ECCLESIASTES 8: COMMENTS FROM JACQUES ELLUL

Jacques Ellul WAs a Christian author that most of you have probably never heard of before. He was a leader in the French resistance during WWII and later a professor of history and sociology who died in 1994. Some terms that he used to describe himself or that others have attached to him include: Bible commentator, Calvinist, philosopher, existentialist, socialist, anarchist, and universalist. That last term means that he believed everyone would be saved in the end..

Despite his lack of solid evangelical credentials, or perhaps because of that fact, several of his books are definitely worth considering just to gain a different slant on things. Most of his writings in one way or another warn the reader against the evils of political power, economic power, materialism, technology, nationalism and scientism. And thus, Ellul is probably best known for his sociological and theological writings such as The Technological Bluff, The Subversion of Christianity, and Money & Power.

But I have personally gotten the most out of his Bible commentaries, the most prominent of which are The Meaning of the City and Apocalypse. That is not to say that I agree with everything he says, but he always has a unique slant on every text that he tackles. One of his lesser known works is a commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes titled Reason for Being, and below are some miscellaneous quotations in it relating to the eighth chapter of Ecclesiastes.

Ecclesiastes 8:1 – “Qohelet [i.e. The Teacher] shows us wisdom as the search for an explanation...(8:1). This view is utterly modern, since it has nothing to do with metaphysics or rhetoric. Rather, the idea of explanation suggests 'scientific' rigor and precision. After all, the term 'explanation' covers both of science's early objectives: the why and the how.”

We can see that same “scientific” approach even better in the earlier chapters of the book where the author sets out to “consider” and “test” one aspect of life after the other in an attempt to find out something he can state for sure. But he always ends up in a state of frustration, uncertainty and confusion. We are reminded somewhat of Job, who tried his best to do the same regarding his personal situation, but had to throw it all in God's lap in the end for an (at least partial) insight into His ways.

Ecclesiastes 8:5 – “Since life is fragile and finite, marked by death, respect it all the more by adopting modest and humble rules of behavior. 'The one who observes the precept knows nothing evil, and the heart of the sage knows time and judgment' (8:5). Accept that there are rules to follow, and when you obey God's commands, you will keep from committing any evil deed.”

“Qohelet does not refer to the Torah here, but I believe he has precepts based on it in mind. To live your life well, you need to observe certain times...and make certain necessary judgments and assessments. These things make life possible. Qohelet goes no further; for example, he does not say that life is marvelous. On the contrary, everything he teaches us points to the opposite! But he states that if we observe the Law, the times for things, and make certain judgments, we can live, and life is not so bad. But we must never claim to go beyond this humble possibility,”

Of course, Qohelet is writing strictly from an Old Testament perspective without the clear teachings in the New Testament regarding the possibility of a better life beyond this one.

Ecclesiastes 8:5b-6 – “I find three simple remarks necessary if we are to understand the meaning of 'judgment' in the texts we want to examine and such an introduction was necessary for the reader to understand why I place judgment within the gift of God. One of the texts concerning judgment does not refer to God: 'The heart of the sage knows time and judgment. Indeed, there is a time and a judgment for everything. For a person's evil is heavy upon him'. Thus there is not only a time for each thing, but also a judgment. In this text the judgment seems not to involve God, but rather the sage's capacity to bring judgment to bear on things.”

Ecclesiastes 8:12 – “Qohelet assures us that happiness will come to those who experience this fear of God: 'I myself know...that there will be happiness for those who fear God because they experience fear before him' (8:12) Thus the very fact that one is filled with this fear produces happiness. I do not believe a reward is involved; the meaning is not 'If you fear God, he will make you happy.' I believe Qohelet has sufficiently demonstrated the opposite! Rather, the person who fears God experiences happiness because this fear itself is the presence of God. For the person who experiences it, this fear gives assurance of the Lord's presence...Those who tremble in God's presence are in his presence. But their trembling stems from their 'fear' as much as from their emotion, 'enthusiasm,' bedazzlement, or fullness. They tremble at the approach of God. Here we see extreme joy and happiness – in the recognition of one's helplessness and unworthiness...”

Again, Ellul's interpretation reminds me powerfully of the passage at the end of Job where our protagonist says to God, “I had heard of thee by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees thee; therefore I despise myself, and repent in dust and ashes.” (Job 42:5-6)

Ecclesiastes 8:12b-13 – “Now we come up against a new obstacle: Qohelet presents the mechanism of retribution that Job criticized so much and rejected: 'Although I know that there will be happiness for those who fear God, because they fear before him. And there will be no happiness for the wicked person; like a shadow, he will not prolong his days, because he does not fear before God.' (8:12b-13). This is absolutely staggering! This man who questions everything, this antiestablishment person who goes to the bottom of things, now comes up with a platitude that flies in the face of reality. Qohelet must have known how Job protested, yet he offers precisely the arguments of Job's friends.”

Rather than falling back on what some commentators do (namely, assuming that a pious editor has added these words), Ellul responds that Qohelet “calls himself into question, and in an act typical of faith, he proclaims the opposite of what the evidence seems to show. Our experience indicates that the unjust reigns and lives on, and that the good person fails to be recognized. Faith rears up in the face of this evidence and declares: 'True, that is how things are, but I know...' making its appeal to another dimension – something qualitative and not observable. As I have often emphasized, faith like this, that stands in the face of all the evidence to the contrary is the very essence of hope.”

Ecclesiastes 8:14 – “Qohelet is not a book on morality! Although he declares certain situations 'evil,' our author says almost nothing about 'good.' ...All we see in Qohelet is that doing good, being just, etc., are useless and have no meaning in the long run.” After quoting 8:14, Ellul continues: “Of course Qohelet does not approve of the situation. He does not even state objectively 'that is how things are.' No, he finds in such events an evidence of vanity. This vanity takes many forms and turns up everywhere. The passage just quoted points to one of them: just and unjust people are treated in the same way. There is no justice – no reward we can expect if we do good and act justly. Everything is inverted, perverted, or muddled by the enormous effect of vanity.”

Concerning this 'vanity' with which we are surrounded here on earth, Ellul concludes, “Certainly Qohelet does not tell us we must not do good: just that we must not expect anything from it or be shocked by the triumph of the evil person and the defeat of the just person. We must not have blind faith in some triumphant future for humanity...This lesson on vanity does not constitute pessimism, but rather a warning. Qohelet shows us the reality of what surrounds us so we will not take it seriously, so we will not believe it. We must not attach our love, our truth, or our person to this reality. Do not devote yourself to all this, since that would amount to chasing after wind!”

The above message is a good one for some of the liberal mainline churches to keep in mind. Just manning a soup kitchen for the poor may be a good work for a Christian. Just don't expect that it will automatically give you any sort of lasting satisfaction, recognition here on earth, or save the world. Instead, you may be cursed by even those you are attempting to serve.

Ecclesiastes 8:15 – “Each happy day should move us to give thanks. This is what Qohelet says, repeating it like a refrain – at least as often as 'All is vanity': 'I praised joy!...And this accompanies a person in his work during all the days of his life that God has given him under the sun' (8:15). This passage brings out an attitude found frequently in the Old Testament and repeated in the New, but abandoned by theologians...Rather than saying bluntly 'this is a gift from God, Qohelet suggests 'I see [or I know] this to be a gift from God.' I believe we should understand in this same sense the texts where he makes such a statement directly...This basic understanding moves us from an ontological to an existential approach. Qohelet does not say that things 'are,' but that he sees or conceives them in a certain way. He interprets them...For the believer, the result is a confession of faith.”

Ecclesiastes 8:17a – “Fundamental reality, the relationship between the Creator and the world, remains unknowable and impenetrable. We can only 'know' that a given action of God exists – no more...Reality is as unknowable as the future, because of God's omnipotence. 'A person cannot manage to arrive at what God does..he seeks and seeks, but he does not understand' (8:17a)'. These words do not constitute a condemnation of trying and wanting to understand. But first we must realize that if God the Wholly Other, does things, we cannot expect to fathom them.

Ecclesiastes 8:17 – And as a fitting ending to this particular post, here is more of what Ellul has to say regarding the whole of verse 17: “Wisdom seems ultimately impossible: 'I saw...that a person cannot discover the work that is done under the sun, since he tires in the search and fails to find anything. And even if the sage says he knows, he cannot find.' As for us moderns, we have discovered a great many things. But, as we have already seen, the horizon continually moves farther from us. In this connection, Qohelet seems to posit a kind of absolute: no matter what he does, he cannot find the ultimate secret, the key that would enable him to understand everything. As little as I know, what strikes me most is that the further we advance, the more everything we know becomes complex and elusive.”

I remember when I was in high school and really thought that I knew everything there was to know in the Bible since I had literally attended church from the time I was a week old. Then as I began reading the Bible for myself, I realized that all our pastors tended to stick to a very narrow scope of Scripture passages and ignore those which might tend to confuse the congregation. There were huge chunks of material that I didn't even know were in the Bible. Then years later, when I was sure I knew everything there was to know in Scripture, I began purchasing and reading scholarly Bible commentaries and realized that there were many more nuances and ways of interpreting the Bible than I knew ever existed. That was over 50 years ago and I am still learning more every day.

I shouldn't have been surprised at that revelation, since my own chosen profession was chemical research, and I realized soon enough that every time a scholar solved one research problem, it generally brought up ten more questions that also needed pinning down or even opened up a whole new field of research for investigation. That fact, of course, guaranteed a certain amount of job security for a researcher, but on the other hand it could be frustrating for those who dearly desire to see the eventual end of the process.

As Paul writes in I Corinthians 13:12, “ For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood.” (RSV)

ECCLESIASTES 8: VERSE-BY-VERSE COMMENTS

Mainstream commentators on this chapter have brought out a number of useful perspectives on the Teacher's words. Below is a sampling of such insights:

Ecclesiastes 8:1 Several scholars note that there is some controversy as to whether this verse rightly begins Chapter 8 or concludes Ecclesiastes 7, but as David Moore concludes, “This verse could easily serve as a wrap-up to chapter 7 or as an introduction to this chapter. In either case, it reminds us of the benefits that people derive from living wisely.”.

Seow: “The precise meaning of the Hebrew peset is uncertain. It occurs only here in the Biblical Hebrew.” But there are similar words in the Apocrypha, Syriac, Aramaic, and the Dead Sea texts which lead one to feel that 'solution' is the best interpretation.

Ecclesiastes 8:2-9 “The wise man will have a wholesome respect for the absolute power of the monarch, and will conduct himself with discretion in his relations with him. The king has the power of life and death, which ordinary people do not. It is implied that the wise man belongs to the upper classes, with access to the court.” (Scott)

2. The textual note to RSV explains that the Hebrew text here begins with “I keep” vs. the wording as a command (“Keep”) most translations employ.

The Jerusalem Bible adds: “The king wields a sacred authority. The 'oath of God' may be the promise given by God to the king, 2 S 9; Ps 89, or else the oath sworn to God either by the king or by his subjects.”

3. “RSV interprets the verse as simple advice to the courtier to waste no time in carrying out the king's commands even when the errand is an unpleasant one. This, however, involves a somewhat strained interpretation of 'go from his presence'. Of the alternative interpretations, that which takes the verse to be a warning against conspiracy is perhaps the most probable: 'Do not be in a hurry to desert him and involve yourself in a plot which is bound to fail, since he will get his own way' (cf. Prov. 20:2; 24:21-22; 25:2).” (Whybray)

4. Kostenberger says in relation to John 6:30, “'What are you going to perform?' represents a common OT expression of incredulity (cf. Job 9:12; Eccles. 8:4; Isa. 45:9...”

5,7. “The word for 'misery' (ra'ah) is related to the word for 'harm' (ra) in verse 5. This misery comes because people are ignorant of 'what will happen' and 'when it will happen'.” (Glenn)

6. Fleming: “Perhaps the verse means that although troubles and failures are inevitable, there is sure to be a loophole somewhere so that a wise man will find his way out. More likely, however, it connects with the following verse and has to do with man's ignorance of the future.”

8. “It is wrong to claim...that the Bible discourages us from viewing time in cyclic terms; instead it offers the possibility of investing such earthly time with a transcendent and even divine perspective and significance. It is a mark of human wisdom to 'know the time' for performing a human act (Eccles 8:5) and to be among those who know the times (Esther 1:13).” (Dictionary of Biblical Imagery)

Regarding the phrase 'no substitution,' (mislahat bammilhama), Seow says that it “is difficult to interpret. Most commentators take it to mean that there is no exemption or discharge from war.” In this particular case he feels it means: “Each person must face the day of death personally.”

8-9. Glenn says, “The reason for such misery is the inescapable consequences of wickedness that arise from such ignorance; just as no man can control the wind (cf. Prov 27:16), postpone the day of his death, or be discharged while in the midst of battle, so no man can escape the consequences of his wickedness. The first three clauses in Ecclesiastes 8:8 are parallel in Hebrew and are comparative to the last clause.”

9. Hendry wisely states that “an authoritarian order of society may be irrational and even evil (v. 9b); nevertheless loyalty to it is preferable to insurrection. Cf. Rom; 13. This is hardly an acceptable doctrine nowadays; yet it is a profound challenge to those who identify change with progress. The idea of reform was no doubt strange to the mind of the writer, who construes criticism of authority as simple insurrection. But his reflections are no less applicable to it....It is a fact that reforms which are designed to remove one evil often put others in its place.”

Ecclesiastes 8:10-15 “Since a man therefore cannot count on his virtue being recompensed, he must find his only compensation for life's struggle in the daily enjoyment of living.” (Scott)

10. Scott also points out that there has been the suggestion that 'the sacred place' is an euphemism for 'the unclean place', i.e. the cemetery.

The note in JB states, “The whole verse is obscure and has been corrected here [to read 'And then I see the wicked brought to burial and people come from the Temple to honor them in the city for having been the men they were.'] following the Greek, cf. Jb 21:27-34. Other translations 'Then, too, I have seen the wicked carried to the grave; they used to go forth from the holy place and were honored in the city' or 'Then, too, I have seen the wicked approaching and entering but they went away from the Holy Place; while those who had done good were forgotten in the city'.”

11. “My interpretation of the difficult preceding verse indicated that the absence of retribution was at the heart of Qohelet's frustration. He now formulates the problem and states why it is a problem. In this verse, Qohelet asserts that when there is no apparent punishment for evil, then it will flourish. If people do not observe negative consequences for bad actions, they will be encouraged to do even more evil.” (Longman)

12-13. Oswalt: “...God will bring all people into judgment (Eccles 3:17; 5:6; 8:12-13; 11:9 12:14). Judgment according to what standard? The answer is supplied in Ecclesiastes 12:13: judgment will be according to the commands of God that have been revealed. Given that fact, we are not surprised at the repeated injunction to 'fear God' (Eccles 3:14; 5:7; 8:12; 12:13).”

13. “Evening shadows may...represent the peaceful end of the righteous (Eccles 8:13) or even a time for romantic repose (Song 2:17.” (DBI)

14. Walton says regarding this verse, “In the book of Ecclesiastes Qohelet holds the retribution principle at arm's length, but he does hold it...He labels the experiences that contradict the retribution principle as meaningless (Eccles 8:14), but despite those contradictions he advises that it will go better for those who fear God (Eccles 8:12-13).”

15. Other places where eating and drinking are commended by the author include Ecclesiastes 2:24-25; 3:13; 5:18; and 9:7.

Ecclesiastes 8:16-17 “Qoheleth returns to the theme of the impenetrable mystery which surrounds man's life, since God has kept its meaning hidden from him..., and the fate of all living creatures is the same death (...viii 8). (Scott)

Moore says, “The closing two verses of this chapter continue with Solomon's graphic realism. Life is far too complex for any human to figure out how all its parts fit together. The most insightful people will continue to be mystified by much that life offers. The mystery of God's revelation reminds us of our rightful place in relation to it.”

 

ECCLESIASTES 8: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

This interesting chapter was chosen quite randomly to see what different perspectives could be brought to bear on it. Besides this post on how the chapter is organized, subsequent postings will treat it in two additional ways.

Structure

One must start first with an overview of how the whole book is organized. The arrangement shown in Figure 1 above has much to recommend itself and is defended in my post titled “Is There Any Organization to Ecclesiastes?” But, of course, there are many alternative ways of viewing it.

Figure 1: Overall Structure of Ecclesiastes

A. Prologue (1:1-11)

    B. The ultimate futility of pursuing wisdom (1:12-2:11)

        C. The common fate of the wise man and fool (2:12-26)

            D. God’s time for everything, including judgment (3:1-22)

                E. Enjoyment of work better than pursuit of riches (4:1-5:20)

-----------------------------

                E'. Prosperity and adversity both come from God (6:1-7:14)

            D'. God’s time for everything, including judgment (7:15-8:17)

        C'. The common fate of the righteous and the wicked (9:1-10)

    B'. Live wisely but realize that success is uncertain (9:11-11:10)

A'. Epilogue (12:1-14)

Concentrating on Chapter 8 only, we note the following parallels which pair up D with that portion of D'.

    The majority of the references to “matter” appear in D and D' (see especially 3:1 and 8:6).

    The thought in 3:11 is parallel to the teachings in 7:27-28 and 8:17.

    The phrase “there is nothing better” appears in 3:12; 3:22 and 8:15.

    The Teacher observes examples of oppression in 3:16 and 8:9.

    Childs sees a similar eschatological motif in 3:17 and 8:11-12.

Zeroing in on our chapter in question, one should keep in mind the astute comment of Fredericks: “No structural outline for the entire book has demanded significant support from critics, though many outlines have been offered.” And the same is certainly true of this one chapter.

Thus, looking first at the scope of the literary unit only, we have the NIV, Whybray, and Scott attaching 8:1 to the ending of Chapter 7 as well as disagreement as to where the section's conclusion is located. J.S. Wright believes that from 8:8 to 9:3 constitutes a discrete literary unit, and Scott includes the last two verses of Ecclesiastes 8 in with 9:1-12.

Just about the only point of agreement between the above options is that v. 1 serves as an introduction to the chapter while vv. 16-17 constitute the conclusion. This view is actually strongly suggested by the following parallel words and phrases found in both those passages:

    “the wise man” / “those who are wise”

    “know” / “claim to know but they cannot find it out”

    “wisdom” / “wisdom”

    “one's face” / “one's eyes

Then, even among those who treat chapter 8 as a complete unit, there is disagreement as to its internal divisions. Several sources locate one major break of thought in this chapter, but there is little agreement between them as to exactly where that is located:

    J.S. Wright: after v. 7

    Dorsey: after v. 8

    Glenn, Fleming, and Scott: after v. 9

    The Message: after v. 13

Most others propose multiple sub-sections within the bulk of Ecclesiastes 8:

    NIV                  2-4; 5-8; 9-10; 11-13;       14-15.

    Living Bible    2-7; 8;    9-13;                   14; 15

    The Message   2-7; 8;    9; 10; 11; 12-13; 14; 15

    TEV                2-8;        9-10; 11-14;              15

    RSV, NRSV    2-9             10-13              14-15

    JB                    2-9;           10-14;                   15

    Whybray         2-9;           10-15

    Hendry            2-9;           10; 11-15

Note the reasonable agreement here with those who see only one break in the chapter and locate it after either verses 7 (2 votes), 8 (4 votes), or 9 (6 votes). In addition, five of the above sources feel that v. 14 begins a new thought.

The section divisions in Figure 2 below are those determined by RSV and NRSV.

                                           Figure 2: Structure of Ecclesiastes 8

        1. Introduction (v. 1)

                2. Dealing with Authorities (vv. 2-9)

                2'. Fate of the Wicked (vv. 10-13)

                2''.Fate of and Advice for the Wise (vv. 14-15)

        1'. Conclusion (vv. 16-17)

The parallels between 1 and 1' have already been enumerated above. But, as you can see, it is much more controversial as to the internal breaks between sub-units, especially since Bible scholars and lay readers alike tend to look only for basic changes of thought or topic in the text to indicate at what point a new literary unit begins. Such a method is usually far too subjective a criteria to be safely relied on when taken alone.

The above is why the identification of the opening (v. 1) and closing literary unit (vv. 16-17) is relatively easy to determine since there are the four verbal agreements given above to help confirm them as a matched pair. But in the absence of such obvious confirmation (as in the remainder ot chapter 8), one person's opinion is just about as good as another's. So below is a rough compilation of verbal or near verbal parallels arranged in order of their appearance in the text:

wise man (1a)

            who knows? (1b)

wisdom (1c)

                        God (2)

                                    evil (3)

                                                power (4)

            not know (5a)

                                    evil time (5b)    

            do not know (7)

                                                power (8a)

                                    wickedness (8b)

                                                         I saw (9a)

                                                                applying my mind (9b)

                            done under the sun (9c)

                                    evil (9d)

                                                       I saw (9e)

                                                power (10a)

                                                                        this is vanity (10b)

                                    evil deed (11b)

                                    do evil (11c, 12a)

            know (12b)

                        God (12c)

                                                                                    their days (13)

                                                                         this is vanity (14a)

                                        done on earth (14b)

                                   deeds of the wicked (14c)

                            under the sun (15a)

                                                                                    the days of life (15b)

                            under the sun (15c)

                                                                I applied my mind (16a)

            to know (16b)

wisdom (16c)

                    to see (16d)

                            what is done on earth (16e)

                    he sees not (16f)

                    I saw (17a)

                            done under the sun (17b)

While the above analysis certainly does not immediately lend itself to an exact breakdown of the sub-sections in Ecclesiastes 8, just glancing at it reveals that it builds to a peak somewhere in the vicinity of vv. 13-15 with the repetition of references to the days of one's life. In addition, there appears to be a parallel pattern with “under the sun...on earth...under the sun” in both 9c-15a and 15c-17b, suggesting a major break somewhere in v. 15. Another piece of data leading to the same basic conclusion of a two-part construction is the fact that all references to evil, wickedness, vanity and power are located in the first half of the chapter.

I am afraid that in this particular chapter, trying to go to the next step of breaking it down further into precisely delineated sub-sections which are exactly parallel to one another both verbally and in thought would be going beyond what the evidence demands. However, in many other instances in the Bible, such a procedure is very helpful in understanding now the inspired authors organized their thoughts.

 

REVELATION 14:8

There are several questions and insights which this single verse brings up.

Two Implications

A few scholars have pointed out how the symbology in this verse indicates dual meanings. Thus, the following citations:

Morris: “The reason for her [i.e. Babylon's] fall is her bad influence She made all the nations drink of the wine of her fornication (again in xviii, 3). John is combining two thoughts: first, that Babylon makes the nations drink the wine of her impurity, i.e. she corrupts them with her evil ways, and second that this impurity brings down upon it the wrath of God (cf. Je. xxv. 15), 'The nations having drunk the wine of her fornication have really therein drunk the wine of the wrath of God' (Charles).”

John Phillips states, “If the first proclamation [Rev. 14:6-7] was good news, the second was great news...This is the first mention of Babylon in the Apocalypse, but it is by no means the last. It gathers up into itself, in one brief preliminary statement, all that is later unfolded in chapter seventeen and eighteen. This proclamation anticipates the complete collapse of the political, economic, and religious system of the beast. This note is sounded here in view of the warning that follows, for those alive on the earth at this time will have a dire choice before them. That choice is the subject of the third proclamation [Rev. 14:9-12]. This second proclamation puts things into perspective and thus helps them decide. The triumph of Babylon will be brief.”

Porter: “In Revelation 14:8 and Revelation 18:3, in two similar passages, an angel proclaims that Babylon the whore, a personification of Rome, has fallen. She is the one who made the nations drink the wine of the passion (thymos) of her immorality. There is the possibility that thymos here should be interpreted anger or wrath, in light of Babylon's destructive and bloodthirsty purposes.”

Society set free from God is its own worst enemy...This pictures Rome the prostitute seducing the world by the intoxicating influence of her corrupt practices. The other concept is that of the cup of God's wrath as divine punishment (a figure used elsewhere in Rev. 14:10; 16:19; 19:15). By joining the two symbols, the angel may be pointing out that the heady potion of Rome's seductive practices inevitably involves the wrath of God.” (Mounce)

Figurative Language

Almost all commentators agree that the Book of Revelation is filled with non-literal language containing many figures of speech and symbols.

Hendricksen, speaking from an amillennialist perspective, says, “Chapter 13 shows us the agents, instruments, or tools which the dragon uses in his attack upon the church...The first is satan's hand. The second is the devil's mind. The first represents the persecuting power of satan operating in and through the nations of this world and their governments. The second symbolizes the false religions and philosophies of this world...In 14:8 a third agent is mentioned, namely, Babylon, the harlot. So, in all, three agents are employed by satan in his attack upon the earth. They are: antichristian persecution, antichristian religion, and antichristian seduction.”

Ford states that 'wine' in this verse “indicates the intoxicating influence of Babylon's vices. The same concept appears in Jer 51:7,8, which refers to Babylon as 'a golden cup in the Lord's hand' that has intoxicated the earth and driven the nations mad.”

“A second angel now appears...and announces the fall of Babylon the Great. The introduction of this symbolic reference without explanation assumes that the readers would understand the allusion. The ancient Mesopotamian city of Babylon had become the political and religious capital of a world empire, renowned for its luxury and moral corruption. Above all it was the great enemy of the people of God...It is a symbol of the spirit of godlessness which in every age lures men away from the worship of the Creator. It is the final manifestation of secular humanism in its attempt to destroy the remaining vestiges of true religion. (Mounce)

D.R. Wright states, “The Revelation of John makes frequent use of the language of prostitution and fornication, sometimes literally (Rev 9:21) but more often figuratively of idolatry and the excesses of debauched luxury (Rev 14:8, 17:1-5, 18:3, 19:2)...In these later chapters pagan, Christian-persecuting Rome seems to embody these forces of evil, but the letters to the Asian churches in Revelation 2-3 reveal subtler internal threats.”

The footnote to the Jerusalem Bible states: “The 'wine of anger' is a familiar image, cf. Is 51:17+, for the divine anger to which Babylon (Rome) has exposed all nations by making them worship her idols.”

“To drink from a cup handed to you by the Lord means accepting your lot, a metaphor frequently used in prophetic writings to describe the bitter end of the wicked. The cup, described as containing divine judgment and wrath, is one from which they have no choice but to drink.” (Dictionary of Biblical Imagery)

“Images of prostitution are completed by judgment. In Revelation's judgment, prostitution again assumes figurative force. Babylon, the city of godlessness, decadence, materialism and ruthless power, is pictured as the Great Whore 'which made all nations drink the maddening wine of her adulteries' (Rev 14:8 NIV).” (DBI)

“Revelation...depicts the Christian community as a temple (naos, Rev 3:12; 11:1-2) and as a city (polis, Rev 3:12; 11:3; 20:9; 21:2,22; 22:19) – a city that is opposed by another city, the embodiment of evil (Rev 11:8; 14:8; 16:19).” (Giles)

The True Identity of Babylon

There is reasonable agreement between most theological branches of Christianity concerning this issue:

Ruiz: “Babylon is a symbolic name for Rome (2 Esd 3:1-2). The association of the two is based on the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon in 586 BCE and by Rome in 70 CE.”

Beasley-Murray: “In the latter chapters of the book Rome is called 'Babylon' (see Rev 14:8; 16:19; 17:5; 18:2,10,21). The most probable reason for giving the name Babylon to Rome was that as Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, had destroyed Jerusalem in 586 B.C. so Rome had done in recent times...This symbolic name [i.e. 'Babylon'] for Rome appears in 1 Pet. 5:13, the Sibylline Oracles 5:143, 159 and 2 Baruch 11:1.”

Metzger calls this verse “an anticipation of ch. 18” which he labels as “Dirge over the fallen city (Rome).”

Payne's historical premillennial view is expressed in his interpretation of Rev. 14:8. “After the eschatological material of vv. 1-7, this verse appears to involve a reversion to the conditions of John's day...Fulfillment...the fall of the Roman empire, A.D. 476...”

“The theme of great Babylon's downfall is continued [from 14:18], but is now presented in terms of the destruction of a great mercantile city. In John's day Rome was the center of world commerce...and what is here portrayed is not merely the doom of an ancient city, but the sure collapse of all human organization, commercial and otherwise, that leaves God out of its reckoning.” (Bruce)

“While the image of Babylon in the Revelation may not be exhausted by the exclusive application to Rome, there is much about the imperial capital that well fits the apocalyptic denunciation.” (Rapske)

Beagley presents the arguments pro and con regarding the identity of Babylon – either Rome or Jerusalem. He remains undecided as to which city is intended.

Arnold says, “While there is much in the Apocalypse that has the historical city of Rome in view, there appears to be the anticipation of judgment on a future city (or, possibly, some future manifestation symbolized by the city) that possesses all the ungodly and evil characteristics of ancient Rome and Babylon.”

Although most of the above opinions center in one way or another on the Roman Empire of the past which indeed fell as predicted in Revelation, there is one outlier. Thus, Walvoord, speaking from a dispensational viewpoint (which always insists on taking Scripture in a strictly literal manner even when it makes little sense to do so) disputes whether this identification is fully justified. He concludes “that it is Babylon itself, located on the Euphrates River, which in the end time will be converted into a ship-bearing river. When all the evidence is studied, the conclusion seems to point to Babylon being rebuilt as the capital of the world empire in the end time rather than to Rome in Italy. Bible expositors, however, continue to be divided on this question.” Notice that even he hedges his bets in that last statement.

 

"UNLESS" IN JOHN'S GOSPEL

There is a grammatical construction which appears eleven times in the Gospel of John. In Greek it reads “ean...me,” which roughly translates to “unless” (or “except”)...you cannot.” These occurrences are listed in their order of appearance, where they are grouped together by similar formulations. Thus, the first four occurrences form a symmetrical ABBA pattern:

Apart from God you can do no miracles (3:2)

Unless you are born from above, you cannot see the kingdom (3:3)

Unless you are born of water and the Spirit, you cannot enter the kingdom (3:5)

Without it being given from heaven, you cannot receive anything (3:27)

The next appearance of “ean...me” is in John 4:48, which reads, “Except you see signs, you will not believe.” Whereas the other ten usages of this formulation describe necessary conditions for one to be a a true and productive Christian, this one is more of an ironic usage pointing to the hard-heartedness and unbelief possessed by skeptics who need to be convinced before they will even consider the claims of Christ.

The following four references in order also form a symmetrical pattern, this time being an ABAB one:

Unless you are drawn by the Father, you cannot come to me (6:44)

Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you (6:53)

Unless it is granted by the Father, you cannot come to me (6:65)

Unless a grain of wheat dies, it cannot bear fruit (12:24)

And as a concluding note, there is a double usage of “ean...me” found in John 15:4 –

“Unless the branch abides in the vine, it bears no fruit”

These final references serve to tie together the whole series above by echoing ideas and specific language found in both John 3:2 and 12:24. Here are what a few commentators have to say regarding these occurrences:

John 3:3

R.E. Brown notes regarding “the synonymous, parallel expression 'enter' in vs. 5” that “perhaps 'see' brings out more clearly the relationship of the kingdom to the revelation brought by Jesus, revelation that has to be seen, accepted and believed.”

John 3:5

“This is linked immediately with the new birth [3:3]...One application of 'water' may, indeed, be the act of John's baptism to repentance, though the idea of Christian baptism is not entirely unconnected, since in the NT it is closely linked with the imparting of the Spirit to the individual (cf. Ac. 2:38).” (Ellis)

John 3:37

Blum: “God is sovereign in bestowing His blessing on one's ministry...This principle of God's sovereignty is stressed in John (cf. 6:65; 19:11) as well as elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g. 1 Cor. 4:7).”

John 4:48

Culpepper: “Jesus laments the necessity of 'signs and wonders,' but the sign leads the official to believe...The official...exemplifies those who believe because of the signs but show themselves ready to believe the words of Jesus. Theirs is an authentic faith, and they will have the life it gives (cf. 20:30-31).”

John 6:44

“Logically His claims seemed inconceivable, but discernment needed a spiritual impulse.” (Guthrie)

John 6:53

Guthrie also states: “The metaphor of eating and drinking prepares the way for the later institution of the Lord's Supper. It is understandable that the Jews would not have grasped the spiritual meaning of these words, which can be understood only in the light of the subsequent sacrifice of Jesus upon the cross.”

John 6:65

“Once again [see v. 36] what follows is not an exact citation of anything that Jesus has said, although it is almost a composite of what is said in vss. 44 and 37.” (R.E. Brown)

John 12:24

“The grain of wheat introduces us to a paradox, namely, that the way to fruitfulness lies through death...it is only through 'death' that its potentiality for fruitfulness becomes actual. This is a general truth. But it refers particularly to our Lord Himself.” (Morris)

John 15:4

Borchert says that “this theme of remaining or abiding is one of the key Johannine themes that in the mashal [figure of speech] or parable of the vine and branch becomes a focal term for the evangelist in his enunciation of genuine qualities of disciplehsip (15:4-7).”

“Abbott points out that eun me with the present subjunctive is rare in the New Testament, being found twice in this verse and again only in v. 6, and Luke 13:3 in the Gospels.” (Morris)

WAS ZEPHANIAH OF AFRICAN DESCENT?

This is one of those controversial issues in the Bible where the more one reads on the subject, the more 

confused one becomes. That is why it is so common among Christians I have known over the years to

 fix on one particular commentator and swear by everything that author, preacher or media personality

 says. The advantage of that approach to the Bible is that you never are called upon to think for yourself

 by having that one particular view questioned by other commentators. That way you can always be

 definite in your opinions even if those opinions happen to be definitely mistaken.

Pro

One of the most intriguing issues in this book is the identity of the author since although his name is 

obviously Hebrew (meaning “Yahweh has protected, or hidden”) with three other personages in the 

Bible by the same name (see II Kings 25:18; I Chronicles 6:36; and Zechariah 6:10-14), his father is 

called Cushi, indicating that he comes from Cush, almost always in the Bible referring to Ethiopia.

So although there are other characters in the Bible who come from Africa (such as Moses' wife, the 

Queen of Sheba, and the Ethiopian eunuch converted by Philip), Zephaniah may possibly be the only 

author of Scripture with that distinction.

Con

Working against that possibility is the fact that Zephaniah's heritage goes back three more generations 

(a highly unusual occurrence in the Bible) and all of those names are squarely Hebrew, and one of 

them, Hezekiah, may even refer to the famous king of Judah. Watts, for example, says, “The 

superscription goes to unusual lengths in giving the prophet's ancestry, which is traced back to 

Hezekiah, the great Judean king.”

After consulting all of the pertinent resource books in my home library, I compiled the following 

citations from fairly recent Bible commentaries. .

Zephaniah 1:1

Why are so many generations of descendants given? Who was the Hezekiah mentioned in this verse?

These two closely related questions are best handled together. Childs appears to be one of the few 

scholars who doesn't feel it is necessary to even discuss these questions. He says, “The unusually 

lengthy genealogy of the superscription has evoked some interest, but the message of the book seems 

unaffected regardless of the identification of Hezekiah.”

Most other commentators fall into one of two camps, those who feel that Zephaniah was descended to 

royalty and those who are negative or undecided. In the former camp we have the following:

Payne: “Zephaniah 1:1 introduces the prophet through a genealogy that goes back four generations. 

This  is the longest for any of the writing prophets for it identifies Zephaniah's great-great grandfather 

as the  famous King Hezekiah...who reigned 726-697; and this may, in turn help account for the 

prophet's insight into the royal family (1:9) and into the contemporaneous international situation (as in 

2:8). For that reason, it has even been proposed without proof by some that those three names were 

purposely added later by an editor to remove any suggestion of the prophet's African lineage.

Hicks states that “Zephaniah's intimate knowledge of Jerusalem and its court circles, his failure to 

denounce the king personally, and the absence of any concern with the poor of the land support the 

inference that he was of royal descent.”

Hannah: “Most prophets are traced only to their fathers. Zephaniah's careful delineation of his 

pedigree which included Hezekiah has led many scholars to assume Zephaniah's royalty...”

“The use of four generations for a prophet is unprecedented in Hebrew tradition and may indicate that 

Zephaniah himself was of royal lineage...” (Redditt)

Chisholm states that “there must be some reason for the more extensive genealogy that appears in 

Zephaniah's case. The best explanation for this is that Zephaniah was a descendant of the famous king

 Hezekiah.”

Then there are those who are not quite convinced that the prophet was related at all to King Hezekiah:

“The connection to 'Cushi' in the genealogy raises the intriguing possibility of an African ancestry for 

the prophet, which in turn may explain the longer introduction for the purpose of stressing legitimacy.” 

(Premnath) In plain words, that means that a later editor probably added the genealogy in v. 1 to the 

text..

Bullock: “C.F. Keil...avoids the problem that he [i.e. Hezekiah] is not directly called 'king' by taking 

'king of Judah' at the end of the verse, obviously applied to Josiah, to apply also to Hezekiah...However

 appealing the identification of Hizkiyyah with king Hezekiah, it cannot be substantiated. Yet being the 

last named in the list, we surmise that he was a very important man.”

Reid: His genealogy is much longer than the usual prophetic pedigree...Suggested reasons for this are 

(a) to overcome opposition to him because of his African father, 'Cushi' meaning 'Ethiopian', though 

this does not tally with Dt. 23. (b) that 'he probably belonged to a family of some importance' 

(Ellison).”

Redditt explains:”The name 'Cushi'...means 'Ethiopian.' A reader might wonder if such a person were 

indeed an authentic spokesperson for Judah's God, and so, one might presume a redactor added the 

Yahweistic pedigree that follows...Thus, the superscription seeks to stamp the imprimatur of Yahweh 

on the collection of sayings of the prophet.”

Bridger: “We're told that Zephaniah's father is a man called Cushi (1). This is an Egyptian name, and 

some have suggested that he may have been of Ethiopian negro origin and a slave or civil servant in the

 royal household. We can't be sure. More significant perhaps is the mention of a Hezekiah as the great,

 great grandfather of Zephaniah. Is this King Hezekiah the earlier reforming king of Judah? Again we 

can't be sure. But why does the ancestry stop once Hezekiah is mentioned? Could it be to relate 

Zephaniah to the royal house? This certainly fits in to what we find Zephaniah saying and knowing.”

It has been suggested that the extended Jewish genealogy at the start of the book was purposely given 

to counter any suggestion that Zephaniah was in fact of Ethiopian lineage. (LaSor, Hubbard, and Bush)

“The superscription of Zephaniiah is unique in that the prophet's lineage is traced back through four 

generations. This may indicate that Zephaniah's great, great grandfather was the famous King Hezekiah.

 However, if the Hezekiah of the superscription had been the king, that probably would have been 

made clear. Kapelrud points out that Hezekiah was a common name in Judah (1 Chr 3:23; Ezra 2:16;

 Neh 7:21), so this Hezekiah could have been someone other than the king. There were only two 

generations between Hezekiah and Josiah according to 1 Kgs 21-22 (Manasseh and Amon) not three as

Zephaniah's superscription would have it if Hezekiah were the king. Also, Amariah is not attested as 

one of Hezekiah's sons.” (R.L. Smith)

Zephaniah 2:12

Was “Cushite” in the original text and, if so, to what country does it refer?

The second appearance is in the “Oracles to the Nations” section where it is notable in that (a) the 

oracle is unusually truncated, (b) “Cushites” appears in place of the expected “Cush,” and (c) it is not 

clear why Cush is mentioned instead of the expected powerful nation of Egypt. (Berlin) Dorsey labels 

this verse textually suspect and “seemingly intrusive.” Assuming the verse is authentic, the nation 

actually referred to by this designation could be either Egypt, Ethiopia, Midian, tribes of the Arabian

 peninsula, or Assyria. (See Baker and Boda for discussion of these options). If the last country is in 

mind, then 2:12 should be included with 2:13-15, thus disrupting the entire chiastic structure...Midian 

or the tribes of Arabia are equally poor options in light of the geographical scheme for the Oracles 

described earlier. Some scholars feel that Egypt is being referred to in this verse since it sometimes 

appears in the Hebrew Bible in close conjunction with Cush although Berlin notes that Cush never 

stands in place of Egypt. The best option appears to be a literal rendering of Cush as Ethiopia. The last 

appearance is at 3:10 (“rivers of Cush”) where it may or may not refer to one of the four rivers of Eden.

Remarking on 2:12, Reid says, “Cushites may be reference to Egypt whose 25^th dynasty, 712-663

 B.C., had been Cushite. Since the other nations mentioned are on the west, east and north points of the 

compass, it seems that Cush was chosen as representing the south.”

It is also worth noting in the fact that in the oracles to the nations in Zephaniah 2:4-15, the prophecy 

against Cush is much briefer (only one very short verse) than those against Philistia (4 vv.), Moab and 

Ammon (4 vv.), and Assyria (3vv.).

Zephaniah 3:9-10

Beale and Gladd list Zephaniah 3:9-10 as one of twelve Old Testament passages, eight of which are 

found in Isaiah, predicting what has been been labeled as the “eschatological pilgrimage of the 

Gentiles.”

“Obadiah, Joel, Amos, and Isaiah had all spoken of this day [i.e. Day of the Lord], but Zephaniah alone

 emphasized more strenuously than them all the universality of its judgment while also surprisingly 

predicting the conversion of the nations as one of its fruits [see 3:9].” (Kaiser)

Childs notes that in Zephaniah, “the nations have been assigned a new role in the promise of God 

which breaks out of their traditional role as mere recipients of divine judgment. 2.11 first introduces a 

new note by describing the conversion of the nations, but in 3.9f. the new period of promised salvation

actually begins with the conversion of the nations which precedes the promise to Israel...The 

universalism of the threatened judgment is closely paralleled by a universal redemption.”

Literary Considerations

One way in which to present the overall contents of a biblical book as well as to show how it is organized in a symmetrical manner. Figure 1 summarizes by analysis of Zephaniah (discussed in more detail in my post “Zephaniah: Introduction to the Literary Structure”).

Figure 1: The Structure of the Book of Zephaniah

I. The Day of the Lord: Judgment (1:1-18)

A. Universal Events (1:2-3)

B. Against Judah (1:4-13)

A'. Universal Events (1:14-18)

II. Call to Repentance (2:1-4)

III. Oracle to the Nations (2:5-15)

A. Against Philistia (2:5-7)

B. Against Moab and Ammon (2:8-10)

C. Universal Worship of Yahweh (2:11)                                                                                            B'. Against Cush (2:12)

A'. Against Assyria (2:13-15)

II'. Call to Repentance (3:1-7)

I'. The Day of the Lord: Salvation (3:8-20)

                    A. Universal Events (3:8-10)

                                    B. Regarding Judah (3:11-18)

                    A'. Universal Events (3:19-20)

Thus the three occurrences of “Cush” happen to appear at the beginnings of Sections I (1:1) and I' 

(3:10), as well as the almost exact center (2:12). How Cush relates to the overall theme of the book, The

 Day of the Lord, is hard to fathom. However, in retrospect, it appears that perhaps the prophet 

highlighted this term as a purposeful play on his father’s name, contra those who feel that Zephaniah 

wished to distance himself from Ethiopian connections.

In any case, it seems likely that all three symmetrically disposed references to Cush are a purposeful 

touch designed by the author and are all part of the original text (contra Dorsey's opinion regarding 

2:12).

.