The Holy Spirit in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Part 2

In Part 1 of this article, I examined the references to the “holy spirit” in the Qumran Writings, focusing primarily on the three key texts—the Community Rule (1QS), the Damascus Document (QD/CD), and the Hymns (Hodayot, 1QH). These writings share a common understanding regarding the holy spirit of God, and its relation to the holiness of the Community. As it happens, there is a rather different aspect of the pneumatology of the Qumran texts, expressed within an elaborate ritual (and visionary) setting, that is attested in several key writings, most notably the so-called “Angelic Liturgy” or “Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice”. Because of the difficulty and complexity of this material, it is necessary to give it a separate treatment here.

Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice

This work is preserved in at least 9 manuscripts from Qumran (4Q400-407, 11Q17), and one from Masada (Mas1k). The number of manuscripts, copied over more than 75 years, attests to the popularity of the work; presumably, it was utilized within the worship and ritual of the Qumran Community. The commonly accepted title today (Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice), reflects the structure of this work—a series of thirteen “Songs”, one for each Sabbath during the first quarter of the year. The introductory formula for each Song indicates that it was meant to accompany the daily burnt offering on the Sabbath. The association with the Temple-ritual is important for an understanding of the Community’s religious identity, both in its origins and present constitution—with a strong priestly component, having separated from the Temple establishment in Jerusalem. As occurred within Judaism following the destruction of the Temple, it was necessary for the Qumran Community to find a new way of expressing the reality of the Temple ritual for its members—at the spiritual/symbolic level, and within an entirely new visionary setting.

For a fine treatment of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, in English, with reconstruction, translation, textual notes, and commentary, cf. James R. Davila, Liturgical Works, Eerdmans Commentaries on the Dead Sea Scrolls (Eerdmans: 2000), pp. 83-167.

The Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice make for difficult reading; in addition to the fragmentary text, the work has a visionary and liturgical character that is quite foreign to our religious sensibilities today. A proper understanding is helped by realizing that there are three interrelated aspects throughout the Songs:

    • The ritual setting and religious life of the Community, tied to the actual Sabbath-worship during the year
    • The Old Testament description of the Temple and Tabernacle, along with related traditions
    • A visionary description of the heavenly realms, which, while drawing upon Scriptural expressions and imagery, is largely independent of Old Testament tradition

The three aspects blend together in an original and powerful way. It is the last aspect that is especially foreign to Christians today; however, it will not seem quite so strange to scholars and students who are familiar with the Jewish apocalyptic and mystical writings of the first centuries B.C./A.D. and beyond. It is worth touching on these briefly before proceeding to a discussion of the Songs.

Jewish Visionary Tradition

There are certain definite parallels between the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and several lines of visionary and mystical tradition in Judaism. Certainly, many of the pseudepigraphic writings from the period c. 200 B.C. to 400 A.D. contain apocalyptic elements that include visions of heaven—even visionary journeys through the heavenly realms—similar to the descriptions we find in the Songs. However, the closest parallels are perhaps to be found in the Hekhalot literature, so named because the writings involve a visionary ascent through the heavenly “palaces” (hekhalot, tolk*yh@). It represents an expression of the so-called Merkabah (“chariot”) mysticism. The merkabah (hb*K*r=m#, “sitting/riding place”, i.e. chariot) idea stems largely from Old Testament tradition, and especially the visions in Ezekiel 1 and 10, as representing the dwelling place and throne of God. In the Merkabah-mysticism, this idea is adapted in a curious way: the mystic goes down (descends) into the chariot, which serves as the vehicle for the visionary ascent. It is possible that the “chariot” here stands as a symbol for a ritual meditative technique that enables the visionary experience. In any case, the seer ascends through the “palaces” of the seven heavenly realms, facing challenges and dangers along the way; ultimately, if successful, he reaches the Throne of Glory and is allowed a glimpse of the worship performed there by the Angels.

The Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice share many characteristics and manner of expression with these Hekhalot writings. The litany-like sequences and chains of phrases are quite similar at many points, though never reaching the excesses (of names, titles, and apparent nonsense-words) found in the Hekhalot literature. The central feature in common, of course, is the idea that the earthly participant is able to witness the Angelic worship and ritual that takes place around the Throne of God. The dating of the Hekhalot literature is difficult; the main texts (or macroforms) date from the early medieval period, but may contain material or traditions that go back to the 1st-2nd centuries A.D.

Another important line of tradition is the Enoch-literature, including the main Book of Enoch (1 Enoch), the later 2 Enoch, and the Hebrew 3 Enoch (which is also to be counted among the Hekhalot writings). This reflects a long line of tradition stretching back centuries. The rather cryptic reference to Enoch in Genesis 5:24 may indicate that there were already extensive Enoch-traditions in circulation by the early-mid 1st millennium B.C., though it is just as likely that the Genesis reference served as the basis for all the subsequent traditions. In any event, a central feature of the Enoch writings is a detailed description of the heavenly realm, which the exalted seer experiences as part of an extensive heavenly journey. The main Book of Enoch (1 Enoch) is a complex, composite work that was almost certainly composed over a long period of time, by different authors. The earliest portions probably date from around 250 B.C., while the latest were likely written by 100 A.D. The work was known by the Qumran Community, and may even have been regarded as authoritative Scripture; that it was also familiar to Christians in the 1st century is indicated by the reference in Jude 14-15, and by certain parallels elsewhere in the New Testament.

The Structure of the Songs

In my view, there is a clear three-part structure to the Songs:

    • Songs 1-5—In these five Songs, the setting of the heavenly realm is established, along with the “holy ones” in heaven; a comparison is also made with the earthly Temple/Tabernacle, and the “holy ones” (i.e. the Qumran Community, esp. its priests) on earth.
    • Songs 6-8—These three Songs form the heart of the work, with a central depiction of the heavenly Temple (Song 7), flanked by two Songs (6, 8) which present a series of praises and blessing by seven “Princes” of heaven.
    • Songs 9-13—In these five Songs, the heavenly Temple is described in detail, culminating with the inner Throne room of God, and the worship/ritual that takes place there.

Songs 1-5

In the first two Songs, the heavenly-setting is introduced, with the palace/temple and “holy ones” of heaven being compared with those on earth—a comparison that continues at least into the second Song. The theme of holiness is established from the beginning, along with the expression “holy (one)s”, and, in particular, the extended idiom “holy (one)s of the holy (one)s” (<yv!odq= yv@odq=). This is important because of the way it blends together three different ideas:

    • The supreme and complete holiness of God
    • The heavenly beings as “holy ones”, and
    • The sanctuary (i.e. in the Temple) where God dwells as the “holy of holies” (Exod 26:33-34, etc)

The double-plural form is best understood as an intensive—i.e., “the most holy (place), most holy (ones)”. This expression occurs multiple times in the main portion that survives from Song 1 (4Q400 fragment 1, col. i.1-21 = 4Q401 fr. 15). The parallel between the “holy ones” (i.e., heavenly beings) and the “holy of holies” (Temple sanctuary) is key to understanding the visionary landscape of the Songs. Unlike the earthly Temple, made of physical objects and lifeless furnishings, the heavenly Temple is made of living beings—that is to say, of the heavenly beings or “holy ones”, and the ones closest to God’s throne are the holiest of these. The heavenly “holy ones” are all to be understood as “spirits”. In column ii of the same fragment, the phrases “spirit [j^Wr] of all…” and “holy ones of the holy of holies” occur in close proximity (lines 5-6).

Nothing certain survives of Song 3, and very little of Song 4, so there is no way of knowing exactly what these portions contained. Also quite uncertain is the nature of the 5th Song, though it seems to provide a parallel of sorts with Song 1. This would make sense if, as indicated above, Songs 1-5 represent a distinct unit. One interesting detail is the mention of the multi-colored material (hmqwr) in connection with the “inner chamber” of the King (God); this certainly alludes to the decoration of the Tabernacle/Temple sanctuary and the curtain at its entrance, and is an important part of the parallel between the earthly and heavenly sanctuaries. The largest fragment of Song 5 (4Q402 fr. 4 = Mas1k i.1-7) would seem to emphasize God’s work as Creator, especially in the creation of the heavenly beings. The references to warfare (lines 7-10) may relate to the ancient cosmological myth that defines the creation of the universe as the product of conflict (among the deities) in heaven. However, I think it perhaps more likely that these references simply allude to the traditional role of the heavenly beings as “armies” who will fight on God’s behalf; in the eschatological battle depicted in the War Scroll (1QM), the “holy ones” of heaven join with the “holy ones” on earth (i.e. the Qumran Community) to defeat the forces of darkness.

Songs 6-8

As noted above, Song 7 is the center of the entire work, preceded and followed by parallel Songs (6, 8) which consist of a series of praises and blessings uttered by seven “Princes” of heaven. Possibly the number seven, apart from its symbolic and traditional importance (cf. in the book of Revelation, etc), refers to the cosmology of the time, with the idea of seven concentric heavenly domains (or spheres), and God dwelling at the highest point. Certainly the Hekhalot literature (cf. above) makes much use of this cosmological framework; given the basic similarities with the Songs in other respects, it seems likely that a similar framework may be in view here—seven heavenly realms, each with a pair of “Princes” who govern it. Songs 6 and 8 have precisely the same format; in Song 6 the praises/blessings are uttered by seven “chief Princes”, while in Song 8 the praise comes from seven corresponding Princes who are identified specifically as priests (of the interior) and called “wondrous second Princes”. The distinction with the first group of seven is not entirely clear, but it may reflect the Priest-Ruler dual leadership emphasized in the Qumran texts.

Song 7 is the center-point, and we are fortunate that at least two substantial sections have been preserved. The first of these (4Q403 fr. 1 col. i.30-47 = 4Q404 3-5 + 4Q405 4-5, 6) contains the opening of the Song and a two-fold invocation: (1) to all the “holy ones” in the heavens (lines 31-40), and (2) to those beings which make up the heavenly ‘Temple’ (41-47). These “holy ones” are also called spirits— “spirits of understanding” (line 37) and “spirits of righteousness (line 38). Moreover, the living beings which form the heavenly Temple and sanctuary are also “spirits” (of perfect knowledge and light). As noted above, the spirits in the sanctuary would have been considered especially holy, and this seems to be expressed in lines 44ff; here I cite Davila’s reconstruction of the text (p. 124) in translation:

“Most hol[y spi]rits, living divinities, [ete]rnal holy spirits above all the hol[y ones… of wonder, wonderful of effulgence and ornament. And wondrous is the God of gl]ory in the light of perfect light(!) of knowle[dge] […in all wondrous sanctuaries. The spirits of God surround the dwelling of the K]in[g of faithfulness and righteousness. All] [its walls…in the holy of holies…”

In the separate fragment 4Q403 fr. 1 col. ii.1-17 (+ 4Q404 fr. 6), we seem to have a clearer sense of the structure of the heavenly Temple, consisting of seven exalted holy places (line 11, cf. above), along with a ‘tabernacle’ (dwelling) of the “exalted chief” that apparently stands as separate “holy place” before the entrance to the inner chamber (holy of holies). All throughout this space, and especially in and around the inner sanctuary, there are “holy spirits” —spirits of God, and even those holiest of the holy ones (“spirits of the holy of holies”, line 7f). It would seem that these spirits all appear in bright, fiery colors, drawing their life and energy from the spirit of God Himself. This last point is not entirely clear, but it is suggested by the fascinating wording at the beginning of this fragment: “…complete [i.e. perfect] light, multi-colored(ness) of (the) spirit of the holy of holies”. In any case, they are depicted as colorful flames that surround God’s throne in the inner chamber (line 9f). The spirits of the inner shrine all praise God together (lines 15-16).

Songs 9-13

The final 5 Songs provide a more detailed description of the heavenly Temple and sanctuary, culminating with a liturgical presentation of the praise/worship of God that takes place before His Chariot-Throne (Songs 12-13). The chariot-motif for the throne of God stems primarily from the visions in Ezekiel 1 and 10, as noted above. Throughout in these Songs there continue numerous references to the “spirits” who are the beings that comprise this living sanctuary, and especially those “spirits of the holy of holies” (11Q17 col. iv, etc) who surround the Throne of God. Those spirits who make up the curtain and floor, etc. of the sanctuary are especially glorious—spirits of light in various shapes, wondrous colors, etc. As we move in closer to the very throne of God, the praise of these spirits begins to grow quiet, and we even read of a “spirit of quiet” that emerges among these divine beings. From this quiet blessing (cf. the beginning portions of Song 12), a tumult of praise comes forth again, radiating outward into the entire heavenly realm.

In the concluding Song 13, the focus shifts from praise of God to the (sacrificial) ritual aspect of worship performed by the priests. On the heavenly level, of course, these are holy ones (Angels/spirits) who perform the ritual, but they have their corresponding form among the holy ones (the Qumran Community) on earth. These ministers perform their offerings in purity, with a “spirit of holiness” (vd#oq j^Wr, 11Q17 col. ix). The holy ones approach God in living garments that correspond with the colorful spirit-beings who form the curtains, etc, of the sanctuary—they have garments “of light of the spirit of the holy of holies” (4Q405 fr. 23 col. ii.8ff). They possess pure colors, with the substance/likeness of the “spirit of glory”.

Conclusion

From this study of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, as well as those texts and passages discussed in Part 1 of this article, it is clear that the Qumran Community had a very distinctive understanding of the “holy spirit”. On the one hand, it continued the concepts and terminology from earlier Old Testament and Jewish tradition, emphasizing the cleansing aspect of God’s Spirit, along with the close association with wisdom and spirit-inspired leadership. There were two main aspects to the role of the Spirit in the leadership of the Community—focusing on the priestly character of the Community, and the continuation of the inspiration of Scripture (the Torah and Prophets) through the inspired teaching/interpretation that took place within the Community.

However, in terms of the specific expression “holy spirit” (or “spirit of holiness”), the Qumran texts understand (and express) this almost entirely in terms of the holiness of the Community. The true members of the Community, by  their very nature (as “sons of light”), possess an upright spirit, given to them by God, even prior to joining. Upon entry, they are further cleansed (symbolically and ritually) by God’s holy spirit, and are made completely holy. The need to maintain this holiness and purity was central to life in the Community. Indeed, the Community itself, as representing the faithful ones in Israel, possessed a “holy spirit”. This emphasis on its holy character is best seen in the Community Rule (1QS) 8:20-21ff: it is a “Community of holiness”, led by a “council of holiness”, and comprised completely of “men of holiness” (or “men of complete holiness”), being established, in truth, by God’s own “spirit of holiness”.

I disagree with commentators (e.g., Charlesworth) who claim that the references to the “holy spirit” in the Qumran texts are a precursor to the early Christian concept of the Holy Spirit. I find little indication of this. Instead, the “spirit of holiness” appears to be one of many different “spirits” who function together to perform God’s will. Of course, all of these spirits are holy—they are among the “holy ones”, as is clear from the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice. There is no one “holy spirit”, but many holy spirits—those closest to God being the most holy (“spirit[s] of the holy of holies”, etc).

Thus I would maintain that, for the Qumran Community, there is an interesting example of the “one and the many” with regard to the “holy spirit”. On the one hand, the texts can still speak in traditional terms of the “spirit of (God’s) holiness” —that is, His own Spirit that is at work in the world. At the same time, this Spirit is manifest in many different ways and forms, through the different spirits that serve God on His behalf, in relation to His people (the Community). All of these are holy, but when one is emphasizing or focusing on this idea of holiness or purity, specifically, one can speak of a distinct “spirit of holiness” that is present in the Community, and is reflected in the “holy spirit” of the Community itself, along with the “spirits” of its individual members.

It is in the entrance ritual that the Qumran understanding of the “holy spirit” is closest to that of the New Testament and early Christianity. During the water-ritual (par. to Baptism), the “spirit of holiness” cleanses the individual from sin, and the person’s own spirit is thus made holy. The holy person then becomes part of a holy Community. The main difference in early Christianity was that the very Spirit of God comes to dwell within the person (and in the Community). I do not find anything comparable in the Qumran texts. Instead of the person’s own spirit being made holy, the emphasis is on the Spirit of God abiding in their spirit (and uniting with it). There is also, of course, the idea of the Holy Spirit as representing the continuing presence of the exalted Jesus in and among believers; this is thoroughly unique to Christianity, with noting remotely like it in the Qumran texts.

December 9: Revelation 19:9-10

Revelation 19:1-10, continued

Revelation 19:9-10

“And he says to me, ‘You must write (this): Happy (are) the (one)s having been called into the marriage supper of the Lamb’. And he says to me, ‘These are the true accounts [i.e. words/sayings] of God’.” (v. 9)

The subject of “he says” is not immediately clear; there is certainly a Messenger present with the seer in v. 10, perhaps to be identified with one of the two mentioned in chapter 18 (v. 1, 21). At the beginning of the book, the seer (John) was commanded to write down the things he would see in the visions (1:11, 19), a command which effectively runs through the letters to the seven cities (2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14). A closer parallel is found in 14:13, where what he is told to write is a beatitude, likewise beginning “happy (are) the ones…” (maka/rioi oi(…):

    • “Happy (are) the dead, the (one)s dying away in the Lord from now (on).” (14:13)
    • “Happy (are) the (one)s having been called into the marriage supper of the Lamb.” (19:9)

On the beatitude form itself, see my earlier study series on the Beatitudes of Jesus, esp. the introductory article on the contextual and historical background of the form, and the concluding article on the other beatitudes in the New Testament. The context of these beatitudes is fundamentally eschatological—that is, they relate to the blessed state of the righteous in the afterlife (or, in the Age to Come), following the Judgment. In Christian terms, the righteous and faithful ones (believers) will join in the heavenly, divine life, in the presence of the exalted Jesus (the Lamb) and God the Father. From the standpoint of the symbolism in the book of Revelation, this refers to the People of God in their heavenly aspect.

In this instance, the blessed life is expressed by the motif of a marriage and its wedding festivities (cf. the previous note). In Jesus’ parable of Matthew 22:1-10, the invitation to a wedding feast serves as a figure for the calling of believers and the proclamation of the Gospel. The meaning is comparable here, only the setting is that of the exalted condition of those believers who have remained faithful. There is actually a blending of images here, since believers represent both the bride and the wedding guests. As it happens, a number of written wedding-feast invitations, that are roughly contemporary, are preserved in the surviving ancient Greek papyri (e.g., P.Fay. 132, P.Oxy. 1579, 3313; Koester, p. 731).

The second declaration by the Angel (“these are the true words/accounts of God”) affirms the promise of salvation and the blessed future life for believers in Christ. Even as God Himself is true (a)lhqino/$, 3:7, 14; 6:10; 15:3; 16:7; 19:2), so also are all His words and promises. This also confirms the inspired character of the visionary message (cf. on verse 10 below). One is reminded of the Johannine emphasis that identifies truth (a)lh/qeia) with the Holy Spirit (Jn 4:23-24; 14:17; 15:26; 16:13; 1 Jn 4:6; 5:6).

“And I fell (down) in front of his feet to kiss toward [i.e. worship] him, and he said to me, ‘See (that) you do not (do that)! I am a slave together with you and all your brothers, (all) the (one)s holding the witness of Yeshua; (it is) God (that) you must kiss toward [i.e. worship]. For the witness of Yeshua is the Spirit of profhtei/a.'” (v. 10)

In previous notes, I have mentioned how there is a close relationship between believers and the heavenly beings (i.e. Messengers/Angels), both essentially making up (together) the People of God. This is expressed various ways throughout the book, and is emphasized again here in chapter 19, as exalted believers blend into the heavenly multitude (vv. 1-3, 6-8). The conjunction is also represented by the twenty-four Elders alongside the four Living beings (v. 4f). Perhaps nowhere is this relationship expressed more clearly than here in verse 10, where the Messenger (heavenly being) declares that he is “a slave together with” all human believers. The main thing they have in common is that they hold (vb e&xw) “the witness of Yeshua”. The directive by the Angel that the seer not give homage to (lit. “kiss toward”, i.e. worship) him, is found in other apocalyptic writings (e.g., Ascension of Isaiah 7:21) of the period, and so may have been something a standard traditional detail. It of course reflects the fundamental idea that worship belongs to God alone.

The expression “witness of Yeshua” (h( marturi/a  )Ihsou=) is central to the book of Revelation, which makes extensive use of the nouns marturi/a (9 times), ma/rtu$ (5 times), and the related verb marture/w (4 times)—the verb and noun marturi/a also occur frequently in the Johannine Gospel and Letters. The specific expression “witness of Yeshua” occurs four other times in the book of Revelation (1:2, 9; 12:17; 20:4). The genitival relationship can be understood two ways: either as a subjective genitive, i.e. Jesus is the one witnessing, or an objective genitive, in which case it is a witness about Jesus. Both are entirely valid, and each fits well in the overall outlook of Revelation. However, given the way that the book begins (cf. the initial note on 1:1), the subjective aspect should be given priority. Jesus is the one who gives witness, and believers reproduce Jesus’ own witness, both by word (preaching/proclamation) and example. This is beautifully expressed by the idea of believers following the Lamb wherever he goes (14:4).

The concluding declaration by the Angel states that “the witness of Yeshua is the Spirit of profhtei/a“. The relationship of this statement with the rest of vv. 9-10 is not immediately apparent. Normally, I would translate the noun profhtei/a rather literally as “foretelling”; however, this can be misleading, as it suggests that the word refers merely to predicting the future. Certainly, the visions in the book of Revelation are to be taken as prophetic in that sense (1:1, etc), and yet early Christian use of the Greek word-group is better understood in light of the corresponding Hebrew root abn. A ayb!n`, in the religious sense, functions as a spokesperson for God—i.e., one who speaks on God’s behalf, communicating His word and will to the people. This is fundamentally the significance of a profh/th$ (foreteller, prophet) in early Christianity as well. Such divine communication was considered to inspired by the Holy Spirit—the Spirit of God and Christ. Here, the statement confirms still further the close relationship between heavenly Messenger (Angel) and believer. Just as the Angel conveys the word and will of God, so also do believers through the Spirit. The basic message both groups convey can be defined as “the witness of Jesus”, and what unites believers (especially those gifted as prophets) with the heavenly beings—as messengers—is the guiding presence and activity of the Spirit. There are relatively few references to the Spirit in the book of Revelation, apart from the letters to the seven congregations in chaps. 2-3 (once in each letter). The seer (John) is said to be “in the Spirit” on several occasions, indicating the inspired and prophetic character of the visions (1:10; 4:2; 17:3; 21:10); however, the closest parallel to the statement here is perhaps found at 22:17, in the concluding words of the book.

Some commentators would treat verse 10 as the end of a major section, thus separating it from the remainder of chapter 19. The declaration regarding the prophetic Spirit would certainly fit such a climactic position. However, I do not believe this way of dividing the book is correct; in my view, it is much preferable to retain the integrity of chapter 19 as a distinct unit, a set of three visions similar in structure and theme to those of chapter 14. Indeed, it is the sequence of visions in chaps. 14 and 19, rather than the more elaborate seven-vision cycles, which best encapsulates the traditional early Christian eschatology. This will be discussed further in the next daily note (on vv. 11-16).

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

December 8: Revelation 19:4-8

Revelation 19:1-10, continued

Revelation 19:4-5

“And the twenty-four elder (one)s and the four living (being)s fell (down) and kissed toward [i.e. worshiped] God the (One) sitting upon the ruling-seat, saying: ‘Amen, Hallelu-Yah!’ And a voice came out from the ruling-seat, saying: ‘You must give praise to our God, all His slaves [and] the (one)s fearing Him, the small (one)s and great (one)s (both)!'”

On the significance of the twenty-four Elders and the four Living beings, cf. the earlier notes on 4:1-5 and 4:6-13. In my view, the 24 “elders” (presbu/teroi) represent the People of God, in their heavenly aspect, perhaps alluding to the 12 apostles and 12 tribes of Israel together (see 21:12-14). Their voices come between the two songs of praise by the multitude (cf. below); all they say in response is simply “Amen, Hallelu-Yah!”. The centrality of this scene is confirmed by the fact that these beings surround the throne of God; and it is a second voice, coming from the throne, which calls on the the People to give even greater praise to God. While such a heavenly voice often signifies that it is God Himself speaking, here it more probably refers to a great Messenger (Angel), one associated specifically with the throne.

In verse 2, believers were called “slaves” (dou=loi), as here again in verse 5; in fact, this is a regular label for Christians in the book of Revelation (1:1; 2:20; 7:3; 10:7; 11:18, etc), as also in the New Testament as a whole. It specifically connotes those who are faithful to the witness of Jesus and the proclamation of the Gospel (Paul uses it frequently as a self-designation for himself and other missionaries). The New Testament conception of dou=lo$ does not quite fit our modern idea of slavery, but it also rather inaccurate to translate with the softer term “servant”. While servitude is definitely indicated, here in the book of Revelation, especially, is the important idea of belonging to a master. The seal or branding provides the mark of ownership. Believers belong to God and Jesus (the Lamb), while the wicked (non-believers) belong to the forces of evil (Sea-creature/Dragon/Satan). Here all believers are addressed, collectively—small and great alike, from all backgrounds and segments of society.

Revelation 19:6-8

“And I heard as (though) a voice of a throng (of) many (people), as a voice of many waters, and as a voice of strong thunderings, saying:
‘Hallelu-Yah! (For it is) that [our] Lord God the All-mighty ruled as king!
We should be glad and leap (for joy) and give honor to Him,
(in) that the marriage of the Lamb came,
and his woman [i.e. wife/bride] made herself ready (for it),
and it was given to her that she should throw (fine) linen about (her), bright and clean,
for the (fine) linen is the just (thing)s of the holy (one)s!'”

Again, as in vv. 1-3, a “throng of many (people)” (o&xlo$ pollo/$) uttered a song of praise, only now the multitude (of believers) has blended more completely into the heavenly scene, sounding also like “many waters” and “many thunderings”, both expressions characteristic of theophany—the presence and manifestation of God Himself (1:15; 4:5; 6:1; 11:19; 14:2). At the same time, the “many waters” in the vision of chapter 17 were interpreted as the nations and peoples of the earth (vv. 1, 15); this adds to the idea that we are still dealing with a great multitude of believers, the people of God, as in vv. 1-3 (cp. 7:9-10). However, now they speak with a voice that is virtually indistinguishable from the heavenly voice of God.

What the multitude sings is a hymn of praise to God, as in vv. 1-3, again opening with “Hallelu-Yah!”. The focus is on God’s kingship and kingdom, as it has finally been realized over all the nations and kingdoms on earth. The fall of the Great City, and with it the defeat of the nations (vv. 17-21), has demonstrated the ultimate authority of God and His anointed one, the exalted Jesus (the Lamb), over the earth. The verbal tenses throughout vv. 6, 7b-8 are aorist forms, indicating something which has taken place (in the past). However, here they could be understood as ingressive-stative aorists, i.e. that things are entering into a particular state; or, perhaps, as consummative or effective aorists, indicating that a climax has been reached, etc. Certainly, the great Judgment, marking the end of the current Age, makes for a dramatic climax to the visionary narrative. In terms of the narrative, the marriage (ga/mo$) of the Lamb is something that is about to happen. On the language in verse 7, cf. Isaiah 61:10 (Koester, p. 728).

There are numerous layers of meaning and significance to the motif here of marriage and wedding ceremony. To begin with, at the close of chapter 18, as part of a list of daily activities that will come to an end with the fall of the Great City are “the voice of bride-groom and bride”, i.e. wedding festivities and the institution of marriage. While they are gone from the fallen earthly City, they remain in the heavenly City, and, indeed, there is to be a great wedding between the exalted Jesus (the Lamb) and believers (the woman). I have intentionally rendered gunh/ as “woman” rather than “wife”, despite the odd/inappropriate sound this has in English. The main reason is that I feel it is important to retain the connection with the prior woman-figures in chapters 12 and 17-18. In chapter 12, the Woman represented the People of God, especially in her heavenly aspect (Heavenly City); by contrast, the Woman (the prostitute) in chaps. 17-18 represents the forces of evil and wickedness in the world (Earthly City). After the fall of the wicked/earthly Woman, the scene shifts back to the pure/heavenly Woman; and it is this woman, the purified believers in Christ, who are to be married. This sexual imagery was introduced in 14:1-5, and reaches it climax here in chapter 19.

The richness of this motif may be summarized by noting the following strands of tradition which relate to it (cf. Koester, pp. 728-9):

    • The period of betrothal (prior to marriage) during which the bride (as also the bride-groom) was expected to remain faithful; even while living apart during this engagement, bride and groom were required to act in faithfulness, as though they were already married. For believers in Christ, the betrothal-period began with Jesus’ departure to heaven, and continues through the end-time period of distress (qli/yi$). For the author and original audience of the book of Revelation, they were thought to be living in this period, presumably at an early point in the distress. The question was whether the bride (i.e. believers) would remain faithful to Christ, or be led astray under the influence of the wickedness (fornication/prostitution) of the “Great City”.
    • In numerous passages of the Old Testament, God (YHWH) was depicted as a husband with the people Israel as His bride. Cf. Hosea 2:19-20 (and chapters 1-3 as a whole); Isaiah 54:5; 61:10; 62:5; Jeremiah 2:2; 3:20; 31:32; Ezekiel 16:8-13. Many Jewish readers and commentators interpreted the Song of Songs along similar lines. The question of faithfulness/fidelity was central to this tradition as well.
    • The eschatological application of marriage imagery (esp. the wedding festivities) to the end-time appearance of God (and/or his Anointed representative) bringing salvation/deliverance for the faithful. The seeds of this line of tradition begin in the Old Testament Prophets (e.g. Isaiah 25:6), and continue in Jewish apocalyptic literature, etc (2 Baruch 29:1-8; 1 Enoch 62:14-15). Jesus utilized this same imagery in his eschatological sayings and parables (Mark 14:25 par; Matt 8:11-12; Luke 13:28-29). Of special significance in this regard was the idea of waiting faithfully for the bride-groom’s appearance, which could be readily applied to believers in the end-time period prior to Jesus’ return (Matt 25:1-13). Interestingly, this wedding/marriage imagery does not appear to have been generally applied to Messianic figure-types in contemporary Jewish sources, and may have been a uniquely Christian development.
    • Another Christian tradition is a corollary of the God-as-Husband motif (second item above), so that Jesus is the husband (bride-groom) and the faithful people (of Israel, etc) the bride. There is evidence for this application already in the Gospel tradition (Mark 2:19-20; Matt 19:15; Luke 5:34-35; John 3:29; Gospel of Thomas log. 104; cf. also the contextual setting of John 2:1-11). Admittedly, the motif is not prominent elsewhere in the New Testament, though Paul clearly makes use of it in 2 Cor 11:2 (cf. also Eph 5:28-32). Believers as the “Bride” of Christ became a common-place idea in early Christian writings (e.g. 2 Clement 14:2), and has continued on in Christian tradition to the present.

What is specifically emphasized here in verses 7-8 is how the woman (or “wife”, gunh/) makes herself ready (vb e(toima/zw) for the marriage. This should be understood on two levels: (1) the period of betrothal (cf. above), during which she remains pure and faithful, and (2) preparation for the actual wedding festivities. Both aspects are indicated by the bright and clean (i.e. white) linen garments she is to wear. There is special eschatological (and Messianic) significance to the verb e(toima/zw in the New Testament. This goes back to the association of Isaiah 40:3 (LXX) with the preaching of John the Baptist as one who “prepares the way” for the Messiah (Mk 1:3 par; Lk 1:17, 76). In Luke 9:52, Jesus’ disciples similarly “prepare the way” for him as he begins his journey to Jerusalem (for which there may also be an allusion in Mark 14:12, 15-16 par). Otherwise, the eschatological usage tends to be on God (and/or Jesus) preparing a place in his kingdom for the faithful (Matt 25:34; Luke 17:8; John 14:2-3; 1 Cor 2:9; Heb 11:16). The idea of believers being prepared for the coming of the bride-groom (and the wedding festivities) is certainly central to the parable in Matt 25:1-13.

The motif of pure white (linen) garments is traditional (Ezek 16:10, etc), with white (i.e. shining bright) clothing typical of heavenly beings (Dan 7:9; Matt 17:2; John 20:12; Acts 1:10, etc). It indicates purity and holiness, but also can serve as a sign of honor. Believers are said to wear (or put on) white garments at several points in the book of Revelation (3:4-5, 18; 4:4; 6:11; 7:9, 13-14). In the context of the visions, and according to the traditional imagery, this marks believers’ as belonging to the People of God, in its heavenly aspect. Cf. Koester, p. 314.

In verse 8 it is stated specifically that these bright linen garments are the dikaiw/mata of the holy ones. The plural noun dikaiw/mata would be translated as “things (that are) right”, “things (that are) just”, sometimes more pointedly as “just deeds”, “right actions”, etc. The word is relatively rare in the New Testament, occurring only 10 times, half of which are by Paul in Romans (1:32; 2:26; 5:16, 18; 8:4). In the only other occurrence in the book of Revelation (15:4), the dikaiw/mata belong to God or are characteristic of Him. Here the word is best understood in the sense that believers have been faithful to God, in obedience to Him and the witness of Jesus His Anointed.

References marked “Koester” above (and throughout this series) are to Craig R. Koester, Revelation, Anchor Bible [AB] Vol. 38A (Yale: 2014). This outstanding critical commentary has been especially useful in locating and confirming many related references in Classical and Jewish literature.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

December 7: Revelation 19:1-3

Revelation 19

There are three visionary scenes in this chapter, which effectively concludes the depiction of the great Judgment upon the earth. The seal-vision cycle offered a brief description (6:12-17), foreshadowing the trumpet- and bowl-cycles where the earthly Judgment was portrayed in full. It also featured in the intermediate visions of chapter 14 (vv. 8ff, 14-20). The visions and announcements of the fall of “Babylon” in chapters 17-18 belong as part of the bowl-cycle (chaps. 15-16) and must be understood in relation to that visionary narrative cycle. The same is true, to a large extent, for the visions in chapter 19. The Great City’s fall was depicted in the seventh bowl vision (16:17-21), and extended into chaps. 17-18. Meanwhile the scene of the judgment of the Nations in the sixth bowl vision (16:12-16) was left unfinished and unresolved. This delay is, in part, a narrative device which builds suspense, akin to the delay between the sixth and seventh visions in the earlier cycles. The fall of the City and defeat of the Nations (in battle) are two sets of images for the same basic idea—the end-time Judgment of the Nations by God.

Each of the main cycles of visions is preceded by a heavenly scene, in which the People of God (i.e. the righteous/believers) are gathered together and worship God and/or the exalted Jesus (the Lamb). The throne scene in chapter 4 (and 5) precedes the seal-vision cycle; chapter 7 precedes the trumpet-cycle (along with a brief heavenly scene in 8:3ff); while chapter 15 (esp. verses 1-4) precedes the bowl-cycle. Similarly, in the chapter 14 visions, the scene with the 144,000 and the Lamb (vv. 1-5) precedes the Judgment visions. So it is also here in chapter 19:

    • Heavenly scene: Worship of God and announcement of the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (vv. 1-10)
    • The Judgment: Vision 1—The end-time appearance of the exalted Jesus, in his Messianic role of conquering King (vv. 11-16)
    • The Judgment: Vision 2—The defeat and destruction of the Nations (vv. 17-21)

Revelation 19:1-10

The first scene in verses 1-10 may be divided further into several components, including three specific instances where the People praise God; or, perhaps better, two parallel instances with an intervening moment:

    • The voice of a great throng [o&xlo$ pollo/$] of people praises God (vv. 1-3)
      • The twenty-four Elders praise Him (vv. 4-5)
    • The voice of a great throng [o&xlo$ pollo/$] again gives praise (vv. 6-8)

Verses 9-10 are a separate episode, an exchange between a heavenly Messenger and the seer (John). We begin in this note with the first song of praise by the “throng (of) many (people)” (vv. 1-3).

Revelation 19:1-3

“With [i.e. after] these (thing)s, I heard as (though) a great voice of a throng of many (people) in heaven saying:
‘Hallelu-Yah! The salvation and the honor and the power of our God—
(for it is) that true and just are His judgments,
(in) that He judged the great Prostitute who corrupted the earth in her prostitution,
and He worked out justice (for) the blood of His slaves out of her hand’ —
and a second (time) they have uttered ‘Hallelu-Yah!’ —
‘and her smoke steps up into the Ages of Ages!'”

This heavenly “throng of many (people)” represent the collective People of God, who speak in unison with a united voice (a “great voice”, fwnh/ mega/lh). On numerous occasions a great voice was heard coming out of heaven; generally this would be understood as the voice of God Himself, but here it is clearly that of a multitude, i.e. God’s People. I have previously discussed how many of the symbols in the book of Revelation have both earthly and heavenly aspects. That is certainly the case with the People of God, a comprehensive symbol for believers, but not limited to the idea of believers on earth; moreover, in their heavenly aspect, the People of God is hard to distinguish from the other groups and multitudes of heavenly beings. No such distinction is made here, with parallels in 7:9-10 and 15:3 (where human believers are clearly in view), and also 12:10ff (where Angels are suggested by the immediate context).

These are instances of praise to God, as is indicated by the use of the Greek a(llhloui+a/, a transliteration of the Hebrew expression Hy` Wll=h^ (Hal®lû Y¹h), meaning something like “Give a shout to Yah(weh)!” It opens a number of Psalms in the last division of the Psalter (111-113, 135, 146-150); it is used both in the opening and closing of Psalm 106. The Greek transliteration occurs only here in Revelation 19 (4 times) within the New Testament. The initial words of praise in v. 1 are similar to those in 12:10, juxtaposing swthri/a (“salvation”) and du/nami$ (“power”), along with do/ca (“honor/esteem”, = basilei/a in 12:10); cf. also 7:10, 12; 4:9, 11; 5:12-13. God’s people refer the salvation and power and honor/esteem they experience back to God as its source. This draws upon the traditional covenant idea, the bond between sovereign and vassal. In ancient Israel the covenant model was applied to the people as a whole, in their relationship with God (YHWH).

The core of this song of praise emphasizes justice and the role of God as judge, the fundamental context being the great end-time Judgment upon the wicked. Three distinct statements are made in the lines of verse 2:

    • God’s judgments (kri/sei$) are true and just (di/kaiai)
    • He judged the great Prostitute for her prostitution, i.e. for her actual crime, showing that his judgment is fair
    • He worked out justice for the victims of her crimes—i.e. for believers persecuted and put to death

The profligacy and extent of the Woman’s (the Great City’s) “prostitution” (pornei/a) was noted in 17:2, 4, 15ff and 18:3, 9 (also 14:8), involving all the kings and nations of the earth (cf. Jer 51:24-25). The same cup that poured out the wine of immorality also poured out blood—the violence done against believers in Christ (16:6; 17:6; 18:20, 24). The dual imagery of wine/blood is especially vivid in the vision of 14:17-20 (cf. also 18:4ff). Overall, the wording of verse 2 echoes that of 18:20:

    • “God judged your judgment out of her” (18:20)
    • “(God) worked out justice for the blood of his slaves out of her hand” (19:2)

The prepositional expression “out of her (hand)” refers to the reason for the judgment—i.e. her punishment comes out of (or as a result of) her own actions (“her hand”). The verb e)kdike/w (“work out justice”) is generally synonymous here with kri/nw (“judge”); since God is true and just, his judgment establishes justice.

The final expression of praise in verse 3, prefaced by another shout of “Hallelu Yah!”, draws upon the image of a destroyed and burning city (as in 18:9, 18). The announcement of “Babylon’s” fall in chapters 17-18 clearly depicts it as the result of a military attack (17:16). The specific motif of the city’s smoke rising up (eternally) is derived from the Abraham narrative (19:28); the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah came to be a traditional symbol for the end-time Judgment. A similar sense of finality is expressed in Isaiah 34:10, in the context of a nation-oracle that takes on eschatological significance. The same imagery was used in 14:11 for the heavenly aspect of the Judgment—that is, the eternal punishment that awaits for the wicked.

If the fall/destruction of the Great City represents the judgment on the Nations, it is depicted again, in different terms, in verses 17-21 (to be discussed). This is parallel to the visions in chapter 14, which, indeed, have a similar structure:

    • Declaration of the Great City’s fall (14:8; 19:1-3ff)
    • Vision of the coming of the exalted Jesus, marking the onset of the Judgment (14:14-16; 19:11-16)
    • The Judgment of the Nations, in terms of a great battle, resulting in carnage and destruction of the wicked (14:17-20; 19:17-21)

The first episode is an oracle of the Judgment, the third a description of the Judgment itself. There is thus no need to consider the fall of the Great City and the defeat of the Nations as separate events (indeed, they are combined in 16:17-21). However, it is possible that the author (and his readers) would have expected to see “Babylon” (i.e. Rome) fall at the beginning of this Judgment, with the defeat/destruction of the remaining nations following thereafter. This will be discussed further when we examine various interpretive approaches to the eschatology of the book, at the conclusion of this series.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

September 25: Revelation 5:11-14

Revelation 5:1-14 (concluded)

Rev 5:11-13

Following the song sung by the Living Beings and Elders (cf. the previous note on vv. 9-10), a vast multitude, both in heaven and on earth (and below the earth), joins in the singing. First we read of “many Messengers” (i.e. Angels, heavenly beings), almost beyond numbering—indicated by the expression “ten thousands of ten thousands and thousands of thousands (more)”. As they add their voices, it is as though we are hearing a refrain to the song in vv. 9-10, as it follows a similar pattern:

“…a&cio$ [i.e. worthy] is the Lamb th(at) has been slaughtered to receive the power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honor and esteem and (a) good account!” (v. 12)

Not coincidentally, there are seven attributes listed here, in keeping with the seven horns and eyes possessed by the Lamb, as well as the seven seals on the scroll. In some ways, the sequence of seven is more important than the individual attributes, as it clearly indicates the divine status and character of the Lamb, who is worthy (on a&cio$, cf. the previous note) to receive the same declaration of praise, worship and homage that the heavenly beings would give to God on His throne. This is a fundamental theme of the chap. 4-5 vision, as well as the book of Revelation as a whole. The seven attributes are traditional, and require little comment; I begin with the first four, which properly reflect divine attributes:

    • du/nami$ (“power”)—For God (or Christ) to receive power from others is a reflection of the (ritual) language and imagery of vassalage. The beings around the throne receive their position of rule/power from God, and thus give it back to him, as an indication of their submission and obedience, etc. It is also a natural characteristic of (religious) praise to emphasize the greatness of the Divine. The word du/nami$ indicates not only strength, but also the ability or authority to do something.
    • plou=to$ (“wealth, riches”)—This is a collective noun related to the verb plh/qw (“filling, fullness”). The customary translation “wealth” or “riches” can be somewhat misleading, suggesting a static possession, whereas here it denotes the fullness of God’s presence, power, etc—the source of all life and blessing. To recognize this of God (and Christ) effectively gives “wealth” back to him.
    • sofi/a (“wisdom”)—In its more original (and practical) sense, sofi/a refers to a thorough knowledge or skill in a particular area. Eventually, it came to have a more strongly intellectual denotation. Among early Christians, in particular, the word took on an increasingly spiritual dimension. True knowledge and ability comes from God, through Christ, by way of the presence of the (Holy) Spirit at work in and among believers.
    • i)sxu/$ (“strength, ability”)—Fundamentally, this refers to something which a person holds, or possesses—the ability to do something, in terms of capability. It is tied more directly to a person’s life-force, than is the similar term du/nami$ (above). The declaration here recognizes God (and Christ) as the source of life, and our own (natural) strength and ability which we give back (through worship, service, etc).

The final three words are, in a sense, synonymous, forming a triad which reflects how devout religious persons (believers) view God/Christ:

    • timh/ (“honor”)—This word fundamentally means “value” or “worth”, but is usually translated in the New Testament as “honor”. It refers to the worth we place on God and Jesus, i.e. the extent, or the way in which we value them.
    • do/ca (“esteem”)—Often translated “glory”, the word more properly refers to the way in which we consider or regard someone/something. However, in traditional religious usage, this represents only one side of the equation. How we regard God and Jesus is based on the nature and character which they possess—i.e., they are esteemed because they are worthy of esteem. In Hebrew, the word typically translated as “glory” actually means “weight” (db)K*), i.e. the weight or value which God possesses in His person.
    • eu)logi/a (“good account”)—The word is derived from eu)loge/w, “give a good account”, i.e. “speak/think well (of someone)”. Customarily, eu)logi/a is translated as “blessing”, but that covers up to some extent the concrete sense of the word. Because of their nature and character, and what they have done for us, God and Jesus are deserving of good words (of praise, proclamation of the Gospel [“good message”], etc) from us.

In verse 13, all creatures—in heaven, on earth, and under the earth (cf. verse 3)—join the song, further expanding the vast number of voices. Their refrain serves as a climax to the entire vision of chaps. 4-5, joining God and the Lamb (the exalted Jesus) together as the focus of worship:

“To the (One) sitting upon the ruling-seat, and to the Lamb—(be) the good account and the honor and the esteem and the might [kra/to$] into the Ages of the Ages!”

The three attributes (cf. above), which reflect how created beings (should) view and respond to God and the Lamb (Jesus), are repeated here; and a fourth is added: kra/to$. I am inclined to view this word as a summary of the four divine attributes in v. 13 (cf. above); in which case, the multitude of living creatures here echoes that earlier refrain. The meaning of kra/to$ (often translated “might”) differs somewhat from the words du/nami$ (“power”) and i)sxu/$ (“strength”)—I would define this as signifying the manifest presence of power and strength. As such, it is commonly used in reference to Deity. It is rather rare in the New Testament, occurring just 12 times, but its earlier use in Rev 1:6 is worth noting. Indeed, it may well be that its presence here, following do/ca, is meant as a deliberate echo of the closing words of 1:6. The entire greeting of 1:4-6 has the same two-part structure as chaps. 4-5, and shares many of the same phrases and ideas.

Rev 5:14

This verse serves as a coda to the vision, repeating the gesture of homage by the four Living Beings and twenty-four Elders. In 4:9-10, it was given to God on His throne, while in 5:8, it is directed toward the Lamb; now, here, we must understand it as an act of worship for them both, together. It is a solemn and fitting conclusion to the grand dual-vision in chapters 4-5.

September 22: Revelation 4:8-11

Revelation 4:1-11 (continued)

(For the discussion on verses 1-7, see the previous note)

Rev 4:8

The throne-vision in chapter 4 reaches its climax with the four “living (being)s” and the worship which they give to God on the throne. I noted the general similarity between the description in vv. 6-7 with that of “living (being)s” (toYj^) in Ezek 1:4-11ff. However, for v. 8, there is a more immediate parallel in Isa 6:1-3, with the description of the six-winged “fiery (being)s” (v. 2, cp. Ezek 1:11). The “living beings” here in chapter 4 perform a function similar to to the “fiery beings” in Isa 6; even their declaration of praise is similar:

    • “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God, the All-mighty…” (v. 8)
    • “Holy, holy, holy is YHWH (creator) of the (heavenly) Armies…” (Isa 6:3)

Both Ezek 1 and Isa 6 record theophanies, presented as prophetic visions of God on his throne. These are perhaps the clearest examples in the Old Testament Scriptures of the heavenly rule and splendor of YHWH, and certainly it is no coincidence that the throne-vision in the book of Revelation is described in similar terms. There is, however, a significant difference between the declarations in Rev 4:8 and Isa 6:3, in the second half:

    • Isaiah has: “…all of the earth is full of his weight [i.e. glory]”
    • Revelation has a variation on the earlier declaration in 1:4 (cf. also verse 8 and 11:17; 16:5):
      “the (One who) was, and the (One) being, and the (One) coming”

The expression in Isaiah is spatial and concrete, while that in Revelation is temporal and more abstract (existential); but both emphasis the comprehensive and all-encompassing nature of God. The motif of God as Creator is found in the parallel declaration by the 24 ‘Elders’ (verse 11, cf. below).

Rev 4:9-11

The praise and worship given to God by the “living beings” is echoed by the “elder (one)s” (‘Elders’), reflecting two distinct groups of beings who surround the throne of God. I have argued that the descriptions of these two groups of heavenly beings effectively represent, or symbolize:

    • All of created life (animal and human), particularly in its greatest and noblest aspects—Four Living Beings
    • The People of God, especially in the honor and rule which it shares with God—Twenty-Four [12 x 2] Elders

The two groups are clearly parallel in the description of their worship:

    • “And when the Living (Being)s give esteem [do/ca] and honor [timh/] and good (thanks for His) favor
      • to the (One) sitting upon the ruling-seat, the (One) living into the Ages of the Ages…”
    • “…the twenty-four Elder (One)s will fall (down)…and kiss toward [i.e. worship]
      • the (One) sitting upon the ruling-seat, the (One) living into the Ages of the Ages…”

I have above reordered the wording of verse 10 slightly in order to bring out the parallel. We may also identify a different sort of (chiastic) structure, bringing in verse 11:

    • Declaration of praise/worship: “a%gio$…”
      —The Living Beings give honor and thanks to the Living God on his throne
      —The Elders give homage and worship to the Living God on his throne
    • Declaration of praise/worship: “a&cio$…”

The assonance between a%gio$ (hágios) and a&cio$ (áxios) is, of course, lost in English translation. The first adjective is typically rendered “holy”, emphasizing the holiness and purity of God, that which separates him from all other (created) beings (Heb. vodq* in Isa 6:3). The second adjective (a&cio$) is more difficult to translate. It literally refers to something which brings into (equal) balance (as on the scales); however, it is commonly used in the more general, abstract sense of something which is proper or appropriate for a given situation (i.e. giving it the proper weight or balance). Recall that the word usually translated “glory” in Hebrew db)K* literally means “weight”. Created beings (especially human beings), should regard God in a way that is worthy of his awesome “weight”—i.e. his power and splendor, his holiness, etc. In such a context the Greek a&cio$ is typically translated “worthy”; rendering it this way in verse 11, we have the concluding declaration by the Elders (i.e. the heavenly People of God):

“Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive the esteem [do/ca] and the honor [timh/] and the power (we give to you) , (in) that [i.e. because] you formed all (thing)s, and (it is) through your will (that) they are and were formed!”

Note, again, the similarity to the declaration by the Living Beings, especially in the first half. The significance here of including the word du/nami$ (“power”) is often overlooked. Exactly what does it mean for other beings to give “power” to God? Is it not He who is all-powerful and gives power to others? Here it is necessary to consider the important gesture of the Elders who “throw (down) their crowns in the sight of [i.e. in front of] the ruling seat (of God)”. While it may seem that this is simply a spontaneous act of adoration, it likely has a deeper meaning as well. The gesture itself has a socio-political significance, whereby a subordinate (or vassal) indicates his submission to a superior. It indicates not only subordination, but also the relationship of vassalage—the vassal receives the power/authority to rule from the sovereign. Moreover, in Greco-Roman worship, wreaths would sometimes be placed at the feet of the gods (their statues, cf. Koester, p. 365). Both political and religious aspects are connoted by the gesture. The People of God in heaven rule because of the authority/power which God gives to them; the gesture of throwing down their crowns (symbolizing their rule) shows that the ruling power truly belongs to the Living God upon His throne.

The application to believers in Christ is obvious—we who are faithful will receive heavenly/eternal crowns from Jesus, indicating that we share in his rule. It is Jesus’ rule in heaven, alongside God the Father on His throne, which becomes the central theme and motif of the remainder of the vision in chapter 5, which we will examine in the next daily note.

“…Spirit and Life”: John 4:21-24

John 4:21-24

In discussing the “living water” (u%dwr zw=n) which Jesus gives (4:10-14, cf. the previous note), I mentioned that it is to be identified with the giving of the Spirit. This can be inferred from a number of passages in the Gospel (beginning with the earlier statement in 3:34), but it also is confirmed if we continue on in the discourse of chapter 4. Following the Samaritan woman’s (second) reaction in verse 15, there is a second exposition by Jesus in vv. 16-26, which takes the form of a mini-dialogue, and which may be characterized as a “Messianic dialogue”. The woman’s reaction continues the motif of misunderstanding, common to all of the Johannine discourses; she continues to think of this “water” in an ordinary (physical) sense, though perhaps now with a glimmer of its deeper meaning:

“(My) lord, give to me this water, (so) that I might not thirst, and would not (have to) come through (here) in (this place) to take up (water).”

The dialogue-exposition by Jesus, in response, may be outlined as follows:

  • Miracle—demonstration of Jesus’ (divine) foreknowledge (vv. 16-18)
    • Declaration by the woman:
      “I look (on and perceive) that you are (the) Foreteller” (v. 19)
      and statement relating to the role of the Messiah (v. 20)
      • Exposition by Jesus (vv. 21-24)
    • Declaration by the woman:
      “I see [i.e. know] that the Mashiaµ {Messiah} comes” (v. 25a)
      and statement regarding the role of the Messiah (v. 25b)
  • I Am saying—identification of Jesus as the Anointed One of God (v. 26)

As with several other episodes (and discourses) in the Gospel, a miracle, demonstrating Jesus’ God-given power, leads to an “I am” statement by which Jesus effectively declares his special status (and nature) in relation to God the Father. This is the framework for the dialogue in vv. 16-26, within which the portion spanning vv. 19-25 is, as I have already indicated, a kind of “Messianic dialogue”—with a central exposition by Jesus (vv. 21-24) flanked by two declarations by the woman. Each of these declarations has a Messianic significance.

There is some ambiguity regarding the first of these, as the word profh/th$ (“Foreteller”, i.e. Prophet), without the article, could mean either “a Prophet” or “the Prophet”. Jesus’ demonstration of foreknowledge in vv. 16-18 certainly would mark him as a prophet (lit. “foreteller”); yet the woman’s entire statement in vv. 19-20, taken as a whole (and in context) suggests that she believes that he might be the Prophet to Come—i.e. the end-time (Messianic) Prophet expected by the Samaritans. This Prophet-figure is derived from Deut 18:15-19, and the expectation of a “Prophet like Moses”, who would appear at the end time, was shared by many Israelites and Jews (cf. Part 3 of the series “Yeshua the Anointed”). A number of references to “the Anointed One” (Xristo/$, Christ/Messiah) in the Gospels may refer to such a Prophet-figure, rather than the more familiar Davidic Ruler figure-type. Similarly, there are specific references to “the Prophet”, especially in the Gospel of John (1:21, 25; 6:14; 7:40), which would seem to confirm this. Jesus is specifically identified as the Prophet of Deut 18:15ff in Acts 3:22-23.

In the second declaration (v. 25), the woman apparently uses the term M¹šîaµ (j^yv!m*), transliterated in Greek as Messi/a$ (and translated by the Gospel writer as Xristo/$, “Anointed One”). There is some question whether, at the historical level, a Samaritan would have used this title. According to (later) sources, the Samaritan “Messiah” had the title Taheb, presumably related to the root bWv (šû», Aramaic bWT, tû»), “turn (back), return”, and thus meaning either “the Returning One”, or “the One who returns/restores (things)”. For the Samaritans, this figure would have been related to the Messianic Prophet figure-type (from Deut 18:15ff), and not the Davidic Ruler type with its origins in Judean (Jewish) royal tradition. There is some thought that the Taheb was expected to restore true/proper religion for humankind, and this would seem to be reflected by the woman’s statements in vv. 20 and 25b. The sharp divisions between Israelites/Jews and Samaritans were both ethnic and religious in nature, most particularly, with regard to the central sacred location—Mt. Gerizim vs. Jerusalem (i.e. Mt. Zion). The woman brings out this religious difference in v. 20, perhaps expecting Jesus (if he is the Prophet) to arbitrate or judge the question. Her statement is worth citing in full:

“Our fathers kissed toward [i.e. worshiped] (God) in/on this mountain, and (yet) you [i.e. Jews] say that the place where it is necessary to kiss toward [i.e. worship] (God) (is) in Yerushalaim {Jerusalem}.”

This serves as the immediate basis for the exposition by Jesus in vv. 21-24. If she expects Jesus (as the Prophet) to explain/resolve this religious difference, it may be parallel to her statement in v. 25b regarding the role of the “Messiah” (Samaritan Taheb): “…when that (One) should come, he will offer up a message to us (about) all (thing)s”.

Let us now turn to the central exposition by Jesus, examining briefly, but carefully, the main statements. His initial statement in verse 21 is a direct response to the religious differences (between Samaritans and Jews) mentioned by the woman:

“Trust me, (my dear) woman, that an hour comes when (it will) not (be) in/on this mountain, and not in Yerushalaim {Jerusalem} (either), that you will kiss toward [i.e. worship] the Father”.

This declaration essentially abrogates and removes the religious-cultural differences between Samaritans and Jews, as represented by the central difference regarding the place for worship. It is presented from an eschatological point of view—”an hour comes”, i.e. in the future. At that time, worship will transcend specific (sacred) places, etc, rooted in ancient ethnic and religious traditions. For the present—that is, at the moment when he is speaking with the woman—it would seem that Jesus recognizes (and even affirms!) the religious differences (v. 22). He appears to speak from the Israelite/Jewish standpoint, which represents the “correct” religious tradition, expressed in the Johannine (dualistic) vocabulary of “knowing” vs. “not knowing”—i.e., worship done in ignorance, without true knowledge. He even goes so far as to state that “salvation” comes “out of the Jews”—that is, out of the Jewish milieu and religious heritage (in which Jesus was born).

If Jesus seems to confirm the religious-cultural distinctions in v. 22, he eliminates them again, repeating (even more forcefully) his statement in v. 21:

“But an hour comes, and now is, when the true kissers toward (God) [i.e. worshipers] will kiss toward [i.e. worship] the Father in (the) Spirit and (the) Truth—for (it is) even (that) the Father seeks these (very sorts of people) kissing toward him.” (v. 23)

I have translated the verb proskune/w literally, according to its probable fundamental meaning—to kiss (kune/w) toward (pro/$) someone, i.e. as a gesture of adoration, homage or respect. The ancient symbolism of the expression came to be used in the more general and abstract sense of “worship, adoration”, etc. However, I think it is worth preserving the sense of the action underlying the idiom. At any rate, what Jesus characterizes as true (a)lh/qino$) worship is said to occur, not in a specific place, but, rather, “in (the) Spirit and Truth” (e)n pneu/mati kai\ a)lhqei/a|).

Yet when and how will this true worship take place? Jesus has modified the eschatological orientation of v. 21; instead of saying “an hour comes”, he states: “an hour comes, and now is [kai\ nu=n e)stin]”—that is to say, it is here now, in the present. This is another example of the “realized” eschatology expressed numerous times in the Johannine discourses of Jesus. Believers experience now, in the present, what traditionally would be experienced by the righteous at the end time (in the Age to Come). The basis for this realized eschatology is trust in the person and work of Jesus. The Johannine Christological theme of Jesus (the Son) making God the Father known to believers is very much central to this passage. Worship in the Spirit, which is the only true worship (“in the Spirit and Truth”), can only be realized through the gift of the Spirit. Jesus (the Son) gives the Spirit, which is given to him by the Father (3:34-35)—the ultimate source of the Spirit is God the Father. Jesus expresses this clearly enough in the concluding verse 24:

“God (is) Spirit, and the (one)s kissing toward [i.e. worshiping] him, it is necessary (for them) to kiss toward [i.e. worship] (him) in (the) Spirit and Truth.”

We cannot truly worship God, who is Spirit, unless we are in the Spirit. This is not a temporary, charismatic phenomenon, but an essential and permanent condition—it is the very Life (eternal, divine Life) given to us by Jesus (the Son) from the Father.