two angels have proclaimed the need to fear God and the imminence of Babylon’s fall, a third angel appears, pronouncing the torment of those who worship the beast. In 13:15, the social cost of non-conformity was stressed. Now the cost of conformity is set forth: “They will also drink the wine of God’s wrath.” Intoxication with Babylon can lead only to God’s wrath, expressed in the image of anger as a strong 274. See Ched Myers, Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story ofJesus (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1988).

666

REVELATION

14:6-13 COMMENTARY

wine drunk undiluted (cf. Isa 51:17; Jer 25:15), in the form of torment (cf. 9:5; 20:10) with fire (Matt 5:22; 25:41; Mark 9:43, 48; 1 Cor 3:13-14; 2 Thess 1:7; 2 Pet 3:7). The presence of the Lamb and the angels is not a blessing (cf. 7:11; 11:4) but judgment (cf. 3:5), consistent with the great day of the wrath of the Lamb, when all the inhabitants of the world will desire to hide themselves (6:16-17). Here the Lamb is not kept away from wrath; as is implied in its role in the opening of the seals, it is a witness to the judgment that takes place upon those who have been compromised by their involvement with the beast and Babylon (v. 10). 14:11-12. Those who surround the throne do not cease day and night praising God (cf. 4:8; 7:15), and in the same way the torment of those who worship the beast and its image and those

resisting the devil, whose authority is given to the beast (cf. 12:10, 17; 13:15ff.). Endurance, which John himself practices (1:9) and which is a key characteristic required of the angels of the seven churches (2:2-3, 19; 3:10), is particularly necessary in the face of the demands of the beast (13:10). It enables “conquest” (cf. Mark 13:13;

Luke: 8:15; °21:19;"Rom-8:24-25;

12:12;"2° Cor

1:6; 1 Thess 1:3). Perseverance is required to resist the blandishments of the beast and the peer pressure that persuades humans to conform. 14:13. Another voice from heaven commands John to write, just as he had been commanded in 1:19; 10:4 and will be again in 19:9. As in 12:10-11 (cf. 11:15) the heavenly voice effects a new situation for the dead who “die in the Lord,” a phrase found only here in Revelation and reminiscent of the ethical injunctions of the Pauline tradition (e.g., Rom 14:14; 16:2ff.; 1 Cor 11:11; 1O:0932 GomZ th Eplink totes Ou Phil 2.24. 29° 3-leArl-23°Cob 4:17 Thess 3:8)% There is an affirmative echo (cf. 1:7) from the Spirit (cf. 22:17; cf. 4:5), who addresses the churches (2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22). The rest from toil echoes 6:9, where the agony of waiting and nakedness is resolved by the granting of white robes. The deeds of the dead are not forgotten, however, for “their deeds follow them” (cf. Sir 44:1ff., esp. v. 9). The deeds of all persons have been written down, to be opened up to public gaze when the books are opened (20:12). The angels of the churches are shown that their deeds are all known as well (2:5). For example, the angel at Sardis is told that its deeds are not perfect in the sight of God (3:2). The prerequisite for humanity is to repent of their evil deeds (9:20; 16:11). (See Reflections at 14:14-20.)

marked with the beast’s name carries on day and night (cf. 20:10). Theirs now is that constant threat of accusation that had hitherto been the fate of “our comrades” (12:10). Verse 11 repeats the words of v. 9, which set out the qualifications for those who receive the awful judgment: “those who worship the beast and its image and for anyone who receives the mark of its name.” The dire warning concludes with a message to the saints: Endurance consists in keeping the commandments of God and holding fast to the faith of Jesus (v. 12). The expression tlotiv “Inoot (pistin Jesou, “faith of Jesus”) is probably a subjective genitive and so refers to Jesus’ faithfulness, which is exemplified in a particular way of life (and death). (If pistin lésou were an objective genitive, the phrase would mean “faith in Jesus.” Interpreters face the same choice in Rom 3:22, 26.) This fidelity means

REVELATION 14:14-20, THE HARVEST OF THE EARTH NIV

~ NRSV 14Then I looked, and there was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one like the Son of Man, with a golden crown on his head, and a sharp sickle in his hand! '°Another angel came

14] looked, and there before me was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one “like a son of man”? with a crown of gold on his head ald Daniel 7:13 \

667

REVELATION

14:14-20

NIV

NRSV

and a sharp sickle in his hand. '*Then another angel came out of the temple and called in a loud voice to him who was sitting on the cloud, “Take your sickle and reap, because the time to reap has come, for the harvest of the earth is ripe.” '°So

out of the temple, calling with a loud voice to the one who sat on the cloud, “Use your sickle and reap, for the hour to reap has come, because the harvest of the earth is fully ripe.” '°So the one who sat on the cloud swung his sickle over the earth, and the earth was reaped. 17Then another angel came out of the temple

he who was seated on the cloud swung his sickle

over the earth, and the earth was harvested. Another angel came out of the temple in in heaven, and he too had a sharp sickle. '*Then heaven, and he too had a sharp sickle. '*Still another angel came out from the altar, the angel another angel, who had charge of the fire, came who has authority over fire, and he called with a from the altar and called in a loud voice to him loud voice to him who had the sharp sickle, “Use who had the sharp sickle, “Take your sharp sickle your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of the and gather the clusters of grapes from the earth’s « vine of the earth, for its grapes are ripe.” !°So the vine, because its grapes are ripe.” '°The angel angel swung his sickle over the earth and gathered swung his sickle on the earth, gathered its grapes the vintage of the earth, and he threw it into the and threw them into the great winepress of God’s great wine press of the wrath of God. ?°And the wrath. *°They were trampled in the winepress wine press was trodden outside the city, and outside the city, and blood flowed out of the blood flowed from the wine press, as high as a press, rising as high as the horses’ bridles for a horse’s bridle, for a distance of about two hundred distance of 1,600 stadia.? miles.? 420 That is, about 180 miles (about 300 kilometers)

4Gk one thousand six hundred stadia

COMMENTARY 14:14-16. John now sees a white cloud (cf. 1:7; 10:1) and on it one like a son of man (NRSV, “like the Son of Man”), resembling the vision in 1:13ff. (cf. Matt 24:30). Like the elders (4:4), the first rider (6:2, though the crown is not golden), and the locusts (9:7, though their crowns are like gold), this Son of Man figure has a golden crown. He also holds a sharp sickle in his hand (cf. 1:16, where the Son of Man has seven stars). An angel comes out from the temple (which in 11:19 is the repository of God’s just laws) and bids the one seated on the cloud to reap, “for the hour to reap has come.” In words reminiscent of Joel’s “Put in the sickle,/ for the harvest is ripe” (Joel 3:13 NRSV; cf. Mark 4:29), he is commanded to begin “the harvest of the earth” (cf. Jer 51:33). Note that this is the harvest of the earth, and not just of its inhabitants (cf. 16:1ff.). 14:17-20. Another angel emerges from the temple in heaven with a sharp sickle. A third angel, “who has authority over fire,” emerges from the altar and cries to the preceding angel

(vv. 17-18) to use the sickle to “gather the clusters of the vine of the earth.” The fruit that is gathered is cast into a wine press (cf. Isa 63:2; Lam 1:15). In the light of 19:15, this seems to be an image of judgment rather than of redemption (cf. 14:3). The wine press is said to be outside the city (v. 20), a place separated from the places of holiness, just as outside the New Jerusalem are the dogs, sorcerers, and immoral persons (22:15). But it is also the place, outside the camp, where followers of Jesus are summoned to go (Heb 13:13). Here the blood of judgment flows. Elsewhere in Revelation, there is no reference to the shedding of the blood of those being judged; instead the blood that is shed is that of the Lamb (1:5; 5:9; 19:13) and martyrs: (6:10; 7:145. 12:1; 917363121824: 19:2). Hence this passage has been interpreted as describing the martyrdom of the saints, which, to the eye of faith, is the judgment meted out on Babylon.’”° If so, then the gory character of this 275. See G. B. Caird, A Commentary on the Revelation of Saint John the Divine (London: A. & C. Black, 1984) 194.

668

REVELATION

14:14-20 COMMENTARY

passage might be related to the “judgment to begin with the household of God” (1 Pet 4:17 NRSV)—the slaughter of the martyrs, whose witness is, in some sense, vicarious. In the light of the rest of the vision and the reference to first fruits earlier in the chapter, we may see here an

anticipation of judgment, described in other terms later in the book (e.g., 19:11ff.), from which the servants of God cannot escape. They, too, find that their time of trial comes when they must resist and that they, too, will be martyred.

REFLECTIONS é

1. Chapter 14 offers a contrast to the chapter that precedes it. Those who conform to the ways of the beast may achieve a temporary respite and prosperity, but ultimately that cannot continue. John’s vision offers hope to those who stand firm. The stress on integrity and truthfulness contrasts with the duplicity and deceit made manifest in chapter 13, where what is false leads astray and is met by the self-serving response of the world’s inhabitants. Those who have compromised have demonstrated to them the error of their ways as the truth is revealed. In rather brutal fashion, the vision brings home the ultimate character of apparently harmless actions. Compromise with the old order is nothing less than being marked by the beast (14:9). For John, all action, however small, is ultimately significant and of infinite value in the divine economy. The New Testament writers see in the mundane situations of life in the present the challenge, the threat, and the opportunity of the hidden life of God. They seek to offer readers a mixture of the mundane and the heavenly to convey the deeper character of reality. We see this perhaps most clearly in Matt 25:31-46 in the subtle relationship between the eschatological judge and his hidden presence in the least of his “brethren” in the midst of the present age: The consequences for final judgment, indeed, are now being gestated in the womb of ce This is true of the Bible as a whole. All of life is an issue for the religious person, from eating to buying, from words and deeds, as well as what is narrowly regarded as worship. No area of existence is neutral and unaffected by religious significance. Christianity inherited from Judaism this perspective and has preserved an indissoluble link between the public and the private, the spiritual and political, which has become a central feature of catholic Christianity. To use contemporary religious terminology, “spirituality” is not a matter of private cultic devotion unconnected with the demands of ordinary life.

2. The clear contrast between the Lamb and the beast foreshadows Ignatius of Loyola’s meditation on Two Standards in the Spiritual Exercises (incidentally, the Ignatian Exercises offer an excellent example of how to use texts that are, in Blake’s words “not too explicit” to “rouze the faculties to act”): “This is the history. Here it will be that Christ calls and wants all beneath his standard, and Lucifer, on the other hand, wants all under his.” ... “This is a mental representation of the place. It will be here to see a great plain, comprising the whole region about Jerusalem, where the sovereign Commander-in-Chief of all the good is Christ our lord; and another plain about the region of Babylon where the chief of the enemy is LUCHeR Gara “_. consider the address which Lucifer makes, how he goads demons to lay snares for humanity and bind them with chains. First they are to tempt them to covet riches (as Satan is accustomed to do in most cases) that they may the more easily attain the empty honours of this world and then come to overweening pride.” ... “Consider the address which Christ our Lord makes to all his servants and friends whom he sends on this enterprise, recommending them to seek to help all, first by attracting them to the

669

REVELATION

14:14-20 REFLECTIONS

highest spiritual poverty, and should it please the Divine Majesty...even to actual poverty. Secondly, they should lead them to a desire for insults and contempt, for from these springs humility.”?”°

3. It is often difficult, when one is committed to a set of principles or to a particular community, to maintain one’s stand when fear and public disgrace tempt one to retreat. This chapter of Revelation indicates that, while the price is worth paying, all those who are committed to causes continually need to assess their commitments, their motives, the cost to others and to themselves. On the one hand, caution may lead to never taking sides, and, consequently, never taking a stand about anything. On the other hand, certainty of the rectitude of one’s cause may lead to intransigence and a mindless devotion to that cause. In this chapter the company of the redeemed is standing, not on their own, but with the Lamb. The criterion of the “good cause” must be the person, the activity, and the story of the Lamb. As Paul would put it, it must be conformity with the pattern of Christ’s life that counts.

4. The imagery in the closing verses of Revelation 14 seems barbaric, unedifying, and theologically immature. This is one of the sections of the book that continues to be a scandal for modern readers. As with the material in chapters 6, 8, and 9, we cannot gloss over it, nor does an attempt to water down its shocking effect really do justice to the text. The Commentary suggests that the text stresses with the utmost seriousness the choices we make and the consequences of those choices. Given that Revelation is an allusive, suggestive text rather than a prescriptive one, its function is to move readers and hearers to think anew, to allow their perspective to be changed and to portray the consequences of failing to respond rather than to describe in minute detail the future of the world. This does not diminish the sense of alienation that a modern reader has when confronted by these verses. Valiant attempts have been made to “christianize” the text, and yet the vision resists neat accommodation to our theological sensibilities. Most of us, as a result, read or use Revelation little. We have simply abandoned it to fringe religious groups and lost a resource that can help us to see what makes for our peace. Bonhoeffer reminded his contemporaries that the church is the church of Apocalypse, and it must not cut itself off from this important

theological resource.”” We may discern that what the Spirit says to the churches demands of Christians imagination, not slavish dependence on the minutiae of exegesis of this or that apocalyptic image, but openness to the process of disorientation to our understanding, which a metaphorical text sets in motion, just as the prophetic Scriptures themselves did for John. 276. Translation from The Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius, L. J. Puhl, S.J. (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1950) paragraphs 137-48. 277. D. Bonhoeffer, No Rusty Swords (London: Collins, 1965).

670

REVELATION 15:1-8 ANOTHER SIGN IN HEAVEN: THE SEA OF GLASS AND THE SONG OF THOSE WHO CONQUERED NIV

NRSV ]

Then I saw another portent in heaven, great and amazing: seven angels with seven plagues, which are the last, for with them the wrath of God is ended. 2And | saw what appeared to be a sea of glass mixed with fire, and those who had conquered the beast and its image and the number of its name, standing beside the sea of glass with harps of God in their hands. *And they sing the song of Moses, the servant? of God, and the song of the Lamb: “Great and amazing are your deeds, Lord God the Almighty! Just and true are your ways, King of the nations!? 4 Lord, who will not fear and glorify your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship before you, for your judgments have been revealed.”

] 5) saw in heaven another great and marvelOus sign: seven angels with the seven last plagues—last, because with them God’s wrath is completed. And I saw what looked like a sea of glass mixed with fire and, standing beside the sea, those who had been victorious over the beast and his image and over the number of his name. They held harps given them by God %and sang the song of Moses the servant of God and the song of the Lamb: - .

“Great and marvelous are your deeds, Lord God Almighty. Just and true are your ways, King of the ages. 4Who will not fear you, O Lord, and bring glory to your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship before you, for your righteous acts have been revealed.”

SAfter this I looked and in heaven the temple,

5After this I looked, and the temple of the tent¢ of witness in heaven was opened, °and out of the temple came the seven angels with the seven plagues, robed in pure bright linen,’ with golden sashes across their chests. Then one of the four living creatures gave the seven angels seven golden bowls full of the wrath of God, who lives forever and ever; ®and the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God and from his power, and no one could enter the temple until the seven plagues of the seven angels were ended.

that is, the tabernacle of the Testimony, was opened. 6Out of the temple came the seven angels with the seven plagues. They were dressed in clean, shining linen and wore golden sashes around their chests. ’Then one of the four living creatures gave to the seven angels seven golden bowls filled with the wrath of God, who lives for ever and ever. 8And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God and from his power, and no one could enter the temple until the seven plagues of the seven angels were completed.

aGk slave ernacle

671

©Other ancient authorities read the ages dOther ancient authorities read stone

¢ Or tab-

REVELATION

15:1-8 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY (ef, 136; 4:81 Te 17s 10:72 04s 10:07 1S. 222) and, here alone, “King” (Christ is king in 1:5; 19:16). God is “King of the nations” (NRSV; NIV, “King of the ages”) that threaten the holy place (11:2); elsewhere that sovereignty is shared with the one who conquers (2:26) as well as the Messiah (12:5). The song asks, “Who will not fear’ and glorify your name?” (v. 4; cf. Ps 86:8-9; Jer 10:7), reflecting the content of the eternal gospel in 14:7. The answer to that question will be a depressing negative in 16:9, 21, though in 11:13 a (temporary?) attitude of fear and a willingness to give God the glory were found. God’s holiness is stressed in 16:5. The coming of the nations to worship before God will be fulfilled in the new Jerusalem (21°24. .ck» Isa-2:2)15:5-6. God’s righteous deeds have been made manifest not only in the acts of judgment but also in the opening of the temple in heaven (11:19). Now the “temple of the tent of witness” is opened (v. 5), rather than the ark of the covenant, and from it proceed seven angels holding the seven last plagues. Here is the justice of divine judgment that is outlined in Revelation. The covenant forms the basis of judgment and vindication. The angels are clothed in “clean, shining linen” (v. 6; cf. 19:8, 14), possibly inspired by the man dressed in linen who exercises judgment on Jerusalem in Ezek 9:3-4 (though their appearance reflects also that of the Son of Man in Rev 1:13; cf. Dan 10:5-6). 15:7-8. One of the creatures then gives the angels the seven bowls that are full of the anger of God (cf. 6:1ff.). The golden bowls in 5:8 were full of incense, representing the prayers of the saints (cf. 8:3-4). But now these golden bowls are full of the wrath of God (cf. 16:1; 17:1; 21:9). The prayers for vindication of the souls under the altar who had asked, “How long?” are about to be answered (cf. 6:10). The temple is filled with smoke “from the glory of God” (cf. Exod 40:34), and no one can enter until the last plagues are completed (cf. Exod 40:35; 1 Kgs 8:10-11). Smoke is more usually linked with the fire of judgment than with God’s glory (9:2-3; 14:11; 18:9, 18; 19:3), though in Isa 6:4 God’s glory is

15:1. Another “portent” is seen by John (cf. 12:1, 3). This is said to be “great and amazing.” Like the dragon in 12:3, it is threatening: “seven angels with seven plagues, which are the last” (cf. 21:9, where these angels are explicitly linked with the seven bowls). This indicates that what will be described in chap. 16 has the air of finality, which is confirmed by the end of 15:1, “with them the wrath of God is ended.” 15:2-4. The scene changes to the sea of glass, which has already appeared in 4:6, but here it is mixed with fire (there is a similarity with the hail mixed with fire in 8:7, which is also found in the description of God’s throne in / Enoch 14). The sea seems to be of little threat in chap. 4, but its absence in 21:1 and its fiery aspect in chap. 15 suggest otherwise (cf. 8:8; 9:17-18; 11:5; 14:10; 16:8; 18:8; 19:20). John sees those who have conquered the beast (v. 2; cf. 12:11), its image, and the number of its name (cf. 13:18). Like the Lamb (5:6; 14:1), the great multitude of 7:9, and the 144,000 of 14:1, these people are standing (cf. Rom 14:4), this time beside the sea. They hold “harps of God” (cf. 5:8) and “sing the song of Moses” and “the song of the Lamb.” This same song was sung by the Israelites after they passed through the Red Sea and the army of Pharaoh was destroyed (Exod 15:1-18). By analogy, then, those who have conquered will be on the other side of the sea of glass—in other words, on God’s side of the throne (4:6: “in front of the throne there is something like a sea of glass, like crystal” [NRSV]}. Like the great host in 7:9, therefore, they stand in the divine presence beyond the threat of ultimate alienation from God, though still on the very margins of that threatening situation (beside the sea of glass). The hymn (vv. 3-4) reflects the central verses of the song in Exodus 15, where God’s character is lauded. As in the Exodus passage, there are echoes of the psalms (esp. Pss 111:2; 145:17). God’s wonderful and mighty deeds are lauded in words without exact parallel in earlier hymns, though the just and true acts (here only “ways” [oSot hodoi]) of God are themes that recur in 16:5, 7 and 19:2 (cf. 19:11). God is “Almighty”

672

REVELATION

15:1-8 COMMENTARY

linked with the smoke that fills the Temple. In __ saints arises to the presence of God. What follows Rev 8:4, smoke mingled with the prayers of the __ is final judgment.

REFLECTIONS The significance of human behavior is expressed clearly in Revelation 15. When the people of Israel reached the other side of the Red Sea, they sang a song of deliverance (Exodus 15). This song is echoed in Revelation 15. “Those who had been victorious over the beast” (15:2 NIV) is a metaphor for non-conformity and the refusal to accept the beast’s dominion and way of life. This action becomes equivalent to the redemptive crossing of that threatening sea to God’s side. A neutral, apparently secular, action can be an event of supreme importance in the eyes of God, on a par with other fundamental redemptive moments like the exodus. The redemptive moment means siding with the Lamb by standing firm in one’s convictions and one’s commitment to the way of hope, symbolized by the Lamb who bears the marks of slaughter. The liberative character of participation in the outlook and practice of a movement that promises freedom from the bondage of culture and society is on every page of Revelation (cf. 1:6), but it differs from the revolutionary zeal of the mass movements mentioned by Josephus, whose

leaders sought to replicate the events of the exodus.” 278. See Josephus Antiquities of the Jews XX.97ff.; 167ff. See also R. Gray, Prophetic Figures in Late Second Temple Jewish Palestine (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993); and M. Walzer, Exodus and Revelation (New York: Harper Collins, 1985).

673

REVELATION 16:1-21 SEVEN ANGELS AND SEVEN JTRUMPETS NRSV

NIV

Then | heard a loud voice from the temple l telling the seven angels, “Go and pour out on the earth the seven bowls of the wrath of God.” 2So the first angel went and poured his bowl on the earth, and a foul and painful sore came on those who had the mark of the beast and who worshiped its image. 3The second angel poured his bowl into the sea, and it became like the blood of a corpse, and every living thing in the sea died. AThe third angel poured his bowl into the rivers and the springs of water, and they became blood. °And I heard the angel of the waters say, “You are just, O Holy One, who are and were, for you have judged these things; ° because they shed the blood of saints and prophets, you have given them blood to drink. It is what they deserve!” 7And I heard the altar respond, “Yes, O Lord God, the Almighty, ~ your judgments are true and just!” 8The fourth angel poured his bowl on the sun, and it was allowed to scorch people with fire; *they were scorched by the fierce heat, but they cursed the name of God, who had authority over these plagues, and they did not repent and give

]

Then I heard a loud voice from the temple saying to the seven angels, “Go, pour out the seven bowls of God’s wrath on the earth.” The first angel went and poured out his bowl on the land, and ugly and painful sores broke out on the people who had the mark of the beast and worshiped his image. 3The second angel poured out his bowl on the sea, and it turned into blood like that of a dead man, and every living thing in the sea died. 4The third angel poured out his bowl on the rivers and springs of water, and they became blood. °*Then | heard the angel in charge of the waters say: “You are just in these judgments, you who are and who were, the Holy One, because you have so judged; for they have shed the blood of your saints and prophets, and you have given them blood to drink as they deserve.” 7And I heard the altar respond: “Yes, Lord God Almighty, true and just are your judgments.” ®The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and the sun was given power to scorch people with fire. °They were seared by the intense heat and they cursed the name of God, who had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify him. The fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom was plunged into darkness. Men gnawed their tongues in agony "and cursed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, but they refused to repent of what they had done. '2The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up to prepare the way for the kings from the East. '3Then I saw three evil? spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon,

him glory.

10The fifth angel poured his bowl on the throne of the beast, and its kingdom was plunged into darkness; people gnawed their tongues in agony, ''and cursed the God of heaven because of their pains and sores, and they did not repent of their deeds. 12The sixth angel poured his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up in order to prepare the way for the kings from the east. '’And I saw three foul spirits like frogs coming from the mouth of the dragon, from the mouth of the beast, and from the mouth of the false prophet. ‘These are demonic spirits, per-

4/3 Greek unclean

674

REVELATION 16:1-21.

NRSV out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. '“They are spirits of demons performing miraculous signs, and they go

out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty. “Behold, I come like a thief! Blessed is he who stays awake and keeps his élothes with him, so that he may not go naked and beshamefully exposed. : ‘eThen they gathered the kings tooeines to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon. The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and out of the temple came a loud voice from the throne, saying, “It is done!” !*Then there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder and a severe earthquake. No earthquake like it has ever occurred since man has been on earth, so tremendous was the quake. '°The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God remembered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath. ?°Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found. *'From the sky huge hailstones of about a hundred pounds each fell upon men. And they cursed God on account of the plague of hail, because the plague was so terrible.

forming signs, who go abroad to the kings of the whole world, to assemble them for battle on the great day of God the Almighty. '9(“See, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and is clothed,? not going about naked and exposed to shame.”) '°And they assembled them at the place that in Hebrew is called Harmagedon.

17The seventh angel poured his bowl into the air, and a loud voice came out of the temple, from

the throne, saying, “It is done!” '®And there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, and a violent earthquake, such as had not occurred since people were upon the earth, so violent was that earthquake. "The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations

fell. God remembered great Babylon and gave her the wine-cup of the fury of his wrath. ?°And every island fled away, and no mountains were to be found; ?!and huge hailstones, each weighing about a hundred pounds,’ dropped from heaven on people, until they cursed God for the ee of the hail, so fearful was that plague. aGk and keeps his robes

6 Gk weighing about a talent

COMMENTARY translates 8uds (thymos, “fury”) instead of the usual dpyn (orge). The former word is used elsewhere in a context relating to God only at Rom 2:8, and there only implicitly. Elsewhere in the New Testament it is used of human anger (e.g., Luke 4:28; Acts 19:28; 2 Cor 12:20; Gal 5:20; Eph 4:31; Col 3:8; Heb 11:27, several of which are lists of vices). In Revelation, thymos is usually used to refer to the anger of Satan (12:12) and for Babylon’s fornication (14:8; 18:3). In two places it is used with the word orge (16:19; 19:15) and in a further four places of God’s anger (14:19; 15:1, 7; 16:1). Elsewhere, orge is used exclusively for the wrath of God and of the Lamb (cf. 11:18). There does not seem to be any significant difference between these words, though

hapter 16 contains the description of the “seven last plagues, completing the se quence of sevens that starts with the letters to the angels of the seven churches in chaps. 2-3 and becomes more specifically focused on judgment in the series of seals and trumpets in chaps. 6; 8-9; and 11. In the series of seals and trumpets, the penultimate marks a moment of interruption and delay. It is less obvious in chap. 16, but still present in 16:15 before the process is completed with the judgment of Babylon in chaps. 17-19. 16:1. The temple is the site from which a loud voice proceeds (cf. 1:10; 11:12; 12:10; 14:13; 16:17; 21:3; Isa 66:6). This voice tells the seven angels: “Go and pour out on the earth the

seven bowls of the wrath of God.” Here “wrath” 675

REVELATION

16:1-21 COMMENTARY kind of parenthesis in which the angel pronounces the worthiness of the saints and the prophets: Since their blood has been shed, they deserve retribution in kind (cf. 4:11; 5:9, 12). In 9:13, John heard a voice from the four horns of the altar. Here the altar itself speaks, asserting God’s true judgment (cf. 15:3-4; 19:2). 16:8-9. The fourth angel pours out a bowl on the sun, and the sun is given permission to scorch humanity with fire (cf. 7:16; 8:12; Matt 13:6). The consequence is that humankind blasphemes the name of God (cf. 13:6; 16:11, 21). The phrase “plasphemed the name of God” (NIV and NRSV, “cursed”), found also in Rom 2:24 (cf. John 10:33; Acts. 6:14) 19-375 17 im, Onl las. 2e74: echoes Isa 52:5. Such blasphemy is particularly linked with the last days in 2 Tim 3:2 and 2 Pet 2:2. The ultimate authority over the plagues rests with God, who permitted them. Unlike 11:11, where great fear spread among earth’s inhabitants, here there is no sign of repentance (cf. 9:20) or of giving God glory (cf. 11:13; 14:7), rare indeed in the book (4:9; 19:7). In contrast, God as giver is a theme that runs throughout. In the letters to the angels, God gives time for repentance (2:21) and promises the varied gifts that belong to life in the future (e.g., 2:7; 11:18). The use of the passive €860n (edothe, “was given”) is widely used to express divine permission (6:4; 7:2; 9:3; 13:5; 20:4), and in 17:17 (cf. 11:3) God is specifically mentioned as the one who inspires the process of judgment. In the new Jerusalem, God gives liberally from the water of life (21:6), echoing the promise of the gifts in the letters. 16:10-11. The destination of the wrath of the fifth bowl is the throne of the beast (cf. 2:13; 13:2), and its kingdom is plunged into darkness (cf. 8:12; 9:2; Exod 10:22; Matt 24:29- 27-45: Acts 2:20). Strangely, the themes of light and dark are less prominent in Revelation than we would expect in a text in which dualistic contrasts are fundamental to its worldview (cf. John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35). The darkening of minds, which Paul refers to in Rom 1:21 and 11:10 (cf. Eph 4:18), however, is reflected in humanity’s hostile attitudetand failure to recognize the true significance of the cataclysm taking place. Revelation echoes the sentiments of the Fourth Gospel: “People loved darkness rather than light” (John 3:19 NRSV). These

we may note the use of orge in contexts of eschatological judgment in Matt 3:7; Luke 21:23; John 3:36; Rom 1:18; 5:9; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; and Peiness bl0"216+5:9% 16:2. The first angel pours out its bowl on the earth, and humankind is afflicted with sores (cf. Exod 9:10-11; Luke 16:20-21). Because of these sores, humanity will blaspheme God and be unrepentant (16:11). This plague specifically affects those marked with the mark of the beast and who worship its image (13:15-16; cf. 7:3;

Ezek 9:4). 16:3-4. The second angel pours out its bowl on the sea (cf. 8:8-9; Exod 7:17ff.), which becomes like the blood of a corpse. Whereas in the aftermath of the eighth trumpet blast a third of the creatures in the sea were destroyed, here every living thing in the sea dies. The third bowl is poured out on the rivers and the “springs of water” (ci. 8:10; Exod 7:17-18). In 8:11, the waters were made bitter. Here they become blood. This prompts the angel of the waters to shout out in praise of God (note that in chaps. 2-3 an angel is linked with the created world).

16:5. Just as in 11:17, God is hailed as just, as both past and present (cf. 1:4). Here God is referred to as the “Holy One” (as in 15:4) and judge (cf. 6:10; 18:8, 20; 19:11; Ps 119:137). The increased amount of hymnic material in this part of the vision is noteworthy. The heavenly choir’s comments on the eschatological process seem to intensify in direct proportion to the intensification of the woes that afflict the world. Although there is no explicit suggestion that theodicy is the motive for this, the effects of this passage on the reader raise this possibility, particularly as the justice of God is a theme of these chapters. 16:6-7. This hymn from the angel of the waters (v. 6) is based on the lex talionis (Exod 21:24): Humanity has shed the blood of the martyrs, so the water that they have to drink is turned into blood. Thus the “shedding” of blood occurs in a chapter where “shedding” the contents of the bowls is a central theme. At the end of v. 6, “It is what they deserve!” (NRSV) freely renders a€vot eiow (axioi eisin, “they are worthy”). The phrase probably is an indication that humankind is getting its just deserts—that is, “they deserve” to drink blood, and thus fall foul of the prohibition in Lev 17:10. Or it may be a

676

REVELATION

16:1-21 COMMENTARY 16:16. The kings assemble at Armageddon (ixa an har Meégiddo, “the Mount of Megiddo”), which is explicitly referred to only here in Revelation.?”? John reminds his readers that the name is a Hebrew word (cf. 9:11). Megiddo was the site of the death of Jehu (2 Kgs 9:27) and more particularly of the defeat of the righteous and reforming king Josiah (2 Kgs 23:29). It had by the end of the period of the Hebrew Bible achieved a place in the events of “that day” (Zech 12:11). 16:17-19. The seventh bowl is now poured out on the air (cf. 9:2), which provokes the loud cry, “It is done!” from the Temple and the throne. If the NIV and the NRSV translations are correct in including both the temple and the throne as the origin of the cry, this is the only place where the two are juxtaposed (in 16:1, the temple alone is the origin of the voice; in 4:5, the voice comes from the throne). A parallel proclamation is to be found in 21:6, where the one seated on the throne speaks. The juxtaposition in v. 18 is like {fo (ct. O:12°-6:5." 11:13). though John adds that the earthquake was without parallel (cf. Dan eas In Revelation earthquakes accompany significant moments: the opening of the sixth seal, which prompted a response of fear on the part of humanity (6:12); at the ascent of the prayers of the saints to God (8:5); in the aftermath of the witness of the “lampstands,” which prompted fear in the inhabitants of the city (11:13-14); and following the seventh trumpet blast and the second woe, when God’s reign is seen to be effective (11:19). As has been noted, in Matthew also earthquakes attended both the crucifixion and the resurrection (Matt 27:54; 28:2). The “great city” is destroyed (v. 19) as in 11:13, as well as the cities of the nations, which in this age have been led astray (14:8; 18:21; 20:8). In the age to come, however, under the rule of Christ in the new Jerusalem (12:5; 19:15), the nations are destined to be healed (21:24-25; 22:2). All of this prefigures the fall of Babylon, called “the great city” in 18:10, 16, 18-19, 21. Its part in the outworking of God’s wrath is remembered; like the prayers of the saints, Babylon will not be

people gnaw their tongues and persistently refuse to repent; instead they blaspheme God because of their pain. 16:12-14. The pouring out of the sixth bowl prompts the longest description of the consequence of the plagues. The Euphrates dries up (cf. 9:14), making way for the “kings from the east” (cf. Isa 11:15), who are among those gathering for the last battle (cf. 19:19; 20;8), referred to in anticipation in v. 16. Apart from the submission involved in the donation to Zion in 21:24, the kings of the earth are invariably led astray (6:15; 17:2; 18:3; 19:19) and only too late recognize their folly (18:9). John’s vision then turns to the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet, from whose mouths proceed unclean spirits, resembling frogs (cf. Exod 8:3; on the mouth as the source of evil, see Rev 12:15; 13:5-6). These froglike beings are “unclean spirits” (mvevpata aka8apTa pneumata akatharta, v. 13; NIV, “evil spirits”; NRSV, “foul spirits”), and they characterize Babylon (cf. 17:4; 18:2; this expression is used for demons in Wark 1223;3:11; 5:13 725% 9:25; ci. Luke 11:24). The “great day of God Almighty” (v. 14; cf. 6:17) echoes the ideas connected with the day of the Lord in the OT (e.g., Amos 5:18; cf. Rom 2:5; 2 Thess 2:2). The link between the day of the Lord and the sudden disruption caused by the thief in vv. 14-15 is found in 1 Thess 5:2. 16:15. In this verse the sequence of bowls is interrupted with a saying, probably from Christ, if this verse is a parallel to 1:3. As elsewhere in the vision, the interruption comes before the final event of the sequence of seven (after the sixth seal, the servants of God are sealed [7:2-8], and after the sixth trumpet blast come the prophetic commissioning and the vision of the two witnesses [10:1-11:14]). The warning immediately follows the reference to unclean spirits and the need to be ever watchful of their activities. Vigilance (cf. 3:2-3) is a necessary quality for survival in the last days (cf. Matt 24:42-43; 25:13; 26:38; 1 Thess 5:6; 1 Pet 5:8). A beatitude (cf. Matt 5:2) is pronounced on the one who remains alert (cf. 1:3; 14:13; 19:9; 20:6; 22:7). “Keeping” one’s robes (NRSV, “is clothed”) means avoiding the fate of Babylon (17:16) and the threat that confronts the Laodicean angel (3:17-18). In 22:14, washing one’s robes (cf. 7:14-15) is the key to e the tree of life.

279. See J. Day, “The Origin of Armageddon,” in S. Porter, P. Joyce, and D. Orton, Crossing the Boundaries (Leiden: Brill, 1994) 315-28; and God’s Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985).

677

REVELATION

16:1-21 COMMENTARY heaven (v. 21; cf. 8:7; 11:19, where no reference is made to heaven as the source of the hail). Once again people (does the Greek dvOpwrot [anthropoi, “men”] include women?) blaspheme God because this plague is so great

forgotten in the presence of God (cf. 8:4). Babylon is to be given the cup of God’s wrath, a recompense (18:6) for the cup she has made others drink (14:10; 17:4). 16:20-21. As in 6:14, mountains and islands flee (cf. 20:11). Hail of enormous size (NRSV and NIV, “about a hundred pounds”; ws tadavtiata hos talantiaia, “like talents”) descends from

(NIV, “terrible”; NRSV “fearful”; cf. 15:1; Num 11:33), just as they had because of the sores (16:11).

REFLECTIONS In the light of passages like Isaiah 21, Jeremiah 8, or Nahum 2, the doom-laden words of Revelation 16 are a prophet’s attempt to describe the tumult of forces in language of myth. Their images bring readers’ attention to the chaos around them as a moment of opportunity to pursue a different course. We may imagine that the upheavals in the aftermath of the death of Nero, when the Roman Empire was on the verge of crumbling, may have been either a backdrop or a vivid memory for the prophet’s imagination. The fragility of a seemingly invincible empire and the superhuman forces that, once let loose, could wreak havoc on the apparently impregnable foundations of a civilization defied adequate description in the language of conventional historiography and needed the distinctive language of prophecy or apocalyptic. “All that the poet can do today is warn,” wrote a modern poetic commentator on the chaos and destruction of war, drawing on the inspiration of imagination to enable some understanding of these awesome forces and the appropriate response to them. John sees behind the machinations of human beings a more profound disease in culture and society, which will mean doom if there is no change of attitude and practice. When cataclysmic forces are unleashed, people cower in fear and incomprehension and anger. It would have been a perplexing time for the tiny Christian groups who found themselves scapegoats in a crumbling social order. What was required of them was patient endurance and even the shedding of blood as they strove to resist the power of the beast. Revelation may be seen as an imaginative commentary on the world, a prophetic critique of human delusion and the terrible consequences of social upheaval. It summons us to read the signs of the times with the visionary imagination and insight of prophecy and, at the same time, to recognize that the prophetic words are addressed to people with minds and habits so formed by culture and human interests that they cannot understand and repent. They need to be jolted from the slumber of incomprehension caused by the idolatrous habits of oppression, violence, and hedonism.

678

meV ECATION

[7:1-18

‘THE VISION OF BABYLON NIV

]

NRSV

One of the seven angels who had the seven

]

bowls came and said to me, “Come, | will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters. *With her the kings of the earth committed adultery and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.” ’Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a desert. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. “The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled © with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. “This title was written on her forehead: MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

°] saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus. When I saw her, I was greatly astonished. 7Then the angel said to me: “Why are you astonished? I will explain to you the mystery of the woman and of the beast she rides, which has the seven heads and ten horns. ®The beast, which you saw, once was, now is not, and will come up out of the Abyss and go to his destruction. The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast, because he once was, now is not, and yet will come. %This calls for a mind with wisdom. The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits. l0They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for a little while. ''The beast who once was, and now is not, is an eighth

Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the judgment of the great whore who is seated on many waters, with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and with the wine of whose fornication the inhabitants of the earth have become drunk.” °So he carried me away in the spirit? into a wilderness, and | saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns. “The woman was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her fornication; °and on her forehead was written a name, a mystery: “Babylon the great, mother of whores and of earth’s abominations.” °And I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses to Jesus. When I saw her, I was greatly amazed. 7But the angel said to me, “Why are you so amazed? I will tell you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast with seven heads and ten horns that carries her. ®The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to ascend from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the inhabitants of the earth, whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will be amazed when they see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come. 9“This calls for a mind that has wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; also, they are seven kings, 'of whom five have fallen, one is living, and the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain only a little while. ''As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to

the seven, and it goes to destruction. And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together aOr in the Spirit

679

REVELATION

17:1-18

NIV

NRSV

king. He belongs to the seven and is going to his

with the beast. '*These are united in yielding their power and authority to the beast; ‘they will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful.” 15And he said to me, “The waters that you saw, where the whore is seated, are peoples and multitudes and nations and languages. '*And the ten horns that you saw, they and the beast will hate the whore; they will make her desolate and

destruction. 2°The ten horns you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but who for one hour will receive authority as kings along

with the beast. '*They have one purpose and will give their power and authority to the beast. '‘They will make war against the Lamb, but the Lamb will overcome them because he is Lord of lords

and King of kings—and with him will be his called, chosen and faithful followers.” Then the angel said to me, “The waters you saw, where the prostitute sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations and languages. “The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the prostitute. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire. For God has put it into their hearts to accomplish his purpose by agreeing to give the beast their power to rule, until God’s words are fulfilled. '8The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.” _

naked; they will devour her flesh and burn her up with fire. '7For God has put it into their hearts

to carry out his purpose by agreeing to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God will be fulfilled. '*The woman you saw is the great _ city that rules over the kings of the earth.”

(COMMENTARY _ he description of the awesome period of woe comes to an end, and one of the angels offers to show John the judgment of Babylon. John sees Babylon seated on a scarlet beast. The vision includes detailed interpretation of various parts of the vision, quite out of keeping with other parts of Revelation. This vision is then followed by a sequence of heavenly acclamations juxtaposed with earthly laments over Babylon’s fate. 17:1-2. John is approached by one of the angels who had held one of the bowls containing the seven last plagues. John is summoned to witness the judgment of the great whore, Babylon (cf. 4:1; 21:9, there to view a very different kind of city). Babylon’s destruction is a particular focus of the account of judgment that has preceded (cf. 15:1). Readers of the vision will already be aware of the threat of “immorality” (Topveta porneia, 2:21; 9:21; 14:8), and now will see its embodiment in the great “whore” (tépvn porne) who is “seated on many waters” (cf. Jer 51:13, where Babylon is said to “live by mighty waters”

[NRSV]), a phrase that evokes, and contrasts with, the vision of the Son of Man in 1:15 (cf. 14:2; 19:6). Babylon, with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication (v. 2) resembles Tyre (Isa 23:17; cf. Nah 3:4), and her “golden cup” (17:4) has made all the earth drunk (v. 2; cf. Jer 51:7; cf. 18:3). Babylon, too, is drunk—with “the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses to Jesus” (v. 6). 17:3-4. John is taken away to the desert (cf. 12:6) by the Spirit (cf. 1:10; 4:1; 21:10; Ezek 8:3). It is in the desert, or wilderness, that John comes face to face with Babylon (cf. 12:6), just as Jesus had come face to face with Satan (Matt 4:1). The wilderness, then, could be a place of insight and renewal (Hos 2:14) and the place from which movements of renewal arose (Matt 3:1; cf. Acts 21:38).78 280. See Josephus The Jewish War V1.281-283, 301-315; Antiquities of the Jews XX.97-99; 167-172; 185-188; M. Goodman, The Ruling Class

of Judaea: The Origins of the Jewish Revolt Against Rome, A.D. 66-70 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) 51ff.; R. Gray, Prophetic Figures in Late Second Temple Jewish Palestine (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993).

680

REVELATION

17:1-18 COMMENTARY

John sees a woman seated on a scarlet beast (v. 3; cf. 18:12, 16) that is “full of blasphemous names” (v. 4; cf. 13:1; 18:12, 16; Dan 7:25). It has seven heads and ten horns, like the beast that arose from the sea. Unlike the saints, who are clothed in white (3:5; 4:4; 7:9, 13; cf. 19:13), the woman is bedecked in purple and scarlet robes (v. 4; see 18:12 for the list of the differentcolored cloths traded by the merchants and from which Babylon would have profited). She is adorned with gold, precious stones, and pearls, and holds a golden cup “full of abominations and impurities” in her hand (cf. 1:17). We have here the first of a number of ideas and images derived from Ezekiel’s dramatic condemnation of Tyre. In Ezek 28:13, Tyre is said to have “every precious stone [as] your covering...and worked in gold were your settings” (NRSV). Ezekiel depicts Tyre as being a proud city that has amassed great wealth through trade with other nations (Ezek 28:5). But that prosperity will ultimately end in devastation (Ezek 27:27-36). Babylon both resembles and contrasts with the “bride of the Lamb,” the new Jerusalem in John’s final vision. The cup she holds is full of abominations (v. 5; cf. 21:27; Matt 24:15; Luke 16:15, where the abomination has become associated with Mammon). The reference to “the impurities of her fornications” (v. 4) coincides with the concern throughout the vision to see things in clearly dichotomous ways: clean/unclean; heaven/earth; virginity/fornication; bride/whore. “Fornication” (porneia) refers to the transgression of clear, pub- | licly recognized boundaries of what constitutes appropriate relations (for example, incest is strictly prohibited by levitical law; see Lev 18:6ff.). The “impurities” are not just the uncleanness caused by sexual intercourse (Leviticus 15), however, but defilement that is the result of “fornication” (cf. Deut 22:22). 17:5-6. The woman resembles the saints in having a name (v. 5), rather than merely a mark (cf. 13:16; 14:1), written on her forehead: “Babylon the great, mother of whores.and of earth’s abominations” (v. 5). This name is a “mystery” (uvoTHpLov mysterion; a word used only here and at 1:20; 10:7; cf. its use to speak of the mystery of salvation in Rom 11:25; Eph 3:6-11; Col 1:26; and of the eschatological process in 2 Thess 2:7}. And this eschatological mystery needs

681

explaining. Like the scandal of the cross, if left a mystery, it can be a stumbling block to those who do not recognize Babylon for what it really is. “Babylon” is the woman’s name (14:8; 16:9), linking her with the prediction of an imminent fall. What is said about her in this and the following chapters owes much to biblical oracles about Babylon’s destruction (e.g., Jeremiah 51). Babylon was an alien culture and the place of exile, hence the reference in 1 Pet 5:13, a work for which the experience of exile is a significant theme (e.g., 1 Pet 2:11).28! Babylon the great, the epitome of the earth’s “abominations” (some of which will be described in chap. 18), commits “fornication” and is the source of other similar acts. Babylon is “drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses to Jesus” (1:5; 2:13; 11:3, 18; 18:20, 24), and she offends the prohibition of Lev 17:10: “If anyone of the house of Israel or of the aliens who reside among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood” (NRSV; cf. Rev 16:6). Babylon’s drunken stupor is infectious, and it contaminates those with whom she commits her “fornications.” So the inhabitants of the earth have become drunk from the wine of Babylon’s “fornication” (v. 2). But Babylon is about to drink the cup of the wine of God’s wrath (16:19; cf. 14:8). John is “greatly amazed” by the wondrous spectacle (v. 6), language he had earlier used to describe the wonder of the earth at the might of the beast (13:3). This reaction, which will be replicated at v. 8, may itself be the prelude to captivation, however (cf. 13:4). This inclusion of the reference to John’s reaction parallels other moments in the book of Revelation, for example, the weeping in 5:4 and the repeated attempts to worship angels in 19:10 and 22:8. 17:7-8. At this point an angel questions John about his amazement and proceeds to tell him about the mystery of Babylon and the beast who carries her. This passage is a unique one in Revelation in which the angelic messenger offers the meaning of a vision. Seldom used in Revelation, such interpretation is a typical feature of other works in the apocalyptic tradition. The second half of the book of Daniel, for instance, offers several 281. SeeJ.H. Elliott, A Home for the Homeless (London: SCM, 1982).

REVELATION

17:1-18 COMMENTARY 6:15; 18:3). It is the kings who will receive the focus of attention in vv. 10-14. Five of these kings have fallen already, one is still living, and the final king has not yet come. When this final king comes, he will reign for only a short time. The beast is said to be an eighth king (v. 11) who “belongs to the seven,” and it will “go to destruction.” The ten horns are ten kings who are still to come, and their authority will last for “one hour” (cf. 18:10, 19). These kings share a common purpose of bestowing their power and authority on the beast. They will make war with the Lamb (actually it is the rider on the white Horse in 19:16 who engages in the struggle; cf. 2:16, 17 12:7 13:4. 20:8)! Butsthe Lamb. will conquer them (19:21; cf. Isa 11:4), for he is called “Lord of lords and King of kings” (cf. 19:16; 1 Cor 8:6). The Lamb is accompanied by the faithful “elect” (exdexTOos eklektos, v. 14; NIV and NRSV, “chosen”; used only here in Revelation, though it is used several times in the synoptic eschatological discourse, e.g., Mark 13:20, 22, 27). 17:15-18. The angel now explains to John that the “many waters” upon which the woman is seated are “peoples and multitudes and nations and languages” (v. 15; cf. 5:9; 7:9; 11:9; 13:7). The ten kings of v. 12 unite with the beast to make the woman “desolate and naked.” The focus now is on the pact between the kings and the beast to utterly destroy Babylon (v. 16; cf. 18:16, 19). They will “devour her flesh and burn her up with fire” (cf. 19:18; burning was the fate of a priest’s daughter who had resorted to prostitution in Lev 21:9). So the beast will turn against what it supports, an example of a kingdom divided against itself being laid waste (Matt 12:25). The purposes of God are at work in this selfdestruction of Babylon and the beast (v. 17), stressing the omnipotence of God. Verse 17 is a striking sentence. God is seldom explicitly named as the author of such events (see 1:6; 7:17; 18:5, 8,° 205 19:63 21:3, *22:9:22:5, 718:10 “of. these instances, only 7:17, the references in chap. 18, and 22:18-19 compare with 17:17, which echoes the “permitting” affliction in passages like 1 Kgs 22:22 and Job 1:12). Such statements contrast with the passive verbs that are usually employed to convey the fulfillment of the divine purposes. The common purpose of the ten horns in v. 13 to give their power and authority to the beast

examples of this kind of angelic explanation of events; Daniel 7 is an obvious example where Daniel’s vision of the thrones, judgment, and the coming of the Human One is interpreted in terms of human history. The beast that came up from the sea (v. 8) “was, and is not, and is about to ascend from the bottomless pit” (an allusion to the first reference to the beast in 11:7), the place from which the destruction of the fifth trumpet had started and into which Satan will be cast (20:3). The phraseology used for the beast in v. 8 is reminiscent of that used for God in 16:5, where God is referred to as the “Holy One, who are and were” (NRSV). As in 13:8, those whose names are not written in the book of life will be amazed when they see this beast, though, as in 13:8, they will not worship it. Such wonder is a spiritually dangerous attitude to take, and it makes the interruption by the angel in v. 7 all the more comprehensible. Seeing the beast that “once was, now is not, and yet will come” can easily lead people astray (cf. 13:14). To be in receipt of a heavenly vision is a threatening business.”*” The parody of the divine character in the description of the beast (the one who was and is to come) parallels similar descriptions, particularly the beast with the mortal wound that had been healed in 13:3. John is fortunate to have revealed to him the true identity of the beast upon which Babylon sits and through that disclosure be saved from a profound mistake. 17:9-14, The angel continues to explain the vision by saying, “All this calls for a mind that has wisdom” (v. 9), a repeat of the formula John used in 13:18, another passage where there is a probable historical allusion. While the angel’s purpose seems to be to decode the vision for John, one cannot ignore the fact that he has nearly been carried away by the wonder of what he has seen. True wisdom may consist, therefore, in making a correct identification of Babylon and the beast so that John and others like him are not deceived, as will be many of the inhabitants of earth. In the explanation that follows (v. 9), various parts of the vision are explained. The seven heads stand for both seven mountains (elsewhere mountains are to be shaken and removed; see 6:14-15; 8:8; 16:20; cf. Mark 11:23) and seven kings (cf. 282. See G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (New York: Schocken, 1955).

682

REVELATION

17:1-18 COMMENTARY

has become, in the interpretation in vv. 16-17, a common purpose to give their kingdoms to the beast as well. That conspiracy will last until the words of God are fulfilled (cf. 10:7, when the seventh angel’s trumpet announces the fulfilling of the mystery of God), when the rider on the white horse emerges to complete the judgment (19:11), and when the marriage supper of the Lamb takes place (19:9). :

needs to find a way of interpreting 17:9-18 to include Emperor Domitian. The Sibylline Oracles,*> a Jewish text contemporary with the book of Revelation, starts the list with Julius Caesar, even though he did not, strictly speaking, take the title of emperor. If, however, one starts with Augustus, one needs to decide whether to include the three emperors (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius) who reigned for only a short time in the upheaval that shook the empire after the death of Nero in 68-69 ce. If these emperors are excluded, then we are left with a date in Vespasian’s reign. The simplest solution is to start with Augustus and, like Suetonius, the chronicler of the early Roman emperors, include the three emperors who briefly succeeded Nero (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius), meaning that the five who have fallen are the emperors before and including Nero.?** The one who is to come would then be Galba, and the one who is to succeed Galba and is one of the five is probably Nero?® (on the widespread belief that Nero would return, see the Commentary on 13:11-14). But for reasons that will be set out, care needs to be taken to avoid any kind of mathematical precision in correlating visionary imagination with historical events.

The final word of interpretation in v. 18 concerns Babylon, the great city, which rules over the kings of the earth. Elsewhere Babylon’s relationship with the kings is less explicitly monarchic; Babylon exercises power through her “fornication” (e.g., 17:2; cf. 16:20). Along with chap. 13, Revelation 17 has rightly been seen as a fairly explicit point of contact with the history of John’s own day. Assuming that Rome has inspired John’s vision of Babylon in 17:9-18, the reference to the seven heads may be references to Roman emperors. It is not clear whether John intends readers to associate specific emperors with the seven kings, and if so, where to start the list of emperors. The computations are bound to be affected by assumptions we may have about the date of John’s writing. If one favors a Domitianic date for the writing of Revelation, as early church tradition suggests (see the section “John, the Gospel of John, and the Revelation to John” in the Introduction, p. 513-17), then one

283. See Sib. Or. v. 12. 284. See also ibid., vv. 13¢f. 285. See R. Bauckham, “Nero and the Beast,” in The Climax of Prophecy (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993) 384-452.

Figure 5: Roman Emperors 49 sce-138 cE Julius Caesar

AQ—-AA BCE 31 BcE-14 CE 14-37 cE

Augustus (Octavian) Tiberius

Gaius (Caligula) Claudius Nero Galba Otho Vitellius Vespasian Titus Domitian Nerva Trajan Hadrian

17-136

683

REVELATION

17:1-18 COMMENTARY

As the report on the vision progresses, there is a change of interest in v. 11 away from the heads of the beast to the beast itself. The eighth head, which is one of the seven, is in fact the beast “that was and is not and is to come” (v. 8). There is a similar oscillation between the beast and its heads in 13:1-3, 12, where the beast as a whole is characterized by the head that has been mortally wounded, yet healed. The eighth king is the one who goes back to perdition, the last embodiment of the works of darkness. That this eighth king is one of the seven may reflect the widespread belief that Nero would rise again from death. All this points to a date after the fifth king and before the last one, who is one of the seven, returns. That would seem to exclude the emperor Domitian, during whose reign the earliest commentators sug-

gested that the book of Revelation was written.28 Indeed, the evidence for persecution of Christians in Asia Minor at the time of Domitian is non-existent apart from Revelation.?*” At the end of Domitian’s reign there appears to have been harassment of Jews and those identified with Judaism (among whom Jewish Christians, like John, would have been numbered) as the scope of the fiscus Judaicus (a tax imposed on all Jews after the destruction of the Temple in 70}?®° was extended. Dio Cassius tells us that certain prominent members of the imperial court had been charged with “atheism” in the dying years of Domitian’s reign,?® which may refer to sympathizing with the Jews rather than with Christians. Domitian claimed for himself the title dominus ac deus noster (“Our Lord and God”; cf. Rev 19:16), a move that no doubt presented a particular problem for Jews and Christians, who would have viewed the state cult and its idolatry as utterly blasphemous; that crisis passed with the accession of a new emperor, however (Nerva). Even if the vision reflects the turbulent events at the end of Nero’s life instead of those of Domitian’s time, it is entirely possible that persons and events of that era of upheaval imposed themselves on the visionary much later than the time in which they took place. We are left with a situation in which the external evidence is strong for a date during

Domitian’s reign, but the internal evidence of this chapter points in the general direction of a date three decades earlier. Either way, the message is unaffected, though the hermeneutical implications are significant (see Commentary on 1:19). Readers are directed, rather as they are when they are confronted by Mark 13:14, to see in the beast and Babylon an ancient referent. This consideration suggests a reading of the book that is not exclusively concerned with eschatology but attends to prophecy as an act of insight into present circumstances rather than a prediction of the future. John’s vision relates to social and political realities that confront his readers, even if such references are now transformed in the visionary’s imagination. We need to remember that the vision John sees is of Babylon, not of Rome.” Thus it assumes a wider significance than the narrow focus on Rome in the vision could achieve. The image of Babylon resonates with passages that point back to the OT experiences of displacement, exile, the threat of idolatry, and the longing for Zion. Too narrow a focus on vv. 8-14 can beguile us into a process of decoding. To leave interpretation

at the level of identification of heads and horns, however, would be to end up engaged merely in a hermeneutic of decoding. The allure of Babylon as well as its identity remain as pressing for modern as for ancient readers. Like John, readers today may be amazed at her description, stunningly evoked in the lament of her fall in the following chapters. As the vision in chap. 17 makes clear, she is no hapless victim who sadly ends up desolate at the hands of supposed supporters (vv. 16-17). Babylon, too, will be drunk with the blood of the saints (v. 6), because the horns of the beast on which she sits will make war against the Lamb (v. 14). Babylon is not merely a symbol of all that is dissolute, who ultimately will end up in her own dissolution. Rather, she colludes with “war” on the saints, which causes intoxication and lack of proper judgment. John’s vision of the two witnesses in chap. 11 enabled readers to see where the threat to the prophetic witness of the church comes from: “the beast that comes up from the bottomless pit” (11:7 NRSV). That beast reappears in 17:8, and its

286. E.g., Irenaeus Against Heresies v.30:3.

287. See Leonard L. Thompson, The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990) chap. 6. 288. C. Rowland, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (London: SPCK, 1982) 407-13. 289. Domitian Histories 16.14.1.

290. See P. Minear, /Saw a New Earth: An Introduction to the Visions of the Apocalypse (Washington: Corpus, 1968).

684

REVELATION horns are the kings and profit from the Not only is Babylon also the beast, the

17:1-18 COMMENTARY

who persecute the righteous __ tined for destruction (v. 11). The abomination of riches of Babylon (18:9-10). luxury, persecution, and military might also goes to be laid waste (v. 16), but to desolation. supporter of Babylon, is des-

REFLECTIONS 1. Mention was made in the commentary of the way in which isolated historical events can be taken up and become part of a prophet’s visionary insight. For the writer of Revelation, recollections of past events, whether from the late 60s, at the time of the Jewish revolt and the chaos after the death of Nero, or from the time of Domitian, have infused the visionary’s imagination and become part of the apparatus of the symbolic world and graphic scenery that confront us. The original historical significance of these events is transcended and ceases to determine their import within the framework of the prophecy.”” The discussion of such possible historical allusions raises an important hermeneutical question: Does it matter whether or not we can now pick up the precise allusions? That is a matter of interest only if we think that the sole way to make sense of an ancient text is to locate it precisely in its ancient context. That strategy may be necessary if a text remains utterly opaque. Revelation’s opacity has little to do with our inability to understand the weft of allusion, however. The point at issue in Revelation 13, for example, is quite clear: Do not worship the beast or the dragon that stands behind the beast. We do not need to know the details of the Roman imperial cult or even economic life in Asia Minor in the last half of the first century (about which, unfortunately, we know all too little) in order to understand Revelation. History can satisfy our curiosity and occasionally enrich our exegesis. But it is not essential for it. What we have in Revelation 17 are traces of a first-century setting that have been taken up in the language of visionary imagery so that the contingent is rendered in a form that transcends the original circumstances to become prophetic pronouncement. Modern

readers do not need the ancient allusion in order to make sense of the text.” We assume that ancient readers would have been better equipped to make sense of apocalyptic texts than we are. This presupposes that there was a deliberate attempt on the part of the writer to couch the message in such a way as to facilitate the understanding of those “in the know” and to avoid having the message be understood by others if it fell into the wrong hands. We cannot be sure, however, whether this is what happened. The visionary used elements of the prophetic discourse of Ezekiel and Daniel, which would have been familiar to ancient readers. It may also be that those first readers were as much at a loss as we are, though in all likelihood they were more familiar with the ancient scriptures. Those persons involved in the life of their communities and for whom the imperial cult caused no offense might have reacted with the same mixture of incredulity and disdain that has always characterized the reaction to sharply worded prophetic messages. The problem now and then is not the opacity of the images but the inability of minds soaked in a dominant culture to be shaken from complacency by metaphorical texts.

2. At the time the naming of the symbol of military Lamb, it is a place

when John was writing, the Roman Empire had inspired his imagery, but woman as Babylon gives a wider application to the image.” Bablyon is a power and oppression. Above all, for those who witness to the ways of the of exile and alienation (see Psalm 137; 1 Pet 5:13). Yet it is a place where

291. Indeed, Caird comments: experience.” See G. B. Caird, The 292. See P. Ricoeur, Time and 293. See Minear, J Saw a New

“We cannot expect to decipher the book unless we know what happened to account for John’s visionary Revelation (London: A. & C. Black, 1966) 6. See also Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy, 450-52. Narrative, trans. K. McLaughlin and D. Pellauer (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984) 157. Earth. \

685

REVELATION

17:1-18 REFLECTIONS

the person with a visionary eye can see the glory of God, as Ezekiel did (Ezekiel 1), in whose footsteps John follows. John writes and readers read in the mist of the dominion of the beast and Babylon’s luxurious consumption. However strong the desire of the saints to come out from the midst of Babylon (see 18:4), the book of Revelation is addressed to people who breathe Babylon’s ethos, whether they like it or not, and need a vision of how to live under its imperial rule yet without becoming a part of it (parallel in some respects to the conduct of the Jews in the stories in the early part of the book of Daniel). There is no escape from exile this side of the millennium, except, that is, in the difference of perspective that comes with a vision of a common life based on different values. 3. The kings of the earth commit fornication with Babylon, and the mighty of the earth are intoxicated by Babylon’s power. As elsewhere in the Bible, sexual language is used here to capture certain aspects of the need for exclusivity in divine service and distinctiveness in ethical response. Throughout Revelation, John encourages resistance to compromise and the blurring of boundaries, except in the circumstances determined by God. So consummation comes only when the marriage of God and the bride takes place in the new age. A degree of exclusivity rather than promiscuity characterizes relationships between humans and between the divine and humans. Boundaries are set in place, transgression of which is proscribed. It is only in the new Jerusalem that the boundary between heaven and earth is swept away and the nature of God is shared by all its inhabitants; yet, even there the sense of exclusion and divine superiority remains. Discrimination in intimacy, particularly when that involves one’s vocation and integrity as a person created in God’s image, matters; to be marked with the mark of the beast is, in fact, a denial of one’s true self. To commit “fornication” or be “intoxicated” risks compromising both our ability to discern truth and justice and our sense of integrity. The book of Revelation is a challenge to see ourselves as we are seen by God and to see others without the corrupting lens of self-interested exploitation. 4. Harlotry involves selling one’s body. The situation in which men and women are driven to that means that it is an epitome of ways of life in the distorted world of the beast and Babylon. Submission to the beast, enjoying Babylon, may seemingly save the lives of the kings of the earth and its inhabitants; but it will mean forfeiting their souls (Mark 8:36; Luke 12:5). The kings of the earth, through their involvement in trade with Babylon, accumulate great wealth. Even ordinary people enjoy some benefit, provided they become part of the system. They get drunk with the wine of Babylon’s fornication, desensitized by the ideology and diversions of its culture. People become stupefied by the effects of Babylon’s activities and by participating in that which makes Babylon “great.” People are in no state of mind to see clearly the cost of involvement with Babylon, not least in human lives (18:13). Reading Revelation may enable some people to see the truth of

what they are doing.” 5. Chapter 17 epitomizes the negative portrayal of women in Revelation.”® To the modern reader, these negative images include: Jezebel, who personifies prophecy that is opposed to God; the new Jerusalem, which is portrayed as an adjunct of the bridegroom whose life is governed by pleasing “him”; the exaltation of celibacy; and the use of sexual imagery focusing on the woman as the harlot. The book seems to project images of women as either whores or brides, active Jezebels or passive wives and mothers. Women are viewed in terms of a patriarchal culture and its attendant economy. They can survive only by being harlots or wives and risk destitution if single or widowed. The way women are pictured in Revelation is complicated, however. Revelation 12:1-2, 294. Cf. W. Stringfellow, An Ethic for Christians and Other Aliens in a Strange Land (Dallas: Word, 1979). 295. Tina Pippin, Death and Desire: The Rhetoric of Gender in the Apocalypse ofJohn (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992).

686

REVELATION

17:1-18 REFLECTIONS

with the woman clothed with the sun, has been a key text in the development of doctrine and iconography about Mary, whose ambiguous role within theology has been widely discussed.” There is nothing sexist about the reference to Jezebel. Like Balaam, Jezebel has come to embody the false prophet:”” She “calls herself a prophet and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practice fornication and to eat food sacrificed to idols” (Rev 2:20 NRSV). Moreover, we need to bear in mind that the ultimate inspiration for the immoral behavior lies with the beast supporting the woman. While it would not be correct to describe Babylon as a victim of the beast and its allies, Babylon is consistently not the active partner in the “fornication” but the object of the attentions of the kings of the earth. They have played their part in making Babylon what it is. Without the support of the beast, Babylon will perish. So the apocalyptic imagery suggests the complexity of oppression. Babylon is culpable, but ultimately at the mercy of the beast. Although in some instances women are idealized in the book of Revelation, the overall portrayal hardly evinces a sympathetic attitude to women. Yet, paradoxically, as a prophetic book, Revelation has offered space for women as well as men to enable their spirituality to flourish and for them to emerge as individuals in their own right, created in God’s image, in the midst of a society steeped in patriarchy. Prophets and mystics have found in Revelation the inspiration to explore the inner life and to exercise a ministry denied by much else in Scripture and tradition (with the possible exception of the Song of Songs).”° Teresa of Avila, Catherine of Siena, and Hildegard of Bingen, like the male radicals who turned to Revelation, found in this allusive text the freedom to resist received religion and practice. This canonical text opened a door for an experience of God that enabled them to transcend the boundaries imposed by what was conventionally possible.” There was in John’s day (and often still is) only a severely constrained range of possibilities for resisting the hegemony of the dominant culture. Yet even from within the constraints of patriarchy, however, insight emerges. For example, patient endurance might be required instead of grand gestures. Or better, Revelation helps us to see that “holding the testimony of Jesus” in patient endurance is the only grand gesture we need. Faith (14:12), readiness, and witness (11:2ff.), emotional involvement and perseverance have all been characteristic, for good or for ill, of women’s lot in our male-dominated world. Such characteristics have been resistance and

subversion, enabling a modicum of integrity in cultures that have been dominated by men.*” Watching and waiting are the daily experience of women at times of crisis, in labor (of different kinds) or death, but also in the ordinariness of life: “There were also women looking on from a distance” (Mark 15:40 NRSV); “[Anna] never left the temple but worshiped there with fasting and prayer night and day” (Luke 2:37 NRSV). Patient endurance, so often characterized by women, seemingly futile and ineffectual, is a form of witness characteristic of the divine, powerful in its apparent weakness, and is part of the reconceptualization of what constitutes cosmos, order, in Revelation. The exploitation of small opportunities for change is not to be despised. Revelation challenges the dominion and patterns of patriarchy in its key hermeneutical concept of the slaughtered Lamb.*’ In the new Jerusalem, God is not “father” but “God” (21:7; a subtle change of 2 Sam 7:14: “I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me” [NRSV]). Divine dominion is marked by a Lamb who shares the throne. One thing the 296. See P. Prigent, Apocalypse 12: Histoire de l’exégése (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1988); Y. Gabara and M. C. Bingemer, Mary Mother of God, Mother of the Poor (Tunbridge Wells: Burns and Oates, 1989); M. Warner, Alone of All Her Sex: The Myth and Cult of the Virgin Mary (London: Picador, 1985). 297. See G. Vermes, Scripture and Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 1973). 298. On female visionaries, see S. Elm, Virgins of God: The Making of Asceticism in Late Antiquity (New York: Clarendon, 1996) 32; G. Jantzen, Power, Gender, and Christian Mysticism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995). 299. Iam grateful to Sara Maitland and Ros Hunt for helping me reflect on some of the contemporary hermeneutical issues posed by the book of Revelation. 300. See James Scott, Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990). 301. William Blake, The Four Zoas, in Blake: Complete Writings, ed. G. Keynes (London: Oxford University Press, 1966).

687

REVELATION

17:1-18 REFLECTIONS

reader should be used to by now about Revelation: To offer neat explanations and rationalizations of a text like this is to risk misreading it. As with so much else, its metaphorical form is not about tidy systems of satisfying exegetical solutions. The medium can, understandably, detract from its message, so that the unpalatable character of its imagery becomes an obstacle. There is no easy answer, notwithstanding the attempts to understand and apologize for the language and imagery of Revelation. John’s horizon in certain important respects differs from ours. Perhaps a way to a solution is offered by William Blake’s prophetic mythology, in which the imagery of Revelation is taken up and expanded, different from but in continuity with the book of Revelation itself.°’ Blake embarked on a new form of mythopoesis. He was not a commentator or an exegete; thus he is not closely tied to the text. He engaged with, and his work embodies, the “spirit of apocalypse.” He was capable of leaving the detail of Revelation behind in exploring an apocalyptic vision for his own day. It

can be said that he developed “voices of apocalyptic thunders.”*° For his own day, in a medium different from, but intimately linked with, Revelation, he was not tied to the ancient images and their context, historical or textual. Instead he sought to reimagine and recast them. As we engage with both Blake’s and Revelation’s ambivalent attitude toward women, we need to explore other apocalyptic media to find a discourse that will permeate contemporary minds dulled to the shock and insight of metaphorical language and at the same time not run the risk of putting a stumbling block in the way of those it seeks to persuade. 302. T. Pippin, Death and Desire: The Rhetoric of Gender in the Apocalypse ofJohn (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992) 107. 303. See Stephen Moore, “The Heavenly Vision as a Posing Exhibition,” /SNT60 (1995) 27-55.

688

REVELATION 18:1-19:10 ~ THE FALL OF BABYLON NIV

NRSV

] Q4After this I saw another angel coming

. UO)down from heaven. He had great authority, and the earth was illuminated by his splendor. With a mighty voice he shouted: “Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great! She has become a home for demons and a haunt for every evil? spirit, a haunt for every unclean and detestable bird. 3For all the nations have drunk the maddening wine of her adulteries. The kings of the earth committed adultery with

her, and the merchants of the earth grew rich from her excessive luxuries.” “Then I heard another voice from heaven say: “Come out of her, my people, so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues; “for her sins are piled up to heaven, and God has remembered her crimes. Give back to her as she has given;

pay her back double for what she has done. Mix her a double portion from her own cup.

7Give her as much torture and grief as the glory and luxury she gave herself. In her heart she boasts, ‘] sit as queen; I am not a widow, and | will never mourn.’ 8Therefore in one day her plagues will overtake her: death, mourning and famine.

She will be consumed by fire, for mighty is the Lord God who judges her. “When the kings of the earth who committed adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her. ‘Terrified at her torment, they will

stand far off and cry: “Woe! Woe, O great city, O Babylon, city of power! a2 Greek unclean

]

After this I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority; and the earth was made bright with his splendor. ?He called out with a mighty voice, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! It has become a dwelling place of demons, a haunt of every foul spirit, a haunt of every foul bird, a haunt of every foul and hateful beast.?

$ For all the nations have drunk? of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth have grown rich from the power¢ of her luxury.” 4Then I heard another voice from heaven say-

ing, “Come out of her, my people, so that you do not take part in her sins, and so that you do not share in her plagues; > for her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities. © Render to her as she herself has rendered, and repay her double for her deeds;

mix a double draught for her in the cup she mixed. 7 As she glorified herself and lived luxuriously, so give her a like measure of torment and grief. Since in her heart she says, ‘I rule as a queen; I am no widow, and | will never see grief,’ 8 therefore her plagues will come in a single day pestilence and mourning and famine— and she will be burned with fire; for mighty is the Lord God who judges her.” 9And the kings of the earth, who committed a Other ancient authorities lack the words a haunt of every foul beast and attach the words and hateful to the previous line so as to read a haunt of every foul and hateful bird 6 Other ancient authorities read She has made all nations drink ¢ Or resources

NIV fornication and lived in luxury with her, will weep and wail over her when they see the smoke of her burning; 'they will stand far off, in fear of her torment, and say, “Alas, alas, the great city, Babylon, the mighty city! For in one hour your judgment has come.” 11And the merchants of the earth weep and mourn for her, since no one buys their cargo anymore, '*cargo of gold, silver, jewels and pearls, fine linen, purple, silk and scarlet, all kinds of scented wood, all articles of ivory, all articles of costly wood, bronze, iron, and marble, '%cinnamon, spice, incense, myrrh, frankincense, wine, olive oil, choice flour and wheat, cattle and sheep, horses and chariots, slaves—and human lives.? 4 “The fruit for which your soul longed has gone from you, and all your dainties and your splendor are lost to you, never to be found again!” ‘The merchants of these wares, who gained wealth from her, will stand far off, in fear of her torment, weeping and mourning aloud, 10 “Alas, alas, the great city, clothed in fine linen, in purple and scarlet, adorned with gold, with jewels, and with pearls! '7 For in one hour all this wealth has been laid waste!” And all shipmasters and seafarers, sailors and all whose trade is on the sea, stood far off '8and cried out as they saw the smoke of her burning, “What city was like the great city?” And they threw dust on their heads, as they wept and mourned, crying out, “Alas, alas, the great city, where all who had ships at sea grew rich by her wealth! For in one hour she has been laid waste.” 20 Rejoice over her, O heaven, you saints and apostles and prophets! For God has given judgment for you against her. 21Then a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying,

In one hour your doom has come!’ “The merchants of the earth will weep and mourn over her because no one buys their cargoes any more— cargoes of gold, silver, precious stones and pearls; fine linen, purple, silk and scarlet cloth; every sort of citron wood, and articles of every kind made of ivory, costly wood, bronze, iron and marble; ‘cargoes of cinnamon and spice, of incense, myrrh and frankincense, of wine and olive oil, of fine flour and wheat; cattle and sheep; horses and carriages; and bodies and souls of men. “They will say, ‘The fruit you longed for is gone from you. All your riches and splendor have vanished, never to be recovered.’ !°The merchants who sold these things and gained their wealth from her will stand far off, terrified at her torment. They will weep and mourn !°and cry out: “Woe! Woe, O great city, dressed in fine linen, purple and scarlet, and glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls! ‘In one hour such great wealth has been brought to ruin!’ “Every sea captain, and all who travel by ship, the sailors, and all who earn their living from the sea, will stand far off. '*When they see the smoke of her burning, they will exclaim, “Was there ever a city like this great city?’ '!°They will throw dust on their heads, and with weeping and mourning

cry out: “Woe! Woe, O great city, where all who had ships on the sea became rich through her wealth! In one hour she has been brought to ruin!

0Rejoice over her, O heaven! Rejoice, saints and apostles and prophets! God has judged her for the way she treated you.’” 7IThen a mighty angel picked up a boulder the size of a large millstone and threw it into the sea, and said: “With such violence the great city of Babylon will be thrown down, never to be found again. 22The music of harpists and musicians, flute players and trumpeters, will never be heard in you again.

aOr chariots, and human bodies and souls

690

REVELATION

NIV

18:1-19:10

NRSV

No workman of any trade will ever be found in you again.

“With such violence Babylon the great city will be thrown down, and will be found no more; 22 and the sound of harpists and minstrels and of flutists and trumpeters will be heard in you no more; and an artisan of any trade will be found in you no more; and the sound of the millstone will be heard in you no more; 3 and the light of a lamp will shine in you no more; and the voice of bridegroom and bride will be heard in you no more; for your merchants were the magnates of the

The sound of a millstone will never be heard in you again. 3The light of a lamp will never shine in you again. The voice of bridegroom and bride

will never be heard in you again. Your merchants were the world’s great men. By your magic spell all the nations were led astray. 4In her was found the blood of prophets and of the saints, and of all who have been killed on the earth.” | After this I heard what sounded like the roar of a great multitude in heaven shouting: “Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God, 2 for true and just are his judgments. He has condemned the great prostitute who corrupted the earth by her adulteries. He has avenged on her the blood of his servants.” sAnd again they shouted: “Hallelujah! The smoke from her goes up for ever and ever.” 4The twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God, who was seated on the throne. And they cried:

earth, and all nations were deceived by your

sorcery. 4 And in you? was found the blood of prophets and ofsaints, and of all who have been slaughtered on earth.” ] After this I heard what seemed to be the loud voice of a great multitude in heaven, saying, “Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power to our God, 2 for his judgments are true and just; he has judged the great whore who corrupted the earth with her fornication, and he has avenged on her the blood of his

“Amen, Hallelujah!”

servants.” ° 3Once more they said, “Hallelujah! The smoke goes up from her forever and ever.” 4And the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God who is seated on the throne, saying, “Amen. Hallelujah!” 5And from the throne came a voice saying, “Praise our God, all you his servants,’ and all who fear him, small and great.” Then I heard what seemed to be the voice of a great multitude, like the sound of many waters

°Then a voice came from the throne, saying:

_ “Praise our God, all you his servants, you who fear him,

both small and great!” 6Then I heard what sounded like a great multitude, like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder, shouting:

“Hallelujah!

For our Lord God Almighty reigns. 7Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come,

and his bride has made herself ready. Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear.”

aGk her

691

© Gk slaves

REVELATION

18:1—19:10

NIV

NRSV

(Fine linen stands for the righteous acts of the saints.)

and like the sound of mighty thunderpeals, crying

out, “Hallelujah! For the Lord our God the Almighty reigns. 7 Let us rejoice and exult and give him the glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready; 8 to her it has been granted to be clothed with fine linen, bright and pure”—

°Then the angel said to me, “Write: ‘Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!’” And he added, “These are the true words of God.” 10At this I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, “Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”

for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints. QAnd the angel said? to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.” And he said to me, “These are true words of God.” !°Then I fell down at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, “You must not do that! I am a fellow servant? with you and your comrades‘ who hold the testimony of Jesus.? Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus? is the spirit of prophecy.” aGk he said

6 GK slave

¢ Gk brothers

@Or to Jesus

(COMMENTARY Isa 21:9) and a statement about its present pitiable state (cf. 17:16): “It has become a dwelling place of demons.” In the light of what has already been said in 16:14, Babylon had probably been an abode of demons and full of unclean things as a result of “fornication” (17:4) long before its fall. Its site as a place of impurity is affirmed by virtue of the fact that it has become a haunt of “every unclean and detestable bird” and “every foul and hateful animal” (cf. 17:16; 22:15; see the list in Deuteronomy 14), though there is some textual uncertainty here. 18:3. Once more we hear that the nations and the kings of the earth have “drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication” (cf. 14:8, as will the one marked with the beast in 14:19). The awkward Greek genitive construction (“the wine of the wrath of her fornication”) seems to be a compressed way of speaking about collusion, thereby earning the wrath of God. In 16:19, God gave Babylon the “wine-cup of the fury of his

he vision reported in 18:1—-19:10 begins with series of statements from representatives of heaven. By the end of the passage, however, the tone and the speakers have changed. The angel predicts that kings (18:9), merchants (18:11-17), and shipmasters and sailors (18:17-18) will weep over Babylon’s demise. Chapter 18 ends with a mighty angel demonstrating the violence of Babylon’s overthrow, followed by rejoicing in heaven (19:1-10). As well as an oscillation between voices, some rejoicing, some lamenting, Babylon’s fall, the text moves between verse and prose. 18:1-2. John sees another angel descending from heaven (cf. 10:1; 20:1) with authority and with such splendor that the whole earth is illuminated (cf. 15:8; 21:23; 22:5; Isa 6:4). The angel cries out with a mighty voice, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great!” (cf. 18:2, 10, 21). There is a twofold assertion of Babylon’s fall (cf. 14:8, where the proclamation of Babylon’s fall has already been anticipated, and the threefold woe in 8:13 and

692

REVELATION

18:1—19:10 COMMENTARY

wrath,” and it is this wrath that Babylon now shares with the nations (cf. 17:2). The kings in particular have committed fornication with Babylon. The merchants have become rich as a result of Babylon’s luxury (v. 3, already hinted at in the description of Babylon in 17:4 and to be expanded further in 18:11-19). True wealth is not what Babylon has offered (18:15); true wealth comes only from Christ (3:17-18). , 18:4-5. John hears another voice out of heaven (cf. 10:4; 14:13), summoning God’s people out of Babylon (implying that they had lived in the midst of it until that point) so as not to share in Babylon’s sins (cf. Jer 51:45). God’s people will share in the life of the new Jerusalem (21:3), so they must separate themselves (cf. 2 Cor 6:17, drawing on Lev 26:16) to avoid Babylon’s “plagues” (cf. Ezek 9:4-5). As in Sodom and Gornmorah (Genesis 18-19), the righteous must evacuate Babylon, for its sins are “heaped high as heaven” (Jer 51:9). But coming out of Babylon is less about escaping the judgment that will fall upon the city than it is about avoiding the risk of contamination from Babylon’s “plagues” (the word tAnyn [plege] is invariably used of the eschatological plagues; e.g., 9:18; 15:1; 16:9). Babylon’s “plagues” will be the destruction and nakedness referred to in 17:16. Like the “abomination of desolation” that Jesus commands the disciples to flee (see Mark 13:14-15), Babylon’s desolation is a reason to flee. God now remembers Babylon’s misdeeds (cf. 16:19). 18:6-8. In v. 6, the summons to God’s people turns into a plea to God to repay Babylon (cf. 16:6) and to double that recompense (cf. Isa 40:2; Jer 16:18), a double draft of the wine of wrath (14:8). The theme of recompense continues in v. 7 with the plea for Babylon’s judgment to be in direct proportion to the glory and luxury Babylon had enjoyed. Instead of luxury, Babylon should now be in “torment and grief” (cf. 9:5; 14:11), a continuation of what the two witnesses had earlier carried out before the inhabitants of the great city (11:10). The grief Babylon is about to endure will not be part of the life in the other city, the new Jerusalem (21:4). The arrogance of Babylon’s supposition that she will be free from grief because of her royal status is condemned (v. 7; cf. Isa 47:8; note the description of Zion as a woman

echoes that of the king of Babylon who presumed to be a god in Isa 14:13-14. Babylon’s particular plagues are mentioned in v. 8 (cf. 17:16): “pestilence and mourning and famine—and she will be burned with fire” (cf. 6:8), contrasting with the luxury and consumption that have characterized Babylon and will be set out in the merchants’ lament in v. 11. This reversal is a manifestation of the almighty God’s judgment upon her (v. 8; note that God is called “mighty” |ioxupds ischyros], an adjective used of Babylon in v. 10). 18:9-10. The kings of the earth weep and wail at Babylon’s demise (v. 9; cf. 1:7 and the similar juxtaposition of verbs in Jas 4:9; 5:1, the latter in a context of the condemnation of the rich). The kings have accommodated Babylon, who has been the means of their own enrichment. They now lament from afar on account of fear (cf. 11:11), just as the sailors wept over the fall of Tyre in Ezek 27:30ff.°°¢ The double woe of v. 10, “Alas, alas,” will recur in vv. 16 and 19 (cf. 8:13). Babylon’s judgment comes quickly, “in one Hour” (VOLOs cits 17212) 18:11-19. Just as the kings of the earth had wept, so now do the merchants weep and lament, “since no one buys their cargo anymore” (v. 11). Babylon had been the hub of trade, and the merchants had depended on her. Those who refused to worship the beast had been excluded from buying and selling (13:17). These merchants had colluded with Babylon (they committed “fornication”), thus avoiding ostracism and enjoying the opulence of the wealth they amassed (v. 15). The list of the items of trade in vv. 12-13 echoes places in Revelation where these goods are linked with God and the Messiah. Gold, silver, and precious stones have bedecked Babylon (17:4; cf. 18:16), and precious stones will form the foundations of the new Jerusalem (21:19). Gold is mentioned throughout the book in connection with those who are opposed to God (9:7; 17:4; 18:12, 16), and it is often used to describe the apparel of the Son of Man (1:12), the crowns of the elders (4:4), the angel’s crown (14:14), the golden measure (21:15), and the street of the new Jerusalem (21:21). Silver is mentioned only here 304. See Nelson Kraybill, /mperial Cult and Commerce in John’s Apocalypse (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996); R. Bauckham, “The Economic Critique of Rome,” in The Climax of Prophecy (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1993) 338-83; P. Garnsey, K. Hopkins, and C. Whittaker, 7rade in the Ancient Economy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983).

in mourning in 4 Ezra 10:41). This arrogance 693

REVELATION

18:1—19:10 COMMENTARY Their cry, “What city was like the great city?” is meant to elicit pity and great sadness at Babylon’s destruction (cf. Ezek 27:32). They throw dust on their heads as they cry out in sorrow for the loss of the place from which all who had ships had grown rich. 18:20-24. Such sentiments are interrupted, however, by a different kind of cry, one of rejoicing (v. 20), echoing the joy of heaven at Satan’s ejection in 12:12 (cf. Jer 51:48). Apostles as well as saints and prophets are commanded to rejoice (“apostles” [amdéoToAot apostoloi| is used only here and at 2:2; 21:14 in Revelation), because God has judged in favor of them over Babylon (v. 20), who has been drunk “with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses to Jesus” (17:6 NRSV). This alternative theme is taken up in the following verses. A mighty angel casts a millstone into the sea: “With such violence the great city of Babylon will be thrown down” (v. 21; cf. 5:2; 10:1; Jer 51:63). The once great city “will be found no more” (v. 21; cf. Ezek 26:21). The tone of sadness resumes in v. 21, this time in the words of the mighty angel, who announces the end of Babylon’s music, contrasting with the heavenly music that is often mentioned (e.g., the trumpets of apocalypse and the songs of deliverance accompanied by harps; 5:8; 14:2; 15:2). Babylon as a place of art, music, craft, and trade is no more. Lamps will no longer shine in the city’s windows (cf. Jer 25:10), and the voices of “bridegroom and bride” will no longer be heard (cf. Matt 24:38). The merchants had been “the magnates of the earth” (v. 23; cf. 6:15), but now their goods go unsold. Readers will be in for a rude shock if they think that there is a neutral character to all the activity of trade, commerce, and socializing. Such commercial and cultural activities are described as “sorcery” (v. 23), an activity that will be excluded from the new Jerusalem (21:8; 22:15) and of which humanity has refused to repent (9:21). (God’s witness against sorcery is closely linked with the oppression of the hired laborer, the widow, the orphan, and the stranger when the refining fire of judgment comes [Mal 3:5].) The lament for Babylon’s culture and sophistication and wealth cannot pass without the reminder that in Babylon the blood of the prophets and of the saints had been shed (v. 24; cf. 6:10; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; Matt 23:35ff.), as well

in Revelation. Pearls adorn Babylon as well (17:4), and the twelve gates of the heavenly city will each be made of a single pearl (21:21). Fine linen is the clothing of the great city (18:16) and of the bride of the Lamb (19:8) and its armies (19:14), while purple and scarlet belong to Babylon alone (17:4). The different woods (EvAov xylon) contrast with the wood of the tree (xylon) of life (22:2, 14, 19; xylon is used for the cross in Acts 5:30;

Gal 3:13; 1 Pet 2:24). The feet of the Son of Man were compared to “burnished bronze” in 1:15, and it is with an iron rod that Christ will rule the nations (2:27; 12:5; 19:15). Incense is the vehicle of the prayers of the saints to God (8:3-4; cf. 5:8); frankincense (18:13) is contained in the golden censer with which the angel offers the saints’ prayers at the altar before the throne (8:3, 5). Oil and wine had been spared in the first part of the judgment, when the seven seals were broken (chap. 6; cf. 9:7). But now they, too, have become unsalable merchandise. The culmination of the list is the brief, but poignant, reference to “human lives” (v. 13; cf. Ezek 27:13). The Greek merely has “bodies” (owpata somata). Thus slaves were just bodies, mere commodities to add to the long list. But John cannot allow that to pass without glossing the word: They are human lives.%° The reference to human beings at the end of v. 13 prompts a short refrain on Babylon’s loss: “The fruit for which your soul longed/ has gone from you” (v. 14). The word emOupta (epithymia, “desire,” “lust”) echoes Exod 20:17 and the fruit in the garden in Gen 3:6. Babylon’s soul is taken up with “dainties” and “splendor.” “Desire” is related to affluence and property in 1 John 2:16; it is the way of Cain, who hated and killed and who, according to Josephus, degenerated into amassing material property.°° Like the kings (v. 10), the merchants (v. 15), who had become rich, stand afar and weep. Again, there is a cry of woe because Babylon has been stripped of the purple, scarlet, gold and precious stones mentioned in v. 12. Wealth is laid waste (cf. 17:16; Ezek 26:19). Then the seafarers (v. 17; cf. Ezek 27:27ff.) from afar view the smoke that comes from the fire of Babylon’s burning. 305. See K. Wengst, Pax Romana and the Peace of Jesus Christ (London: SCM, 1988) 118ff. 306. See Josephus’s telling of the story of Cain and Abel in Antiquities of the Jews 1:52-66. Cf. Augustine’s use of the story in The City of God

1:52-66.

694

REVELATION

18:1—19:10 COMMENTARY

as all those “who have been slaughtered on earth” (v. 24; cf. Jer 51:49). Babylon is not only a place of prosperity for kings and merchants, but also a place of viciousness toward human beings. The contrast in the perspective of the different voices in chap. 18 is obvious. The kings and merchants lament Babylon’s fall as a past event (vv. 9, 11, 14, 17), whereas some of the heavenly voices (not all, as v. 2 indicates) speak of the fall as imminent, rather than past: God has passed judgment against Babylon (v. 20), but the desolation is still to come (vv. 21-24; cf. v. 7). That is in line with the vision in chap. 17, which concerns a future desolation (17:16). Surrounded by all these voices, readers must choose between them. Each voice echoes deeply held sentiments,

19:5-8. A voice comes from the throne in v. 5 (for the first time in Revelation; cf. 16:17; 21:3). This voice commands God’s servants and all those who fear God, “small and great,” to “praise our God2a(cis 1 1:18;4 3el6; 19:18920:12Ps 115213). This command is parallel in some respects to the summons contained in the eternal gospel in 14:7. Again a voice that resembles “a great multitude” and the sound of “many waters” speaks (1:15; 14:2; cf. 19:1), asserting God’s sovereignty. The words echo the cry of the psalms: “The Lorp is King” (cf. Pss 93:1; 97:1; 99:1). God the Almighty reigns (parallel to 11:17; cf. 12:10). The joy in which hearers are asked to participate contrasts with the sorrow and lament of the kings and the merchants. Verbs are used in v. 7 that have few parallels in Revelation. The word xatpw (chairo) is elsewhere used only of the festive “rejoicing” of the inhabitants of the earth after the death of the two witnesses (11:10). Gladness is now that of the servants of God, who are vindicated (cf. Matt 5:12; see also Ps 118:24, alluded to in Rev 7:10; 22:14). Unlike 16:9, where the inhabitants of the earth refuse to repent, now God is given the glory (v. 7; cf. 11:12; 14:7). The reason for this joy is eschatological: “The marriage of the Lamb has come.” Now licit, rather than illicit, sexual congress in marriage replaces fornication. The “bride” who has been prepared is none other than the new Jerusalem, in which the Lamb will dwell (21:2-3, 9). The bride is given a garment, “fine linen, bright and pure” (v. 8; cf. 18:12, 16; Isa 61:10). Note that in v. 8 a rare significance is given to an image: The fine linen is “the righteous deeds of the saints” (cf. 3:5; 5:8). The Lamb, the Son of Man, has communion with the churches;

some more so than others. In this antiphonal dialectic, the prejudices and preferences of the readers and hearers are themselves subjected to scrutiny.

19:1-2. The focus shifts from Babylon and its fate to a voice like “a great multitude in heaven” (cf. 9:9; 19:6; Dan 10:6), declaring the attributes of God. This declaration is prefaced by “Hallelujah” (aAAnAouta hallelouia; cf. Ps 104:35), which will recur three more times at the beginning of proclamations in this part of the vision. Salvation is mentioned here as in 7:10 and 12:10 (in the latter used in the paean of praise after the ejection of Satan from heaven). As in 16:7, God’s judgments are hailed as just and true. The condemnation of Babylon is on the grounds of having corrupted the earth through “fornication” (cf. 11:18). The kings of the earth, who have “lived in luxury with her” (18:9 NRSV), have thereby committed fornication with Babylon. The blood of God’s servants is now avenged, fulfilling the plea of the souls of those who had been slaughtered (6:10; cf. Deut 32:43; 2 Kgs 9:7). 19:3-4. A response follows, introduced by the words “a second time” (Sevtepov deuteron, NRSV, “once more”; NIV, “and again”). The identity of those who utter the words is unclear: Is it the angelic host or God’s servants? If the latter, it would help us to understand the vengeful, even gloating, tone of the pronouncement (cf. 8:4; 9:2-3; 14:11): Now John sees the twenty-four elders and the creatures fall down in worship with their own simple “Amen. Hallelujah” (cf. 4:10; ey 4 Pas Ge Ke)B

consummation is about communion of an explicit, demonstrable kind, rather than covert and illicit, requiring an apocalypse to reveal it (cf. Luke 12:2). The letters to the angels in chaps. 2-3 reveal as much. This consummation is the demonstration that the dwelling of God is with humanity (21:3), with the throne of God and the Lamb in the midst of it (22:3). 19:9-10. The sequence of voices leads to a command once more for John to write (cf. 1:11, 19; 10:4; 14:13). The identity of the speaker is not revealed, but is simply “the angel.” The angel tells him to write these words: “Blessed are those

695

REVELATION

18:1—19:10 COMMENTARY been granted the privilege of writing to angels about the secrets of God. But the angel refuses to accept such an exalted status. Angels are not superior to humans (cf. Heb 2:5ff.). Indeed, humans have a role in proclaiming the gospel to the angelic world (Eph 3:10). God alone is to be worshiped (cf. 11:16; 14:7; but note the exceptions in 3:9; 13:4ff.). There has been much dispute as to whether the phrase “the testimony of Jesus” (uaptupia ’Inootd martyria lesou) should be translated as a subjective genitive (Jesus’ testimony) or an objective genitive (testimony about Jesus; cf. 12:17). In the concluding sentence (“the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”), the former mode of translation is to be preferred. The witness that Jesus himself offered becomes the paradigm of all prophecy and is the foundation of the lives of God’s servants thereafter, who may expect to share in his fate (cf. 7:14; 12:11). In fact, the difference in meaning is not great, except that the specific character of the life of the Lamb moves into greater prominence.

who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb” (ef Luke 2:75. 3:20; 14:15+16). Such beatitudes are common in the book (e.g., 1:3; 14:13; 16:15; 20:6; 22:7, 14). After having told John what to write, the angel states that “these are true words of God” (v. 9; cf. 21:5; 22:6). To these words, John has borne witness (1:2). In the next part of his vision, John will see one who is called “The Word of God” (19:13). For whatever reason, John falls down at the angel’s feet to worship the angel,*°” just as the elders and the living creatures had done before God. The angel sternly rebukes him and explains that the one who talks with John is “a fellow servant” of all those who hold the testimony of Jesus. The reference to the voice from the throne might have suggested to John that the angel speaking to him was a divine figure, like the Son of Man. The angel refuses to accept such an exalted status. That is exactly what we should expect when John, though a human being,°°* has 307. See L. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1995). 308. See P. Schafer, Rivilitat zwichen Engeln und Menschen (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1975).

REFLECTIONS 1. This vision (particularly 18:13) gives a reader a glimpse of how the wealth of Babylon has been gained at the expense of millions. Luxury items here gravitate to the center to supply an insatiable need. Those on the periphery become merely the means of supplying the needs of others. John’s vision is an evocation of the consequences of a narcissistic social order, in which everything revolves around the needs of a demanding upper class that makes itself the center of the universe and preserves that position by force, ideology, and demands for conformity. The beauty, sophistication, and splendor of its culture, arts, social life, and technology may be great, but it is in a condition of death. The prophet exposes that reign of death while pointing to ways whereby new life can be found. This vision invites us to consider carefully the history of our wealth and to assess the extent to which the trade that forms a part of the business of our international order (18:13) is neutral in its inspiration and effects: “Trade as much as conquest violates the integrity of communities which become dominated by the influence of the stronger trading partner.” Babylon and the kings and the mighty have committed fornication; great lengths have been taken in order to achieve wealth, status, and power. And that has come about through trade, which is very starkly seen as fornication. International trade can be a form of cultural promiscuity by which one power exploits and drains the resources of many others. In extravagance and luxury lies hidden a cost in human lives and societies. There is no view in Revelation of economic and political activity as autonomous enterprises devoid of any theological meaning. Trade and commerce are shown to be shot through with 309, O, O’Donovan, “The Political Thought of the Book of Revelation,” Tyndale Bulletin 37 (1986) 85.

696

REVELATION 18:1—19:10 REFLECTIONS human interest (as in Rev 13:6). Many Christians feel out of their depths when they seek to explore contemporary politics and economics in the light of the gospel. But Christians are obligated to learn about and to understand through the lens of the story of Christ the nature of what confronts them. That story casts its shadow over every human transaction. No activity can be regarded as morally neutral and beyond critique and the need for redemption of the Lamb who was slain. That is one of the reasons why Revelation is such a difficult book to read. Its panorama is too big for most of us to grasp. However hard we try, we cannot tame its message and the scope of its concern. It compels us to recognize the vastness of God’s concerns and the scope of God’s justice. We would prefer a spirituality that concentrated on the individual. But the book of Revelation refuses to allow us to narrow our vision or to be anesthetized in our moral sense. We would prefer to believe that the dark side did not exist. It does, and we must face up to it, individually, socially, and economically, if we are truly to reflect the scope of God’s concern. Our assumptions about how the world does and should work may need to be scrutinized in the light of another way of viewing things.’ The striking imagery demands that we see the prosaic and ordinary as, in reality, extraordinarily threatening to God’s way. Harmless words and actions are shown as being of ultimate significance. Revelation’s symbolism refuses to allow us to remain indifferent.

2. The command in 18:4, “Come out of her, my people,/ so that you do not take part in her sins” (NRSV), is an indirect reminder that people have to live and work in Babylon for the time being. Jeremiah told the unsettled Jews of his day to “build houses... plant gardens and ...seek the welfare of the city” of their exile (Jer 29:5-7 NRSV). There has to be some degree of acceptance of Babylon, but not conformity with it. There is no escape from the place of exile. There is no safe haven where the elect can remain unspotted by the world, particularly so in a world in which communications and the influence of dominant ideologies are all-pervasive. Until the time comes to leave, Chrisitans need to claim a distinctive identity and to develop habits of resistance that will enable witness and prophecy to take place. 3. One feature of chapters 18-19 is the welter of voices that confront the reader. They oscillate between cries of triumph at Babylon’s fall and searing laments at the end of that sophisticated culture. Revelation is full of competing voices, symbolic systems, and worldviews. We are called to identify with John’s visionary voice and any claim to vision (such as that of Jezebel, Balaam, or the false prophet) is to be rejected. Voices, even within John’s own church, which commended the eating of meat sacrificed to idols and compromise of social mores, have their echoes in the merchants and the mighty who lament Babylon’s fall. The unclean thing that has pervaded the life of Babylon still lurks at the gates of the city.” The perspective of the beneficiaries of Babylon’s wealth is included as well. Sadness is expressed at the passing of the splendor of Babylon, though none of the heavenly voices is raised in support of Babylon. The uncomfortable fact is that the perspective of those who have profited from Babylon’s greatness includes all of us who have become prosperous. To the degree that we are honest, we may identify with the laments of the kings, the merchants, and sailors and bemoan the ease with which the seemingly eternal and beautiful can be destroyed, a waste of all that talent, time, and industry that has gone into making the fabric of society. The way in which John’s lament looks at the event from the perspective of the merchants reminds those of us who are privileged that there is another side to our world in which impoverishment is the price to be paid for our ease and wealth. If we identify with the sorrow of the merchants at the end of civilization, we shall, as Allan Boesak has put it, share “the viewpoint which is so typically the one of those who do

not know what it is like to stand at the bottom of the list.”*” 310. See U. Duchrow, Alternatives to Global Capitalism (The Hague: International Books, 1995); T. Gorringe, Capital and the Kingdom

(London: SPCK, 1994). 311. See E. Schiissler Fiorenza, Revelation: Vision of a Just World (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991) 132ff.; T. M. S. Long, “Narrator Audiences and Messages: A South African Reader Response Study of Narrative Relationships in the Book of Revelation” (Ph.D. diss. University of Natal, 1996). 312. Alan Boesak, Comfort and Protest (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1987) 121-22.

697

REVELATION AQ sbbedd HEAVEN OPENS, AND THE RIDER ON THE WHITE HORSE APPEARS NIV

NRSV

"] saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. '?His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 'SHe is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. '*The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.”* He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. '°On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:

11Then I saw heaven opened, and there was a white horse! Its rider is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. '2His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head

are many diadems; and he has a name inscribed that no one knows but himself. '*He is clothed in a robe dipped in? blood, and his name is called The Word of God. '4And the armies of heaven, wearing fine linen, white and pure, were follow-

ing him on white horses. !From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule? them with a rod of iron; he will tread the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. !°On his robe and on his thigh he has a name inscribed, “King of kings and Lord of lords.” 17Then I saw an angel standing in the sun, and with a loud voice he called to all the birds that fly in midheaven, “Come, gather for the great supper of God, '*to eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of the mighty, the flesh of

KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

'7And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, '*so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and mighty men, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, small and great.” ‘Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to make war against the rider on the horse and his army. 2°But the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who had performed the miraculous signs on his behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped his image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. ?'The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.

horses and their riders—flesh of all, both free and Slave, both small and great.” !°Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth with their armies gathered to make war against the rider on the horse and against his army. 2°And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed in its presence the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur. ?'And the rest were killed by the sword of the rider on the horse, the sword that came from his mouth; and all the birds were gorged with their flesh.

475 Psalm 2:9

aOther ancient authorities read sprinkled with

698

>Or will shepherd

REVELATION 19:11-21 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY n this passage, John describes a warriorlike ridet on a white horse who goes forth to pass judgment upon human beings. This is the second judgment passage (there has been a vision of the eschatological harvest in 14:14), and there will be a universal judgment before the great white throne, described in 20:11ff. There is an eschatological battle, as in 20:7ff. The particular focus of judgment is the beast and the false prophet, the former having once supported Babylon (17:7). 19:11-16. The long concentration on Babylon comes to an end, and the vision takes another important turn. This is marked by the words, “I saw heaven opened” (v. 11; parallel to the door that opened in heaven in 4:1; cf. Ezek 1:1; Mark 1:10; Acts 10:11). John sees a white horse with a rider seated upon it, repeating words from 6:2, where the first of the four horsemen came forth to conquer. This rider is called “Faithful and True” (cf. 1:5). Christ is the faithful and true witness in 3:14 (cf. 2:13), but the term “witness” is lacking from this rider’s description. Rather, he will be engaged in carrying out judgment in righteousness (cf. Pss 72:2; 96:13; Isa 11:4). The time for testimony is over; the case has been made, and the sentencing will begin. Links with the figure of Christ earlier in the vision are confirmed by the description of the rider (v. 12), which harks back to the description of the Son of Man (1:14): “His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems” (cf. 12:3; 13:1). He has a name “inscribed” that no one knows but himself (echoing 2:17), a name that contrasts with the widely used name of the beast (13:17). This rider’s name is “The Word of God” {(v. 13; cf. John 1:1; Wis 18:15 [NRSV]: “Your all-powerful word leaped from heaven, from the royal throne,/ into the midst of the land that was doomed,/ a stern warrior/ carrying the sharp sword of your authentic command,/ and stood and filled all things with death”). And on his robe and his thigh are inscribed the words, “King of kings and Lord of lords” (v. 16; cf. 1:5; 17:14; Deut 10:17; 1 Cor 8:6). The word kvptos (kyrios) is

usually used to describe God, but here it describes the divine warrior. He is wearing a garment that has been dipped in blood (v. 13), a hint that he is the Lamb who stood as if it had been slaughtered (5:6; cf. Isa 63:1ff.), bearing the marks of his own blood. He leads the heavenly armies, who are riding white horses and are clad in white linen (cf. 18:12; 19:8), like the white garments of the elders and the righteous one (4:4; 6:11; 7:9; cf. 3:4). From this rider’s mouth comes “a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations” (in 1:16 it is a two-edged sword; cf. 2:12; Isa 11:4;

49:2). According to v. 15, he will rule (lit., “shepherd” [motpaivw poimaino|; see NRSV textual note) the nations “with a rod of iron.” The role of the shepherd in Revelation has two aspects. On the one hand, as here, the shepherd is a stern ruler (2:27; 12:5); on the other hand the shepherd is a more gentle image, providing pasture for the sheep (7:17). Here the rider will smite the nations as a shepherd, a curious reversal of Zech 13:7 (quoted in Matt 26:31), where the shepherd himself will be struck down. The links to earlier items in the vision continue in v. 150 when the rider is described as treading “the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty” (cf. Isa 63:2). So the identity of the one treading the wine press in 14:19 is now revealed. 19:17-18. An angel appears, standing “in the sun” (the subject of a dramatic painting by JadM. W.. Turner |c. 1825);.see. the insert in the Introduction, cf. 7:2). The angel summons the birds that “fly in midheaven” (cf. 8:13; 14:6) to a feast. Unlike the marriage feast of the Lamb (v. 9), this feast will be a “sreat supper of God,” an occasion for the birds to gorge themselves on the flesh of the kings, the captains, and the mighty who (according to 6:15) had pleaded to be hidden from the great day of the wrath of God and the Lamb. It is an awesome destruction like that of Gog and Magog in Ezek 39:17. The inclusion of “small and great” (cf. 13:16) shows that Revelation contemplates no respite

699

REVELATION

19:11-21 COMMENTARY The destruction of enemies links back to Isa 11:4 and parallels other passages indebted to it:

for anyone who has been taken in by the ideology of the beast and Babylon. 19:19-21. The summons for the birds to gather is matched in v. 19 by the gathering of the beast and the kings of the earth with their armies to make war on the rider on the white horse, who “in righteousness judges and makes war” (v. 11 NRSV). That gathering was alluded to in 16:14, in which evil spirits come from the mouths of the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet. This war continues the one that had been started with the assault on the two witnesses in 11:7. This time, however, the initial as well as the final victory will belong to the rider on the white horse and his army (v. 20), and the beast and the false prophet will be captured (mid€w piazo; the word used of the attempts to arrest Jesus in John’s Gospel, e.g., John 7:30). In v. 20, the reader is reminded of the identity of the false prophet: He is the one “who had performed in its [the beast’s] presence the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped its image” (cf. 13:13; 16:14). The mark of the beast here seems to be the possession of those who have been deceived, rather than something that is inflicted on them (cf. 14:9). But these people were no hapless victims who had been forced to submit; rather, they had willingly colluded with the culture of Babylon and the dominion of the beast. So those who worship the image of the beast “receive” (AayBavw lambano) rather than “are given” the mark, as in 13:16. Those who worship the beast are active in their acceptance of this deceit. Ultimately, the beast and the false prophet are thrown alive into the lake of fire, a feature that anticipates the final vision (20:10, 14-15; 21:8; cf. 9:1718; 14:10; and Num 16:33, where Korah and his household go down to Sheol alive). The people who have worshiped the beast and received its mark are killed by the sword that proceeds from the mouth of the rider on the horse.

With righteousness he shall judge the poor, and decide with equity for the meek of the earth; he shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall kill the wicked. (Isa 11:4 NRSV) When he saw the onrush of the approaching multitude, he neither lifted his hand nor held a spear or any weapon of war; but I saw only how he sent forth from his mouth as it were a stream of fire, and from his lips a flaming breath, and from his tongue he shot forth a storm of sparks. All these were mingled together, the stream of fire and the flaming breath and the great storm, and fell on the onrushing multitude which was prepared to fight, and burned them all up, so that suddenly nothing was seen of the innumerable multitude but only the dust of ashes

and the smell of smoke. (4 Ezra 13:9-11)!° And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy with the breath of his mouth, annihilating him by the manifestation of his coming. (2 Thess 2:8 NRSV) “These are the words of him who has the sharp, two-edged sword....1 will come to you soon and make war against them with the sword of my mouth.” (Rev 2:12, 16 NRSV) From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations....And the rest were killed by the sword of the rider on the horse, the sword that came from his mouth. (Rev 19:15, 21 NRSV)

All of these passages suggest that judgment in the context of an eschatological battle comes by means of the power of the Word of God rather than through force of arms. The effect is devastating, because it functions as a divine illocutionary act. The Word of God brings it into effect the moment it is uttered: The word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul from spirit, joints from marrow; it is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And before him no creature is hidden, but all are naked and laid bare to the eyes of the one to whom we must render an account. (Heb 4:12-13 NRSV) 313. Translation by B. M. Metzger, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Apocalyptic Literature and Testament, vol. 1, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1983).

700

REVELATION

19:11-21 REFLECTIONS

REFLECTIONS 1. The vision described in Revelation 19 concerns the judgment on institutions that had been responsible “for a disordered world and that had attracted to themselves absolute power and demanded conformity. It is a reminder to followers of Jesus that God cannot allow the injustices of human history to continue forever. We may prefer a God who will treat those who have accepted the ways and benefits of the beast in the same way as those who have refused to conform are treated. But a view of God that is merely supportive of our prejudices and desires is idolatrous. The chatlenging picture of Christ as judge is iconoclastic and disturbing. Revelation represents one pole in the Christian gospel: the justice of God. Balancing justice and love lies in the depths of both Jewish and Christian wrestling with the character of God. No theodicy can answer the problem merely by showing revulsion at the consequences of justice. Love’s ability to cover a multitude of sins in a vision of eternal inclusion is in danger of baptizing the status quo of this world’s injustice, as the kings, magnates, and captains ride into the kingdom on the tide of the love of God. That sentimentality is ruthlessly challenged by the apocalyptic vision. Nevertheless, the pattern of justice and judgment is gruesome in its execution (Rev 19:21 0). Readings of Revelation must not dilute what seems to us the force of this “scandal,” failing to grapple with its scandalous imagery. But apocalypse is untamed and perhaps untamable. Perhaps that is why the book of Revelation was canonized—so that the norms and orderliness of religion might channel its desire and prophetic energy into more constructive operations. But the vision remains chaotic and wild, hoping for the order of the new Jerusalem, but denouncing injustice and proclaiming dissolution. 2. Revelation offers a vision of another path for humanity than of the road of violence and evil. But it is a vision, not a prescription. It is more a warning of what to avoid than a manual of what to do. It shocks and disconcerts us so that we might begin to assess reality afresh. It is the means of beginning on a new path, rather than a precise guide for following that path. What proceeds from the mouth of the Messiah is seen to be devastating (cf. Isa 11:4; 2 Thess 2:8). “The two-edged sword” of the Word of God (19:13) is threatening, but it is also a metaphorical image. An effective word, but still only a word and not a violent action. Perhaps our difficulty with Revelation’s harsh words should prompt us to reflect on our easy use of words: Do we disguise from ourselves the wounding and destructive, as well as the creative, power of words? Words can torment hearers as much as does the eschatological judgment itself (as Rev 11:6 reminds us). Jesus’ words, recalled by the Spirit, assist in the conviction of the reality of sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8ff.). His words are the cornerstone of the indictment against a world that prefers darkness to light. John’s vision is couched in words of frightening and forbidding tones, reflecting the ultimate seriousness of the choices and the extent of human imperviousness to the problems of this world.

3. The future dimension of Revelation 19:11-20 should not lead us to neglect the present effectiveness of the divine word. In Hos 6:5, God’s prophetic word has the same devastating effect as does the manifestation of the eschatological rider: “I have hewn them by the prophets,/ I have killed them by the words of my mouth,/ and my judgment goes forth as the light” (NRSV). John’s words, too, are prophecy (Rev 22:18), and their effect is like Jeremiah’s: “to pluck up and to pull down,/ to destroy and to overthrow,/ to build and to plant” (Jer 1:10 NRSV; cf. Rev 10:11). That task is not reserved for just a prophetic elite." As Blake said, “The voice of honest indignation is the voice of God.”*” 4. However awesome

Revelation’s images are, we should not allow ourselves to get

314. See R. Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993) 80ff. 315. William Blake, plates 12-13, in Blake: Complete Writings, ed. G. Keynes (London: Oxford University Press, 1966) 153.

701

REVELATION

19:11-21 REFLECTIONS

too involved in speculating about what the future will be like. The description of judgment is economical in the extreme. Only what is necessary to make the point about the message of justice and judgment and the significance of present words and deeds is included. To this extent, Revelation differs little from the Gospel of John in placing all the emphasis on present decisions, attitudes, and conduct (John 5:24-25). In Rev 19:17-21 there is little attempt to satisfy the reader’s curiosity about how it will all work out. The list of those upon whom the birds will gorge themselves in 19:18 is consistent with the perspective of the book: While the “small” can be expected to be led astray as they desperately seek for their own survival (13:16), it is the kings, the captains, and the mighty who are prominently mentioned as receiving judgment (cf. 6:15). Those who benefit most from Babylon are least likely to notice the effects of the culture Babylon creates. 2, ~~

2, ~~

“~

o,~~

ExcuRsUsS: THE PAROUSIA IN THE New TESTAMENT” There is ample evidence of the belief in the Second Coming of Christ, most apparent in Rev 1:7; 19:11ff.; and 22:20 (the word tapovota [parousia| is not used in Revelation, though it is a technical term elsewhere in the NT; e.g., Matt 24:3; 1 Cor 15:23; 1 Thess 5:23; 2 Thess 2:1; 2 Pet 1:16; 1 John 2:28; cf. Jas 5:7). In eschatological Jewish texts contemporary to Revelation, reference may be made occasionally to a messianic agent,*” though even these texts are less concerned with the identity of the Messiah than with the conviction of some future reign of God on earth. In Rev 19:11-21, there are explicit links with the vision of the Son of Man in Rev 1:14, which inaugurates John’s vision. Revelation 19:11-21 forms part of a much longer symbolic account of the culmination of the manifestation of the divine wrath within human history, stemming from the exaltation of the Lamb and its claiming the right to open the sealed scroll. After the diversion in Rev 17:1-19:10, which considers the character of Babylon and speaks of its destruction and the reaction in heaven to it, John’s vision resumes with the heaven opened and the appearance of a rider on a white horse, which leads to a holy war. Like the descendant of David, described in Isaiah 11, it is with the sword proceeding from his mouth that this rider will rule the nations. He comes as “King of kings and Lord of lords” (Rev 19:16 NRSV); his victory, therefore, in the struggle that is to take place has already been assured (exactly what we would expect in the light of Rev 11:17). There gather together the beast, the false prophet, and the kings of the earth to make war against the rider on the white horse (19:19). The beast and the false prophet are thrown into the lake of fire, and their allies are slain with the sword that proceeds from the mouth of the rider on the white horse. This triumph immediately precedes the establishment of the messianic kingdom on earth (Rev 20:4). But this is not the end of the struggle against the forces opposed to the divine righteousness, because the messianic reign is temporary and depends on the binding of Satan in the abyss (Rev 20:2). Satan’s release, however, leads to another terrible conflict. But whereas the rider on the white horse had conquered the beast and the kings of the earth, in the next battle, Satan, released from prison, gathers the armies of Gog and Magog to wage war against the camp of the saints and against the holy city—only to be destroyed by fire 316. See the survey in C. Rowland, Christian Origins (London: SPCK, 1985) 285ff.; G. B. Caird, New Testament Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994) 250-56; A. L. Moore, The Parousia in the New Testament (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1966); R. Bauckham, Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1972) 2:28.3. 317. E.g., Pss. Sol. 17:24-25; 1 Enoch 46:5-6; 90:37; 4 Ezra 7:29; 12:32; Syr. Baruch 29:3; 39:7; 72:2; Sib. On. iii. 652ff.; T. Levi2:11; 4QFlor; 10S 9:11).

702

EXCURSUS: THE PAROUSIA IN THE NEW TESTAMENT from heaven. The devil will join the beast and the false prophet in the lake of fire for eternal torment. This is then followed by the last assize, which paves the way for the new heaven and new earth and the establishment of God’s dwelling with humankind. The closest parallel in the New Testament to Rev 19:11-21 is the short eschatological account in 1 Corinthians 15. In a discussion focusing on the belief in the resurrection and the character of the resurrection body, Paul alludes to the future consummation in two passages. In the first passage (1 Cor 15:20-34), Paul outlines the order in which the resurrection from the dead will take place: Christ, “the first fruits” (which has already taken place), then those who belong to Christ at his coming (cf. 1 Thess 4:16). Then comes the end, when Christ hands over the kingship to God, “after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power” (1 Cor 15:24 NRSV). Paul then interpolates the comment that Christ must exercise the sovereignty until he has put all his enemies under his feet (an allusion to Ps 110:1); the last enemy to be destroyed is death itself. It is only when all things are subjected to the Messiah that the Son will himself be subject to the Father and God will be all in all (1 Cor 15:28). Later in the chapter, in a discussion of the character of the resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58), Paul stresses that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God and tells his readers of the mystery of the resurrection of the elect: Not all will die, but all will be “changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet” (1 Cor 15:52 NRSV; cf. Matt 24:31; 1 Thess 4:17). When the heavenly trumpet sounds, the righteous dead will be raised, incorruptible. It is when what was corruptible has put on immortality in the form of the resurrection body that death will be swallowed up in victory. It is not clear whether this passage contradicts the earlier hint of a period of a messianic kingdom on earth at some point during the lordship of the Messiah, during which he puts under subjection the enemies of God. But it is possible to read 1 Cor 15:25-28 as indicating that Paul’s eschatology follows the general outline of that found in Revelation 19-21 and presupposes a messianic reign on earth. Also related to Revelation 19 is the account of the parousia in 2 Thessalonians 2. This eschatological passage is to be found in a context dealing with a particular pastoral problem. As such, like 1 Corinthians 15, it offers only a fragment of an eschatological scheme, sufficient to deal with the particular issue confronting the writer: the threat of disturbance to the community because of an outburst of eschatological enthusiasm, prompted by the belief that the day of the Lord had already arrived (1 Thess 2:2). In order to counteract such enthusiasm, Paul reminds his readers that a rebellion must first take place, and the “lawless one,” who opposes God and sits in the Temple of God, “declaring himself to be God” (1 Thess 2:4 NRSV), must be revealed. This sign of the coming of Christ has not yet occurred, because it is being restrained until the proper time (1 Thess 2:6). It is unclear as to what the restraint Paul asks his readers to remember might be. Is it Paul himself? Is it the evangelization of the Gentiles? Is it the Roman Empire? Is it some divine/angelic restraint, such as that found in Rev 7:1? Meanwhile the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. In other words, the present is, in some sense, an eschatological time. The coming of the lawless one will be accompanied by signs and wonders that will deceive those who are on the way to destruction, just as the activity of the beast and the false prophet deceive the nations of the earth in Rev 13:7, 12-18. Finally, the Lord Jesus will slay the man of lawlessness with the breath of his mouth (2 Thess 2:8). So there is some similarity between this passage and Revelation, where the exaltation of the Lamb provokes the initiation of the whole eschatological drama, which moves forward according to its own apocalyptic logic. Until the restraint is removed, there can be no manifestation of the Antichrist figure (cf. the reason for delay given in Mark 13:10). As it does for Rev 19:15, Isa 11:4 has contributed to this passage from 2 Thessalonians, particularly in the description of the destruction of the lawless one. A similar description turns up in Ps. Sol. 17:24 as well: “With a rod of iron he shall break in pieces all their substance; he shall destroy the godless nations with the word of his mouth. At his rebuke shall the nations flee before him.” Likewise, in the vision of the man from the sea in 4 Ezra 13, we find a similar description of the destruction of his enemies (4 Ezra 13:8ff.). In the interpretation of the vision, we are told that,

703

EXCURSUS: THE PAROUSIA IN THE NEW TESTAMENT after a period of unrest when nation will rise up against nation (4 Ezra 13:30ff.), the one whom the Most High has been keeping for many generations will appear to reprove the assembled nations for their ungodliness (4 Ezra 13:37-38) and destroy them by the law. After this, the tribes of Israel will gather at Mount Zion, where they will live in peace. In all of these passages from 4 Ezra it is made quite clear that those forces opposed to God will be destroyed. Thus the appearance of the Messiah will be more than just a prelude to a better order, made quite explicit in passages like 4 Ezra 13 and Revelation 19, for he will act as the agent of destruction of the evil that stands opposed to the righteousness of God. When viewed in the light of Rev 19:11-21, the eschatological discourses in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew 24-25; Mark 13; Luke 21) show some remarkable omissions. There are the messianic woes that are so characteristic of eschatological writings of this period of Judaism. While there may well be some kind of connection between the sort of focus on evil that is cryptically outlined in Mark 13:14 and the hubris of the man of lawlessness mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2, nothing is said about the effects on the forces of evil of the coming of the Son of Man. Indeed, the description of the coming of the Son of Man in all three synoptic Gospels is linked primarily with the vindication of the elect, thus focusing on the final aspect of the messianic drama in the vision of the man from the sea in 4 Ezra 13:12. The certainty of vindication is there, but the lot of the elect when they have been gathered from the four corners of the earth is not touched on at all in Mark. The element of judgment at the parousia of the Son of Man is not entirely absent from the synoptic discourses. The climax of the Matthean version is the account of the final assize, with the Son of Man sitting on God’s throne, separating the sheep from the goats (Matt 25:31-46). Here, too, the focus of attention is on the present response of the elect. It is those who recognize the heavenly Son of Man in the brethren who are hungry, thirsty, strangers, naked, weak, and imprisoned in the present age who will inherit the kingdom prepared by God from the foundation of the world. There is a possible link here with the much disputed / Enoch 3-71, where the Son of Man sits on the throne of the lord of the spirits and exercises judgment (7 Enoch 69:2). The primary concern of the Markan discourse on the parousia is not satisfaction of curiosity about the details of the times and seasons so much as dire warnings of the threat of being led astray, of failing at the last, and of the need to be ready and watchful to avoid the worst of the coming disasters. In the bleak moments of the last days there is little attempt to dwell on the delights awaiting disciples in the messianic kingdom (though an eschatological promise is made a little later in Luke’s Gospel in the context of the supper discourse; Luke 22:29-30). The reader’s thoughts are made to dwell on responsibilities in the short and medium term as the essential prerequisite of achieving eschatological bliss. These sentiments are very much at the fore in 4 Ezra, where the emphasis is on the need to follow the precepts of the Most High in order to achieve eternal life. In comparison with the more extended accounts of the coming of the new age to be feted in other material, both Christian and Jewish, the synoptic discourses concentrate on the period of strife and tribulation leading up to the coming of the Son of Man, itself an expectation only hinted at in the Similitudes of Enoch. In the Gospels what happens after the coming of the Son of Man is not mentioned, though in the Lukan version there is the expectation that the arrival of the Son of Man will be the beginning of the process of liberation, for which the tribulations and destruction had been the prelude (Luke 21:26ff.). The implication is that the kingdom does not arrive with the coming of the Son of Man; that is only part of the eschatological drama, whose climax is still to come—exactly what we find in Revelation. The arrival of the rider on the white horse in Revelation is the prelude to the struggle that must precede the establishment of the messianic kingdom, an event still to come, when there will be a reversal of Jerusalem’s fortunes (Luke 21:24). In the Pauline letters, the word tapovoia (parousia) is used in the context of Christ’s coming (e.g., 1 Thess 3:13; 2 Thess 2:8; cf. his revealing at 1 Cor 1:7), and also that of the apostle (2 Cor 10:10; Phil 1:26; 2:12) or his agent (1 Cor 16:17; 2 Cor 7:6-7). The present

704

EXCURSUS: THE PAROUSIA IN THE NEW TESTAMENT experience of the Christ who is to come can be discerned also in aspects of Paul’s understanding of apostleship.** There is a close relationship between the parousia of Christ and the apostolic parousia, so that through the presence of the apostle, whether in person, through a co-worker, or through letter, the presence of Christ was confronting his congregations (Rom 15:14ff.; 1 Cor 4:14ff; 1 Cor 5:3ff; Phil 2:12). Paul’s presence brings eschatological power, despite his human weakness and humility (2 Cor 10:10; cf. 1 Cor 4:9-10). According to 1 Corinthians 4—5, Paul is a father in Christ Jesus to the Corinthians (4:15); Paul’s person is to be imitated (4:16) as he is the embodiment of Christ (11:1). Paul’s coming will be with power (1 Cor 4:19). His emissary Timothy will remind the church of the way of Christ (1 Cor 4:17), and even Paul’s absence will not diminish the force of the apostolic will (1 Cor 5:3). When he comes, it is either with discipline (1 Cor 4:21; cf. 1 Cor 2:27; 3:19) or with gentleness (cf the gentler tone of the letter to the Philadelphian angel in Rev 3:7-13). And he promises the Roman church that when he finally reaches Rome his coming will bring blessing to them (Rom 15:29). Like the risen Christ, who stands in the midst of his churches as judge and sustainer (Rev 1:13), the apostle of Christ comes as a threat and a promise—a threat to those who have lost their first love or exclude the Messiah and his apostle; a promise of blessing for those who conquer. The Fourth Gospel’s account of the coming of Jesus has been seen as a development of the early parousia hope that moves away from the public cosmic scenes we find in the other Gospels. Jesus will come to his disciples (John 14:21, 23). The dwellings that Jesus goes to prepare for the disciples can be enjoyed by the one who loves Jesus and is devoted to his words (John 14:2; cf. John 14:23). Likewise, the manifestation of the divine glory is reserved not for the world, but for the disciple John 14:19). Whereas all flesh will see the salvation of our God in Isa 52:7-10 and those who pierced the victorious Son of Man will look upon him in glory (Rev 1:9; cf. Mark 14:62), the world cannot see the returning Jesus. Indeed, the goal of the new age in Revelation, where those who bear the name of God on their foreheads (Rev 22:3-4) and will see God face to face, is part of the bliss reserved for the disciples in heaven to be with God and to see God’s glory (Rev 17:24). Just as Jesus comes again to the disciples, so too does the Paraclete (NRSV, “Advocate”). The world cannot receive Christ, and it is the Paraclete that enables the disciples to maintain their connection with the basic revelation of God, the Logos who makes the Father known (Rev 14:17ff.; 15:26). The Paraclete thus points back to Jesus, the Word made flesh, and is in some sense a successor to Jesus, a compensation by his presence for the absence of Jesus, who has returned to the Father. An issue that always arises when the parousia is discussed is the problem caused for Christians by the non-fulfillment of the expectation of Christ’s return. Explicit evidence that the delay of the parousia was a problem within early Christianity is not as vast as is often suggested; 2 Peter 3 is, in fact, a rather exceptional piece of evidence. Other passages that are often mentioned, for instance, in Matthew (the parables at the end of Matthew 24) and Acts 1:7 need to be seen as indirect rather than direct evidence of the supposed problem. Within the eschatological tradition there was an attempt to come to terms with the delay of the coming

of God’s reign>’ The apocalypses are an important resource for dealing with the non-appearance of God’s reign on earth, since they reflect interest in the world above, where God’s reign is acknowledged by the heavenly host and where the apocalyptic seer can have access to the repository of those purposes of God for the future world. Thus the visionary can either glimpse in the heavenly books about the mysteries of eschatology or be offered a “preview” of what will happen in the future of human history. The privilege of having the heavenly mysteries revealed could be extended to a wider group. The Hodayoth from the Dead Sea Scrolls (1QH) and the Odes of Solomon offer the elect group a present participation in the lot of heaven and a foretaste of the coming glory. 318. See R. Funk, “The Apostolic Parousia: Form and Significance,” in W. R. Farmer, C. F. D. Moule, and R. Niebuhr, Christian History

and Interpretation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967) 249ff. 319. See R. Bauckham, “The Delay of the Parousia,” Zyndale Bulletin 31 (1980) 3-36.

o, bX

“

o, bg

“

705

o, ~

REVELATION 20:1-15

MILLENNIUM AND JUDGMENT OVERVIEW bound. The millennial kingdom, over which the martyrs preside, ends with the release of Satan, a final war with Gog and Magog, and another version of the judgment, parallel to 19:17-21, this time before the great white throne.

fter the vision of the rider on the white ® horse in 19:11-21 comes one of the most

controversial passages in this controversial book: the description of the thousand-year messianic ‘reign on earth. During this period, Satan will be

REVELATION 20:1-6, ANOTHER ANGEL DESCENDING FROM HEAVEN, THE BINDING OF SATAN, AND THE MI LLENNIUM Nv.

i.

NRSV

And I saw an angel coming down out of 20 having the key to the Abyss and

7

Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the keyto the bottomless pit and a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, 3and

holding in his hand a great chain. *He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. *He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations

threw him into the pit, and locked and sealed it over him, so that he would deceive the nations no more, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must belet out for a little while. AThen I saw thrones, and those seated on them

anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time. ‘I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. °(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. °Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

were given authority to judge. I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus* and for the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. Over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him a thousand years. 4Or for the testimony of Jesus

706

REVELATION 20:1-6 COMMENTARY

(COMMENTARY 20:1-3. John sees an angel descending from

11:16, twenty-four elders, seated on thrones, surround the one who is seated on the throne and spend their time in worship of the one seated on the throne. Here people sit, and judgment is given to them. There has been a promise to the one who “conquers” to sit with Christ on his throne (3:20), now fulfilled in v. 4. That echoes the promise to the Twelve to sit with the Son of Man judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt 19:28; cf. Luke 22:28, where it is granted to “you who have stood by me in my trials”). John also sees the souls of those “beheaded.” Earlier he had seen the souls of those slain for their testimony (12:17). This appears to be another group, who “refused to worship the Beast or his statue and did not have the brand-mark on their foreheads and hands” (JB). Most translations, however, refer to only one group (e.g., REB, “who for the sake of their witness to Jesus, had been beheaded, those who had not worshipped the beast”). Whether there is a different group alongside those who have been martyred is not clear; John’s Greek is awkward. It could be that the group exercising judgment includes not only the martyrs but also those who did not worship the beast. The obvious parallel to the syntax of this passage is 1:7. As in 19:20, the whole litany of the nature of compromise with the beast is narrated (cf. 14:9, 11; 16:2), so that what is demanded to conform with the will of God, on the one hand, and to reject the beast, on the other hand, is made absolutely clear. If another group is referred to, then their distinctive characteristic is that they did not worship the beast. Whether or not they did so “for the sake of God’s word and their witness to Jesus” is of secondary importance. We may have a vision, therefore, of those who resisted the beast and those who suffered for it, both inside and outside the church, sitting with the one who had himself been the faithful witness (1:5). They had held out against the compromises required of them in the old scheme of things (the extent of the nature of compromise with the beast and the resistance required is narrated in ONS Ree Kee The righteous dead have come to life (like their Lord in 1:18; 2:8) to reign with Christ. The word “Christ” (Xptotés Christos) is seldom used in

heaven (cf. 9:1; 10:1; 18:1; 21:2), holding the key to the abyss, which had been given to the star that fell from heaven in 9:1 (cf. 1:18). With the key, the angel is holding a great chain (cf. Mark 5:3; Acts 12:6-7; Eph 6:20). The angel seizes the dragon (“the ancienf serpent, who is the Devil and Satan”; cf. 12:9), binds him for a thousand years, and throws him into the abyss (whence the beast had emerged, according to 11:7). The angel then locks and seals the pit (cf. 1:18; 3:7; 7:3; 10:4; 22:10), so that the nations will no longer be deceived (v. 3), as they had been previously, into worshiping the beast to whom had been given the dragon’s authority (13:14). This act reverses the bondage by which Satan, through the beast and Babylon, had held the inhabitants of the earth in thrall (cf. Luke 13:16: “whom Satan bound”). After a thousand years, Satan must be released for a short time (cf. 2:21; 6:11; 10:6). The loosing of Satan contrasts with the loosing of the new community from their shackles, allowing them to become a kingdom of priests (1:6). Throughout Revelation, there is a balance of positive effect and negative consequences: the ejection of Satan from heaven in chap. 12 results in a threat to earth, and the loosing by the vindication of the Lamb leads to the opening of the seals of apocalypse in chaps. 5-6. Here Satan’s being loosed brings deceit and war, the significance of which can be apprehended only by those who have been loosed from sin and so perceive the nature of deceit in the cosmos. The word “thousand” (xt\va chilia) occurs only here in the book (cf. 7:4ff.; 14:1; the only other relevant NT passage in which the word is used is 2 Pet 3:8). In that text, in response to those who scoff at the delay of Christ’s coming, the author alludes to Ps 90:4 (“with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day”) as part of an argument to prove that the human and divine time-scales are very different, and that when the Lord does come it will be suddenly, “like a thief” (see 3:3; 16:15). 20:4-6. John sees thrones (v. 4), just as he had seen them earlier (4:4; cf. Dan 7:9). In 4:4 and

707

REVELATION 20:1-6 COMMENTARY Revelation (1:1, 2, 5; 11:15; 12:10; 20:4, 6). Only on four occasions does the word appear in the vision proper, where it is probably best translated as “Messiah.” In addition to reigning with Christ, the vivified also act as priests (v. 6; cf. 1:6; 5:10). The reign of Christ and the elect is still a future event in 5:10 and 11:15 (cf. 20:6; 22:5). Here, the past tense is

used. “King” is used in 1:5; 15:3; 17:14; 19:16 of God or Christ as king, and “kingdom” is used of the kingdom of people that has been constituted by Christ’s saving act (1:5; 5:10), in which John is also a participant (1:9). Like the verb “reign,” “kingdom” is related to moments when God’s sovereignty is demonstrated (11:10; 12:10). Thus the transfer of sovereignty over the kingdom of this world to God is given tangible expression in the thousand-year reign on earth of Christ and those who share in his kingdom. Other parts of the NT offer little help in interpreting the character of this messianic kingdom. The meanings of the terms “kingdom” and “reign of God” in the Gospels are much contested. In Mark 1:15 and 14:25, the usage appears to be a clear future reference, while Luke 11:20 and 17:21 have elements of realization. Neat encapsulations of the meaning of the phrase come up against the stubborn fact that the Gospels consistently portray Jesus as telling parables, which by their allusive nature and accessibility might help hearers respond to God’s reign rather than offer some definitive interpretation of it. What does emerge in the Gospels is a tension between present reality and future realization, which is evident elsewhere in the NT (e.g., future: 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:21; 2 Thess 1:5; present: Eph 5:5; Col 1:13; 1 Thess 2:12). Of most immediate relevance is the eschatological narrative in 1 Cor 15:24-25, which has been linked with the millennium in Revelation 20. The issue is whether in this se“~~

o, ~~

quence in 1 Corinthians there is a period during which Christ reigns and puts his enemies under subjection, much as the devil is bound in Revelation 20, or whether, as 1 Cor 15:52 suggests, the parousia is immediately followed by the resurrec-

tion with no intervening period.°?° It is possible to reconcile the two parts of 1 Corinthians 15, so that what 1 Cor 15:51 describes is exactly the same as Rev 20:4: “they came to life,” which John identifies as the first resurrection (v. 5). But such attempts at harmonizing hardly do justice to the fluidity of the eschatological imagery of the NT. A blessing is pronounced on those who share the first resurrection (v. 6; cf. 1:3; 14:13; 16:15; 19:9; 22:7, 14). The first resurrection, that of the martyrs (v. 6), is to be complemented with another resurrection in 20:12 (cf. v. 5, where John states that the rest of the dead will not be raised until the end of the millennium). Those who participate in the first resurrection are free from the threat of the second death, the lake of fire (21:8; cf. 20:14). It is this second death that will not harm the one who conquers in Smyrna, an angel that knows tribulation and poverty (2:11). Whether John’s visionary zeal has led to the inclusion of various traditions of judgment and future fulfillment has been a matter of debate, particularly in the heyday of source criticism. The repetition of accounts of judgment scenes in 14:14ff.; 19:11ff.; and 20:11ff. and eschatological resolution in 20:1ff. and 21:1ff. may be seen as warnings to those who are “neither hot nor cold” and as encouragement to the faithful witnesses, “who lived not their lives even unto death.” In any case, the first resurrection (v. 5) is a reward reserved for the faithful. The second is necessary to bring the dead to judgment. (See Reflections at 20:11-15.) 320. See C. Hill, Regnum Coelorum: Patterns of Future Hope in Early Christianity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992). ? “~~

°, ~~

Excursus: THE MILLENNIUM” Views about the millennium have varied throughout the history of the Christian church. There are premillenarian ideas, held by exegetes who think that the parousia will take place before the 321. See N. Cohn, The Pursuit of the Millennium (London: Paladin, 1970); B. Daly, The Hope of the Early Church (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1991); Hill, Regnum Coelorum; K. Mannheim, [Ideology and Utopia (Oxford: Routledge, 1936); C. Rowland, Radical Christianity (Oxford: Polity, 1988);J.W. Mealy, After the Thousand Years (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1991); M. Gilbertson, The Meaning of the Millennium (Cambridge: Grove, 1997); C. Keller, Apocalypse Now and Then: A Feminist Guide to the End of the World (Boston: Beacon, 1996).

EXCURSUS: THE MILLENNIUM messianic reign on earth (often linked with a cataclysmic eschatology that envisages a divine irruption into history), and post-millennial ideas, held by those who think that Christ’s reappearance will take place at the end of the millennium (often linked with gradualist, evolutionary views of history, inexorably moving toward an eschatological goal}. In addition, there are amillennialists, who reject the idea of the messianic reign on earth, either because they believe that this event has already happened in the cross and resurrection or in the emergence of the Christian church (Augustine’s interpretation in 7he City of God is a good example of amillennialism). In the earliest period of Christianity, resorting to the language and genre of apocalypse enabled NT writers to understand the significance of events and persons in the light of God’s eternal purposes. It buttressed the belief of the first Christians, in their diverse social settings, that they were privileged to be the ones “on whom the ends of the ages have come” (1 Cor 10:11 NRSV). The nature of that eschatological background has been the subject of fierce debate, however. While few scholars would dispute the preoccupation with the ultimate purposes of God in the NT, there is a significant difference of opinion between those who argue that the first Christians, in contrast to their Jewish contemporaries, expected the winding up of history and ultimately the appearance of a spiritual kingdom and those who consider the expectation to be on the historical plane. Gershom Scholem neatly summarizes these differing views when he contrasts the spiritual messianism of Christianity with the political, this-worldly, messianism of Judaism: A totally different concept of redemption determines the attitude to messianism in Judaism and Christianity. ... Judaism, in all its forms and manifestations, has always maintained a concept of redemption as an event which takes place publicly, on the stage of history and within the community. It is an occurrence which takes place in the visible world and which cannot be conceived apart from such a visible appearance. In contrast, Christianity conceives of redemption as an event in the spiritual and unseen realm, in the private world of each individual, and which effects an inner transformation which need not correspond to anything outside. Events which for the one which stood unconditionally at the end of history as its most distant aim, are for the other the true centre of the historical process, even if that process was henceforth peculiarly decked out as Heilsgeschichte.*”

This contrast exists also in the messianic and eschatological doctrines of Christianity; indeed, they are endemic to Christianity. Even if Christianity has come to be identified with a spiritual messianism, there are important strands in the history of Christianity that bear witness to a political messianism akin to that which is characteristic of Judaism. Both forms of messianism are endemic to Christianity. There are significant strands within the New Testament that exhibit the “chiliastic mentality” (from ytAva [chilia], Greek for 1,000, hence “millennium”) in which the present becomes an opportunity for transforming the imperfect into the perfect; history and eschatology become inextricably intertwined, and the elect stand on the brink of the millennium itself. We can see this in the story of Jesus of Nazareth as he proclaims the present as being decisive in God’s purposes and himself as the messianic agent for change. Jesus’ eschatological expectation was of an otherworldly kingdom of God, brought into being by God alone, where humankind were merely passive spectators of a vast divine drama with the cosmos as its stage. Similarly, Paul saw himself as the human agent in the eschatological act of God, whereby the Gentiles are offered the gospel and the last things are completed. Some texts that are roughly contemporary with Revelation evince the material eschatology that pervades Jewish literature. The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch includes this passage: 322. G. Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Israel (New York: Schocken, 1971). See also M. Walzer, Exodus and Revolution (New York: HarperCollins, 1985) 122-23. For a comparison of Jewish and Christian messianism, see W. D. Davies, “From Schweitzer to Scholem: Reflections on Sabbatai Sevi,” in Jewish and Pauline Studies (London: SPCK, 1984), which picks up on themes in G. Scholem’s Sabbatai \ Sevi (London: Routledge, 1973).

709

EXCURSUS: THE MILLENNIUM And it will happen that when all that which should come to pass in these parts has been accomplished, the Anointed One will begin to be revealed. And Behemoth will reveal itself from its place, and Leviathan will come from the sea, the two great monsters which I created on the fifth day of creation and which I shall have kept until that time. And they will be nourishment for all who are left. The earth will also yield fruits ten thousandfold. And on one vine will be a thousand branches, and one branch will produce a thousand clusters, and one cluster will produce a thousand grapes, and one grape will produce a cor of wine. And those who are hungry will enjoy themselves and they will, moreover, see marvels every day. For winds will go out in front of me every morning to bring the fragrance of aromatic fruits and clouds at the end of the day to distill the dew of health. And it will happen at that time that the treasury of manna will come down again from on high, and they will eat of it in those years because these are they who will have arrived at the consummation of time.*”

Millenarian beliefs are found in various other texts from Asia Minor. Cerinthus, for instance, is linked with such beliefs. In the third century, in fact, Revelation was attributed to Cerinthus because of its millenarian ideas.” Papias of Hierapolis, in the early part of the second century, included in his now lost work a saying attributed to Jesus in which the fruitfulness of the earth would be dramatically increased in the new age: “The days will come in which vines shall grow, each with ten thousand shoots, each shoot with ten thousand branches, each branch ten thousand twigs, each twig ten thousand clusters, each cluster ten thousand grapes; and each grape when pressed shall yield twenty-five measures of wine. And when any of the saints shall take hold of one of the clusters, another cluster shall call out, ‘I am a better cluster; take me, and bless the Lord through me.’ Likewise a grain of wheat shall yield ten thousand ears, each ear ten thousand grains, each grain ten pounds of pure white flour. And fruits, seeds, and grass shall yield in like proportion. And all the animals, enjoying these fruits of the earth shall live in peace and harmony, obedient to man in entire submission.” The authority for these sayings is Papias, who belonged to an earlier generation, who heard John speak and was a companion of Polycarp.*2°

Montanist expectation was for a new Jerusalem that would descend in Phrygia.’ Justin looked forward to an earthly reign of the saints, where they would reign with Christ in peace and prosperity in a rebuilt and enlarged Jerusalem. This is but a prelude to judgment, however, though Justin recognizes that “not all Christians are of this persuasion.”** Irenaeus, in his refutation of gnostic heresy, stressed the material character of salvation and supported Papias’s view about the millennium.” Irenaeus made reference to biblical passages that speak of peace, prosperity, and material restoration, which he refuses to spiritualize. As in Revelation 20-21, at the end of the thousand years will come judgment: For it is only right that [the righteous] should receive the reward of their endurance in that created order in which they suffered hardship or affliction and were in all manner of ways tested by suffering: that they should be brought to life in that created order in which they were put to death for the love of God; and to reign where they had endured bondage. For God is “rich in all things” and all things are his. Therefore this created order must be restored to its first condition and be made subject to the righteous without hindrance.3° 323. See also 324. 325. 326. 327. 328.

2 Bar 29:3-8, trans. A. F. J. Klijn, in The Old Testament Pseudpigrapha, vol. 1, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1983). 4 Ezra 7:26ff., a contemporary of the Syriac Baruch that contains similar ideas. As well as an adoptionist christology. See Irenaeus Against Heresies 1.26; Eusebius Ecclesiastical History \11.27. Eusebius Ecclesiastical History V11.25.1-3. Iraenaeus, Against Heresies, V. 33.3-4, in Bettenson, The Early Christian Fathers, 137. Epiphanius Pan. XLIX; cf. Eusebius Ecclesiastical History V.18.2. Justin Dialogue 113, 139.

329. Ibid., 81. 330. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, V.32.1, in Bettenson, The Early Christian Fathers , 136.

710

EXCURSUS: THE MILLENNIUM Tertullian also defended this belief: For we also hold that a kingdom has been promised to us on earth, but before (we attain) heaven.... This will last for*a thousand years, in a city of God’s making. Jerusalem sent down from heaven which the Apostle designates as “our mother from above” and in proclaiming that “our politeuma,” that is, citizenship, “is in heaven,” he surely ascribes it to a heavenly city. Ezekiel knew that city, and the Apostle John saw it, and the Word of the New Prophecy which dwells in our faith witnesses to it so that it even foretold the appearance of the likeness of that city to serve as a sign before its manifestation before men’s eyes. . . We say that this is the city designed by God for the reception of the saints at the /first/ resurrection, and for their cherishing with abundance of all goods, spiritual goods to be sure, in compensation for the goods we have despised or lost in this age. For indeed it is right and worthy of God that his servants should also rejoice in the place where they suffered affliction in his name. This is the purpose of that kingdom; which will last a thousand years, during which period the saints will rise sooner or later, according to their degrees of merit, and then when the resurrection of the saints is completed, the destruction of the world and the conflagration of judgement will be effected; we shall be “changed in a moment” into the angelic substance, by the “putting on of incorruption,” and we shall be transferred to the celestial kingdom.**!

Elsewhere he is more sympathetic to a less materialistic hope.” Hippolytus’s commentary on Daniel is one of the oldest extant Bible commentaries. In it he affirms the view that the reign of Antichrist and the end of the world will be six thousand years after creation (a view echoed in the work of later commentators, like the early Augustine). That time would be five hundred years after Christ’s birth,’ after which will come a sabbath (cf. Heb 4:9-10), “the future kingdom of the saints when they will reign with Christ after his coming from heaven, as John narrates in the Apocalypse.”*“ Origen rejects this tradition,*” though he is elsewhere content to relate the imagery to actual history, as reflected also in the work of his pupil Dionysius. Victorinus, whose commentary is the earliest extant commentary on the book of Revelation, approaches Revelation 20 literally as a hope for the just to rise from death and reign with Christ over all people. In his Divine Institutes, for Lactantius the victory of Christ ushers in an age of peace.*” After a judgment of believers, the saints will be gathered into the holy city, and the just will rule with Christ. Ambrose transformed the millennial tradition into an allegory about the interim state between

death and general resurrection.*” The influential Donatist commentator Tyconius was convinced that the apocalyptic scenario was imminent, evident in part in the persecution endured by ’ his own church and soon to afflict the whole world. He interpreted the millennium as referring

to the time of the church “from the passion of the Lord until his second coming.”*” In the present age, the saints are already enthroned with the triumphant Christ. Tyconius’s work had

enormous influence on Augustine, who distinguishes sharply between history and eschatology. The eschaton means the end of history. In Zhe City of God, Augustine lists the following as elements of the consummation: the return of Elijah, the conversion of the Jewish people, the coming of Antichrist, the coming of Christ as judge, the resurrection of the dead, the separation

of the good from the wicked, and the burning and renewal of the material world." Earlier in his life, he understood the millennium as the future rest of the saints on earth.” In The City 331. Tertullian, Against Marcion, III.24, in ibid., 226-27. 332. Tertullian On the Resurrection 26. 333. Hippolytus Commentary on Daniel lV.23-24. 334. Ibidf., IV.23. 335. Origen De Principiis. 11.11.2; Commentary on Matthew XVII. 35. 336. Dionysius vii. 24-25. 337. Victorinus Commentary on the Book of Revelation. 338. Ambrose Homily on Psalm 1.54. (Ithaca, 339. See P. Friedriksen, “Tyuconius and Augustine,” in R. K. Emmerson and B. McGinn, The Apocalypse in the Middle Ages N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1993) 24-29. 340. Augustine The City of God XX.30 \ 341. Augustine Ctr AdimII.2.

711

EXCURSUS: THE MILLENNIUM of God, he recognizes that some form of millenarian belief can be held,’ but he developed an ecclesiological interpretation of Revelation 20 in which the kingdom stands for all the years of the Christian era and the thrones of judgment of Rev 20:4 are positions of authority in the church. Thus he follows Tyconius’s lead. Augustine’s role in developing not only a Christian understanding of the state but also an attitude toward eschatology is enormous. Drawing upon his distinctive interpretation of the messianic kingdom in Revelation 20 as a description of the era of the church, Augustine argues that the church now on earth is both the kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of heaven: Now some people assume... that the first resurrection will be a bodily resurrection .. . taking it as appropriate that there should be a kind of sabbath for the saints for all that time, a holy rest, that is, after the labours of the six thousand years since human creation. ... This notion would be in some degree tolerable if it were believed that in that sabbath some delights of a spiritual character were to be available for the saints....1I also entertained this notion at one time. But in fact those people assert that those who have risen will spend their time in the most unrestrained material feasts, in which there will be so much to eat and drink that not only will those supplies keep within no bounds of moderation but will exceed the limits of incredibility. . . . the devil is bound throughout the whole period (of the millennium) embraced by the Apocalypse, that is from the first coming of Christ to the end of the world. ... the Omnipotent did not debar Satan altogether from putting the saints to the test; but he threw out the devil from the inner man, the seat of belief in God.... ... now the binding of the devil was not only effected at the time when the church began to spread beyond the land of Judea into other nations... it is happening now. . . for even now people are being converted to the faith from the unbelief in which the devil held them in power.... ...the thrones are to be interpreted as the seats of authorities by whom the church is now governed, and those sitting on them the authorities themselves ... the beast represents the godless city, and the people of the unbelievers contrasted with the people of the faith and the City of God ... those who do not worship the beast or his image (are) those who follow the instruction of the apostle by not taking the yoke with unbelievers.°*°

In The City of God, a major contribution to political theology, Augustine seeks to combat the view that the sack of Rome was the result of the pagan divinities’ anger at the people’s abandonment of traditional Roman religious practices in favor of Christianity. He questions simplistic attempts to read off from the complexities of history evidence of the hand of God in the affairs of men and women. He does this by espousing a sharp division between the earthly city and the city of God. The city of God for him is a transcendent, heavenly reality. The earthly city is always characterized by corruption and violence™ and can never be identified in its entirety with the city of God. The best that can be hoped for in the earthly city is a modicum of peace and justice to ensure some kind of stability and harmony. In contrast, Joachim of Fiore“ saw history as a process that pushes forward to a goal within history. He divided history into three periods (from the Trinity), the third being the age of the Spirit when the purposes of God will be fulfilled and humanity would manifest moral perfection under the guidance of the Spirit. Even among the radical followers of the Joachite tradition, the millennium was given an Augustinian interpretation, however. That is, the millennium was seen as having begun with the coming of Christ and was not a future event. Even an ardent interpreter of the book of Revelation like Melchior Hoffman, whose interpretation of the book had a significant influence on its use in the Miinster commonwealth, understands 342. Augustine The City of God XX.7.

343. Ibid., XX.7-8. 344, E.g., ibid., XV.4-5. 345. Survey of Joachism in M. Reeves, Joachim and the Prophetic Future (London: SPCK, 1976); and R. K. Emmerson and B. McGinn, eds., The Apocalypse in the Middle Ages (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1993) esp. 72ff.

72

EXCURSUS: THE MILLENNIUM the millennium as the early period of church history, ushered in by Paul’s preaching the gospel to the Gentiles when the Spirit of Christ was still active.“ The case of Thomas Muentzer is instructive. Muentzer seems to exemplify the millenarian spirit, and yet he was not influenced in his revolutionary apocalypticism either by Revelation in general or by Revelation 20 in particular. Muentzer and six thousand poorly equipped peasants occupied a hill overlooking Frankenhausen in Saxony during the Peasant’s Revolt of 1525. They carried a banner proclaiming “The Word of God endureth forever.” Muentzer encouraged his supporters with biblical stories like that of Gideon, in which a small army aided by the power of God defeated a larger enemy. At the decisive moment of Muentzer’s last battle, a rainbow appeared in the sky, and he and his followers took it as a sign that the God of the New Covenant would give them victory. That Muentzer and the peasants believed that they were engaged in a holy war is suggested by their singing “Veni Creator” as they prepared for battle. Any eschatological hopes were rudely shattered once the first cannon round had been fired, however, and the peasants were easily routed. Muentzer escaped but was later captured and was finally beheaded after

having recanted of his theological “errors.”*” In the Geneva Bible there is a rejection of a materialist millennium. The marginal note on Rev 5:10 (“You have made them to be a kingdom and priests” [NRSV]) adds “not corporally.” There is a contrast between the kingdom of Christ and that of the pope: “as the kingdom of Christ is from heaven and bringeth men thither: so the Pope’s kingdome is of the earth and leadeth to perdition and... is established by ambition, covetousnes, beastlines, craft, treason and tyranie” (note on Rev 13:11). The mention of the new heaven and the new earth is a reference to the time when “the faithful shall enter into heven with their head Christ.” The millennium starts “from Christ’s nativitie unto the time of Pope Sylvester the seconde; so long the pure doctrine shulde after as sorte remaine.” At the end of the thousand years, “Satan had greater power than he had before.” “Reigning with Christ” means “while they fi.e., the elect] have remained in this life.” The first resurrection refers to receiving “Jesus Christ in true faith, and to rise from sinne in newness of life.” The rest of the dead refers to those “which are spiritually dead, for in whom satan liveth he is dead to God.” The binding of Satan is the proclamation of the gospel, and the loosing of Satan at the end of the millennium results in an era when “the true preaching of God’s worde is corrupt.” Surprisingly, the millennium of Revelation 20 does not appear to have been an inspiration for many of the radical groups that have sought to establish an eschatological theocracy on earth. Instead, the realized eschatology, the view that the decisive moment in the divine economy is not just imminent but actually here and that humans are agents in bringing it about, has been predominant. Such a mingling of the future age of absolute perfection with mundane history is what Karl Mannheim termed “the chiliastic mentality.”“* He speaks of this conviction as one in which the present moment is of critical significance within the whole gamut of salvation history, in which action is necessary. It is no ordinary moment but one pregnant with opportunities to fulfill the destiny of humankind. The absolute perfection of the millennium ceases to be a matter of speculation and becomes a pressing necessity for active implementation. The reason for such urgency is that the Kairos, or propitious moment, has arrived. As a result, the chiliastic mentality has no sense for the process of becoming; it is sensitive only to the abrupt moment, the present pregnant with meaning. 346. For asurvey of more recent opinions with regard to the millennium see A. Wainwright, Mysterious Apocalypse (Nashville: Abingdon, 1994) part 1. 347. C. Rowland, Radical Christianity: A Reading of Recovery (Oxford: Polity, 1988) 89ff. 348. K. Mannheim, /deology and Utopia (London: Routledge, 1936) 190-96.

713

REVELATION 20:7-10

REVELATION 20:7710; THE RELEASE OF SATAN FOR HE bA Sib Acts bike NRSV

NIV

7When the thousand yearsareended, Satan will

- 7When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison ®and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—to gather them for bat-

tle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. °They marched across the breadth of the

earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven

and devoured them. '°And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had

be released from his prison *and will come out to

deceive the nations at the four corners ofthe earth, Gog and Magog, inorder to gather them for battle; they are as numerous as the sands of the sea. *They marched up over the breadth of the earth and sur_ rounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from heaven? and consumed

them. And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the

beast and the false prophet were, and they will be

been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever. —

tormented day and night forever and ever. aQOther ancient authorities ie from oe out of —

or out of

_heaven from God

(COMMENTARY Satan is released (rather than escapes) from his prison (cf. 2:10; 18:2) at the end of the thousandyear reign of Christ and begins again to deceive the nations (13:14), called Gog and Magog. These are the hordes that descend on Israel, according to Ezekiel’s prophecy, for easy plunder, only to fall in the open field (Ezek 39:4; cf. Ezek 38:22). The battle described in vv. 8-9 parallels the battle in 19:19, which was led by the beast, agent of the devil. This time, the devil himself leads the charge (prompting earlier commentators to suppose that different sources have been stitched together in this part of Revelation).*4? Satan gathers an innumerable host (cf. Josh 11:4; 1 Sam 13:5) and encircles the encampment of the saints (cf. Heb 13:11, 13) and the “beloved city” (cf. Ps 48:4). Military imagery was used earlier in con-

nection with the conquest of the saints who stand with the Lamb on Mount Zion. There the followers of the Lamb were described as an army, and they were in a state of ritual purity appropriate for those who would fight a holy war (see Deut 23:98." i Sam 215% 24Sam Won cand That threat is now removed. 21:2. John sees the holy city descending out of heaven, referred to in 11:2 in the context of the vision of the witnesses (though it is not described there as new). This vision comes after chapters that have focused on the “great city” (e.g., 18:10). Babylon and Jerusalem are thereby implicitly juxtaposed and contrasted, reminiscent of the contrast between Jerusalem above and

evelation contains a repeated pattern of udgment and eschatological resolution. The advent of the rider on the white horse and the messianic reign (19:11—20:6) are completed with the last assize (20:11-15) and a vision of a new heaven and new earth. The focus is now on earth, not heaven, for it is to earth that the heavenly city descends. God’s presence, until now hidden behind the vault of heaven, now tabernacles with those who dwell in the new Jerusalem. The throne of God is in the midst of the city, and the healing, sustenance, and relief, only glimpsed in 7:16, are described once more. The dimensions of the new Jerusalem are set out, and the glory, until now illicitly gained or used, now contributes to this new age. Still there remain discordant notes as the boundaries are set—even though the gates of the city are left wide open, some people will remain outside. 21:1. Picking up on a theme twice repeated in the final chapters of Isaiah (Isa 65:17; 66:22), John sees a new heaven and earth replacing the ones that have vanished. The theme of newness of Second Isaiah (e.g., Isa 42:9), hinted at in promises to the angels of the seven churches (Rev 2:17; 3:12) and in the song that greets the Lamb (Rev 5:9; 14:3), is now fulfilled. What is past, the “first,” the provisional rather than the fundamental (cf. Rev 1:17; 22:13), is no more. There is a brief, unexplained mention that there will be no

below in Gal 4:26 (cf. Heb 12:22).°>! That which descends from heaven is a blessing rather than a curse on humanity (cf. 12:12; 16:21), and this city is a place to enter rather than depart from (18:4); it is from God (cf. 3:12). The image of the city’s being prepared in heaven reflects the apocalyptic view that heaven is, in some sense, a repository of what is to come, which can be revealed to the eye of vision before it descends in the last days (cf. 9:15; 12:6). Jerusalem is 351. A.T. Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981).

720

REVELATION 21:1—22:5 COMMENTARY likened to a bride. The bride’s voice had been silenced in Babylon (18:23), and the wedding feast seemed destined not to begin (19:7). The

21:4. The promise of 7:17 is once again stated (cf. Isa 25:8), and the end of death is repeated (cf. 20:10). There will be no more mourning, true bridegroom will appear, however, and will crying; or /paine {cf visa B510051291;965:19), be summoned to come to the bride (22:17; cf. contrasting with what had been (18:7-8; cf. Matt 25:6). 11:15; 16:10-11). “The first” is replaced by “the 21:3. There is a voice from the throne (cf. new,” expressed in words from the one seated on 16:17; 19:5), a “great voice” from heaven (NIV the throne, who now speaks and asserts responand NRSV, “loud voice”; cf. 11:12; T2217 16k, sibility: “I am making all things new” (see Isa 17; 19:1). God’s dwelling (“tabernacle” [oxnvn 43:18-19). skéne|, the word used of the incarnation in John 21:5-6. This leads to another command from 1:14) will be (taking the cue from the tense of the one seated on the throne (v. 5), presumably the next verb oxnvow [skénoo; “dwell”]) with to John, to write (cf. 1:11, 19; 14:13; 19:9), “mortals” (assuming that dvOpwro. [anthropoi, asserting that the words are faithful and true (see “men”] here is probably to be understood inclualso 19:9; 22:6). This probably refers not just to sively, fulfilling the promise of 7:15). God’s tabernathe promise to make all things new but also, in cle is found in heaven in 15:5, where it is the source the light of 19:9, to God’s promise to dwell with of the seven last plagues. It is the object of the people. Addressing John personally (v. 6), the one beast’s blasphemy in 13:6, where it is interpreted on the throne announces, “It is done!” (like the as “those who dwell in heaven” (NRSV). God’s assertion from heaven at the culmination of the dwelling with people characterizes the life of the seven plagues in 16:17). God is both Alpha and holy nation in Lev 26:12 and Joel 2:27, and it is Omega (v. 6; cf. 1:8), the beginning and the end the new Jerusalem of Ezekiel’s vision (Ezek 48:35, (cf. 3:14; 22:13; the Greek equivalent of A and cf. Ezek 37:27; Zech 2:11). In the New Testament Z). In the declaration that God will “give water God’s dwelling (tabernacle) is the life of a holy, and as a gift from the spring of the water of life,” the so separate, people (2 Cor 6:16). promise of 7:16 is again alluded.to; the spring of Three times in this verse God is said to be water (v. 6) will be described in 22:1 (cf. Zech “with them.” The use of the preposition “with” ° 14:8; John 7:37). Water will no longer pose a (ueta meta) in the sense of accompaniment and threat (cf. 12:15; 15:2), for the waters have rebelonging is found only in the promise in 3:4, turned to the control of the one who created them 20-21, in the eschatological vision in 14:1, and (14:7). The nations, who are the waters on whom in the description of the eschatological reign. This Babylon sat (7:1), are now peoples who can usage contrasts with its use in a hostile context partake of the water of life freely (21:6). (making war with or committing fornication with) 21:7. The one who “conquers” (changed to plural by the NRSV) will inherit “these things.” earlier in the vision. In the new Jerusalem, mortals are now God’s “peoples” (the Greek is plural They are the ones who have overcome the beast here, contrasting with the singular in 18:4; cf. Jer and its image by means of the blood of the Lamb (15:2; 21:11). In being inheritors, human beings 31:1; many mss, however, leave the singular, as now have a familial relationship with God (cf. the NRSV footnote indicates). Verse 3 resonates Matt 5:5; 19:29; 25:34). The promise to the with the theme of 5:9 and 7:9, where those who dynasty of David in 2 Sam 7:14 is here extended have been redeemed come from “every tribe and to all people, as it is in the eschatological passage language and people and nation.” God has not in Jub. 1:24; it is central to the eschatology of been totally absent from the world. Indeed, other parts of the New Testament as well (e.g., the burden of the letters to the angels has Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6). One difference between been the revelation of the intimate relationship Revelation 21 and 2 Samuel 7 should be noted: between the one like the Son of Man and the though human beings inherit from God, God is churches (1:20), and the cataclysm following the not spoken of as Father in Revelation 21 (though opening of the seals is in some sense a revelation that could be explained by the influence of Lev of the mystery of the divine presence, though in wo.a che Zeche:8 in 2'h33). wrath, in the world.

REVELATION 21:1—22:5 COMMENTARY belongs to the Lamb contrasts with Jezebel (2:20) and with Babylon seated on the beast (17:3), but resembles the woman clothed with the sun (12:1). The radiance of the bride/holy city is like that of a precious gemstone, like that of God’s throne in 4:3 (see also 21:18), and it is comparable to Babylon’s adornment (17:4; 18:12, 16). 21:12-14. In these verses John describes the city in terms that evoke the conclusion of Ezekiel’s vision of Jerusalem (Ezek 48:30ff.). Boundaries and separation are fundamental, as 21:8, 27 and 22:6 make clear (cf. Ezek 40:3). Thus a “great, high wall” with twelve gates surrounds the city. The three gates at each compass point resemble those described in Ezek 48:31; here, too, they are linked to the twelve tribes of Israel (explicitly named in Ezekiel). There are angelic gatekeepers (cf. Isa 62:6).°°3 The tribes of Israel are mentioned earlier in the vision of the eschatological host, which was divided into two parts, Israel (7:4-8) and the multitude from “every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages” (7:9-17 NRSV). A related juxtaposition follows in v. 14 between the tribes of Israel and the twelve apostles. Just as the names of the twelve tribes of Israel are inscribed on the gates of the wall, so also the names of the “twelve apostles of the Lamb” are inscribed on the wall’s twelve foundations (cf. 2:2; 18:20). The idea of the apostles as foundation stones is found also in Eph 2:20, where the household of God is built on the foundation of the apostles and the prophets (cf. 18:20, where the two are linked), with Christ as the cornerstone. This is the only reference to apostles of the Lamb in Revelation. Elsewhere mention is made of false apostles (2:2; cf. 2 Cor 11:13), and the prophets and apostles in 18:20 are like the line of witnesses referred to in Luke 11:49 (cf. Matt 23:34). It would appear that in Revelation the prophet assumes more importance than does the apostle. 21:15. The angel (cf. v. 9) who shows the city to John is holding a golden measuring rod to measure the city, an operation that contrasts with that described in Rev 11:1 and Ezek 40:3. The measuring in the latter passage was done to offer an inventory of the city that is to come, to

21:8. The promise is immediately followed by a darker statement, paralleling the contrasts in eschatological passages elsewhere in the NT (e.g., 1 Cor 6:10; Gal 5:21). Interestingly, despite the comprehensive judgment in the previous chapter, there still exist those who are outside the gates and who are destined for the lake of fire (19:20; 20:6). But such a comment manifests a pedantic literalism that does not do full justice to the poetic license of apocalypse. In other words, v. 8 simply elaborates and reinforces what has already occurred: The condemned will have no place in the new Jerusalem. In the list of those intended for the “second death” (cf. parallel lists in Ezek 44:9; Rom 1:29; 1 Cor 6:10; Titus 1:16), the first two (the cowardly and the faithless) have no direct parallel in Revelation, though in the light of the repeated emphasis on being faithful even to death (2:10), we can see the need for courage to resist the allure of the beast, like the “faithful witness” (1:6; cf. 2:10). Babylon is said to be full of abominations (17:4), and so avoidance of fornication (cf. 22:15) may be suggested in the reference to “the polluted” and the “idolaters” who eat food sacrificed to idols (cf. 2:14; 9:20; 17:2). “Sorcery” was mentioned in 9:21 and 18:23 (and see the Commentary on 9:20).%°? No lie was found in those who stood with the Lamb on Mount Zion (14:5), and no liars enter the new Zion (cf. 2:2; 21:27; 22:15; see also 13:13; 2 Thess 2:9-10). 21:9-11. The link with the previous catastrophes is maintained in v. 9, where an angel who had held one of the seven bowls (15:1) comes to show John the bride of the Lamb (cf. 19:7). John’s removal parallels his removal to see another city, Babylon, in 17:3. He is carried away (as in 4:1) “in the spirit.” Like Ezekiel, who in visions was brought to a very high mountain to behold a city (Ezek 40:1), John is taken to a high mountain (cf. Matt 4:8; 17:1). There John again sees the holy city descending from heaven (v. 2), but this time he is “shown” the holy city (this is different from Ezekiel’s city, which the prophet sees perched on the mountain rather than descending from heaven). Additionally, John speaks of the city as possessing the glory of God, as does Ezekiel’s city, once the glory of God had entered the Temple

(Ezek 43:4; cf. Isa 60:1). The “bride” (v. 9) who

353. Angelic gatekeepers are a feature of later gnostic and Jewish texts. See, e.g., Ascension of Isaiah 10:25, where heavenly gatekeepers demand a password before allowing anyone to pass through the gates.

352. See P. L. Esler, The First Christians in Their Social Worlds (London: Routledge, 1994) 131-46.

/

TLe

REVELATION 21:1—22:5 COMMENTARY “declare all that you see to the house of Israel” (Ezek 40:4 NRSV). In Rev 11:1 John is given a

chrysolite, beryl, topaz, chrysoprase, jacinth, and amethyst. The jewels here are reminiscent of the descriptions of the high priest’s breastplate and the Edenic splendor of the king of Tyre. The high priest’s breastplate is adorned with gemstones set in four rows of stones.

measuring rod and is told to measure only a part of what he sees: the temple, the altar, and “those who worship there.” There is no such restriction here, nor is a census taken of those who worship (this contrasts with the contemporary 4 Ezra, which makes explicit comment on the small number of those who will be saved; see 4 Ezra

A row of carnelian, chrysolite, and emerald shall be the first row; and the second row a turquoise, a sapphire and a moonstone; and the third row a jacinth, an agate, and an amethyst; and the fourth row a beryl, an onyx, and a jasper; they shall be set in gold filigree. (Exod 28:17-20 NRSV)

7:70). 21:16-17. The city is “foursquare” (cf. Ezek 48:16), being equal in height, width, and length (v. 16); in other words, it has the shape of a cube.*°* The interior of the inner sanctuary of Solomon’s Temple was also a cube (1 Kgs 6:20; cf. the size of the altar in Ezek 43:16). So the city’s shape is like an extended form of the innermost part of the sanctuary. The vocabulary

The king of Tyre is described in Ezekiel as: full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, carnelian, chrysolite, and moonstone, beryl, onyx, and jasper, sapphire, turquoise, and emerald; and worked in gold were your settings and your engravings. (Ezek 28:12-13 NRSV)

of v. 16 is reminiscent of Eph 3:18 (three of the terms are found), where a complex of images is made up of the biological and the architectural, suggesting (not least in the light of Eph 2:20) that the city’s dimensions are “the measure of the full stature of Christ” (Eph 4:13 NRSV). The angel measures the wall, and it is 144 cubits (cf. the figure used of the host in 7:4 and 14:1, and possibly paralleling the idea of a spiritual building in Ephesians). The angel is said to be using human measurement (cf. Deut 3:11; see also Commentary on 13:18). 21:18-20.

21:21. Each of the twelve gates is made of a single pearl (cf. 17:4; 18:12, 16). The street of the city is pure gold (cf. Babylon’s golden aspect in 17:4; 18:16), transparent as glass (cf. 2 Cor 4:4-"Heb“13;'2 Pet: 1:19), 21:22-23. John reports that he saw no temple in the new city (v. 22). It is possible that there will be no need for a temple, because the city is a sanctuary unto itself. But John’s explanation is that the Almighty God and the Lamb are the city’s temple (v. 22). If a temple marks a discrete place of divine presence in the midst of a world, here the divine is immediately present and all-pervasive; there is no need for a preserve that guarantees and identifies holiness. There is no need for light in the new Jerusalem, either, because of the radiance of divine glory (cf. v. 11; 22:5; Isa 60:19). The city’s brilliance contrasts with the darkness of Babylon (16:10; 18:23), and it parallels the situation where the sun and the moon accompany the woman (chap. 12). The description of God’s glory is like the radiance of Ezekiel’s vision (Ezek 1:28; cf. 15:8; 18:1; 21:11). 21:24-27. The nations are guided by this glorious light (v. 24; cf. Isa 60:3, 5; Zech 8:20), contrasting with the delusion described earlier (14:8; 18:3), which led to the nations’ wrathful

The radiance of the city was lik-

ened to jasper in v. 11, and now John describes the walls of the city as being made of jasper (v. 18). The city itself is built of pure gold, “clear as glass.” The word “pure” (ka8apds katharos) has been previously linked with special clothing identified with God (15:6; 19:8-14; 21:21; cf. Matt 5:8; Jas 1:27). Earlier the sea in heaven had been described as being like glass (4:6; 15:2), and the streets of the city will be described in similar

terms in 21:21.°°° Precious stones were mentioned in a general way in v. 11, but here the foundations of the city are described in more detail and the stones composing it are listed (v. 19): jasper (cf. 4:3), sapphire (cf. 9:17), agate, emerald (cf. 4:3), onyx, carnelian (cf. 4:3), 354 See M. Rissi, Zhe Future of the World (London: SCM, 1972). 355. Itis interesting to compare the description of the city in Revelation with what Josephus has to say about the stunning sight of the high priest’s vestments. See Josephus The Jewish War 5.233.

123

REVELATION 21:1-22:5 COMMENTARY different kinds of fruit each month is characteristic of the trees irrigated by the water that runs from the temple in Ezek 47:12. The leaves of the tree are meant for the healing of the nations. The emphasis on the healing of the nations contrasts with the earlier statements that the nations would be ruled with an iron rod (e.g., 12:5). Nothing accursed enters in (v. 3; cf. Matt 25:41), which is in line with the harsher statement of vv. 11 amndel> (Cha2 1: 83427) Here the throne of God and of the Lamb (cf. 7:17) is in the city. Earlier the throne in heaven was the locus of God’s dwelling (4:1-2), and

response to God (11:18). The promise that the nations will be ruled by the messianic rod has appeared often in Revelation (e.g., 12:5; 19:15). The kings of the earth, until now thoroughly under the spell of the beast (e.g., 17:2; 18:3), reappear (v. 24); but now the kings will bring

their “glory” (86a doxa, the same word used of God) into the city. In Isa 60:11, the kings will lead their nations in a procession to bring their wealth into Zion, whose gates are never closed (cf. Zech 14:7; John 13:30). Nothing profane will enter this city (v. 27; cf. Isa 35:8; 52:1), nor will anyone whose name is not written in the book of life. So no one who has committed fornication with Babylon (17:2), which was full of abominations (17:4), or anyone who lies (cf. 14:5) and has been ensnared in, or colluded with, the deceit of the beast and false prophet (19:20) will be allowed to enter the city. 22:1. Just as an angel pointed out the city in v. 10, so also in 22:1 John reports that the angel showed him the very heart of the city (elsewhere John is promised that he will be shown these things; e.g., 4:1; 17:1). John sees theriver of the

continues to be so when God’s dwelling place is with humanity. But there is still a throne and so a limit to the extent to which God and humanity are identified. Heaven is now on earth, and God’s servants will perform their service to God (cf. 7:15) without a temple. They will see God’s face, the ultimate privilege denied to all until now—not even Moses was allowed to see God’s face (Exod 33:20; cf. Num 12:6). For John the evangelist no one has seen God at any time, and it is only the Logos incarnate who has made God known (1:18; cf. 14:9). In Matt 5:6, it is the pure in heart who will see God. Here it is all of God’s servants, those

water oflife, promised in 21:6. This river, in its limpid and life-giving quality, contrasts with the rivers that were poisoned in the eschatological catastrophes (8:10; 16:4, 12). It evokes paradise, a garden (cf. Gen 2:10).

who have not worshiped the beast or committed fornication with Babylon and have God’s name written on their foreheads (cf. 14:1). Once again John states that the glory of the place is such that

The description of the water as being “bright as crystal” prompts.a comparison with the sea in

there will be no night (cf. 21:25). God will shine

Rev 4:6 (cf. 21:11). The difference between the

upon them (cf. Isa 60:19), and they will reign forever (cf. Dan 7:18, 27). So, as in the millennium, God’s servants share God’s reign (cf. 3:21); they are a kingdom as well as priests who serve (avrctr 7 2k5). From the very beginning of the vision (2:17; 3:12) the righteous have been promised knowledge of the name of God. Understanding what one’s name is, and should be, is crucial. Possession of the right name enables confession before God (Rev 3:5) and entry into the book of life. Fearing God’s name means not blaspheming God, as the beast had done (13:6). To ensure that one’s name stays in the book of life, one must: not worship the beast (14:9). Possession of the divine name distifguishes those who follow the beast, who have a mark and not a name. Only Babylon had a name on her forehead: “Babylon the great,

throne here and the one described in Dan 7:9

bears noting (cf. 7 Enoch 14:18-19). In Daniel, the seer sees a throne of “fiery flames” with “a

stream of fire” issuing from it. There is no stream of fire in Revelation 4, though the throne pro-

duces lightning and thunder, and seven flaming torches are in front of it (Rev 4:5). The fiery stream from Daniel (hinted at, perhaps, in Rev 4:5; 15:2) has been replaced by the stream of

living water that proceeds from the throne and runs down the street of the new Jerusalem. Lifegiving water is a feature of the new Jerusalem in Ezekiel’s vision also, where water flows from the entrance of the Temple, fructifying the land (Ezek 47:1 ff.; cf. Ps 46:4; Zech 14:8). 22:2-5. Verse 2 is awkward, as the variant in the NRSV attests. On either side of the river grows the “tree of life.” That the tree produces twelve

724

REVELATION 21:1—22:5 COMMENTARY mother of whores and of earth’s abominations” (17:5 NRSV). Names link the present and the future, whether it be in terms of judgment (13:8) or the foundations of the new Jerusalem (21:12, 14). So the name is the person (e.g., 3:4: “you have still a few persons [lit., “names”] in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes” [NRSV]; cf.,3:12). “Holding , ~~

the name” (2:13) is equivalent to maintaining the faith. The sin of the nations is having followed the beast and then blasphemed the name of God (16:9). But knowledge of God’s name is not a talisman, some kind of protective charm. Possession of the name of God depends on appropriate behavior: not worshiping the beast or being intoxicated with Babylon.

K2 ~~

~~

ExCURSUS: BIBLICAL SUSPICION OF THE TEMPLE’” In antiquity, every religion—the Jewish religion included—had its sacred space, a temple, the “house of God.” It is remarkable, therefore, that in the New Jerusalem John “saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb” (Rev 21:22 - NRSV). Despite the importance of the Temple in Jerusalem in both pre-exilic and post-exilic times, there is a marked ambivalence toward temple religion in the Bible. The absence of a temple in the New Jerusalem reflects the triumph of a persistent critical attitude toward temple worship. : Although Genesis reports that the patriarchs had worshiped at a variety of holy places, after the exodus provision for liturgy centered on the portable tabernacle. Later, just as there was ambivalence toward the monarchy, important though it was, so also the role of the temple and (more often) other places of worship was viewed with a mixture of approbation, unease, and downright condemnation. Despite the divine sanction for the building of the Temple in Jerusalem and its conformity to the divine plan (1 Chr 28:12, 19) the description of its construction suggests that from its very inception the Temple’s structures were infused with the spirit of Canaan. Temple worship involved compromise with local cults, the world of the senses, and the values of the Canaanite society. Solomon’s departure from the worship of God (recorded in 1 Kings 11) continued in the deeds of his descendants, whose exploits, outlined in the books of Kings, become a litany of catastrophic decline from the singleminded devotion to the God of Israel’s ancestors. God, though acknowledged to be beyond human comprehension in Solomon’s prayer (1 Kgs 8:27), came to be too closely identified with a place, a temple made with human hands (cf. 1 Kings 8; Isa 66:1-2), a dynasty, a city, and oppression and injustice. God’s approval of the building did not extend to the form, content, and actions in it, as the conditions laid out in the response to Solomon’s prayer make clear (1 Kings 9:3). The Temple, influenced by the culture of Canaan, rapidly became more a shrine to Baal than to Yahweh. Subsequently, particularly in the reigns of Hezekiah and Josiah, some people began to recognize the extent of this departure from God’s purposes. They became increasingly more aware of the extent of the discrepancy between the practice of the Temple and the demands of God. They kept alive the Sinaiitic vision of a people, formed in the desert, who had shed the false consciousness of Egypt and its fleshpots and had not yet been corrupted by Canaanite ways. Theirs was a vision of a God who demanded concern for the orphan, the widow, and the stranger and whose presence was particularly connected with the portable tabernacle, rather than the permanent and glorious 356. A survey of biblical and patristic discussion is offered by Bede, De Templo, trans. S. Connolly, in Translated Texts for Historians (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1995).

"25

EXCURSUS: BIBLICAL SUSPICION OF THE TEMPLE edifice of the Temple. The exodus vision had almost disappeared in the Jerusalem of the monarchical period. It makes only a rare appearance in the psalmody of Solomon’s Temple and in the oracles of Jerusalem’s prophets. Even the celebration of the Passover had fallen into desuetude by Josiah’s day (2 Kgs 23:22). In place of the story of the exodus and the giving of the Law, the myths of the Davidic dynasty and the invincibility of Zion and its Temple so dominated the culture that the austere story of the formation of a people with a religion of tabernacle and social justice was almost forgotten. Prophets like Isaiah called a people to seek justice, to rescue the oppressed, to defend the orphan, and to plead for the widow rather than “the multitude of your sacrifices” (Isa 1:11 NRSV). The prophetic critique reaches its climax in Ezekiel and Jeremiah, who regarded Solomon’s Temple as a place of idolatry (Ezek 8:5), nowhere more stingingly rebuked than in the latter’s temple sermon (Jer 7:4, 8-9). For the temple culture, convinced that “God is in the midst of the city;/ it shall not be moved” (Ps 46:5 NRSV), it must have been a terrible shock when the Temple was destroyed after the invasion of Nebuchadnezzar. After the exile there seems to have been a struggle between those like Haggai and Zechariah, who wanted to see the Temple rebuilt as a symbol of Israel’s life, and those who held out against such a move with a grander vision, more universal in scope. Haggai prophesied that the impoverishment of Israel was the result of the neglect of old-fashioned temple religion. If only the Temple were rebuilt (and scarce resources thereby diverted to the restoration of cultic activity), then all would be well in the land (Hag 1:4). It is likely that the oracles that make up the final chapters of Isaiah bear witness to the growing disillusionment of a prophetic group who found themselves outmaneuvered by the protagonists of temple reconstruction and consequently were marginalized in Israelite society. As Jews sought to survive in the hostile world of ancient Near Eastern power power struggles, figures like Ezra and Nehemiah consolidated the life of Jerusalem, centered in priesthood, temple, and law. The Temple continued to play a central role in the lives of Jews both inside and outside Judea in the years preceding the Christian era. The regular flow of income to the Temple from all parts of the empire enriched this institution and those who ran it. The Temple was the focus of religion and was a powerful economic factor in Judean life as well as an influential ideological symbol. The profaning of the temple by Antiochus IV and the prohibition of circumcision (1 Maccabees 1) precipitated the Maccabean revolt (168-165 sc); the subsequent restoration of the Temple was (and still is) celebrated at Hanukkah (also called the Feast of Dedication in John 10:22). But the pre-eminence of the Temple did not silence the continued questioning of the temple cult in inter-testamental literature.*” The priests who held power in Jerusalem preserved the Temple as a holy space at the heart of Jewish life in the holy city in order to maintain the pattern of worship they believed God had prescribed for that place. Anything that might defile the holy place was excluded from the Temple. Because the preservation of this holy place was given the highest priority, in Jesus’ day, the maintenance of the temple cult necessitated some kind of cooperation with the Roman authorities (cf. John 11:49). The maintenance of a holy space was not confined to the Temple, however. The Qumran sect, situated in the desert, created a holy environment where the holy angels were said to have assembled and shared their life. The Pharisees had a view of holiness that could be expressed in the midst of human communities, both near to and far from the Temple. The detailed regulations of the Mishnah (the earliest code of Jewish practice apart from the Bible, completed in the second century cg) bear witness to the seriousness of the endeavor of their rabbinic successors to preserve a holy space in all aspects of existence. That vision enabled Judaism to survive the destruction of its holy place in 70 ce and allowed 357. E.g., 1 Enoch 89:73; Assumption of Moses 4:5; 2 Enoch 45:3.

726

EXCURSUS: BIBLICAL SUSPICION OF THE TEMPLE _ Pharisaism to become the driving force of what was to emerge in the second century as ~ rabbinic Judaism. The Pharisees, like other Jews, may have been devastated by the destruction of the Temple in 70 ce. But the emerging practice of synagogue worship, which could be held anywhere and thus was not necessarily attached to particular places deemed to be holy, was a factor in enabling the Pharisees to survive the events of 70. Buildings did not, in the last resort, matter in the life of the people of God, but obedience to the divine law in all circumstances was essential. Judaism has survived without a temple for the last two thousand years, maintaining a religion that does not depend on temple or even holy places, thereby paralleling the words of the third-century Christian writer Minucius Felix, “We have no temples; we have no altars"—a contrast with what Christianity has become. The synoptic Gospels report that Jesus, in the last days of his life, prophesied the destruction of the Temple (Mark 13:1-2 par.). In Mark’s passion narrative (Mark 11 onward) a dominant theme is the Temple, which Jesus enters and “cleanses.” The story of the cursing of the fig tree, which, frames the cleansing (Mark 11:12-14, 20-22), is a comment on the bankruptcy of the institution. The Temple’s fate will be that of the cursed tree. In addition, before leaving the Temple for the last time, Jesus points to the impoverished widow who gives all the money she has to live on to the Temple, while the rest contribute out of their abundance (Mark 12:41). The incident is described without comment; but, in the light of Mark 12:40, where the scribes are condemned for devouring widows’ houses, the fact that an institution allows an impoverished widow to give all that she has sits uneasily with the Torah’s command to care for the widow (Deut 24:17; Jer 7:6; Jer 7:11 is quoted in Mark 11:17). For Mark, the death of Jesus is the moment when the heart of the old economic, political, and religious institutions are destroyed, symbolized by the tearing of the veil that hides the holy of holies—truly the end of the world for those who set great store by it. Just as the heavens are rent apart at Jesus’ baptism, so also is the veil of the Temple rent in two at Jesus’ death (Mark 1:10; 15:38). Heaven and earth are then linked. But at the moment of Jesus’ death, the tearing of the veil, symbolizing the mystique of the Temple’s power, suggests something more destructive: the end of the Temple itself (cf. 1 Sam 15:27). The Temple is replaced by a way of life based on service and an alternative “holy” space focused on the commemoration of Christ: in place of the temple liturgy, Jesus offers his body—that is, his messianic practice in life and death.* The destruction of the Temple meant an end to an institution and an ideology that had dominated life, politically, religiously, and economically. So the stones of the Temple, which had so impressed the disciples, were destined to be monuments to an obsolescent form of religious life (Mark 13:1-2). In the days of Israel’s exile, the departure of the divine glory from the Temple was a sign of imminent destruction (Ezekiel 1; 10). But unlike the prophecy of Ezekiel, the New Testament offers no promise that any building will ever again be set apart as a particular place in which the divine presence dwells—except, that is, the temple of Jesus’ body (see John 2:19-22). According to Acts, the first Christians continued to worship in the Temple (Acts 2:46) and made it the place of proclamation (Acts 3:1-22; 5:46). But not all did so, apparently, for Stephen’s criticism of the Temple provoked a hostile response, leading to his death. In the speech attributed to him in Acts, he dwells on the rebelliousness of the majority of his ancestors. In his review of Israel’s history, he points to Solomon, who built a house for God, a departure from the divine intention: “Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made with human hands; as the prophet says, ‘Heaven is my throne, 358. Minucius Felix Octavius 32. 359. See Ched Myers, Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story of Jesus (Maryknoll,

727

N.Y.: Orbis, 1988) 364.

EXCURSUS: BIBLICAL SUSPICION OF THE TEMPLE and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord, or what is the place of my rest? Did not my hand make all these things?’ ” (Acts 7:48-50 NRSV, quoting Isa 66:1)

Bede, the great early medieval English writer, regarded Stephen as a spiritual pioneer who explained to his hearers that “the Lord does not place a high value on dressed stone, but rather desires the splendour of heavenly souls.” What Jesus told the Samaritan woman expresses the outlook of the New Testament as a whole: “The hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem... . The true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such as these to worship him” (John 4:21, 23 NRSV). Throughout the New Testament, sacred buildings, however glorious, seem to be of little concern to its writers. What is important is the reign of God, the witness to the ways of God’s justice, and the hope of heaven on earth, anticipated in the common life of small groups of men, women, and children who began to explore a different way of being God’s people. For them the priority was the temple of the Holy Spirit, men and women of flesh and blood (1 Cor 10:19). Immanuel, God with us (Matt 1:23), is not housed in a building, but is met in the persons of the hungry, the thirsty, the naked, and the imprisoned (Matt 25:31; cf. Matt 1:23), for the weak and the marginal are the ones with whom Jesus identified. In the Pauline Epistles we have glimpses of communities that struggled to maintain a style of life at odds with contemporary culture. As the locus of Christ’s presence in the world, the church (found in various places) shares the holiness of God (1 Cor 1:2; 3:17; 6:19; cf. Rom 12:1; 15:16) as it seeks to live as a community under God, distinguished by the quality of its life and its practical service (Rom 15:16, 25, 31; 2 Cor 8:4, 19; 9:1, 12; Phim 13). Heaven and earth meet no longer in tabernacle or Temple but outside the camp, a place of shame and reproach, where the blasphemers and Sabbath breakers are stoned (Exod 33:7; Lev 24:16; Num 15:35; Heb 13:13). Those who share the way of Jesus can expect to go with him outside the camp, in the secular world. God’s love and solidarity are among human beings in ways that the elaborate performance of cultic ritual never can be. The sentiments of early Christian writers make disturbing reading, as Karl Barth appreciated in lectures of 1920: The church of the Bible is, significantly, the Tabernacle, the portable tent. The moment it becomes a Temple, it becomes essentially only an object of attack. One gathers that for the apostles the whole of the Old Testament is summarized in Stephen’s apology. Undeniably the center of interest of both Testaments is not in the building of the church but in its destruction, which is always threatening and even beginning. In the heavenly Jerusalem of Revelation nothing is more finally significant than the church’s complete absence: And I saw no Temple therein.**!

When Christianity became the religion of the Roman Empire, things began to change, especially after the Constantinian settlement. From about 260 ce (but especially after 313), church buildings began to grow in size and become public structures. This growth reflected the increase in the size of congregations and (after 313) of imperial favor. (In the fourth century, church membership grew, according to one estimate, from 10 percent of the populace to about 50 percent). For the design of their new worship buildings, Christians chose the basilica (associated with the emperor and with law courts) rather than the temple (associated 360. M. Isaacs, Sacred Space: An Approach to the Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1992). 361. K. Barth, “Biblical Questions: Insights and Vistas,” in The Word of God and the Word of Man (London: 1935) 72. See also K. Barth, Church Dogmatics I/].3 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1961) 475-76.

728

EXCURSUS: BIBLICAL SUSPICION OF THE TEMPLE with paganism). Not only did their ornate decor reflect imperial iconography, but also their Space was divided into areas for clergy and laity. Because of the large congregations, the worship became large-scale rather than relational and communitarian, and the importance of human relationship in divine service withered as ceremony flourished.” So there began to emerge a pattern of Christian activity that sits uneasily with the biblical vision of the common life. In the New Testament, the image of Christ as a temple, the divine presence in unexpected places and persons, and the priority given to human relationships in ministry should lead us to widen our quest for the gates of heaven. 362. See A. Kreider, Worship and Evangelism in Pre-Christendom (Cambridge: Grove, 1995) 7. KZ “~

2, “

N27 ~

, LX

REFLECTIONS 1. Revelation 21 marks the climax of the whole book. In it we find the culmination of the process that began in chapters 2-3 with the promises made to the angels and chapter 5, where the Lamb receives the sealed scroll. The vision of God’s “tabernacling” with humanity marks the climax in the eschatological drama. In Revelation 4, the seer is granted a glimpse into the environs of God. There God is hidden behind a closed door, in heaven. The contrast between heaven and earth disappears in the new creation. Now the tabernacle of God is with men and women, and they shall be God’s people (21:3). God’s dwelling is not to be found above the cherubim in heaven. The throne is set right in the midst of the new Jerusalem, where the living waters stream from the throne of God (22:1) and God’s servants are marked with the divine name and will see God face to face (22:4). God is no longer far off but immediate and manifest—very much part of that world of perfection and as evident in it as God was in paradise (Gen 3:8). But (as Paul reminds us in 2 Cor 5:17) that new creation is not merely something to look forward to. In Christ there is already the possibility, in the power of God’s Spirit, to bring about that new creation in individual lives, though with the clear recognition of the struggle of the birth pangs the whole of creation must undergo before paradise can be revealed (Rom 8:18ff.). 2. In the new Jerusalem the apostles, the vacillating faint-hearts of the Gospels, turn out to be founding members and contribute to the building of the new Jerusalem (21:14). This is a task not confined to apostles only, as those who conquer (15:2) will have the right to become pillars in the temple, just as Peter was a pillar (3:12; cf. Gal 2:9; 1 Tim 3:15). There has been much debate over the extent to which human endeavor can contribute to the new Jerusalem. Can human initiative help in any way with bringing about the coming of the reign of God, or should one just leave it in God’s hands? In Revelation 21, the fact that the names of the apostles are written on the foundations of the wall and that the kings of the earth bring their glory into the city suggest that humans do contribute to its distinctive character. The city may be from heaven, but humans can be the means of channeling God’s grace into it. So we have here some support for the notion of “building the kingdom.” It is not all left to some eschatological miracle. Human agents infused with the Spirit of the new creation may contribute to that future reign of God here and now in the midst of the debris of the old world.

3. There will be no temple in the new Jerusalem because the glory of God and of the Lamb will pervade the whole city. The establishment of holiness in the midst of the world and in the lives of people is echoed elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., 1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19; cf. 2 Cor 6:16). A renewed temple is often included in eschatological passages in contemporary Jewish writings, so its explicit omission here deserves to be noted. There was ambivalence, even hostility, toward the Temple in early Christianity (Acts 6:7; cf. Mark 14:58; John 4:25). Like the Pharisees,

729

REVELATION 21:1—22:5 REFLECTIONS from whom Christianity derived so much, the first Christians had a view of holiness rooted in practical living in the midst of the variety of human community (Rom 12:1-2; 1 Pet 2:9). The ambivalence toward buildings—and especially the Temple—in the Bible raises a question about the enormous investment in its buildings by the Christian church through the centuries (see Excursus: “Biblical Suspicion of the Temple,” 726-30). Revelation uses evocative language about structure and space. But at its heart is the face-to-face relationship between God and humanity (22:4-5). The building is superfluous in the new Jerusalem. And yet special places seem to have become indispensable to Christians, often taking precedence over the promotion and sustenance of human relationships. Our need to create holy spaces often betrays our failure to understand that the holy space is the body of a crucified man (Mark 15:38) and a group of people who identify with him (Matt 18:20; 1 Corinthians 12). 4. With certain qualifications John’s is not an exclusive vision. The light of God’s glory is a light for the nations, and the glory of the old age is to be brought in. Only those who ignored God by raising the material to the level of a god and placed their own self-interest (cf. 12:11) above God’s justice are barred from entering the city (21:27). Likewise, those whose names are not written in the book of life, who have compromised and collaborated with the old order (13:8), are excluded as well. At the head of the list of those who will be excluded from the new Jerusalem are cowards (21:8), who have refused to stand up and be counted when protest against injustice was needed. 5. John’s vision is of a communal society, a reminder that biblical practice and hope center around humanity’s relationship with God and with one another. Christianity has in its history focused so often on hope for the individual that it sometimes has lost sight of the central place community plays in past, present, and future expressions of human destiny. As we grow ever more fearful about life in our cities, and as people seek escape in some suburban or rural idyll, it is important to be reminded that the fulfillment of God’s purposes is centered on a city, a community that reflects God’s paradise.

6. The climax of the description of the new Jerusalem in 22:4 has the inhabitants sharing God’s character (cf. Phil 3:20; 1 John 3:2) and seeing God face to face (cf. Matt 5:8). Moses was unable to see God, for no one can see God and live (Exod 33:20). That beatific vision, according to John 14:9 (cf. 1:18), was focused in Christ. It is now offered to all, because God will be all in all (1 Cor 15:28; cf. 2 Pet 1:4). All will share in the reign of God on earth (22:5), fulfilling all the promises that have been made (1:6; 5:10; cf. Matt 19:28). The beatific vision marks the climax of life in the new Jerusalem. Yet it is not merely something to be looked forward to in this life and experienced only after death. Jesus reminded his disciples that the one who sits on the throne of glory is present in the midst of the injustice of the old order (Matt 25:31ff.). In Revelation there is the faintest echo of this idea, though in slightly different tones. God is with those who wash their robes and make them white, the non-conformists who resolutely refuse to bow down to the beast. 7. As we watch a loved one die from a painful or lingering illness, we may be reminded of those passages from Revelation 21 that are frequently read at funerals in order to comfort the bereaved. But to reduce the meaning of Revelation to such a message of comfort feels like an escape and a betrayal of the prophecy of the Apocalypse that is not there to console but to challenge and warn. The vision confronts us not so much with relief that everything will turn out well in the end but with the reality that things, here and now, are profoundly unwell and that repentance and change of life are required. Disease is present in a society where there is so much plenty, but there is inadequate provision for the sick and dying. The promise of a new heaven and a new earth is a vision of judgment on Babylon and its culture of death, where money and privilege can buy success, health, and care, and the dignity and well-being of people, young and old, are subordinated to the demands of economic accounting and ability to pay.

730

REVELATION

22:6-21

_ CONCLUDING | SAYINGS ro a es‘said.to me, “These oe. are“trust: worthy. and true, for ‘theLord, the God of the pirts of the prophets, has. sent his angelto show his servants? what must soon take place.” i . 7“See, | am coming soon! Blessed is the one who ae the ‘words: of teae of a

aoe-

_

2

things. And when Thad heardandseeDien, Le 81, ae amae oneoie heard ae saw co

fell down to worship at thefeet oftheangel who a been showing them to me. But he said to

“things. And when I heard and saw them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who

, “Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with—showed them to me; °but he said to me, “You - and with ‘your brothers the prophets and of —‘must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you call ee keep tthe words of thisook.ete and your comrades* the prophets, and with those God!”

.

who keep the words of this book. Worship God!”

Then he told me, “Dornoteon upthe ae - 10And he said to me, “Do not seal up the of the prophecy of thisbook, because the time is _ words of the prophecy ofthis book, for the time

near. ''Let him who does wrong continue to do wrong; let him who is vile continue to be vile,

ig near. ''Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right,

let him who does right continue to do right; and : and the holy. still I beholy.1 let him who isoe continue tobe holy.”

: " . 12See, Iam - coming soon; my reward is with “Behold, qCe comingSoon ‘My reat |is ae to repay according to everyone’s work. I with me, and 7 will give to everyone according am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and ue to what he has done. ‘I am the Alpha and the last, ‘the beginning and the end.

Omega, ‘theFirstandtheLast,theDs

and |.

the End. “ \8+Blessed are e thosece ae their fobes, het

|

- 14Blessed are thos who wash their robes,4 so ‘that they will have the right to the tree of life

theymay have the right to the tree of life and and may enter the city by the gates. Outside are

“may go. through the gates into the city.‘Outside. are the dogs, those who practicemagic arts, the -

the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters, and ee who loves and

sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and practices falsehood. =-_s«*O'It is |, Jesus, who sent my angel to you everyone who loves and practices falsehood. Jesus, have sent my angel to.give you a

with this testimony for the churches. I am the

‘testimony. for the churches. I am the Root and the ea of David, and the bright Spas

[00t and the descendant of David, the bright Morning star."

i

Sa

'7 The Spirit and the bride say, “Come.”

2

The Spiritand thebride ‘say, “Come!”And let him who hears say, “Come!” Whoever is

‘thirsty, let him come; and whoever. wishes, let him take the free aitofthe water of life. a16 The Greek is plural,

.

And let everyone who hears say, “Come.”

And let everyone who is thirsty come. Let anyone who wishes take the water of life as a gift.

@ Gkslaves

6 Gk slave

¢Gk brothers.

authorities read do his commandments

>

731

Other ancient

REVELATION 22:6-21 NIV

NRSV

'8] warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. '°And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the

181 warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this book; 'if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away that person’s share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. 20The one who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! 21The grace of the Lord Jesus be with allfhe saints. Amen.?

holy city, which are described in this book. 2°He who bese to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus. 2IThe grace of the Lord Jesus be with God’s people. Amen.

a Other ancient authorities lack alk others lack the saints, others lack Amen

(COMMENTARY he vision proper stops abruptly at 22:5,

must take place on earth. It is possible, though, that this angel is one of the seven angels with the seven bowls full of the plagues (17:1; 21:9-10; 22:1). So the phrase “his angel” may refer either to one of the angels of the plagues or to the Son of Man. But that needs to be discussed in relation to 22:16, where Jesus speaks of having sent his angel with the testimony. 22:7. The blessing of 1:3, in which the angel blesses both those who read aloud the prophecy and those who hear and keep its words, is balanced by the blessing in this verse. The angel announces, “See, I am coming soon!” The difficulty in determining the precise time to which

“== with a sense of climax in the beatific vision and the sharing of God’s character through the possession of God’s name. It is not too much of an exaggeration to say that Paul’s words “God may be all in all” (1 Cor 15:28 NRSV; cf. Eph 1:23) are an apt comment on these words. But the revelation goes on, albeit by means of a string of injunctions that take us back to the opening of the book. The beginning and the ending of the book of Revelation (1:1, 8; 22:6-20) are a mixture of isolated sayings, the speakers of which are not always evident. For example, who is speaking in vv. 10, 12? There is a sense of repetition in that these words are faithful and true (v. 6; cf. 19:9-11; 21:5). God is said to be God of the spirits of the prophets (cf. 1:4; 4:5; 5:6, where the seven spirits of God are referred to). A similar expression for God is used in the Jewish apocalypse / Enoch 37-71, where God is called “Lord of the spirits” (cf. Num 27:16; Heb 12:9). 22:6. There are differences between the first and last chapters of the book of Revelation. In chap. 1, the revelation given is to Jesus, which he then communicates through an angel to John. In 22:6, it is God who sends an angel to show God’s servants what will occur. This angel may be the “one like the Son of Man” of 1:13, who shows John the way to heaven (4:1) and what

“soon” refers is compounded by the repetition of the promise “I am coming soon” in vv. 12 and 20 and the statement “the time is near” in v. 10 (cf. 2:16). That coming is eschatological in all cases, and the crisis is imminent, incorporating the event narrated in 19:11-21 as well as the Son of Man standing at the door of a church with the threat of judgment in the present (3:20). The sense of necessity (v. 6, “what must soon take place”) is felt in the Gospels also, where it occurs in a similar eschatological context (Matt 24:6). 22:8-9. John identifies himself as the one to whom these mysteries have been revealed (v. 8). His reaction to having heard and seen these things is to fall down and worship at the feet of the

732

REVELATION 22:6-21 COMMENTARY angel who has revealed them to him. John had reacted in the same manner in 1:17, when he fell at the feet of the one like the Son of Man, and in 19:10, where the angel showed him the marriage supper of the Lamb. In 22:9, as in 19:10, the angel tells John that he must not worship the angel and uses the same expression to explain why: “I am a fellow servant with you and your comrades.” In 19:10, John’s “comrades” were those who “hold the testimony of Jesus” (NRSV); here they are the prophets and “those who keep the words of this book.” The angel demands that John worship God alone. 22:10-11. The angel commands John not to seal the words of prophecy in the book (unlike the prophecy of Daniel; cf. Dan 12:9). These words are for the present, and so, because the book stands open, they are relevant not only to readers in John’s day, but also for readers of all eras. The Apocalypse is not a collection of prophecies, like those of Nostradamus, for it relates as directly to the seven churches of Asia Minor as it does to the church today (cf. 1:3). It remains an open book (cf. 10:4). The series of sayings in 22:11 (reminiscent of 13:10) suggests a rather fatalistic attitude, contrasting with the much more vital, open-ended attitude throughout the book, which encourages change of heart rather than resignation to one’s fate. But the deterministic tone may well be read as part of the book’s challenge for us: to decide whether we belong among the unjust or the filthy (v. 11; cf. Dan 12:10; Ezek 3:27). Of all the biblical books, Revelation is the one most intended to lead the reader to change. A watchword of Revelation is “repent.” 22:12-13. The identity of the speaker in these verses is unclear. In the light of phrases similar to v. 13 (“I am the Alpha and the Omega”; 1:8, 17; 3:11; cf. 21:6), we must assume that it is Christ. The speaker is one who comes with a reward, which he will “repay” according to people’s deeds (cf. 20:12; Isa 40:10). The word rendered “reward” (ytc86s misthos) is not widely used in Revelation (cf. Matt 5:12; 10:41-42). 22:14-15. There is another blessing (v. 14; in plural form, as in 14:13; 19:9), this time on those who “wash their robes” in the blood of the Lamb (see 7:14). In the light of 12:11 (“they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb/ and

by the word of their testimony” [NRSV}}, their having washed their robes means that they have kept their witness despite the threat of the beast (cf. 3:4, where the church at Sardis had few people “who have not soiled their clothes” [NRSV]). Washing their robes will give human beings the right to the tree of life (v. 2; cf. 2:7) and allow entry into the city. At the very climax of the vision, when resolution seems to be complete, when judgment is past and heaven has come down to earth, there is a stubborn refusal to abandon the language of contrast, dualism, and separation. Ambiguity remains. Even if there is no longer a boundary between God and human beings, even if the city gates remain open, some barriers to entry still remain. Those who are prohibited from entering the city have associated themselves with the beast; they are abominators (cf. 17:4), fornicators (17:2; 18:3), idolaters (cf. 13:16). They have refused to repent and give glory to God. And they have been shown to be liars (21:8; cf. 2:2), like the beast and the false prophet (13:13-14). They are called “dogs” (kuves kynes, a term designating outsiders in Matt 7:6; 15:26; Paul uses it as a term of disparagement for his opponents in Phil 3:2). The open-endedness of judgment is evident in the letters to the angels of the seven churches (2:1-3:22), communities that often were found to be on the wrong side of the boundary between good and evil.°°> So readers of Revelation are faced with the challenge from beginning to end, even after they have put the book down. Divine guarantee of ultimate salvation is not an unambiguous part of the Apocalypse. 22:16. The speaker now identifies himself as Jesus, and says that he was the one who sent his angel to bear witness to these things (possibly a reference to Christ as Son of Man; cf. 10:1; 14:14; see also Commentary on 1:1). What is included in the book is a continuation of the testimony by the one who had been the faithful witness (1:5), and it is the witness of Jesus that is the heart of prophecy (19:10). Prophecy, witness, and the life of Christ are bound together in Revelation, and its readers find that such commitments and activities have a price (11:3ff.; 12:11). Here testimony is said to have been for the churches themselves 363. See Leonard L. Thompson, 7he Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990).

733

REVELATION 22:6-21 COMMENTARY for the offender. So ill treatment of the book brings a curse. It is, indeed, a holy book. Unlike Deuteronomy, the book of Revelation is not law but prophecy. Its words have a different function. It is not laws to be carried out but visions to be seen, heard, and responded to, so that the nature of reality can be viewed differently, certain acts avoided, and others followed. Although John describes what he has written as prophecy (v. 19), it is also an apocalypse (1:1). But unlike other apocalypses, it was presented to John, an ordinary man, and not to a great figure of the past. Prophecy in Revelation is linked with the testimony of Jesus.°™ It is a means of witnessing, therefore, characterized by the vision of chap. 11. Hearing and reading must be matched by keeping (1:3)—but not preserving the message in some conservationist sense. Keeping the word means observing “my works” (2:26), “my word” (3:8, 10), “the commandments of God” (12:17; 14:12), washing one’s robes (22:14), and keeping “the word of their testimony” (12:11). 22:20. The penultimate word is from the One who bears witness (cf. 1:15; 3:14), who asserts that he comes quickly (22:7, 12; cf. 1:7). The response, “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!” echoes the response found in early liturgies, like the Didache and the enigmatic “Maranatha” of 1 Cor 16:22: “Let anyone be accursed who has no love for the Lord. Maranatha!” (see NRSV note).

rather than, as in the introductions to the letters, being directed to the angel of each church. Davidic descent is once more asserted (something that has made its appearance from time to time throughout the book; e.g., 3:7; 5:5; 12:5). Here, however, it is linked with Balaam’s prophecy (see

Num 28:17; Luke 1:68, 78; Rev 2:14, 28). 22:17. The Spirit and the bride now speak in response to Jesus (cf. 2:7; 21:2, 9). The voice of the bride, the new Jerusalem, is heard only here, and its brief inclusion replaces the stilled voice of the bride in Babylon (18:23). They plead with Jesus to come (cf. v. 20), echoing the command of the creatures to the four riders of the apocalypse (6:2). Whether that coming is with clouds (1:9) or as a thief (16:15), it will be soon (vv. 7, 12; see also 2:16). They make this plea twice, the second time saying, “Let everyone who hears say, ‘Come!’ ” That response is appropriate for all who hear the words of the prophecy (cf. v. 18; 1:3), which is what the Spirit says to the churches (2:7). Hearing must be accompanied by heeding the command of 14:9 and not worshiping the beast. Those who do not hear will find that the One who comes is not a redeemer but a judge (cf. 3:10). The promise of 21:6 (“To the thirsty I will give water as a gift from the spring of the water of life” [NRSV]; cf. 7:16) is then made into an offer: “Let anyone who wishes take the water of life as a gift” (cf. John 7:37). 22:18-19. These verses, apparently spoken by John, solemnly emphasize the authority of the prophecy of this book and, like those of the book of life (13:8), are of utmost significance. In the warning that no one should add to or take away from the book, John repeats words from the Torah:

22:21. John ends with a prayer that the grace

of the Lord Jesus be “with all” (the NRSV does not represent the inclusiveness of the Greek [veTa TavtTwy meta panton| with its “with all the saints”; cf. 1 Cor 16:24). This benediction has many similarities with the conclusions of the Pauline letters (e.g., 2 Cor 13:13; 2 Thess 3:18). It is a final prayer of universal blessing at the end of a text in which threat and division have predominated. It is a final prayer of openness at the end of a text in which threat and division have predominated. At its end there is the promise of water given freely, a tentative refusal of closure or the offer of life.

So now, Israel, give heed to the statutes and ordinances that | am teaching you to observe, so that you may live to enter and occupy the land that the Lorp, the God of your ancestors, is giving you. You must neither add anything to what | command you nor take away anything from it, but keep the commandments of the LorD your God with which I am charging you. (Deut 4:1-2 NRSV)

364. On prophecy, see D. Aune, Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World (Grand Rapids: Erdmans, 1983). On the prophetic character of Revelation, see F. D. Mazzaferri, The Genre of the Book of Revelation from a Source-Critical Perspective (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1989).

This is a warning for the present, with the threat of plagues (cf. Deut 29:19) or loss of participation in the tree of life and the holy city

734

REVELATION 22:6-21 REFLECTIONS

REFLECTIONS 1. We are left in no doubt about the importance John attached to his book. It is ironic that the book in the New Testament with the most exalted claim to authority is the one that is least read and most widely despised. Even if we cannot understand its message in its entirety and are uncomfortable with the import of what we can understand, we must not ignore it. It stands not only at the end of the New Testament, but at the end of the Christian Bible. Thus it may offer us a key to understanding the whole story, because it points to the fulfillment of God’s purposes, of which all else gives only a partial and fragmentary example. Its message is about God and about human history. Its scope is panoramic, and its focus on Jesus as the key to understanding the fulfillment of God’s justice is central. Revelation may enable us to look back over the biblical story and make sense of the whole as well as pointedly reminding us of the demands made on us by a God who regards every action as significant. We may begin to glimpse what the Spirit says to the churches and learn to respond accordingly: “Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they will have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates” (22:14 NRSV; cf. 7:14). 2. Revelation is intended to be heard and read. Keeping the words is not about defensiveness or preservation, nor is it simply a matter of intellectual understanding confined to academy or church. Keeping the words means practicing their message in life. It is a matter of being so utterly informed and pervaded by the words that one can perceive that “the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.” John had to devour the book, and there is a sense in which the reader and the hearer must do that with Revelation—digest it so that one also can “prophesy about many peoples and nations and languages and kings.” Thus the effect of reading the text is to condition an outlook on life whereby image and metaphor jar us awake and transform our actions as well as our attitudes. The temptation is to ask what this book is about and to seek references in history—past, present, or future. But first and foremost, Revelation is meant to be heard and to be read, so that the reader/listener is changed; that change means repentance and rebirth (cf. Matt 19:28). 3. The claim to prophetic insight is fraught with problems. Prophecy may enlighten, but there are occasions when such claims can be diabolically destructive. Throughout the Bible, prophecy is a central component of life, and yet it is also problematic. The very nature of prophecy means that it is not subject to control by any set of regulations. What happens when there are contrasting presentations of the word of God? John’s apocalyptic prophecy obviously did not stand alone (and possibly not unchallenged) in the churches of his day. This issue confronts us in Revelation itself when John condemns “Jezebel” and the pseudo-prophetic witness of the beast and its agent (Revelation 13; cf. 19:20). In the Old Testament, the issue attracted attention as well (Jer 23:9ff.; Deuteronomy 13; 18).°° According to Revelation, a prophet who claimed to speak for God but who also compromised with the existing order (Rev 2:20) is to be repudiated. Similarly, in Deuteronomy 13, the prophetic exhortation to worship other gods and be like the other nations is the mark of a false prophet. Similarly, the voice from heaven is a frequent component of John’s vision. Its presence raises the question of authenticity: How does one distinguish among voices? John offers no explanation, and yet the question remains a pressing one for any New Testament theology. At the start of Mark’s story of Jesus (Mark 1:10) and in the conversion of Paul (Acts 9:4), voices from heaven are heard—unauthenticated and uncompromising. Why are these voices heeded? How, do they

relate to the voice of God in the pages of the Hebrew Bible? The answer in theGospel of John

is uncompromising (John 5:37). All claims to having heard the voice of God (in¢luding. Sinai)’ are 365. On the importance of this theme in the Gospels, see N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (London: SPCK, 1996).

735

REVELATION 22:6-21 REFLECTIONS to be understood in the light of the One whom God has sent, who alone has heard and seen (John 6:46) and can speak the words of God. That voice, the voice of Christ, the voice that speaks with John on Patmos, is the medium and the standard for hearing and understanding what God says. All that is claimed as having been spoken through God must be examined and judged in the light of Christ’s voice. Christ’s words may slay the wicked (cf. Isa 11:4), but never give humans divine sanction to engage in violence.

THEOLOGY LIBRARY CLARE MONT, CALIF / 19WLR

i} Siz fx f oh

¢

VET Be

736

Old Testament and Other Texts Alluded to in Revelation

Texts Alluded to

Genesis 2:9 Ss 3:14 SeaD,, WE! 14:19 14:22 Sei 15:18 18:20-21 19:24 19:28 49:9-10 Exodus Sela

7:17-21 7:17, 19-20 7:19-24

19:20, 24 20:4 201 20:13-15 2o22

Texts Alluded to

Revelation

39:14 40:34 Leviticus 16:12 21:9 26:11-12 26:21 Numbers 1133 16:30, 32 16:36 BT 25:1-2 27:16 31:16 Deuteronomy 37 Salut A:2 5:8 10s; iL1X6) 12287) Sel 13:2-4 28:35 32:4 S247, 32:40 32:43 34:5 Joshua 1:4 ley 6:4 11:4 14:7 Judges 5:19

QF3 22:2, 14, N9, 22:2,,14, 19 12:9 Da, 10:6 10:6 Lilt 9:14 18:5 14:10; 20:10; 21:8 9:2 eS) (1:4, 8; 4:8; 11:17; 16:5 16:3 11:6 16:4 8:8 16:13 16:2 8:7 11:19; 16:18 9:3 16:10 10:1 15:3 13:4 11:16 dele 11:15; 19:6 1-675:105/20:0 Teal 7:14 AS11219 8:5; 10:18 9:2 A:] 533 1O:67'4:7 9:21 EO Tal2 9:13 21:19 21:12-13 13:16 Bios 19513. BO 70328, 1 725: 0a V5; 2-27 Ses 15:5 .

Revelation

21:12 15:5, 8 8:5 17:16; 18:8 2337 1535.0 16:21 12:16 19:20 22:16 Riva, AV 22:6 Daa

9:14 Ze 22:18-19 5:3 17:14; 19:16 12:16 22:18-19 22508 13:14. 16:2 1537 16:5 9:20 10:5-6 6:07 12120192 Ses 9:14 15:3 8:2 20:8 15:3

16:16 20:8 16 10:3 20:8

27 14:14 iss

11:19 15:8 Dies 20:11

737

Old Testament and Other Texts Alluded to in Revelation

Texts Alluded to

16:31 leet 18:24-39 22:19

2 Kings 1:10 Ziel 6:14 7:1 9:7 9:22 9:27 19:2 23:29 1 Chronicles 16:28 16:31 20:2 29:11 2 Chronicles

Texts Alluded to

Revelation

2:20 LG; 12:6 Seite 4:25 9-10-5715, 7 1S:623107 72103 LS Oi; A974> 21:5

11:4 11:6 Wels 19:9 2228 22:28 23:1 23:2 DD 28:4 29:3 SVD 33:3 36:9 40:3 42:2 46:5 46:7 47:9

IES 2.020 ied? 20:9 6:6 6:10; 19:2 2:20; 9:21 16:16 IES 16:16 19:7 19:6 14:14 Art sroyl2

11:19 15:8 Ziles 4:2, 9-10; 5:1, TNS 2016; FAO IS el9:4 INES

55:16 61:6 62:13

10:6 ZES

72:10-11 75:9 78:18 78:23 78:24 78:44 78:45 79:1 79:2 79:3 79:5 79:10 86:9 87:2 88:12 89:7 89:27 89:38 92:5 93:1 96:1 96:5 96:11

68:30 69:25 69:29

10:6

9:17 11:18 1 eam 70)Rojaneh Xe) 2:20:27; 125.1915 II) 19:11 11:15

738

Revelation

4:2 14:10; 20:10; 21:8 22:4 16:7; 19:2 19:5 11:15; 19:6 TA IRIS 17:16 20:12-133922:42 10:3 14:5 5:9; 14:3 21:6 5:9; 14:3 22:4 225 11:18 4:2, 9-10; 5:1, 7; 130: 165) 721.0% Sp. ea Wibss: 19:20 11:18 223% L0213: ZO) TA\oy| 16:1 S04 1385 1728; 20:12, 15° 21-27 21:26 14:10; 15:7; 16:19 20:9 4:1 DG 16:4 16:13 122 11:9 16:6 6:10 OslOAN9:2

3:9; 15:4 20;9 9:11 13:4 ES 5 1533 19:6 5:97 14:3 9:20 12:125°18:20

Old Testament and Other Texts Alluded to in Revelation

Texts - Alluded to

96:13 97:1 97:3 97:7 98:1 98:2 98:9 99:1 103:19 104:2 104:35 105:30 105:38 106:9 106:48 ey 114:3-7

Texts Alluded to

Revelation

19:ital

4:5 6:1

Song of Songs oe

14:1 AD 49-105: 1n/e 13; 6:16; 7:10} WS WSeeis, Wels Wiles) 4:8 15:8 Wee ZA)

16:10 505,225 10 1:4 HOME My, Zi SPS LANG 16:12 G:12-13" 8:12 18:2 8:10; 12:9 16:15 12:3 9:20 IES 14:8; 18:2 37, 18:23 WZ 6:3 18:22 OpSR elke AOS AA 23 TANG QUA RZ 122 8:13 WASee Ike 8:5; 11:19 Sel 1:11 19:a0; 20:10, ol;

16:5, BRAOD 15 19:5 19:5 9:20 19:5 17:14 18:6 13:3 5:8; 8:3-4 5:9; 14:3 15:3:410:5 Sr liss 10:6; LAs? 5:0; 14:3 Proverbs SEND 8:22 isin 242

Revelation

3219 3:14 9:11 223; 2ON2-13: ZIAD

3:20

Isaiah

11:8 ley4 9:20 6:15 9:20 QO Zeal: 27°

739

Old Testament and Other Texts Alluded to in Revelation

Texts Alluded to

43:4 43:18 44:6 44:23 44:27 45:14 46:11 47:7-9 47:9 47:14 48:6 48:12 48:20 49:2 49:6 49:10 49:13 49:23 49:26 51:10 Sills SW EZZ, SYRII 32:5) Syl 53:7, 53:9 54:11-12 Spl 55:4 56:1 58:8 59:18 60:1-2 60:3, 5 60:11 60:14 60:19 60:19-20 61:1 61:6 61:10 62:2 62:6

63:3

Revelation

3:9 Vee NGI ase AAIKOr 22:13 IZ 18°20 16:12 3:9 16:12 18:23 18:23 18:8 1:19 ISIS Axes PAlaor 22S 18:4 TOs 22 IO: 19:15 7:4 7:16-17 12:12; 18:20 3:9 16:6 16:12 21:4 14:10; 15:5; 16:19 DN Di 16:9 18:4 SHO, WETS} 14:5 21:19 IR ANGE bss IEA Oielal 2051 2-13; 22:12 Zlealiel 21:24 21:25-26 3:9 201s 2255 2123; 22:5 5:10 1:6;,5:105 20:6 POs Zc Peis Se ePID ileal 2242 19:13 14:20; 19:15 ley PA Winans7, 3:14

Texts Alluded to

65:19 66:6 66:7 66:22 Jeremiah 1:10 DRAG: Bel. 4:29 5:14 T25 7:34 8:3 9:10 9:15 10:6-7 10:22 10:25 LS 11:19 11:20 27, 13:16 14:12 SA 1533 16:9

Revelation

21:4 LOT 12:2;'5 Ziel 10:11 TATS2N26 Mbps 6:15 TS 10:7 18:23 9:6 18:2 8:11 15:4 6:12 16:1 20:9 5:6 223 -alo:4 20:9 14:7 6:8 13:9 6:8 18:23 18:6 15:4 Zoe 1 2s: DIEND

107, 18:23 14:10; 17:2:°FeS 10:11; 14:18 11:18 ZleS TAG

Old Testament and Other Texts Alluded to in Revelation

Texts Alluded to

Revelation

50:38 50:39 51:6 Sley/ 51:8 51:9 SUS Ses) 51333 51:36 51:45 51:48 51:49 51:63-64

16:12 18:2 18:4 14:8; 17:2, 4; 18:3 La:8. 16:2 18:4-5 WAI 8:8; 11:18; 19:2 14:15 16:12 18:4 18:20 18:24 18:21

Texts Alluded to

22:31 24:7 25:2 26:13 26:15 26:16 POI 26:19 26:21

Lamentations

115

14:20; 19:15 19:11 4:6-7 4:53 11:19 4:8 4:6 PhS: 1A2Z; LOG IRISB AR ORO Sel, He 13; 06:16; 7:10, 1510-45215 4:3 10:9-10 Selle MO, 10:9-10 1:10 PRN 8:7 6:85) Gr7, Fits 20:8 Talis 7:3; 9:4; 14:1 7:3 Tels 8:5 4:8 4:6-7 11:8 Dies, DN3 4:7 4:7 6:8 TAVO 11:8 12:14 it 16:1

39:17-20 40:1 40:3 40:5 43:2 43:16 47:1 47:12 48:16 48:30-35 48:35 Daniel

Revelation

16:1 18:24 10:11 18:22 6:14 18:9 18:10 17:16; 18:19 18:21 18:12-13 18:12-13 18:17 18:19 ISRO, Sy Us} 18:18 18:01, 15 17:4; 18:16; 21:19 12:3 6:8 237, 6:12-13; 8:12 2:23; 6:8 ZieZ7, 2 EMAL 18:24 7:14 Weal les AO! TENSE PAIRS) OnlZon Wels 8:7; 14:10; 20:9 19:17-18 20:9 19:17 PASAY) ies Wiens ZA OS bids Test PENG 22:1 DED Ze ZNLZ Se

2:10 Pils 16:4 PO As 22:6 228; 20s WTS Wet RO Ae 22-6 74S 19s

741

Old Testament and Other Texts Alluded to in Revelation

Texts Alluded to

SA 3:5-6 3:27 4:27 4:30 4:34 Ses} 6:26-27 HD Hes) 7:4-6 Lf. 7:8 7:9 7:9-10 FAO TAG PENS 7:14

Texts Alluded to

Revelation

13:14

6:8

1:6 1:14 2:4-5 25 2:10 2:11 635 3:4 Se)

9:8 22:2 9:7 9:9 6:12-13; 9:2 6:17 8:7 6:12 14:1 14:15, 18; 19:15 6:12-13; 8:12 11:8

Revelation

Lost SRI: 16:7 14:8 18:10 4:9 9:20 4:9 Hell M72 13215 Fes8 Sey ISIS NARS) li7/ eel SD 07: A a2 0: Annie 20:11-12 Sila 13:5; 19:20 7, WSR Wei! LORLs ETS OG 22:5 ese 777 WEES PENS S77 20:4 42235 13:15 172 12:14; 13:6-7 20:4°522:5 1:9 L3ed1 8:10; 12:4 eae 10:4 LO 118 PTS BASES 1:14-15; 2:18; 19:12 237, 13:6 BS; 7145712: F188: 16:185°17:8720:12, LS e727 10:4; 22:10 4:9; 10:5-6; 12:14 Ses KO! 22:1|

Joel

10:3 Mik £15 10:73: 71:18 10:3 £18; 4:8: 11: F715:3: I BIENOian kese 8:12 8:3

PEAS P13 IWSLG 12E2 9:20 LETS Nahum 1:6

Habakkuk 1:6 2:20 Zephaniah 17

1:14 3:8 Sls Zechariah 1:6 1:8

17:16 12:6 8:13 7:6 6:16; 9:6 10:3 SPIE 13:2

742

6:17

20:9 8:1 8:1 6:17 16:1 14:5

NORE elie 6:2; 4; 19:11 6:10 ial 21:16 TRE gs Sele Ale?! 8:1 12:10 ET 4:5

Old Testament and Other Texts Alluded to in Revelation

Texts Alluded to

4:3 4:10 4:11-14 Se, 6:2 O23 6:5 6:6 6:11 6:19 8:8 dali 12:3 12310 el 212 12:14 14:7 14:8 14:9 14:11 Malachi El 3:1-2 3:16 Tobit ZEN WAS 13:7,.14 13:17 13:18 2 Maccabees 2:48 3:25 10:7 11:8 13:4 13:14

Texts Revelation

11:4 5:6 11:4

14:16

6:4-5

6:2; 19:11 Heil 6:25 99:11 4:4 2:10 20:7: SH, 11:2 ilS7f 16:16

hc? ey Dd2 02235 22 niet Se19°6 22:3

15:4 6217372216 35 8:3 8:2 153 21:19 19:1

Doe ed hD 19:11 7:9 19:11 WEVA 19216 2:10

Alluded to Wisdom hei! 16:9 16:22 18:14 18:16 Sirach 1:8

16:12 18:1 39:29 3 Maccabees DRS 5:35 Enoch 9:4 10:6 14:19 14:22 183 18:16 21:3 21:6 40:1 Syleil 54:6 61:5 66:2 86:1 Psalms of Solomon 8:2 14:3 W723 17:93

Revelation

4:11 O83 8:7 8:1 PENA

AD, 9210;-5:15°7, IS ORIOR TIO). 15 19:4eZihS 20:12 1:18; 4:11 8:7 4:11 17:14

SRSE AU/eial 19:20 DORA oFil| 8:8 203 8:8; 17;9 20:3e2 Spill 20:13 13:14 20:13 16:5 8:10 19:1 DID) Dy 3:18

TRANSLITERATION SCHEMA

HEBREW AND ARAMAIC TRANSLITERATION Consonants: 0

=

055

5 or»)

=

a ten RO ‘ee eae Tee ed

woe

>or7 2

= = =

y k 1

yory Pp a

= = =

ap

kee

eee:

noro

= ne (7

v

=

1/

2 0F}

=f

a)

=

‘a

=

y

=

4b,

2)

=

S

n

=

h

y

=

|

YQHD HN

Masoretic Pointing:

Pure-long

Tone-long

le

=o

Soha

=F

ae

at we OL”

ge

mor”:

=

f

OF 5

=

2

COts,

=)

Short

Composite shewa

ad ee =

=

:

SPs

SOL,

oe

i

5)

O

=

Sole

GREEK TRANSLITERATION GR I Beco Vide

6 6.

20 Ae:

aU = Nan | See

ih ga aac

0 GOrs a

5 =

ip as nd

d $e

Came teat

gi 5

U b

=i =>

any, 90n

Cees

ee

Cot,

eG

x

— ae 6)

Wt

ee

Ol-t

=O

chee

ine

Tc

=

ph

L

Uy ee

a

ps Shwe)

INDEX OF EXCURSUSES, MAPS, CHARTS, AND ILLUSTRATIONS

PVCU otisee une tin iis

sel t ware iRe © Sou riala siccu-ee eerie

ER GUISMS me HOUSCHONM daly

sd Maa

Seager: 6 alslen se eS

cee 2 taucuce cus hcrabs Gucpx Ghee ereleksyal wiesiwes o Gene. ed Oe

251

eee

278

SINe env alien mL OVG ALT Lat) OIA ease sheeDeetenie toace tear aucrc esae Wala2 en Hoare a eaten nus WM oko-e-a Boge OE 436 Hie Sencee WUTC OF ROVELANOM 5 ie meio vie qusie SovRevgH Excursus: “Fornication” and QOL Wioice ates c lesen sents aleS

waa WIE ARLE Re egmpatia = x era Rle wee eros 572 tactPoktes eas Saumua wai Srenene ts ena

579

Excursus: God’s Throne, the Heavenly Merkabah, and the Human Figure..................04. 596 ime sequence: C1 seven seals, lrumpets and: BOWS... Feamicrana seme in the: Boek OmRevelatiOnia EXCUSE

e fes.% cn © ds 0S wetted

ee 610

< s5..0.5 an 0 «sus 0s Swe ateiuy Wald «2 soo aie em eltlcmes 622

TIDUAIONSiONtne MESSIANIC AGE sooo. i. ews en's «+ < okepnaper Peet eens » eurater a eTOe brane 635

FeCatt gem NILES Cn AIIMLE TOT

ETO eo ictal s 5 a did-ca ooo ove 4 cea vas mS Sh nw SARE, we Bs

© WBOl NOC caecessackaloierpia eae. tip 64 a ware. cru eter @6.ecetem ete b F7o wae

Pxcuicpismline ParOtisialia the New 1eSta Ment sc LENG

Gerd d see ae

eUe ile

rete eta

cae

Excutamcn bina! suspicion Or EME: TeMPlEss

aces suns es

see

eee

645

eaceamersine ss 683

ee ds «+ Hse oem ees

702

amar va ts 6b oe Scone yguie waieh oe mat ele se bw lsGee Rene 708 goats, sois-5.t:0 6 + aw eac'a,to Beh «arsine 0 ole one ole one

Old Testament and Other Texts Alluded toinpRevelation. ..... 2

745

SP oo. ec te

eye eS

ce ow wee ew a 737

ABBREVIATIONS

BCE CE

ch

chap(s).

Before the Common Era Common Era circa

compare chapter(s) died

esp. fem. f(f). lit. I(I).

masc. MS(S) MT OL n(n).

NT OL OT pls). v(v).

Vg

especially feminine and following

literally line(s) Septuagint masculiine

manuscript(s) Masoretic Text Old Latin note(s) New Testament Old Latin Old Testament plate(s) verse(s) Vulgate Names of Biblical Books (with the Apocrypha)

Gen Exod Lev Num Deut Josh

Judg 1-2 Sam

1-2 Kgs Isa Jer Ezek Hos Joel Amos

Obad Jonah Mic

Nah Hab Zeph Hag

1-4 Kgdms Add Esth Bar Bel

John

Zech

1-2 Esdr

Mal Ps (Pss) Job Prov Ruth Cant Eccl Lam Esth Dan Ezra Neh 1-2 Chr

4 Ezra Jdt Ep Jer 1-4 Macc Pr Azar Pr Man Sir Sus Tob Wis Matt Mark Luke

Gal Eph Phil Col 1-2 Thess 1-2 Tim

Names of Pseudepigraphical and Early Patristic Books 1, 2, 3 Enoch 2-3 Apoc. Bar. Did. 1-2 Clem. Herm. Sim. Jub.

Ethiopic, Slavonic, Hebrew Enoch Syriac, Greek Apocalypse of Baruch Didache 1-2 Clement Hermas, Similitude(s) Jubilees

746

Acts Rom 1-2 Cor

Titus Phim Heb Jas

1-2 Pet 1-3 John Jude Rev

ABBREVIATIONS Pss. Sol. Sib. Or. Hedisss T. Levi

Ign. Ign. Ign. Ign.

Eph. * Magn. Smyrn. Trall.

Bib. Ant.

Psalms of Solomon Sibylline Oracles Testament of Issachar Testament of Levi Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians Ignatius, Letter to the Magnesians Ignatius, Letter to the Smyrnaeans Ignatius, efter to the Trallians Ps.-Philo, Biblical Antiquities

Names of Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Texts

CD 10H 10M 10S 4Q, Flor 11QMelch 11QpHab 110Ps

Cairo (Genizah text of the) Damascus (Document) Hoda yot (Thanksgiving Hymns) from Qumran Cave 1

Milhama h (War Scroll) Serek hayyahad (Rule of the Community, Manual of Discipline) Florilegium (or Eschatological Midrashim) from Qumran Cave 4 Melchizedek text from Qumran Cave 11 a fragment of the Habakkuk scroll from Quran Cave 11 a fragment of the Psalms scroll from Qumran Cave 11

Orders and Tractates in Mishnaic and Related Literature ’Abot ‘Arak. B. Bat.

‘Abot ‘Arakin

Méas.

Ma ‘as erot

Sabb. Sanh. Yad

Baba Batra

Sabbat Sanhedrin

Yadayim

Other Rabbinic Works Rab.

Rabbah (following abbreviation for biblical book: Gen. Rab. [with periods] = Genesis Rabbah)

Greek Manuscripts and Ancient Versions

pp’

Third-century Greek Papyrus manuscript of the Gospels

Commonly Used Periodicals, Reference Works, and Serials

AB AnBib BETL Bib BIRL BWANT BZNW CBQ ConBNT EKKNT FFNT GNB HNTC HTR

Anchor Bible Analecta biblica Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium Biblica Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library ofManchester

Beitrage zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament Beihefte zur ZVWW Catholic Biblical Quarterly Coniectanea hiblica, New Testament Evangelisch-katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Foundations and Facets: New Testament Good News Bible Harper’s NT Commentaries Harvard Theological Review

747

ABBREVIATIONS HUCA IB ICC Int

JB JBL JRH JSNT JSOT

KJV NOE MNTC NAB NCB NCBC NEB NIB NICNT NIGTC NIV NJB NovT NovTSup NPNF NRSV NTD NTS OBT REB RSV SBL SBLDS SBLMS SBT ST SNTSMS TDNT ve WBC WBT WUNT ZNW ZTK

Hebrew Union College Annual Interpreter’s Bible International Critical Commentary Interpretation Jerusalem Bible Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Religious History Journal for the Study of the New Testament

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament King James (or Authorized) Version Loeb Classical Library Moffatt NT Commentary New American Bible New Century Bible New Century Bible Commentary New English Bible New Interpreter’s Bible New International Commentary on the New Testament New International Greek Testament Commentary New International Bible New Jerusalem Bible Novum Testamentum Novum Testamentum, Supplements Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers New Revised Standard Version Das Neue Testament Deutsch New Testament Studies Overtures to Biblical Theology Revised English Bible Revised Standard Version of the Bible Society of Biblical Literature SBL Dissertation Series SBL Monograph Series Studies in Biblical Theology Scottish Journal of Theology Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series G. Kittel and G. Firedrich (eds.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Vigiliae christianae Word Biblical Commentary Word Biblical Themes Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift fiir die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift fir Theologie und Kirche

748

4

i4