DEUTERONOMY 24:1-4 (REMARRYING A FORMER WIFE)

This is certainly not the place for a general review of the passages in the Bible which have relevance to the issue of divorce. In that respect, Wenham notes, “Laws explicitly dealing with divorce are rare...But the most interesting law of all is Deuteronomy 24:1-4.” This Old Testament regulation deals with a very specific issue only – the case in which a man presents his wife with a certificate of divorce because he has found something objectionable about her; she subsequently marries another man but is divorced from him also; and finally the original husband decides he wants her back and remarries her. Such a remarriage is forbidden because it would be “abhorrent to the LORD.”

Such a scenario may appear to be highly unlikely to occur in the first place. I did have an aunt who divorced her husband, remarried him, and then divorced him again. And she told me that he made her pay the legal costs for both marriages and divorces. But that situation is not really covered in Deuteronomy for two reasons: she was the one instituting the divorce the first time, and neither party remarried between their two marriages.

However, I did know an older couple who had a very happy marriage although I found out later that they had earlier been married and divorced; she had remarried and divorced; and then the original couple married each other again. But even that case might not be covered by Deuteronomy 24 since it would depend on whether the man or the wife was the one instituting the original divorce.

Levinson states, “This complex law, theologically applied by two prophets (Isa 50:1; Jer 3:8)...does not prohibit remarriage in general. Biblical laws [in the OT] include no general laws on either marriage or divorce, only special cases that raise particular ethical or religious issues.”

And in the NT, we know that Jesus was highly opposed to the whole concept of divorce in general. But sticking closely to the Deuteronomy passage itself, it raises a host of questions regarding such a legal ruling – What is the underlying problem with such a scenario? Why are only men mentioned as instituting divorces? What are the specific grounds for a valid divorce? Why does a document need to be given to the woman? What use do Isaiah and Jeremiah make of this regulation? Below are some comments relating to these issues. And unfortunately, as Craigie says, “the statement is so succinct that all the details are no longer clear.”

What sort of objectionable conduct on the part of the woman would trigger divorce?

“That no substantial reason for the divorce was in fact required is clearly enough indicated by 'some indecency:' it is not clear what this means...The phrase occurs in 23:14, with reference to that which violates the purity and holiness of the camp. So probably it signifies some state of [ritual] impurity in general, rather than any particular act of indecency.” (Mayes)

Regarding 'something undecent,” Craigie notes: “The same expression is used in 23:14, where it suggests something impure, though the words do not seem to have normal connotations. In this context, the words may indicate some physical deficiency in the woman though this meaning is uncertain. A physical deficiency such as the inability to bear children may be implied.”

Watts notes in regard to the discussions of early rabbis of Jesus' general time “Although there was general agreement on matters such as infertility, unfaithfulness, and neglect (material and emotional [cf. Exod. 21:10-11]), 'no-fault' divorces were the center of contention.”

Thus, according to Blomberg, “The more typically conservative Shammai takes 'indecent' in a sexual sense and thus permits divorce only in the case of infidelity (capital punishment laws for adultery had already been substantially relaxed). The typically more liberal Hillel takes 'something' (lit. 'a thing') in the sense of 'anything' inappropriate and allows for divorce in a wide variety of circumstances, including spoiling the cooking!”

Thompson: “The meaning of this noun [i.e. indecency] is not clear, but we may conjecture that some immodest exposure or unwomanly conduct is meant.”

“A man could not divorce his wife unless there was some sort of unseemly wifely behavior, literally a 'nakedness of a thing' ('erwat dabar, Deut 24:1). This limitation on the husband's prerogatives served to elevate the wife's dignity and standing in Israel's society. The precise meaning of 'nakedness of a thing' is disputed. Many interpreters believe that this term excludes adultery, since adultery was a ground for execution, not divorce. However, the matter is complicated.” (Sprinkle) Thus, he mentions other possible meanings such as suspected adultery which could not be legally proved or the possibility of a woman's dowry being used to ransom her from the death penalty.

Why is this regulation written strictly from the male point of view?

“Male-initiated divorce was the norm, though there is some evidence in the Near East and in the Jewish Elephantine papyri (fifth century BC) of contracts permitting either party to initiate proceedings.” (Levinson)

What was the purpose of the certificate of divorce?

Basically it allowed the woman to freely and legally remarry whomever she chose without any blame attached. “This protected her from an accusation of adultery should she later remarry...Freedom to remarry is the essence of divorce, as opposed to separation.” (Wenham)

And Craigie adds that “possession of the bill of divorce gave her certain protection under law from any further action by the man.”

Why wouldn't God want the couple to get back together again?

The text says it is because “'she has been defiled,' not in general, since she is permitted to remarry, but specifically as regards relations with her first husband.” (Levinson)

Wenham states, “Why this should be forbidden is obscure. Perhaps such a return would make the second marriage look like adultery. Or perhaps because the first marriage made the couple as closely related as brother and sister (they had become one flesh), a second marriage would appear incestuous; similar principles underlie some rules in Leviticus 18.”

Watts: “The reason for the law is not stated but might reflect a concern that if this practice were permitted, adultery might begin to appear less wicked, or, perhaps preferably it sought to prevent the woman from being treated as a object in subordination to the man's interests.”

But Thompson says, “Some have proposed that they [i. e. such laws] were designed to prevent hasty divorce. Others have regarded them as a discouragement of adultery. Yet others think they were concerned with natural revulsion against such a reunion. But there is some value in the proposal that these laws were intended to preserve the second marriage. Once the divorcee has entered a second marriage there is no possibility of the husband reclaiming her. Reunion is forbidden and the second marriage is guaranteed.”

“The intent of the legislation seems to be to apply certain restrictions on the already existing practice of divorce. If divorce became too easy, then it could be abused and would become a 'legal' form of committing adultery.” (Wenham) This would be something like the modern practice of serial monogamy.

How do Isaiah and Jeremiah make use of this ruling?

Isaiah 50:1

“With Deut 24:1-4 as the background for this passage, Yahweh defends his right to take Israel back from the Babylonians since he did not in fact, ever officially divorce her. [Instead,] “he places the entire responsibility for this [separation] upon Israel itself.” (Whybray)

Wolf: “Although Israel's exile was like a divorce, chapter 50 begins with a question that implies that no certificate of divorce existed...Perhaps the rhetorical question in verse 1 is a way of putting the blame for the divorce on Judah...Another possibility is that God considered the Exile as a period of separation, not divorce.”

And McKenzie notes, “Hosea also sees a reunion of Yahweh with the faithless woman, and this is the point of the image in both prophets.”

Jeremiah 3:8 “Against this background [i.e. Deuteronomy 24:1-4] Yahweh can be seen as the one who took the initiative in taking Israel as his wife. But Israel took the initiative in turning aside from Yahweh. Under the circumstances, and in light of the legal prohibition, what right has Judah, frightened by the consequences of her evil deeds, to take the initiative in seeking to return to Yahweh? If that were ever possible, then it could only be on the basis of a profound repentance and a strong loophole from Yahweh himself.” (Thompson)

Are there any NT parallels?

There is an allusion to this regulation in Matthew 19:3-9 where the Pharisees ask Jesus, “Why did Moses command us to give a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her [i.e. a displeasing wife]?” Jesus subtly corrects their faulty rendering of Deuteronomy 24 by replying, “Moses allowed you to divorce your wife because of your hard hearts.”

With all the above in mind as well as the common biblical image of God and believer as man and wife, I wonder if the underlying principle in Deuteronomy 24:1-4 has any bearing at all on either of the following New Testament passage:

Luke 9:62 in which Jesus says, “No one who puts a hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.”

Hebrews 6:4-5 – “For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit...and then have fallen away...”

I will leave that as a homework assignment for you to work on.

I SAMUEL 10:25-11:15

Four years ago, I posted the following new information concerning the above passage:

“During a recent Sunday school class the question came up concerning what would happen if a missing letter of Paul were discovered. How much proof would we need to accept it as genuine? Also, wouldn't it bring up the question as to why God allowed it to be lost for so many years? The closest analogy to that situation I could think of involved the above passage where it appears that indeed a whole verse of the Bible may have been missing until recently. Granted that omission does not involve any great theological issues, but the incident is still enough to make one think.

There are two main questions concerning this I Samuel passage: Who is Nahash and why did he attack Jabesh and want to blind the people? The first presents a problem since in all other cases when a foreign ruler is introduced (in Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel or Kings), that person's full title is given. The second question arises since the opening of I Samuel 11 seems to come out of the clear blue with no historical context behind it. And then one of the Dead Sea scrolls was deciphered which seems to solve both questions. (The story is summarized in Bible Review I (3), pp. 28-29.)

The scroll in question was an early and slightly damaged Hebrew copy of I Samuel in which the passage directly preceding 11:1 read:

“Nahash, king of the children of Ammon, sorely oppressed the children of Gad and the children of Reuben, and he gouged out all their right eyes and struck terror...in Israel. There was not one left among the children of Israel be[yond the Jordan who]se right eye was not put out by Nahash king of the children of Ammon; except that 7,000 entered Jabesh-Gilead. About a month later – [followed by the start of I Samuel 11:1].”

This version not only explains who Nahash was but also why he was attacking the city. It was because the 7,000 refugees from the trans-Jordan tribes were hiding there. By the way, that title “king of the children of Ammon” is a rather unusual one. But a four-inch bronze jar from ca. 600 BC was uncovered in recent years from Ammonite territory. The inscription on it gives the title of the Ammonite ruler as “king of the children of Ammon.”

Thus, this addition has all the marks of authenticity, and so NRSV for one has added this long passage from the Dead Sea scrolls at the end of I Samuel 10:27 to serve as a prologue to I Samuel 11.”

Now the fact that only one modern translation of which I am aware has deemed it proper to add those words to the standard Hebrew text is sure to raise some eyebrows and cause people to be rightly suspicious of this NRSV decision. But beyond the reasons listed above for feeling that it may indeed be the original form of the Hebrew text which was accidentally lost at some point in the process of repeated copying over the centuries, I have the following additional information to offer which may help to authenticate it.

This confirmation comes in the form of a consideration of the structure of the whole passage in which the words appear. In numerous posts I have shown that symmetrical literary patterns appear over and over again throughout the Old and New Testament, and can almost be seen as the hallmark of biblical writings. When that sort of analysis is performed on the passage in question, an amazing pattern is revealed.

                                    Figure 1: Literary Structure of I Samuel 10:27-11:15

A. Samuel tells people the rights and duties of kingship and sends them home (10:25-26)

        B. Book laid “before the LORD” (10:26)

                C. Worthless people despise Saul (10:27a) 

                        D. Ammonites gouge out Israelites' eyes (10:27b)

                                E. 7,000 Israelites escape to Jabesh-Gilead (10:27c)

                        D'. Israelites cut down Ammonite troops (11:11a)

                                E'. A few Ammonites escape separately (11:11b)

                C'. Worthless people are spared by Saul (12-13)

A'. Samuel sends people to go to Gilead to renew Saul's kingship (11:14)

        B'. Sacrifice made “before the LORD” (11:15)

Without the bolded words in the text, the symmetry would be flawed.

A much weaker piece of evidence comes from a consideration of the larger literary unit in which I Samuel 10-11 is placed. From a prior analysis of Samuel-Kings, I developed the symmetrical organization shown below.

                                 Figure 2: Literary Structure of I Samuel (11:1-18:30)

1. God's spirit in Saul (11:1-13:22)

    a. Saul is angry

    b. Saul's successes in battle

            2. Jonathan in battle (13:23-14:23)

                a. Jonathan and his armor bearer

                b. single combat with Philistines

                c. Philistines flee before the army

                                3. Jonathan chosen by God for death (14:24-52)

                                        4. Command to kill all Amelekites (15:1-21)

                                                5. “Obedience is better than sacrifice” (15:22-23)

                                        4'. Samuel kills king of Amelekites (15:24-35)

                                3'. David chosen by God as king (16:1-13)

            2'. David in battle (16:14-17:58)

                a. Saul and his armor bearer

                b. single combat with Philistine

                c. Philistines flee before army

1'. God’s spirit in David (ch. 18)

    a. Saul is angry

    b. David’s successes in battle

In terms of overall themes of the passages, Sections 1 and 1' above both show Saul as angry, but there is a major contrast also in that David has supplanted Saul in popularity with the people and God's Spirit begins to move progressively away from Saul and to David. The only possible point here that might impact on the subject of this short essay comes from the fact that the noun “eye” (ayin) is prominent in I Samuel 11 in appearing twice in the dubious introduction to this story and once in 11:2. Perhaps coincidentally, the corresponding verb (ayan) translated “to eye”appears in the OT only once, at I Samuel 18:9.

So how did it come about that these words were lost in the first place, other than to the Dead Sea community? That is the missing piece of this story.

The textual notes in the NRSV are of great help here. As well as indicating that the words from “Now Nahash” to “entered Jabesh-gilead” in 10:27 are missing in the standard Hebrew text (which scholars refer to as MT), they also reveal that the beginning words “About a month later” were also missing in 11:1 in the MT. From that you can see that what probably happened was that a scribe looked at the scroll in front of him which he was copying and recorded in his new copy the words ending with “But he held his peace” in our 10:27a (keeping in mind that chapter and verse divisions were not invented until over a 1,000 years later) while noting to himself that he was to continue the next section beginning with “Nahash, king of the Ammonites.” After carefully copying the words ending with “peace,” he turned his eyes back to the original scroll to find his place again and came across “Nahash the Ammonite” (in our 11:1) and resumed from there, inadvertently omitting all the words in bold found in Figure 1 above. This sort of copying error is actually so common when it comes to manuscripts of the Bible that it even has a technical name – haplography. The opposite error of repeating the same words twice is called dittography.

At this point, one might rightly ask, “Wasn't the Old Testament complete long before the Dead Sea community was active (very roughly 100 BC to 100 AD)? We must have much older Hebrew manuscripts to consult so that we could find out easily which version was the original, or at least much closer in time to the period of the actual writings.” But flying in the face of that common assumption is the following:

If we consider the time frame during which the OT was originally written, the order would be from earliest to latest: standard Hebrew text (MT) – Greek Septuagint – Dead Sea scrolls. But if instead we are looking at the relative dates of the physical manuscripts we actually possess, then the reversed order ensues: Dead Sea scrolls – Greek Septuagint – MT.

Thus, textual scholar Wurthwein states: “We may note that Hebrew manuscripts of the Bible from the tenth and eleventh centuries [AD!] are very rare. The overwhelming majority are from a later period.”

By contrast, our earliest fairly complete copies of the Greek translation come from the 4^th century AD while the Dead Sea scrolls date back to to approximately the time of Jesus or a little earlier.

In conclusion, there is a very powerful case for considering the words present in NRSV but not in other modern translations as reflecting the original Hebrew wording. The accumulated evidence behind that statement includes factors from the fields of archaeology, textual criticism, and literary analysis as well as just simple logic.

REVELATION 22:6-21 -- PART 5 (TAKE-AWAY LESSONS)

 After criticizing other approaches to the Bible in my previous posts on these verses, I must freely admit that my own weak point is in emphasizing too much the importance of first establishing the literary structure of a book under study. So again, my warning to readers is not to rely on any one strategy for reading, understanding, and applying the Bible. Take what is useful from each commentator and discard what is not. With that, I will bore you some more by first repeating the organization to this passage developed in earlier posts:

                                        Figure 1: Literary Structure of Revelation 22:6-21

A. Introduction (6-7)

        1. true...Lord God

            2. I am coming soon

                    3. blessing on those who keep the words of prophecy in this book

                            B. John “hears” and worships (8-9)

                                C. Center: Ultimate Fates 

                                   1. The Damned and Saved (10-11) 

                                       2. Jesus' self-description (13) 

                                   1'. The Saved and Damned (14-15)

                                      2'. Jesus' self-description (16)

                        B'. The Spirit says, Everyone who “hears,” come (17)

A'. Conclusion (18-21):

                    3'. warnings for those who hears the words of prophecy of this book

              2'. I am coming soon

        1'. amen (truly)...Lord Jesus

At this point it is very valuable to remember why a Christian should be reading the Bible in the first place. Paul says in II Timothy 3:16, “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” In order, this boils down to

    (a) relying on God's word as being absolutely truthful and trustworthy just as God Himself is true and trustworthy;

    (b) because it is true it is valuable for the truths (doctrines) it contains, truths which can enlighten us and which we can share with others;

    (c) it is equally applicable for those who have departed from God's truth, those who have strayed slightly, and those who are committed believers;

    (d) all of it being designed to build up God's people

    (e) for the main purpose of being able to adequately live a full Christian life (application).

Let's break this down a little to see how it applies specifically to the teachings in vv. 6-21, beginning at the two ends of Figure 1 and working our way toward the middle.

Fortuitously, Sections A1 and A'1' closely associate Jesus and God with the concept of truthfulness just as Paul explained in (a) above. And by adding the title 'Lord' in each case, John stresses that this truth counts much more than human truth in that it comes from the Deity, our personal Lord and master. The mention of the Holy Spirit in v. 17 completes the Holy Trinity.

The important doctrinal point found in A2 and A'2' is that of the Second Coming with the attendant Judgment. And it is not just something that is purely theoretical with no real importance to the way we live now. In fact, it should stir us to evangelical action as well as spurring us on to maintaining our close relationship with God at all times since we really have no idea when we might to called on to defend our actions before God's tribunal. This is an important corrective to those prophecy experts who lay out a long scenario of events which they have determined must occur first before the Second Coming.

Next in A3 – A'3', we get another strong warning against those who do not take the writings in Revelation seriously at their face value, but insist on adding their own ill-founded and highly speculative interpretations to it (a word to some fundamentalists) or subtracting from it (as do many liberals).

Moving onward to sections B and B' are two passages designed for the correction of believers and the encouragement of sincere seekers after the truth, respectively. These two thus are addressed to those who are already believers but need a little adjustment in their thinking and to those who are close to belief but may need a little shove in that direction. In both cases, we are dealing with those people who still have time to grow spiritually.

By contrast, those mentioned in C1 and C1' are those who, one way or another, already have their respective fates sealed with no chance of change – true Christians who have eternal assurance of salvation as well as unrepentant sinners who have purposely cut themselves off from God's grace.

Alternating with these two sections are two three-fold descriptions of who Christ is (C2 and C2'). By placing them in association with the two different classes of people in C1 and C1', we are reminded powerfully of the basis of Christ's authority which qualifies Him uniquely to be the judge of mankind's final state. He was present at the beginning of time and will be there at the end (C2). Similarly, King David sprang from His spiritual root just as from a human viewpoint Jesus came from the David's lineage (C2').

That just leaves one detail to explain, the cryptic description of Jesus Christ as “the bright morning star” in verse 16 and also appearing in Numbers 24:17; Isaiah 14:12; II Peter 1:19; and Revelation 2:28. For that I will have to throw myself on the mercy of the commentators:

Fuller says that “the rewards proferred [in Rev. 2-3] are all heaven-oriented and astonishing in their richness...But whatever form this may take, it is clear that such recognition is given only that it may in some way reflect and honor the power and glory of God.”

Neyrey: “The use here [II Peter 1:19] is surely metaphorical. Until the true light ('day' and 'morning star') come to fulfill the prophecy of the parousia [Second Coming], believers must cling to the prophecy itself as a lamp shining in the dark night of waiting in faith.”

Green points out that the Messiah is also associated with stars in Malachi 4:2; Luke 1:78; and Ephesians 5:4.

“Like the morning star Venus, which is seen in its brightest just at dawn, he [Christ] will bring the dawning of the unending day of eternity.” (Harvey)

In the same vein, Mounce says, “The morning star is a promise that the long night of tribulation is all but over and that the new eschatological day is about to dawn.”

Morris: “Some see a reference to the coming of 'a Star out of Jacob' (Nu. xxiv. 17), an idea which is taken up in later Jewish writings...”

Bruce points out that “in the Qumran texts [i.e. Dead Sea scrolls] Num 24:17 is a recurring testimonium of the messianic warrior of the endtimes.”

REVELATION 22:6-7 -- PART 4 (COMMENTARIES)

By far the most helpful books one can purchase for your library are Bible commentaries. And these come in a variety of different types. Those of the more scholarly type can be, first of all, either single or double volumes which cover the entire Bible.

One-Volume Commentaries

Generally speaking, these present the least expensive option and most of them consist of contributions from a number of recognized authorities in their respective fields.

As an example of what one might find in such study aids, here are what three such commentaries have to say regarding the two problem areas which one may encounter in trying to make sense of Revelation 22:6-7.

Walvoord (Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament) comments on the word “soon” in both these verses: “The Greek word tachy may be translated 'soon' (NIV) or 'quickly' (NASB, ASV), and from the divine perspective both are true...The coming of Christ is always soon from the standpoint of the saints' foreview of the future, and when it occurs, it will come suddenly or quickly.”

F.F. Bruce, writing in the International Bible Commentary, straightens out another confusing issue regarding vv. 6-7. It seems to be the angel of 22:1 who is speaking these words. However, they obviously refer to Christ's second coming instead. Bruce says, “The angel apparently speaks in the Lord's name,” with the same applying to verses 12 and 20 in this same chapter. This is really no different than the many times in the OT prophetic books where the prophets speak God's words directly.

The third one-volume commentary I consulted was The New Bible Commentary: Revised, in which Beasley-Murray deals with both the above-mentioned issue as follows: “It is impossible to be sure as to the identity of the speakers in the various paragraphs. Vv. 6, 7, 16 look like the utterances of Christ, vv. 10-15 words of the angel, vv. 8, 9, 17-19, 20b, 21 additions of John...In the last resort it matters little; the speaker is ultimately Christ, whose messenger the angel is, and whose utterances John records as a prophet (v. 10).”

And as to the word “soon,” Beasley-Murray states, “He comes soon; there is no warrant for translating the Greek tachy as 'suddenly'; such an interpretation would make strange sense of v. 6, 'things which must suddenly (en tachei) take place', an impossible rendering in view of the teaching of the book.”

As you can see, Walvoord and Beasley-Murray do not agree with one another regarding the proper understanding of tachys in these verses, and that is typical of what one will find from different one-volume commentaries which do not have enough space to adequately discuss the various pros and cons regarding any one issue in any depth

Revelation Commentaries: Scholarly

If you would like a little more information on a given book of the Bible, you might consider purchasing a commentary devoted entirely to that book. In general, the authors of such works are chosen because they have spent years of their life studying to become an expert on that particular book. But keep in mind that these commentaries differ greatly from one another according to the theological slant of the author. You can either go with the approach which best fits your own theological bent or stretch your understanding of the Bible a bit by instead going with one that may challenge your preconceived notions.

As one example, G.K. Beale's The Book of Revelation is over 1,200 pages long and devotes 7 pages of small print just to a discussion of 22:6-7. I certainly won't quote from any of it here, but I will highlight some of the items of interest he brings out which you will probably not find in any one-volume commentary of the Bible:

1. As to the speaker in these verses, utilizing an angel as God's emissary to speak for Him is not that different from Christ speaking for God in Matthew 10:40; Luke 10:16; John 13:20; Galatians 4:14; and I Thessalonians 2:13.

2. “These words are faithful and true,” also in v. 5, is based on Isaiah 65:16.

3. The second part of v. 6 is clearly paralleled in Daniel 2:45, especially in one of its early Greek translations.

4. The subtle change from Daniel's “after these things” to “pass quickly” in Revelation indicates that the events have already been inaugurated and are not just relegated to the future.

5. “Spirits of the prophets” may refer to either a special class of prophets, all the OT and NT prophets whose words have been recorded in the Bible, prophetic people in general, all Christians who have received the Holy Spirit, those holding a prophetic office in the Church, or John specifically. Beale expends over one page of fine print discussing the pros and cons of these various options.

6. The translation in v. 7 of erchomai by “I am coming” can also be taken in the inaugurated understanding.

7. Blessing is the “bestowal of salvation itself” (see 14:13; 16:15; 19:9; 20:6; and 22:14) and that is the overall goal of the whole book.

Beale's concentration on finding OT parallels to NT texts, to the occasional exclusion of other issues, is seen in the above comments. And such specialization is seen in an entirely different way in Ford's Anchor Bible commentary on Revelation. She spends so much time defending her thesis that Revelation is a hybrid product of writings by John the Baptist and later anonymous Christian writers with all the verses out of order that in the confusion she actually skips over 22:6-7 entirely and does not comment on them or even show where they should show up in her final scrambled order. Unfortunately, this tendency to concentrate on picking the text apart is not at all uncommon with liberal scholars. But the end result is that some of their commentaries are obviously designed for reading by other like-minded scholars in the academic realm rather for the general reader.

Revelation Commentaries: Devotional

Then, in contrast to the mainly scholarly commentaries, there are also the more devotional Bible aids on the market in case you might want to cut straight to the chase with the bottom line without worrying yourself over the details in the text. These tend to be very light on informative detail and very heavy on what the passage might mean to you personally, application-wise. They tend to resemble typical sermons more than actual commentaries, and so it is not a coincidence that such books are often written by preachers rather than professors at Bible seminaries.

As one example, here are some comments taken from John Phillips book Exploring Revelation:

“God's Word is accurate, and the truths it contains have been transmitted, recorded, arranged, and preserved exactly as God had in mind. In the original, autographed manuscripts, every jot and tittle, every word, every letter was God breathed. Men may scoff at that fact, deride it, and deny it, but God declares that His sayings are faithful and true...The words of the angel give way before the direct word of Christ. The Lord breaks in, as it were, as though what He had to say was too good to be passed along merely by an angel. 'I'm coming quickly,' He says. Then he adds, 'keep the sayings of this book.' The spur to holy living is the imminent appearing of the Lord Jesus; the steps to holy living are given in His word.” Note how Phillip's view of the change in speakers here differs from both Bruce and Beasley-Murray.

And in regard to the unusual second time John bows down to an angel, Phillips says, “Such is the heart of man! The whole of the book of Revelation is concerned with the unveiling and exaltation of the Lord Jesus. John, in his frail mortality, attempts to worship an angel!..We would count John's act incredible, did we not carry around in our own hearts the seeds of every imaginable form of disobedience and a whole pantheon of secret idols.” With these exclamation marks and direct appeals to his audience, you can almost hear Phillips pounding on the pulpit as you read.

I am not attempting to make fun of this commentary by any means, but just want to show the great contrast in style and content between a scholarly and devotional commentary. Each one is perfectly suited for its own type of audience. However, just as you should not purchase a devotional commentary expecting that all of your hard questions will be answered, you also should not expect a scholarly commentary to be particularly emotional or exhortational in style or heavy in dispensing practical advice on how to incorporate a biblical text into your daily walk.

Thus, my final post in this series will deal with deriving useful doctrinal information and applications for your own life out of this text.

REVELATION 22:6-21 -- PART 3 (SCHOLARLY ISSUES)

Even with the best study Bible to help you, there are numerous additional insights you can gain from the scholarly literature available. But before beginning this third post on these verses, it will be useful to repeat the organization of the section developed in the previous discussions:

                                           Figure 1: Structure of Revelation 22:6-21

A. Introduction (6-7)

    1. true...Lord God

        2. I am coming soon

            3. blessing on those who keep the words of prophecy in this book

                B. John “hears” and worships (8-9)

                    C. Center: Ultimate Fates 

                         1. The Damned and Saved (10-11) 

                              2. Jesus' self-description (13) 

                         1'. The Saved and Damned (14-15)

                              2'. Jesus' self-description (16)

            B'. The Spirit says, Everyone who “hears,” come (17)

A'. Conclusion (18-21):

            3'. warnings for those who hears the words of prophecy of this book

        2'. I am coming soon

    1'. amen (truly)...Lord Jesus

Textual Matters

Of first importance before attempting to go into any deeper interpretation is the establishment of the original Greek text since not all early manuscripts of the New Testament read absolutely the same. For example, Comfort notes, “The divine 'Spirit' is written as a nomen sacrum (sacred name) in one early MS.” This merely goes to confirm that the three words in bold in Figure 1, located at the start, conclusion, and somewhere in the center, were purposely placed there to highlight the work of the Trinity.

Next, Comfort notes that although “amen” in v. 21 was found in one early manuscript as well as a some early translations, it is missing in others. From that, he concludes “It is probably a scribal addition.”

On this same issue, Metzger is not sure which way to go since although the majority of manuscripts include “amen,” a few are missing that final word. He finds it difficult to account for its absence in that handful of other early manuscripts and translations.

I would argue to the contrary since, as discussed in an earlier posting, the presence of “amen” in v. 21 perfectly balances the occurrence of the Greek word for “true” in v. 6 and thus was more likely part of the original text (see Figure 1).

Another issue with the text of v. 21 is discussed by Metzger. He notes that in many later manuscripts, pious scribes added “Christ” to the title of “Lord Jesus.” Although it is by no means a definitive confirmation of that view, I personally believe that the simple phrase “Lord Jesus” forms a more perfect parallel to “Lord God” in v. 6 (see Figure 1).

Some study Bibles will have textual notes at the bottom of the page to indicate important alternative wordings in some manuscripts when they are present. For example, the RSV Oxford Annotated Bible notes that in v. 14 the metaphorical beginning phrase “Blessed are those who wash their robes” is replaced in some early manuscripts with the more literal “Blessed are those who keep his commandments.”

This at least indicates what some early scribes felt was the clear meaning of the phrase. Going back to Figure 1, you can see that 14a is parallel with 11b: “and the righteous still do right.” Thus, the interpretation of 14a by those minority of scribes seems to be right on the money.

Cross-References

Another method of digging out more meaning from a biblical text is to see if you are have an edition of the Bible which has cross-references to pertinent OT and NT passages located outside Revelation 22:6-21. As a typical example, here are just a few of the many such proposed parallels found in my edition of the New American Standard Bible which may be of aid in deciphering certain passages in Revelation 22:

Verse 6 talks about things “which are shortly to take place.” Since the exact interpretation of this statement is a matter of some controversy among prophecy experts, it is of interest to see whether any of the seven cited parallels in my Bible shed any light on the subject. Of the seven, it turns out that only one addresses that issue at all.

Revelation 1:1 happens to have the same phrase “the things which must shortly take place.” This may not help us pin down any particular timeline. However, it does give us another example of an inclusio, previous defined as a pair of bookends bordering a particular passage in the Bible, in this case the whole book of Revelation.

Verse 8 certainly needs some clarification since John uncharacteristically bows down to worship an angel. NASB point us back to Revelation 19:10 where it turns out that John did the exact same thing, and was chastised in both cases for doing so. So rather than having a clarification for John's actions, they seem even more strange that ever. This is obviously an issue regarding which one would have to consult several scholarly commentaries for a possible interpretation.

Verse 15 may upset pet lovers since it excludes “dogs” from the New Jerusalem. However, consulting the cross-references provided in the margin of my Bible leads us to possible parallels. Deuteronomy 23:18 prohibits women from bringing as offerings to the Lord any money gained by prostitution or men offering “the wages of a dog.” “Dog” in that context refers to male prostitutes, as explained by most commentators.

Matthew 7:6 is also listed as a parallel, but it is a very poor one since in that case literal dogs are in view, not symbolic ones. The last citation is to Philippians 3:2, and it is probably a more appropriate one since it also uses “dog” in an metaphorical sense. “Dogs” are warned against as well as evil-workers and those who demand circumcision for new Christian believers. The problem here is that with such a diverse group of sinners, it is hard to find any consistent theme tying all three of these categories together.

Verse 16 will be my final example since it includes a number of strange identifications Jesus gives in describing himself, all coming from the Old Testament:

“The root of David” also appears as a self-identification of Jesus in Revelation 5:5 along with “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” But that is about as far as it goes in explaining what that term actually means.

“The offspring of David” seems to contradict the previous designation so one would need further clarification from other sources. The cross-reference to the first chapter of Matthew is rather obvious here since it demonstrates enough of Jesus' earthly genealogy to show that he was indeed a descendant of King David.

Finally, we come to the phrase “the bright morning star.” In this case we are referred to two verses as possible parallels. Matthew 2:2 is the very familiar passage in which the Wise Men from the East state that they have seen the star of the king of the Jews and have come to worship him. And finally, in Revelation 2:28 Jesus promises to give the one who conquers “the bright morning star.” I am not at all sure either of these proposed parallels helps us in the least to interpret Revelation 22:16. But that is what one is likely to run into if one only has such helps at one's disposal.

This is not to discourage one from trying to dig deeper into Scripture, but it does serve to demonstrate that at some point one who wishes to do so must break down and start accumulating at least a few necessary Bible aids to supplement a good study Bible. The valuable help that such books can provide will be shown in the following posting on this subject.

 

REVELATION 20

 

This intriguing chapter has given the theological world the mysterious concept of the millennium, a period of 1,000 years of relative peace on earth during which Satan is bound. Unfortunately, it has also caused numerous church splits over the years with each party holding fast to its own view.

Thus, the postmillennialists feel that it predicts a prolonged period on earth of ever-increasing devotion to God and peace between people on earth.

Countering that rosy view of the future are the various brands of premillennialists who see increasing warfare and other forms of turmoil on earth until Christ comes in to set up an interim kingdom which will last for 1,000 years until the Last Judgment comes. The dispensational branch of this theology supplements this understanding with a whole host of historical events which they feel will have to happen first.

And finally, the amillennialists treat the whole present time between Christ's first and second coming as the symbolic millennial period in which we are now living. Toward the end of it, and just before the judgment, earthly affairs will probably become direr and direr while at the same time the church will become increasingly purified. This view sees no interim kingdom on earth before the judgment and God's eternal kingdom being immediately established on a renewed earth.

I would like to say that a proper analysis of Revelation 20 settles all these issues, but it really doesn't since each party generally reads into the text what it wants to see and discards what doesn't fit into its preconceived scenario for the future.

But while we might not all agree on the details, a broad overview of this chapter leads to some facts which appear to be incontrovertible. For one thing, the division of Revelation 20 into separate sections is surprisingly agreed upon by practically every English translation. Of the ten modern renderings I consulted, eight of them saw the following verse divisions: 1-3; 4-6; 7-10; and 11-15. And the only two translations which disagreed did so by sub-dividing one or another of these sections into two separate parts. The consensus literary units resulting are shown below along with the key repeated words and phrases in each one.

    Then I saw...heaven (1)

            bound for a thousand years (2)

                    threw him into the pit (3a)

                            deceive the nations (3b)

                                   until the thousand years were ended...he [Satan] must be released (3c)

---

    Then I saw thrones (4a)

                                    Jesus...God (4b)

            reigned for a thousand years (4c)

                                            dead (5a)

            until the thousand years were ended (5b)

                                            second death (6a)

                                    God...Christ (6b)

            reigned for a thousand years (6c)

---

                                   when the thousand years were ended...Satan will be released (7)

                            deceive the nations (8) - who had deceived them (10a)

                    thrown into the lake of fire (10b)

 

Even a cursory glance at the above reveals that all of verses 1-10 can be represented by a fairly symmetrical ABA' structure in which A (verses 1-3) and A' (verses 7-10) share the same language presented in an exact mirror image fashion while unit B in the middle (verses 4-6) is in itself symmetrical around one of the six mentions of “thousand years,” Note also that these six occurrences alternate between talking about “a” and “the” thousand years. Thus, the so-called millennium is the chief subject of this first half of Revelation 20.

By contrast, from the key words in the final section of the chapter (shown below), it becomes obvious that the Last Judgment is its subject. This time there appear to be two parallel sub-sections in it, verses 11-14 and v. 15. That final verse echoes, in the same order this time, four key phrases from the preceding section.

Then I saw a great white throne...heaven (11a)

        not found (11b)

                dead (12a)

                        books (12b)

                        book...book of life (12c)

                                judged (12d)

                dead (12e)

                                        by what was written in (12f)

                        books (12g)

                                        by what they had done (12h)

                dead in it (13a)

                                               Death and Hades (13b)

                dead in them (13c)

                                judged (13d)

                                        by what they had done (13d)

                                                Death and Hades (14a)

                                                        lake of fire (2x)(14b)

                                                                not found (15a)

                book of life (15a)

                                        not written (15b)

                                                        lake of fire (15c)

All of this is not to say that there are no correspondences between Revelation 20:1-10 and 11-15. For one thing, you can see that the two opening “I saw” statements in verses 1 and 4 reference, respectively, “heaven” and “thrones.” Toward the middle of each half, references to “the second death” appear (see vv. 6 and 14). Then at the beginning of the second half of the chapter, John sees “a throne in heaven.”And moving to the respective endings of each half, we find that both conclude with “the lake of fire.”

I doubt that the above has shed any additional light on the question of whether the pre-, post-, a-, or even pro-millennialist view is the correct one, but it does go to show again that the Book of Revelation is not just, as some have characterized it, the uncontrolled ravings of a person who was mentally unbalanced.

REVELATION 22:6-21 -- PART 2 (SUBDIVIDING A SECTION)

The next logical step in determining how a given literary unit in the Bible is put together is to see how it is divided into even smaller units and then determining how those individual units relate to one another.

As a first approximation, one might compare several English translations of the passage in question and note where the paragraph breaks occur, unless one is happening to be relying on versions such as KJV or NASB which do not attempt to make such judgment calls. Below is a compilation of such breakdowns for our passage in question:

                                      Figure 1: Translations of Revelation 22:6-21

RSV:                  6-7a; 7b; 8-9; 10-11; 12-13; 14-15; 16; 17; 18-20; 21

NRSV:               6; 7;        8-9; 10-11; 12-13; 14-15; 16; 17; 18-19; 20a; 20b; 21

NEB:                 6-7a; 7b-15;                                      16; 17;18-19; 20a; 20b; 21

Phillips:             6-7;        8-11;           12-16; 17;                  18-21

TEV:                  6; 7;       8-11;          12-13; 14-15; 16; 17;  18-19; 20a; 20b; 21

NIV:                   6; 7;      8-11;           12-16; 17;                   18-19; 20; 21

Living Bible:      6-7;      8-9; 10-11;  12-14; 15-19;                        20a; 20b; 21

JB:                      6-7;      8-9; 10-15; 16; 17;                        18-19; 20; 21

Since there is less than unanimity here, it is best to strike out in another direction, keeping in mind that whatever conclusions we reach should probably be in rough agreement with many of the proposed breaks shown above. And there are two general approaches that may give us more success, based on what some scholars call the deep and surface structure of the text.

Noam Chomsky defines the deep structure as the concepts, feelings, thoughts, and ideas being expressed while the surface structure consists of the actual words and language used to express those ideas. Thus, we could either look for natural breaks in the logic of the text or the specific words used in the passage. In actuality, it is a combination of those two factors which usually leads to the most accurate representation of what the author had in mind. And for biblical texts specifically, there is one additional factor aiding us in this quest, the ubiquitous presence of some form of symmetry exhibited by discrete sections.

We are actually a little ahead of the game at this point, since in Part 1 of this series we demonstrated a symmetrical arrangement for the key words appearing at the beginning (vv. 6-7) and conclusion (vv. 18-21) of our passage. Since these division points are quite consistent with those in the proposed in the majority of those seen in Figure 1, we are safe at this point in labeling them as Introduction and Conclusion, respectively.

For the next step in the process, I would personally look for other key words which happen to appear more than once to see if there is any rhyme or reason with where they are placed in the passage. One word which jumps out is “come.” It appears exactly seven times, a number which often has the symbolic indication (along with 10, 12, and multiples thereof) of perfection or completion. Thus, it sometimes serves as additional confirmation that the boundaries drawn for this passage in the previous post are correct. Plotting the contexts for each of these occurrences in order of appearance yields the following:

        I am coming soon (7)

        I am coming soon (12)

                come! (3x in v. 17)

        I am coming soon (20a)

        Come, Lord Jesus (20b)

Note the symmetrical arrangement in which two references to Jesus' Second Coming bracket a threefold exhortation for people to turn to him. In addition, the final appearance of the word incorporates both those types of usage by alluding to the Second Coming but wording it in the form of an exhortation.

At this point it should be noted that the center section in the above arrangement is, in most translations, printed in indentations, indicating that it is a semi-poetic formulation, unlike the prose in the rest of the chapter. Since changes in genre like that often signal important shifts in idea, there is the possibility that it may indicate that v. 17 marks the center of our whole passage.

There are also repeated phrases in Revelation 22:6-21 combining “prophecy/prophets,” “words,” and “book.” Below is a summary of where these appear:

        these words...of the prophets (6)

        blessed is he who keeps the words of prophecy of this book (7)

        the prophets...those who keep the words of this book (9)

        do not seal up the words of prophecy of this book (10)

        warning not to add to the words of prophecy of this book (18)

        warning not to subtract from the words of the book of this prophecy (19)

Then there are the overall contrasts between blessings and curses found in in this passage:

        blessing (7)

        blessing (14a)

        curses (14b)

        curses (18-19)

Likewise there are contrasting descriptions of the saved and damned in vv. 11 and 14-15:

        damned (11a)

                saved (11b)

                saved (14)

        damned (15)

Finally, there is the appearance of the Trinity in the text with:

        Lord God (6)

                The Spirit (17)

        Lord Jesus (21)

Just looking at the various subjects being covered in this section leads to some more clues as to its overall organization. For example, in each of verses 13 and 16 Jesus gives us a threefold description of who he is:

        Verse 13: Alpha and Omega, first and last, beginning and end

        Verse 16: root of David, descendant of David, bright morning star

Then, there is a marked contrast between those in v. 14 who have access to the tree of life and the holy city, and those in v. 19 who are denied access to them.

The two specific “blessings” pronounced in this chapter appear at the start (v. 7) and the center (v. 14) of the organization developed below. They complete the seven total blessings in the book.

With all these pieces in mind, let us attempt to put at least most of it together, looking for some sort of final symmetry in the final product.

A. Introduction (6-7)

        1. true...Lord God

                2. I am coming soon

                        3. blessing on those who keep the words of prophecy in this book

                                B. John “hears” and worships (8-9)

                                        C. Center: Ultimate Fates 

                                                1. The Damned and Saved (10-11) 

                                                        2. Jesus' self-description (13) 

                                               1'. The Saved and Damned (14-15) 

                                                       2'. Jesus' self-description (16)

                                B'. The Spirit says, Everyone who “hears,” come (17)

A'. Conclusion (18-21):

                        3'. warnings for those who hears the words of prophecy of this book

                2'. I am coming soon

        1'. amen (truly)...Lord Jesus

Some of the insights one can get from this analysis as well as from scholarly commentators will be the subject of the next post in this series.

 

REVELATION 22:6-21 -- PART 1 (PROPER DIVISIONS)

 

Revelation 22:6-21—Part I (Proper Divisions)

There are a number of good strategies to use when approaching any portion of Scripture. I thought I would use the last chapter of the Bible as a test case to demonstrate my own personal method. This is generally my first step; the others will be discussed in subsequent posts. Feel free to take anything out of this methodology that seems to be useful to you and ignore the rest.

The Bible is quite unlike any other book you will ever read in that it stands together as a unity while at the same time being composed of numerous separate books written in different languages by a number of human writers over an extended time period. And for the novice, it is hard to make sense out of the way it is organized.

The most obvious division one first encounters is that between the Old and New Testament. While the OT contains the history and religious writings of the Jews written in Hebrew and Aramaic, the NT covers a much later period of history with movement of the people of God outside the Holy Land into the wider Roman Empire, and it was written in the Greek language. To confuse the picture even more, Catholic and ecumenical Bibles also include books called the Apocrypha which were generally written in the time between the OT and NT when Judea was under the control of the Greeks. And these books may be found located either at the end of the Bible or sandwiched between the OT and NT.

The second sort of division one sees in the Bible is into separate groupings according to literary genre, beginning with the historical books in the OT, moving on to the poetic books and the OT prophecies. The NT is similarly divided into the Gospel accounts, church history in Acts, and the letters of church leaders such as Peter, Paul and John. The problem in understanding all this comes in when a reader expects to see a strictly chronological account and fails to realize that some of the poetry and prophetic books were actually written somewhere in the middle of the history related in the history books.

To add to the confusion even more, some of the historical books themselves can't be taken in a strictly chronological order. Thus, I-II Chronicles, which follows Samuel-Kings in the Bible, actually covers most of the same territory as that other account; the four Gospels all parallel one another chronologically; and most of the NT epistles were written during the same period of time covered in Acts.

For one who wishes to get a better feel as to how all of these specific parallels fit together, there are two basic ways to do it conveniently. One is to replace or supplement your Bible with a Chronological Bible. There are a few such different books which are available on the market. In these, one gets a sort of Reader's Digest summary of the Bible neatly arranged so that you can read the whole story in chronological order. And when there is more than one account of the same event in the Bible, the editor will take bits and pieces of each individual account and mash them together to present a unified story with any potential conflicts and contradictions removed. I would recommend this approach only for those who wish to say that they have read the whole Bible, even if they haven't really done so.

A much more sound approach is to purchase what are called “harmonies” that list parallel passages of Scripture side-by-side in parallel columns so that you can easily compare them with one another. Thus, there is a Harmony of the Gospels, of Acts and Letters of Paul, and of Samuel-Kings / I-II Chronicles.

The third layer of divisions in the Bible consists of the separate books themselves. However, one must keep in mind that I and II Kings / I and II Samuel really was written as one coherent book, divided into smaller segments for convenience sake. And the same really applies to Ezra-Nehemiah and possibly I-II Thessalonians.

With that long introduction in mind, we can now begin to approach John's Revelation, which is, of course, divided into separate chapters. Some people naively treat these chapter divisions as being as sacred as the text itself whereas they only came into being during the Middle Ages, well over 1,000 years after the completion of the Bible. Also, they were basically the product of a single scholar, not produced by any sort of official church committee.

For the most part, these chapter divisions do an excellent job of indicating where the natural breaks in the text should be located, but that is not always the case. Two examples happen to be found in the first and last chapter divisions in the whole Bible. Thus, all Bible commentators are in agreement that Genesis 2:1-3 more properly belongs as the conclusion to the creation story of Genesis 1. It is interesting that the same error in division has been committed in starting Revelation 22 where it now is. This is because again the opening verses, 1-5 more properly belong to the preceding chapter instead. That is why I have limited this series of posts to verses 6-21 instead of including the whole chapter as a discrete unit. There are several reasons for making that judgment call:

1. Revelation 22:5 concludes with the words “they will reign for ever and ever,” which certainly sounds like the conclusion to a major literary unit.

2. These first five verses continue the theme of Revelation 21 regarding a description of the holy city and its inhabitants.

3. Revelation 21:1-22:5 consists of things that John “saw” or “was shown” by an angel whereas Revelation 22:6-21 consists of things that he “heard.”

4. With the exclusion of those first five verses, there is formed a perfect verbal bracketing device between verses 6-7 and the ending of the chapter, as shown below.

Figure 1: Inclusio for Revelation 22:6-21

    true (6a)

        Lord God (6b)

            I am coming quickly (7a)

                blessed is the one keeping (7b)

                    the words of the prophecy of this scroll (7c)

-------

                    the words of the prophecy of this scroll (18a)

                cursed is the one changing it (18b-19)

            I am coming quickly (20a)

    Amen (20b)

        Lord Jesus (20b)

Perfectly matched bookends like these are so common throughout the OT and NT that scholars have even given a technical name to this sort of literary device – an inclusio. Notice the way this technique subtly equates Lord Jesus with Lord God, while at the same time highlighting for the final time in the Bible contrasting curses and blessings.

The only set of parallels in Figure 1 which is not transparently obvious is that between “true” and “amen.” The Greek word used here for “true” is alethinoi. But the word “amen” reads the same in Hebrew, Greek, and English. In other words, it is not a translation of the Hebrew original, but simply a transliteration into both Greek and English. Most people know this word as an appropriate response to a prayer and feel that it means something like “Let it be so” or “Great prayer!” But actually, it is attesting to the truth of what has been prayed. Jesus even used it to attest in advance to words that he was about to utter. Thus, the familiar, “Verily, verily, I say to you” translates “Amen, amen, I say to you.”

The close association between “truth” and “amen” can be seen both in older translations (verity with verily) or modern ones (truth with truly).

I hope you can see from the above what kind of additional insights into Scripture can come out of the simple exercise of determining the proper boundaries of a given portion of the Bible. The next post in this series will continue with methods of subdividing a given section of Scripture.